The sucked motion which is unscientific by Chandra

The philosophy of hike of strikes should be too productive of labour insecurity. But what is being preached in Indian muddled thinner rather fatter CPM leaders is tragedy for masses.

“By calling a 12-hour bandh, the CPM brought everything and everyone to a standstill. People couldn't go to offices, schools, hospitals. They couldn't fly because the airport was shut; they couldn't die because the crematoria were shut, and they couldn't get born because the maternity clinics were closed. Total stasis.

The bandh - as perfected by the CPM - is India's answer to what has long been the holy grail for philosophers and scientists: the perpetual motion machine. The CPM's counterblast to the perpetual motion machine is the bandh: the perpetually motionless machine. The Marxist reasoning is simple. Why is fuel so expensive, and getting more so by the day? Because there is more and more demand for it. Because people want to use fuel - in buses, two-wheelers, auto-rickshaws, cars, trucks, planes, trains - to gad about hither and thither, doing footling things like going to work to earn a livelihood, and going to school to get educated, and going to hospital to get cured, and similar piffle. All you have to do is to stop all such pointless activity. Bring everything to a grinding halt. And bingo. With people deterred - on pain of physical chastisement - from buzzing about here and there - jobs, schools, hospitals, etc - using all those fuel-guzzling buses, cars, planes, trains etc, there'll be no further demand for fuel. And so no more fuel crisis.

By eliminating the need for fuel, you not only eliminate fuel price hikes but you ensure fuel cost savings: the money which you'd literally have burnt on fuel which you've saved, because of the CPM. Now the CPM should take its policy to its logical conclusion and effect a 24x7, 365-days-a-year national bandh”.

It is worth read think over it whether we need new way of strike if at all it get sucked our livelihood earning. Read full article here.

Harmless Holes Combine them by Chandra

I first heard economist Raghuram Rajan when he was appointed as head of research at the IMF and first Indian economist under 40. When I was in my M A Economics in Madras University. Later I started reading his interviews and got to know he is researcher and professor of finance. Recently h headed a committee in India’s financial sector reforms. Which started as new financial order yet to dominate as one was earlier. Of many comments posted on his committee, the insightful and honest one is from economic journalist of India is really worth note. His comments are loosely important to the point of economic analysis which is radical need change by logic in the 21st century.

The major correlation of his comments is based on Rajan’s education background alone matter, but the ability to analysis equally matter. Rajan is an undergraduate in engineering.

Take a case of few paragraphs:

“But its chapter on macroeconomic policy suffers from a serious defect in method. This is that it is almost devoid of internally consistent logic. Even its understanding of macro theory seems flawed: how do you recommend a currency appreciation when a country is running a current account deficit? Or is it that you speak only on behalf of the financial sector, the real sector be damned?

In those days a knowledge of logic was to economics what the ability to run a regression is now. Thus, by the end of the 1970s, the dominance of logic as the driver of economic reasoning ceased.

One completely unintended consequence of this change was the sharp increase in the number of persons with an undergraduate background in engineering who became economists. Thanks to the low priority that is given to social sciences in engineering, they were and are largely innocent of the ambiguities and dilemmas of the social sciences, its methods of debate, its underlying non-linearity and, above all, its techniques of reasoning.

Any one who is interested in economic analysis must have essentially, two. One is deduction and the other is induction. Both have their adherents and critics. And as the Karl Popper-induced debates eventually proved, neither is wholly right or wrong. This means that the context also becomes important sometimes. Nowhere is this more true than in macroeconomics.

In deductive logic or reasoning, if I may remind readers, the conclusion depends on the premiss. If the premiss is wrong, the conclusion will be wrong. Deduction also goes from the general to the particular. For example, if your premiss is that the private sector must, regardless of the context, play a certain type of role in the economy you will also have a second premiss that all fiscal deficits are bad because they crowd out private investment. Then since all fiscal deficits are regarded as being bad, fiscal deficits for countries in specific contexts are also regarded as being bad.

Unfortunately, and thanks in a large measure to the data boys, especially those with engineering backgrounds, this has become a generalised problem in macroeconomic analysis and policy wonking. So even though they pour scorn on anecdotal evidence, the data boys have become guilty of the same methodological flaw. They confuse correlation with causality and use induction and deduction inter-changeably.

