The time for middle class has arrived...

Just saw the flash mob dance here. Was static! well can these things also happen in India? young good looking handsome guys and beautiful girls dancing on CST station, the same station which is the synonymous of the "aam aadmi" congress party claims to be whose true representative. This was nice dance indeed but it gave me something to think about. Now bastion of the lower middle classes has been demolished with this young middle class India. Whoa! they made the apathetic CST crowd to stop, cheer and enjoy! let me cut it short; they shook them from their one dimensional world where the metro stations are places where being emotive is 'foolish'.

I remember once I watched a movie where the villein neta yelled on one junior neta , "educated people will not vote and illiterate I can manage".. This has been a sad story for the India a giant democracy as a whole. Educated people considered politics a whim while the poor were too feeble to rise above caste and creed. Corrupt and thieves entered in the parliament and vidhansabhas, making a mockery of the system, the height was achieved when during the fodder scam in Lalu era; Vidhan Sabha passed a "privileged motion" against the CBI regional director for showing "disrespect". He was forced to apologize for this "blasphemy".

So poor were electing those who never deserved it, they at least took their pie of the democracy of India. They; no matter how ill equipped were, made all important decisions about who is going to rule, not only on them but on whole India. Where lies the rich? Nehruvean policies ensured we were to remain and live in the box. So those who were princely before independence were perhaps only one who can enjoy the perks of rich. They actively shared the dais with the power centers, poors were electing them and Rich were funding them while "they" were unaccountable to anyone!

Perhaps the only stratum which do not have any say in the governance is the middle class. neither do they vote nor they have resources to establish the connection with the elites. Disconnected, isolated and someone who were never given a damn! (look at the Indian economic policies, government has always been out there to appease the mass rural voters even if their demands are unjustifiable while neglecting the urban India's just demands).

Sadly this has been a unfortunate tale of India until 1991, when almost a bankrupt India has to initiate the reforms under then prime minister P.V. Narsimha Rao, when India was substantially freed from the shackles of incompetent government; the fruit soon started to show up, one visible area where we can see huge turn around is our "boodhoo box" television, from a flickering BPL, Indians now switched to Sony and LG; IT boomed like anything; even in the recession days, all IT majors posted the profits in "twenties" percentage points, employing this common middle class, raising the purchasing power and connecting them to the global world. pharmaceuticals and automobiles, you name it, India had an growth story after 2000s which it is ready to tell to everyone in the world, India managed to bring up millions of Indians from the trap of poverty and transformed them to the 'middle class' even in recession and corruption hit India is marching ahead at 7% growth rate; termed as miracle economy by World bank standards.

But you can't change the whole structure without touching it's root. There now exists a middle class Indian who can not only take care of their basic needs but also can afford the luxury jeans, but they are still disconnected from their democratic government. This is the reason why Anna Hazare created such a mass appeal among this brand of Indian youth, it was not Anna Hazare; it was this India which created the ruckus inside the governmental circles. There is a strong feeling in this young India about how stuff works in India; this young India is aggravated from the fact that our politicians shamelessly describe their acts as 'opposition ki chaal' and 'an action against their particular caste' (remember Karunanidhi said A Raja is targeted for being a dalit! ) The number of this middle class is increasing with every day passed; so is their frustration with the hypersensitive 24X7 media.

Let's go back to where I've started, this young, middle class, frustrated, zealous, forward-thinkinng, avant-garde, innovative & painstaking India is unfolding it's wings, it wants accountability which whole government has lagged since independence, the questions like "are they destined to rule on us?" are very frequent in Indian democracy. Typically neglected middle class is now stacking the claim to be the India's new signature. How national geographic has also started visiting the infosys campus apaer from there as usual, "interview with the snake charmers".

The flash dance at the CST is not just another ordinary event, or a good dance; this young India has made his presence felt in the bastion of the "aam aadmi" This India is a ever rising power, this is the India which will one day snatch the titles of "real India" from the starving rural India. When this will happen, dynamics of the country would change; it has the potential to trounce a set of whole political class; someone has to rewrite "how stuff works" about India.

