Birbal’s Khichri (Rice) story 6

On a cold winter day, Akbar and Birbal took a walk along the reservoir(lake,झील). A thought came to Birbal that a man would do anything for money. He articulated(expressed,व्यक्त) his feelings to Akbar. Akbar then put his finger into the lake and immediately alienated(removed,हटाना) it because he trembled(shivered,कंपकपी) with cold. Akbar said, “I don’t ponder(think,सोचना) a man would spend an exhaustive(entire,सम्पूर्ण) night in the cold water of this lake for money.” Birbal replied, “I am sure I can find such a person.” Akbar then challenged Birbal into finding such a person and said that he would reward the person with a thousand gold coins.

Birbal searched far and wide until he found a Impecunious(poor,गरीब) man who was desperate enough to accept the challenge. The poor man entered the lake and Akbar had guards posted near him to make sure that he really did as promised. The next morning the guards took the poor man to Akbar. Akbar asked the poor man if he had indeed spent the night in the lake. The poor man replied that he had. Akbar then asked the poor man how he managed to spend the night in the lake.

The poor man replied that there was a street lamp nearby and he kept his attention affixed on the lamp and away from the cold. Akbar then said that there would be no reward as the poor man had survived the night in the lake by the ardency(warmth,गर्मी) of the street lamp. The poor man went to Birbal for help.

The next day, Birbal did not go to court. The king wondering where he was, sent a messenger to his home. The messenger came back saying that Birbal would come once his Khichri(Rice) was cooked. The king waited hours but Birbal did not come. Finally, the king decided to go to Birbal’s house and see what he was up to.

He found Birbal sitting on the floor near some burning twigs and a bowl filled with Khichri(Rice) hanging five feet above the fire. The king and his attendants couldn’t help but laugh.

Akbar then said to Birbal “How can the Khichri(Rice) be cooked if it so far away from the conflagration(fire,आग)?”

Birbal answered, “The same way the poor man received heat from a street lamp that was more than a furlong away.”

The King understood his blunder(mistake,गलती) and gave the poor man his reward.
click here for story 5

Eklavya’s Loyalty. Story 4

This is the story of a long-gone era. In the realm(country,देश) of India, nearly five thousand years back, lived a boy named Eklavya, the son of a tribal chief in the forests of the kingdom- Hastinapura. Eklavya was a valorous(brave,साहसी), handsome boy. He was loved by all. But he was not happy.

His father saw that something troubled Eklavya. More than once he found his son lost deep in thought when other boys enjoyed the pleasures of hunting and playing. One day the father asked his son, Why are you so despondent(unhappy,नाखुश), Eklavya? Why don t you join your friends? Why are you not interested in hunting?

Father, I want to be an archer replied Eklavya, I want to become a disciple of the exalted(great,महान) Dronacharya, the great tutor of Archery in Hastinapura. His Gurukul is a necromantic(magical,जादुई) place where ordinary boys are turned into robust(mighty,सुद्रढ़) warriors.

Eklavya saw his father was reticence(silentमौन). He continued, Father, I know that we belong to the hunting tribe, but I want to be a combatant(warrior,योद्धा), father, not a mere hunter. So please allow me to leave home and become the disciple of  Dronacharya.  Eklavya’s father was troubled, for he knew that his son’s appetency(ambition,अभिलाषा) was not an easy one. But the chief was a loving father and he did not want to disavow(refuse,अस्वीकार) his only son’s wish. So the indulgent(kind,दयालु) man gave his blessings and sent his son on his way to Drona s Gurukul.  Eklavya set on his way. Soon he reached the part of the forest where Drona taught the princes of Hastinapur.

In those days, there was no such regime(system,प्रणाली) as a school, college, university or hostel. The only place where one could get some education was a Gurukul . A Gurukul (Guru refers to “teacher” or “master”, Kul refers to his domain, from the Sanskrit word kula, meaning extended family.) is a type of antiquated(ancientप्राचीन) Hindu school in India that is residential in nature with the shishyas or students and the guru or teacher living in proximity, many a time within the same house. 