This absence of a strong logical foundation has resulted in the report being reduced to what some would call pre-conceived notions regarding how things should do. One expected better.”

It is true in Indian planning commission in every aspect’s of planning for corner of the country flowed differently. Read fully article here.

Yesterday’s RAJAS Today’s Rascals by Chandra

My mind musing goes often like this, when India was ruled by other then present Indian, people were blamed on rulers, still blaming story is fresh. How present elected government rulers are different from those? Why blame mania exist like hay on the common street where the market function by the virtue of man.
One senior economic journalist wrote very interesting interpretation no matter how one muse with some ideas told by teacher both in the class room and outside lay man teacher.
“Look around you, and you will see why India” adopted socialist pattern of centralized economic system instead of least free market tag line. “Thanks to non-governance for nearly a decade, no one, just absolutely no one, has any clue as to what is going on in the country”.
The rest is Line and Length in which TCA Srinivasa-Raghavan writes. A few paragraphs here.
Take the economy first. Is Inflation high? Yes. Should interest rates increase? Yes. Would that slow growth down? Yes. But does it? No, sir, it doesn't. Why? We don't know? Black money effect? We don't know. Does anyone know? No, sir
Or take agricultural growth. Is it a cause for concern? Don't be silly, of course it is. Then how come agricultural growth has been the healthiest at almost 4 per cent in several years? No one knows. Base effect? Maybe, maybe not, we don't know.
Consider the fiscal situation. Is it bad? The finance minister says no but everyone else says yes. The combined deficit of the centre and states will touch 10 per cent soon. True or false? No one knows for sure. Does it matter? No one knows for sure.
Infrastructure: Has it improved? No, yes, maybe, again no one knows. Monetary policy: Sensible, stupid, delivering results? No one knows. Exchange rate policy: Good, bad, idiotic? Depends on who you ask. Employment: Up, down, stagnant? No one knows. Why, the Planning Commission hasn't got the 11 th Plan out yet and it has been beavering away for four years now.
One can go on and on like this but the point should be clear: Even after allowing for the usual amount of nonsense in a democracy, India takes the cake when it comes to not having the foggiest about its whereabouts.
Focusless, directionless, leaderless, governanceless, mindlessly and senselessly, India is stumbling along. Sooner than later, it will take a tumble, a bad one at that.
Read fully here

Crisis Inflation –Confujun to hai Utter by Chandra

The present debate of Indian and world economy is primarily on ‘inflation, nuclear deal, loan waiver to farmer and higher education and food crisis, credit crisis, technology crisis and trade crisis.

For many crucial formal government documents will take several months and years report in a structured format. But only inflation and few other things will come out quickly without waiting for anything.

Ajay Shah writes “Prices are the messenger ……………The simple fact is the average global yields are far, far below what is possible with contemporary science. Vast tracts of land in the world - e.g. in India - have extremely poor yields. High prices generate the incentives for increasing yield. This process, of prices sending out signals and yields then going up, has been going on for centuries”.

Why the Indian governments treat the prices as “The socialist vision sees humans as inflexible and slightly stupid, who then need to be told what to do by the government”.

There is something wrong with the present price system. It seems they have been ignoring some important ideas which are on the top list board meeting in other parts of the world.

The quote mania plays sometime inevitable role to understand the situation that are framed in a sensation mode. One “from Keynes: “By a continuing process of inflation, government can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens.” The other from monetary stalwart from Milton Friedman: “Inflation is the one form of taxation that can be imposed without legislation.”

The other news paper writes “Keynes has a lot to teach us” but the fact is that the news paper wrote the above line because of the following lines goes like this “Speculators may do no harm as bubbles on a steady stream of enterprise. But the position is serious when enterprise becomes the bubble on a whirlpool of speculation. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done”.
We need to learn a lot from F A Hayek not from Keynes whose ideas killed economics muse if not economists.
More importantly, the news paper is totally ignorant of what the other monetary stalwart F A Hayek wrote equally on the subject. Let’s muse some of his ideas wrote in 1976.