With putting my stakes on the line; I predict a huge iceberg is destined to hit the power centers all across India soon! watch out baba's and madams...

Why a country has to be Secular to attain the heights!

Another quite burning issure what I am going to take up this time, every time we hear the chants of "Hindu Rashtra" and Muslim "appeasement" in India, we may see some disadvantages of it but we simply turn blind of what all it offered it to us. So let's get started...

What is secularism?

The term was coined by George Jacob Holyoake, he meant it to associate with the free thoughts which the history was full of. He did not meant to specifically castigate the religion but merely wish the government and the state should be kept away from the religion. This was an adopted definition of the secularism for long, since this notion was from west the definition suggests, "separating the state and the Church". George Holyoake himself defines it in his book "English secularism" as the

"code of duty pertaining to this life for all those who find Theocracy as unreliable, unbelievable inadequate and undefined and those who believe in the three principles, 1) The improvement in this life by material means 2) That science is the providence of man 3) Good is always good."

His secualr ethics calls for the not discussing the religious principles by the state as it was irrelevant. This he broke away with the Charles Bradlaugh and suggested that freethoughs and the atheism are the two different identities.

Classification of the Secularism

The secularism can be classified on the basis of the definition or the way it is applied across the countries, the Institute of study of secularism in society and culture divides the mordern secularism in two broad categories,

1) Hard secularism:- This form of secularism rebukes the concept of the religious doctrine on epistimological grounds and terms the religion as illegitimate and irregular.

2) Soft Secularism:- This brand of secularism have a tolerant quotient in itself and suggests that since the human knowledge can not be absolute, this calls for taking an accommodating stance on the religious issues. Most countries of the world follow this brand of Secularism with a difference degrees of variance.

Attributes of the Secularism

The secularism inherently places everyone at par irrespective of the religion of the person. It promotes the equality within the religion itself, It not only talks with the inter religious issues but also talks about the intra religious disparity as well.

i) Secularism on the intra religious disparities:-

The problems which has been the identified as man made are sought to be answered by means of religion and the philosophy. Secularism adores this conception and thus is not anti religious by any means.

There however exists deep rooted problems in the religion, very few religions calls for the equality between the the two sex, In hindusim, dalits were considered as way below par than Bhramins, they were employed as labors and were persecuted. Secularism thus came into the picture and defies this disparity within the religion and asserts a equlity among religion, but does not defy the religion itself. Hence it can not be termed as atheism which discards for the complete existence of religion itself.

Secular state:-

Some define a secular state as one which is not theocratic, meaning the states which do not take the order directly from a particularly preists or religious authority, however this definition seems to be quite narrow. The Islamic republic of Pakistan have Islam has a state religion and this many times the shariyat get the validity by various courts, hence it can not be termed as a secular society. A secular state ist the one which not only theocratic but also distance itself from all the religions, without disregarding the religion itself.

The secular state ought to promote the puristic society where the people of multiple ethnic group can live peacefully and can co exists together with each being given the equal opportunity. Since everyone is given equal opportunity, the application of he secularism in longer term results in the formation of a society which sounds like a melting pot where people have a common objective thus breaking the combination of the caste and caste.

Models of Democracy:-

Western model of Democracy(American model)

Western and typically the American model of democracy is based on the principle of "Ceaser and God" of the bible which says "Give the caeser what is caeser's and God what is God's" This inherently calls for a separation of powers between the religion and the state. Most appropriate application has been seen in America where the religious institutions and the government are separated with each other and there is no way the two can intersect. The government can not undertake any responsibility which is religious not does it can interfair in any other religious activity. This model makes government passive towards religion. However there are some drawbacks associated with it as well, Since government can not interfare in the religion, it does not have a power to intervene when it is visible that religion is not promoting the equality or is being involved in castigating the other religion. The very sound example was visible when a pastor organised an even to burn a sacred book of other religion and government does not have any tools to stop that happning.