Having said this much, let us now return to Eklavya. When the boy reached Dronacharya s Gurukul, he saw that it consisted of a congregation(group,समूह) of huts,  surrounded by trees and an archery yard. The disciples were practicing to shoot arrows with their bows and arrows in the yard. It was an alluring(engaging,मनोहर) sight. But Eklavya s eyes searched Drona. Where was he? Will he be able to see the man? Without Drona, all his purpose of coming here would be meaningless. But all his worries soon subsided. He did not have to wait for prolonged(long,लम्बा). There was the man standing near a tree busy instructing a boy, who was none else than the third Pandava prince Arjuna, as Eklavya came to know later. Though Eklavya had never seen Drona before, he put his guess at work. He went near Drona and bowed. The sage was astonished(surprised,चकित) to see a peculiar(strange,अजीब) boy addressing him. Who are you? he asked.

“Dronacharya, I am Eklavya, son of the Tribal Chief in the western part of the forests of Hastinapura.” Eklavya replied. “Please accept me as your disciple and teach me the wonderful art of Archery.”

Drona sighed. “Eklavya… if you are a tribal hunter, you must be a Shudra, the lowest social community according to the Vedic Caste System. I am a Brahmin, the highest caste in the kingdom. I cannot teach a Shudra boy” he said.

“And he’s also a Royal teacher,” interrupted Prince Arjuna. “Our Guru has been appointed by the King to train us, the princes and the highborn. How dare you come inside the Gurukul and seek him? Leave! NOW!” he spat out, looking disgruntled(enraged,खफा) that Eklavya had disturbed his practice.

Eklavya was stunned at Arjuna’s behavior. He himself was the son of the chief of his clan, but he never insulted anyone below him in such a way. He looked at Drona for some kind of support, but the sage remained tranquil(silent,चुप). The message was loud and explicit(clear,स्पष्ठ). Dronacharya also wanted him to leave. He refused to teach him.  The innocent tribal boy was deeply hurt by Drona’s refusal to teach him. “It’s not fair!” he thought miserably. “God has given knowledge to all, but man alone segregates(differentiates,अलग) his kind.”

He left the place with a broken heart and a bitter taste in his mouth. But it could not shatter his ambition to learn Archery. He was still as determined to learn Archery. “I may be a Shudra but does it make any difference?” thought he. ” I am as strong and ardent(zealous,उत्साही) as Drona’s princes and disciples. If I practice the art every day, I can surely become an archer.”

Eklavya reached his own forests and took some mud from a nearby river. He made a effigy(statue,पुतला) of Dronacharya and selected a secluded clearing in the forests to place it. Eklavya did this because he faithfully believed that if he practiced before his Guru, he would become an dexterous(able,दक्ष) archer. Thus, though his Guru relinquished(shunned,त्यागना) held him in high esteem and thought of him as his Guru.

Day after day, he took his bow and arrow, worshiped the statue of Drona and started practice. In time faith, courage and persistence(perseverance,हठ) transformed Eklavya the mere tribal hunter into Eklavya the extravagant(extraordinary,असाधारण) archer. Eklavya became an archer of exceptional prowess(skill,कौशल), superior even to Drona’s best pupil, Arjuna.

One day while Eklavya is practicing, he hears a dog barking. At first, the boy ignored the dog, but the continuous disturbance in his practice angered him. He stopped his practice and went towards the place where the dog was barking.  Before the dog could shut up or get out of the way, Eklavya fired seven arrows in precipitant(rapid,तेज़) succession to fill the dog’s mouth without injuring it. As a consequence(result,परिणाम), it roamed the forests with its mouth opened.

But Eklavya was not alone in his practice. He was oblivious(unaware,अनजान) of the fact that just some distance away, the Pandava princes were also present in that area of the forest. As fate would have it, that day, they had come with their teacher, Drona, who was instructing them about some finer points of archery by making them learn in the real-life condition of the open jungle.