Professor Hayek's most important insights is one on Choice in Currency. “THE CHIEF ROOT of our present monetary troubles is, of course, the sanction of scientific authority which Lord Keynes and his disciples have given to the age-old superstition that by
increasing the aggregate of money expenditure we can lastingly ensure prosperity and full employment. It is a superstition against which economists before Keynes had struggled with some success for at least two centuries.3 It had governed most of earlier history”.
Altogether he talked about the Rejection of legal tender issued by the monopoly Government. Read more here.
But the question remain constant as one Indian liberal economist ask "Do all poor not have 8 per cent nominal growth in incomes? With skill shortages in parts of the country (all poor don’t have employer-employee relationships and fixed incomes), do we have a robust empirical basis for the assertion or is it just a mindset? Some (not all) poor also have opportunities for income growth. Otherwise, that other crucial political number, the poverty rate, would not have dropped".

Time Cost Huge than the Cost on Time by Chandra

It is interesting post which is very much readable and muse indeed needed.
Time is the most precious resource of men and women, and even older children. This is why it is disturbing that so much time is wasted through bad policies of the public authorities that manage infrastructure.
Even modest estimate of the value of the time of those caught in traffic holdups would have easily exceeded the extra pay required to have work at night and during weekends when traffic is much slower.
Traffic has grown in virtually all cities, with consequent greatly increased delays during commuting and other times. The solution is not mainly new urban highways, which are expensive to construct and disturb the functioning of local communities, but through pricing traveling on roads that already exist in order to economize on the time of commuters and other travelers.
One important way to price roads and reduce the time of those caught in traffic delay is to introduce “congestion tolls” that vary with time of day and extent of the traffic. London, England has been using congestion tolls for several years to reduce the heavy traffic during weekdays into and out of the center of London.
Despite some grumbling, this toll system has been successful, and is being extended to other parts of London where congestion is also a serious problem.
—http://www.becker-posner-blog.com

Learning is always everywhere and a learning phenomenon by Chandra

Today’s one of the most influential liberal economist in India is Mr Sauvik Chakraverti who argue extremely revealing experience in the field of economics. What the man ought to say after all the age old economicus of mankind have ability to pursue him or herself?
The full article is below read it is really excellent one.

Education provision by a failed State by Sauvik Chakraverti
Every activist in indian education suffers from a ‘delusion of knowledge’ — the notion that the socialist State, i.e. government, is in possession of knowledge that the poor need to succeed in life.
In reality, the State is itself based on failed knowledge. Economic liberalisation was resorted to in 1991 after half a century of socialism, precisely because of knowledge failure. And it is only because of ‘liberty’ that Indian society can now access various fragments of knowledge that were previously unavailable. Now we have modern automobiles, mobile phones, plasma TVs and the like because we allowed knowledge developed abroad to flow into the country. The State-promoted IITs have been operational since the early 1960s but this knowledge wasn’t available in India. The State-owned IIMs are of similar vintage — but there were hardly any business enterprises to manage then.
On the other hand, the poor have traditionally been in possession of various fragments of knowledge — but are denied entry into markets by repressive legislation. Poor girls can sing and dance, but the socialist State has outlawed nightlife. Tribals in the jungles of central India distill stimulating mahua liquor from an eponymous flower, but they cannot sell it. Tapping toddy and fermenting it is specialised knowledge. Last year Karna-taka reported a bumper toddy season — but nowhere on Bangalore’s swanky Brigade Road will you get a glass of toddy. The north-east is poor and underdeveloped; but boast great music bands there. But these bands cannot perform in heartland states because of State-imposed restrictions.
These are all examples of real, hard knowledge going waste. And ironically the State, which is responsible for this waste, wants to teach. If establishment educationists shout in concert, an education tax is immediately imposed. But the ‘planned’ flow of knowledge from State to the poor never happens, and it never will. The minister in charge of education is a Nehru family “loyalist”. As such he will teach Nehruvian socialist propaganda. And his loyal educrats will dictate what private institutes will teach and meddle with what they want to teach.
Thus, for the immediate benefit of the poor, and for the immediate spread of real knowledge, liberty is essential. Just as the public has benefited from foreign car companies entering India, so we will benefit from foreign universities setting up shop here. And just as the poor benefit from freedom, so will the national knowledge pool if anyone with a fragment of knowledge can set up shop and teach to whoever is willing to pay for it. The problem which requires resolution is that of transmission of knowledge from one who has it to another individual who wants to acquire it. The market alone can solve this problem. The State has no ‘collective pool of knowledge’. Indeed, the socialist Indian State is a naked propagandist, and all its attempts to secure ‘uniform standards’ in education have only resulted in the uniform teaching of untruths.
Therefore, the Union ministry of human resource development — actually ministry of human resource destruction — should be shut down. Every educrat should be fired, and all schools and colleges freed from government control and supervision over curriculum as well as certification. Private edupreneurs can then compete for testing scholastic competence and issuing certification — as with SAT, IB or the ISC.What about poor kids in such a scenario? If they learn how to use a calculator, to read, write and speak English, to type on a keyboard and use a computer, to operate a mobile phone and send SMS, and how to drive a car, they will have all the basic knowledge required for success in the contemporary world. I am positive that private for-profit as well as non-profit efforts can easily transmit these fragments of knowledge to them in a manner that is efficient in terms of money as well as time.
Poor kids need to enter the workforce early. for them, 12 years of school is a massive waste of time. The basic knowledge they need, as outlined above, can be transmitted to them by private edupreneurs, cheap and quick. Thus, there is no role for the State in education either for the rich or the poor, in primary, secondary or higher education.
I conclude with what the great French economist Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850) who was also in active politics, wrote in his election manifesto over 150 years ago: “Education is also bound up with the same fundamental question that precedes all others in politics: Is it part of the State’s duties? Or does it belong to the sphere of private activity? I believe that government is not set up in order to bring our minds into subjection, or to absorb the rights of the family... If you want to have theories, systems, methods, principles, textbooks and teachers forced on you by the government, that is up to you; but do not expect me to sign, in your name, such a shameful abdication of your rights.”Indeed, as Bastiat stressed academic monopoly of the State can only work if the State is infallible. In a nation of widespread State failure, the very idea of government infallibility lies in tatters. (Sauvik Chakraverti is an author and journalist, closely involved with India’s liberal movement)