Indian Model:-

Indian models can not truly be said a copy book case of application of secularism but it indeed contain all the basic definitions and prerequisites of the Secular society. The India does not have any state religion nor does it have any affiliation with other religious institutes, it puts it's civilians at par with one another without discriminationg on the basis of caste and religion. The preamble of the constitution of India terms itself a Secular republic in 42nd amendment.

However India does not apply the theory of "Caeser and God". The state see it's role in promoting the harmony in interreligious issues and equality among the intra religious issues. The Personal law boards are put in place for different religions which are delegated the responsibility to formulate the policies for the government on the religious issues. Constitution terms the caste system illegal and tries to bring the oppressed castes at par with others by means of giving them reservations in the governmental jobs.

Social Justice is an integral part of a civilized society.

Before analyzing the term social justice, the term justice needs to be ascertained first, the Justice is the ability of a person or society to be just or to posses righteousness. From ancient times; what a just society or a person should be have been a great question. In Indian culture, all the school of thoughts which are considered as "aastik" have banked upon the vedas and have suggested that following the vedas is indeed the justice a person or a society can do to themselves. In ancient China the great philosopher Confucius have advocated the penalty to those who violate the law while rewarding the virtuoso.

Whether one should remain just at all has been a question for so long. History consists of examples where the people who were not just, still enjoyed the fruit of success in their lives, the reason cited again is the famous proverb, "Until you are caught, you are innocent so rather than abstaining from bad, try not to get caught" This concept has however got a severe castigation by Socrates, who have ascertained that though some people can get away with the enjoying the perks in life with out being just; if whole society would become unjust, there would be a complete chaos since if every person of society tries to live and fulfill his own ambitions, there is very little left for the community living. Hence he concludes in his book "The republic" that in the longer run development of the just society is in the best interest for everyone.

Another question a modern pragmatist will ask "why at all it is necessary to devote ourselves to this question of making a just society", the answer is perhaps answered by the the Martin Luther King when he asserted,

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

Similar words were echoed by the Winston Churchill when he suggested

All great things are quite simple and many of them can be described in a single word, Hope, equality, freedom and Justice;

In modern times, though the context have changed but the question have remained more or less the same. Before starting the discussion on what is justice and thus social justice, lets us consider some thumb rules which all modern philosophers agree and democracies have adopted.

1. Equal Justice for equals

This term of justice is very much co related to the concept of quality, the equality does not necessarily means the equality in the position a person finally attains in his social or public life but the means of equality of opportunity. Kant have once said, every person posses dignity, once this is awarded the next thing that one would require is the equality of opportunity to fulfill their dreams. This also includes the justice in giving the equal treatment to all the people which is independent on the sex, caste and religion.

2. Proportionate Justice

The equal opportunity does not mean all the members of the society would utilize it fully. Some members of the society would en cash the opportunity awarded to them while some other would just not, hence this is very obvious for a society to do the justice with the person in accordance with the skill one posses. The highly skilled person generally is given more recognition than the one who is somewhat below par. A doctor is off course has been more venerated than a manual labor. This concept of proportional justice does not mean applies on the two people have similar skills, thus recognizing the male doctor over a female in spite of the face that both posses the same degree would not be counted as a proportionate justice.

Thus for the just society, the equal treatment has to be carefully balanced with the proportionate justice without getting lopsided towards either.

3. Recognizing the special needs of the needy

The term indicates that the society has to consider the needs for those who are lying in lowest stratum while distributing the rewards and the responsibility. This conception has been coined as even the proportional justice can not guarantee that the affirmative action. Hence there has to exist some safeguard for those who do not have the leisure of the basic amenities like some others. Recognizing the special needs does not necessarily means the violation of the equality among equals, since the special needs are only recognized for those who are considered as unequal( below par) with the others.

Once agreeing on the fact the the just society have to recognize the needs for the marginalized in it, the question arises what is the parameter to judge who is at need. It could be based on the financial status, physically disability or the any other reason which may vary society to society.

In Indian context, the constitution framers decided to remove the malice of the "untouchability" from the society and wished to make those at par with the the others who have been oppressed on the name of caste and creed. For this reason the constitution have reserved some of the seats in educational institutions and in governmental jobs to promote the equitable growth. What is makes the selection of the criteria of "caste" as a parameter is also echoed by the Jai Prakash Narayan, He once said,

Those who are at the lowest stratum in the caste system of India are also more close to face financial bankruptcy .

The basic objective thus of the government is the to ensure the level playing field for all of it's members so as each person can persue his or her objective in life with full freedom.

There have however been a lot's of question on what should be the parameter of selecting the needy and who should be authorized to take the decision on it. A person if is allowed to take the decision on what is the parameter for choosing the needs of the needy may get biased and favor those which personally benefit himself. This has been seen in some states of India where the reservation meant for poors have been twisted to accommodate even those who do not fall in the categories of needy for the sake of getting the political advantages. This question has been answered by John Rawl's theory of Justice.

John Rawl's theory of Justice

When the person are allowed to take the decision on the framework of the society, not all of them can be expected to take the equitable position and some of them would design the architecture which would offer them the most privileged position in it. So how should such architecture be choosed?

John Rawl tries to answer this by suggesting that the thinking should be done under the "veil of ignorance" in which a person should decide the architecture of the society without knowing his own position in it. When one has to design the aspects of the society on this basis, one has to consider the possibility of him getting the worst and thus would try to make the socity most equitable one.

John Rawl thought was that it is not the morality but the rationality which has to be the basic aspect of the determining the form of the equiable society. He thus suggested that working under the "veil of ignorance" is the best way out for a equitable society.

Formulating the equitable policy thus becomes a important question for a just society. Some difference in the members of the society is justifiable but there must not be any difference in terms of the the opportunities. So those who are poor and are lying in the lowest stratum of the society should be given a certain minimum assistance which would ensure the level playing field. what could be the "minimum level of assistance" have been investigated by the various governmental and other institutions the likes of WHO and the various NGO, the reports generally infers to include the basic healthcare facilities, elementary education and the food securities. These basic minimum assistance has been considered as the important responsibility of the welfare government as it encircles the most vulnerable.

Once the formulation of the basic minimum assistance has been agreed, the next problem arises is the method of implementation of this policy. There has been a controversy as who should be given the role of the implementer? This invokes the question of State vs the Market.

State vs the Market.

What is the role of the government in ensuring the equitable growth and promoting the social justice? The state has to be on the board but what would be the roles it should be equipped with? The socialist regimes would like to take all the work themselves. This school of thought believes that state can only be the unbiased and natural choice for promoting the equal growth among the citizens. They cite the example that market will not cater anyone who is not willing to pay or can not pay at all. This has been seen in 2008 Financial crises that if market is left unchecked, the results could be catastrophic.

This model was relentlessly pressed hard in India after independence. The state was considered as the engine for promoting the growth where the private players were dubbed as "inefficient and incapable of bringing anything in to the table". This plan however has failed a big way when the growth rate were dismal in the years after independence.

A consolation has been thus arranged which has been very much in the line with the keynesian economics which calls for the government withdrawing it's role as the sole engine of development by means of the public sector allowing the private players to fill the void, however it is to remain the control on the business and also to regulate it by means of the monetary and financial policies.

The collapse of the socialist governments and the 2008 financial crises points to phenomenon that the market and state needs to co exists together, if anyone is left unchecked; the results could be catastrophic.

No matter how long this discussion goes on; what would be the methods to adopt the social justice, there has been almost a unanimity that we need to have some affirmative actions in place to prepare a just society who according to the Bharat Ratna and the founding father of Indian constitution B.R. Ambedkar,

A society where the ascending sense of reverence and the descending sense of contempt is dissolved into a compassionate society.

This is where I'd like to conclude, Thank you for reading.

CSAT cutoff 2011.

Well! it is slightly incongruous for me to write on this topic but as it is a "thinking hat"; Predicting a cutoff is something very analytic indeed! though some questions are meant not be answered; perhaps the hat has started showing it's effect on me... :-) anyways let's not waste time; let me share you what all I've learned from around 10 hour of extensive browsing of internet about CSAT cutoff.