Welfare Just cost odd VOTES! By Chandra

In India, one of today’s most influential political science expert is Pratap Bhanu Mehta who often comment on strange stuck of politics at different sort of episodes that comes nonstop since the ugly man find the word politics as a part of mankind no matter how it is debated and where and when it bites!
Today there is a piece in The Indian Express on “Modi’s secession?” of course it is not all about him. What he argues is all about the power between Centre or Union and States. Instead of writing “Modi has raised a serious issue” Mehta have understood poor muse.
Let’s see one by one first we will take position of what the Constitution of India Stand, whatever the legitimate action taken by both States and Centre are to help the individual citizen of this country to generate a faire amount of wealth creation. This wealth creation is no different o other individual who is also well under the same law in same territory of India.
What the States and Centre did since the independence of this country? Mr Mehta writes “In the past, patently absurd schemes undertaken in the name of regional equality, like freight equalisation, left poor states irrevocably more impoverished. And before India’s richer states get too self-assured that their prosperity rests on self-sufficient foundations, it is worth reminding them how it was based on all kinds of impoverishments inflicted on poor states”.
First all the schemes are not for wealth creation instead of vote creation to bring another election etc etc.
There is nothing called regional equality.
There is nothing called poor States and rich States ban the word ‘State’ promise the word ‘Man’ is poor by State coercive power.
No State ever become Self sufficient or self assured in the history in anything of what is called human needs.
It is political murder to votes for saying “The poor states feel cheated anyway”.
Another lobby point “is greater accountability. The Centre will hold the states accountable. But under present circumstances, we have the worst of both worlds. On the one hand, the Centre consistently overestimates its power to hold the states accountable. On the other hand, greater centralisation impedes the creation of horizontal accountability within states. In the final analysis, state governments can be held accountable only by their electorates, not by some vertical oversight imposed from the top”.

When the politicians demand votes by the cost of accountability and all that? And the argument goes “it has not led to mechanisms for strengthening the collective dialogue amongst states”.

Every collective action of State is become biggest hurdle for the individual who is in interest of creating wealth. Precisely State is=STEAL men wealth!
The State which ensure individual freedom, private property right and free trade is must be encouraged.