1. The cut off would be determined by simply adding the marks you've obtained in both papers; there would be no sectional cutoffs; well the most convincing reason was supplied in one website, it stated that "CSAT is a single paper, having two parts, the sectional cutoffs are taken in to account when there are two papers" I'm convinced, I think there is no reason why you think you shouldn't; did not came across any such post where they said there would be sectional cutoffs!
   
   
   
2. The answers keys are quite conflicting with one another! I can't imagine how one can determine the cutoffs by banking upon these answer keys? you check your paper with multiple answer keys and will have a difference large as of 20-25 marks! this is something huge and thus I'd say that rather than going for a particular answer keys; google the question you've answered and check it on individual basis, (Most incorrect answers were in RAUS answer key, have they really produced 1/3 of all the civil servants? may be yes that's why the Indian bureaucracy is so "amazing" :P) the question about VPN was wrong in all the answer keys, It is 'B' infact (working in IT, I, almost daily have to use VPN)
   
   
   
3. The paper was not heck of the difficult, all those who scared the new comers by showing the misleading figures are proved insane by UPSC, paper II specially should be quite mouth watering for the science background students, engineering to be in particular. Almost everyone is bitten by the "let's bell the cat" syndrome in there 3rd or final year and since this paper was way below at par with that of CAT; thats why guys from Engineering background found it not so difficult. Even in paper I, a person who has completed economics and environmental well, should have been able to hit around 70-85 marks. Though as a matter of fact, the options were very difficult indeed. "All 1, 2 & 3" are very difficult to attempt if you are not aware of all the 3 statements well.
   
   
   
4. Let me finally talk about the cut offs; well first thing first, whenever there is a 33% of negitive marking; cutoffs should not exceed the 50% of the total marks, almost a thumb rule I've never seen violating! so I am totally convinced if point 1 is right, i.e the cutoffs would simply the addition of the marks obtained from two papers; it should not be more than 200 in any case; I came across some blogs which put it as high as 240, I think they are disgustingly incorrect!
   
   
   
5. So less than 200; can we converge more? at least to a corridor of 5-10 marks? Yes; says others, I have seen nearly 80% of the institutes have converged to 180 (+ or - 5 marks), humm I think they are right, but an and Important but; how to check your marks are 180? from the shabby answer keys? NO, I'd certainly say; ("the" Raus answer keys says the radio transmission does not occur because ionosphere reflects the radio waves as they being of larger wavelength while the TCYonline says the commits are mostly found between Venus and mercury!!!) So check your answers properly, wikipedia, governmental portal of India and the ministry sites would yield the correct answers. Once you are convinced you've secured 170-175 solid marks, I think you should be in, this is also attributed to the fact that students thinks they have marked the correct answer after seeing the correct answer in the answer keys, this is psychological not to blame them at all..

finally Don't loose hope if you have not able to score the marks I've mentioned, "the best about failure is it is not final" and this is where I'd like to conclude!

Thank you,

Cleaning of contamination!

Saw Kanimozi and her great dad "Kalinger" in full of tears in news papers, well first thing first; was relieved to see those pictures, at least this is not totally a banana republic. After the "nero" chief justice Balakrishnan retirement, if court have turned towards turned anything, it is cracking the whip on corruption; So when the bench of Justices Sanghvi and Ganguly relentlessly pressed the investigating agencies, the beans started to spill all over; even a kid now knows the figure of 1.76 Lack crore; with supreme court firing daily and media prime time slots were booked to this hypersensitive issue; What Kalinger came up with? He played the old "Dalit card" of 1980s; (Kalinger perhaps means leader! ) hoping the people will divide and will start to fight themselves; however this didn't worked out, an old saying "you can fool some people for all the time, and all people for some time but not all people for all the time" validated itself again.

After the rout in Tamilnadu and Congress turning blind towards this tamil outfit at the centre, there are very little options left for DMK, While the news of Kani and the likes of Balswas and Chandolias are in jail, let's pray that this becomes a copy book case of India's fight against it's corrupt

India and capital punishment

To err is human has long been used as gentle phrase to represent the humans are destined to make mistakes. With no doubt the mistakes are the integral part of the life, however when it comes to committing the mistakes which can and sometimes does harm the society, law takes it's curse of action and decides whether the person that has harmed the society should be rewarded the punishment. This whole mechanism works as a flexible architecture to make sure that the criminals are kept away from society as well as ensuring that people are discouraged to take any action that is against the society. There is a universal acceptance of this way of governance to make society crime free one day.

However, the punishment that an offender can get should include the taking the life of guilty? This has for long been subjected to debate. There have been liberals who call it anti society while there exists the conservatives who see capital punishment as a tool to "cleanse" society. History is full of examples where almost all the regime whether in east or in west has extensively used to crush any uprising against the crown, it includes some very barbaric methods, typically in England where the person is first partially hanged and then diesected and his organs burned in front of ailing eyes of dissenter. This sinister attitude was earlier associated with the imperialism. However this soon turned out to be a myth, as the republic France used the death penalties so excessively that all the modern English dictionaries now has a word "guillotine".

With the advancement of the society and gradual development of the liberal view started seeing capital punishment as savage, the main reasoning of the liberals are that since humans can not create a life, it has no right to take it either, another school of thought believes that every one deserves another chance in life, since the offence has already been done, executing anyone would not remedy the loss, rather person be given a chance to rectify it's mistakes. There have been many countries which has taken action to repeal the death penalty, mostly western Europe is a indefatigable advocate of removing death penalty. EU has taken a tough stance that it even did not extradite a person accused to a country where he can be awarded death penalty. New Zeland, Australia the league of such nations are going long with every year.

While there exists the liberal thought, still there are states which extensively uses death penalty in their law enforcement system. The typical examples are United states of America and China, the world two largest economies and super powers. USA executes a criminal if it is proved that action of the person have initiated the war on state, it also uses it in the cases of brutal murder. It is claimed that the frequent death penalty awarded to those who attacked the Muslims after 9/11 have saved many from a black lash. The case of China is however not so neat; it has in past used to execute the political prisoners and the dissenting voices. There also exists some African nation which employ death penalty for homosexuality, the likes of Zimbabwe.


In terms of India, the constitution has laid down that death penalty can be used in certain cases which include treason, wagging war against the nation, murder, act of terror and recently added in case of a plane Hijack. Supreme court, as a interpreter of constitution has unequivocally stated though the death penalty must be used as a last resort, the quote used by supreme court "rarest of the rare" Casar has been religiously followed by the Indian judiciary. The capital punishment in India has been used rarely, there are handful of people who have been executed for their sins. Last person to be executed was named as Dhnanjay that too some year back for raping and subsequently murdering a teenage girl.

There is however, a thumb rule about the law, that is; it has to keep track on all the changes that are taking place in society, since it is only meant for the society. The capital punishment is also the same, with the globalisation on; there arise a need of having uniformity across the worlds, even in terms of law; however then again; with the terrorism a strict law was required to comact it's growing threat. Hence one country, typically India ought to have strict punishment for the heinous crimes, reason being it is one of the most eyed target of the religious fanatics who export terrorists. It has long been argued by the advocates of death penalty.

Thus, to completely remove the death penalty, there should bee an proper alternative punishment, everyone is unanimous of it being the "life imprisonment"; in fact the western countries which have abolished the death penalty uses life imprisonment as a alternative tool, in these countries life imprisonment is essentially means imprisonment for life. This however is not the case in India, where the judge decided it on the case bt case basis but the criminal convicted in life term is eligible for a parole and are released generally after 14 years. Hence to remove the capital punishment, the first step forward to make life imprisonment more full proof.

Still should convicted of heinous criminals not awarded death penalty ? answers to this question can perhaps not be a straight Yes or No. It depends on the case by case basis, even the most buoyant supporter of repealing of capital punishment would disagree if the criminals the likes of Ajmal Kasab are let off. India being fiercely targeted by both internal and external threats could only afford to make death penalty more stringent but can not truly repeal it. The presence of a judiciary which has been pretty reluctant to uses death penalty already has ensued that there would be no such misuse of the punishment.

Death Penalty is very much like possesing the nuclear weapons, they are evil but necessary, one must not use it as long as the water is below the nose. Indian policy has so far been pretty consistent on the above lines.

Why inflation will not come down with same policy.

the food inflation is something which is really threatening one for the current government; people of India can tolerate anything but the inflation; on top of it there exist the highly exaggerating media which describes the ailing condition on food prices on almost hourly basis. The government track record has been pretty shabby, in spite of all the repeated claims of PM and FM, it has remained on 7-9 percent corridor, the condition of food items has been typically worst, the inflation of the food items have been hovering around 17 to 20 percent mark for almost an year now.








The causes, as described by agriculture minister Sharad Pawar are typically from global warming to the increase in the minimum support price that government offer to the farmers, while on the financial side; Montek Singh Ahluwalia, deputy chairman of planning commission says, since per capita income of Indians have risen considerably, they should be ready to pay more.





Unfortunately all these reasons look more of an excuse than anything else, Let's first see how inflation works; nation adopt currency and decide that all the goods in the country would be measured against the currency, it is very important to make sure how much notes are printed, if you print loads of currency notes; more notes would be im market thus more notes would be required to buy a good, for example, if today government decides to flood the market with twice as much rupees notes as of now, price of the milk which would be at 20 rupees a liter would increase to 40 rupees a liter, but imagine the additional currency that has been released in the market has been distribute unevenly, (say 20% people get 80% of the excess notes pumped by governemnt) those 20% can afford to buy the milk easily but those who have fixed income have to pay more for the same milk, here starts the problem, since one has to consume milk, the person would start saving the money more and would spend less in leisure and thus the industries such as manufacturing and cinema halls will face the music and the recession spiral would start. Hence government has to be on it's toes to make sure prices remain stable, it is also termed as regressive form of taxes which affect poor the most.





Coming back to Indian context, why the inflation has remained so high? There are some fundamental errors that has been committed which has resulted in the today sky high prices, Let's take it one by one...

1. Useless public expenditure and rising fiscal deficit.

Former RBI Governor, Bimal Jalan in his book, Indian fiscal policy in 21st century has said "fiscal deficits are not unpopular however same can't be said about inflation" however; there exists a direct correlation in between the two, if fiscal deficit will increase; there would be less money in the government treasury than it should be, so where this difference of money goes? It goes in the market, look at the example above, once there is more currency in the market; value of it will decrease, what will happen next? the prices would increase. Congress led government allowed the fiscal deficit to increase in 2006-2008 period, FM keep on assuring that things are under control. However it was not! allowance of high fiscal deficit has resulted in this inflation. The governments, irrespective of whom so ever party in in centre; has failed to understand the importance of decreasing fiscal deficit; they like to spend more in popular schemes, which might help in gaining the short term success but in longer run; it is people who have to pay back with the higher prices. So when Mamta Banerjee says she cares about the poor by giving some relaxations to poor in cost of maintaining the fiscal deficit, she is actually giving them from one hand while taking even more from other! Something which displays complete lack of vision.



2. Increasing Minimum support prices of FCI for no reasons
There exists a committee that takes the call on all the minimum support price which FCI food corporation of India pays to the farmers, the stock of FCI is used by the government sponsered PDS schemes as well as a tool to maintain the the stable prices in the market; This unfortunately has been used as a political tool, governments for long has used MSP as a political instrument while displaying themselves as more farmer friendly, historically the prices of the MSP are artificially fixed very high than market prices, Congress government from 2004 onwards has increased the MSP from an 20 to 60% until 2008, if government is paying more to the farmers, from where the additional money that has been gifted to farmers would be recovered? It would be from market. More expensive you will purchase more expensive you have to buy, this flawed policy hurts government economics too badly, the food subsidy has to be increased, (since you have to keep the price which you sell to poor constant while the purchasing cost has increased), would further cause the fiscal deficit to increase, creating a spiral effect!

Sanjay Nirupam, congress MP from Mumbai participating in the price rise debate in Loksabha pointed out a very important point, since the government has increased the MSP for farmers, so one should expect the price rise, while he cleanly discarded the fact the poor farmers would be in the line of fire once the price would increase.



3. Hesitation on retail reforms

Imagine if there were only BSNL were in the telecom market; one have to stand in the long queue to get a Internet connection, service would have been pathetic, something Indians are very familiar since India has for 40 years adopted the socialistic and communistic model of economy. the 1991 NIP tried to address the causes resulted in India turning the most booming telecom markets of the world, but the same has not been done in the retail sector, still there exists the monopoly of 1960s by those contractors who buy cheap from typical thok bazars and sell dear in the local market, stocking and black marketing are another blemishes of this system, why can't this sector be reformed and ensure there exists enough competition so that people get the best deals? populist leaders cite the poor dukandaar who would loose everything to big corporate houses once such reforms are adopted, however the same concerns were also raised when India opted for free market economy in 1991, what happened next; everyone knows, Mayawati government decided to close "Reliance fresh", citing the same old reason, potentially loosing an window of opportunity.



One has to acknowledge that there exist a trade off between the growth and inflation, however a wise fiscal policies and keeping the medium and long term vision, can ensure that high growth rate can be achieved by keeping inflation checked, finally problem converges to one one single point; governments lack the vision and the will to carry out any functional and structural reforms to combat the inflation.

Why we are so feeble in the front of corruption.

Recently it was reveled by an US agency that 500 billion dollars are stashed abroad, Like Germany, Italy and UK India could have taken stern measures to make sure that It gets it's money back home and invest it in some meaningful work, remember everyone always cry foul about poor infrastructure we have in India, the biggest obstacle in the way of progressive society and it's ambitious young people. The planning commission has pegged the total cost to improve the infrastructure between 2007 to 2012 as 500 billion; the same amount that has been theft away from India.


So what is government is doing? It is quite so easy to put the blame on the difficult Swiss laws which only reveal the information if you prove that it is used for the some unholy purposes like the drugs and smuggling rackets, unfortunately for us, tax invasion is not considered "unholy", but consider this, India has still been unable to ink a deal which would have given it access to the Swiss bank accounts if the it manages to prove that the money stashed is truly a black one. The lousiness is in the part of government, when SC asked recently,"why you can't reveal the names of those names submitted by Germans about the black money" solicitor general was looking like a poor helpless lamb. Ashok Chavan was asked to quit as a CM but Vilas Rao Deshmukh, who was CM when the Adarsh project was expedited was still allowed to retain the status of cabinet minister.

Now question arises, why India has not been able to ink the deal with Switzerland which would have given the access to the bank accounts? Why can't it reveal the names of the defaulters? Why can't it remove it's tainted minister? Where is truly the miss? The answer was perhaps best explain by Minhaz Merchant from times of India group. He asserted that Manmohan Singh has absolute accountability but no power while Sonia Gandhi has absolute power and no accountability. Manmohan Singh may be consulted before his cabinet is reshuffled but even a most buoyant supporter of the congress would agree that he is not the one who calls the shots, during UPA1 there was a very fine tuning among the four power houses, Sonia, Pranab Mukharjee, Singh and Ahmad Patel. Every one backing one another whenever needed; Nuclear deal was the best example among all. Ahmad Patel, The right hand man of Sonia Gandhi was first time seen as demonstrating in the parliament against maneuvers of BJP. Sonia was of notion; whether government remains or falls, Singh would be the head of government.


But with increased numbers and less dependency on the hardcore allies this fine balance is looking lopsided towards the president of Congress. While Singh is duty bound to offer his position on the various scams that are cropping up like mushrooms, Sonia have the veto in every decision that is made. So as the PM in waiting Rahul Gandhi, Both Gandhi's have absolute power but are not at all accountable to anyone, it is Singh who has to face all the seem and spin attacks but alas! he did not even have a bat to defend himself.

The corruption can only end if there would be an absolute accountability.It is however implicit that power lies within the domain of all those who should be accountable. Gandhi's however in spite of enjoying the full power in 10 Janpath; does not fall in the brackets accountability. This is perhaps the biggest shortfall of current structure of Congress and government.