As they were busy practicing, they abruptly(suddenly,अचानक) chanced upon the “stuffed” dog, and wonder who could have pulled off such a feat of archery. Drona was amazed too.”  Such an excellent aim can only come from a mighty archer.” he exclaimed. He told the Pandavas that if somebody was such a good archer then he surely needed to be met. The practice was stopped and together they began searching the forest for the one behind such amazing feat. They found a dark-skinned man dressed all in black, his body besmeared(involved,लिप्त) with filth and his hair in matted locks. It was Eklavya. Dronacharya went up to him.

“Your aim is truly remarkable!” Drona praised Eklavya, and asked, “From whom did you learn Archery?” Eklavya was thrilled to hear Drona’s praises.  How surprised he will be if he told Drona that he, in fact, was his Guru! “From you my Master.  You are my Guru,” Eklavya replied humbly.

“Your Guru? How can I be your Guru? I have never seen you before!” Drona exclaimed in surprise. But all of a sudden he remembered something. He remembered about an eager boy who had visited his Gurukul several months ago.”  Now I remember,” said he. “Are you not the same hunter boy whom I refused admission in my Gurukul some months back?”

“Yes, Dronacharya”, replied the boy. “After I left your Gurukul, I came home and made a statue like you and worshiped it every day. I practiced before your image. You refused to teach me, but your statue did not. Thanks to it, I have become a good archer.”

Hearing this, Arjuna became angry. “But you promised me that you’d make me the best archer in the world!” he accused Drona. “Now how can that be? Now a common hunter has become better than me!”

The other princes remembered their master frequently praising Arjuna that he had enormous(immense,अपार) talent and will be the greatest archer in the kingdom. They waited with bated breath. What will their teacher do now?

Unable to answer Arjuna’s question, Drona remained silent. The sage too was upset that his promise to Prince Arjuna was not going to be fulfilled. He was also angry with Eklavya for disobeying him. So the sage planned to punish Eklavya.  “Where is your guru dakhsina? You have to give me a gift for your training,” the sage demanded. He had finally found a way to make Eklavya suffer for his disobedience.

Eklavya was overjoyed. A guru dakshina was the voluntary fee or gift offered by a disciple to his guru at the end of his training. The guru-shishya parampara, i.e. the teacher-student tradition, was a hallowed tradition in Hinduism. At the end of a shishya’s study, the guru asks for a “guru dakshina,” since a guru does not take fees. A guru dakshina is the final offering from a student to the guru before leaving the ashram. The teacher may ask for something or nothing at all.

“Dronacharya, I’ll be the happiest person on earth to serve you. Ask me anything and I will offer it to you as my guru dhakshina “he said. “I might ask something you don’t like to give me. What if you refuse the dhakshina I want?”  Drona asked cunningly.

Eklavya was shocked. It was considered a grave insult and a great sin if a guru’s dakshina was refused. “No! How can I, teacher? I am not that ungrateful.  I’ll never refuse anything you ask, Dronacharya,” promised the unsuspecting boy.

Drona did not wait anymore. “Eklavya, I seek to have your right-hand thumb as my guru dhakshina” he declared. Silence befell on everyone. Everyone was shocked, even Arjuna. He looked at his teacher in horror and disbelief. How could their teacher make such a   demand? That too, from a mere boy?

For a moment Eklavya stood silent. Without his thumb, he could never shoot arrows again. But the teacher must be satisfied. “Ok Gurudev as you wish”, said he. Then, without the slightest reluctation(hesitation,झिझक), Eklavya drew out his knife and cut his thumb!  The prince gasped at Eklavya’s act of bravery. But the tribal boy betrayed no signs of anguish(pain,दर्द) and held out his severed thumb to Dronacharya.

“Here is my guru Dakshina, Drona”, Ekalavya said. “I am happy that you have made me your disciple, even if I’m a mere Shudra hunter.”

The sage was humbled. He blessed the young archer for his courage. “Eklavya, even without your thumb, you’ll be known as a great archer. I bless you that you will be remembered forever for your loyalty to your guru,” Drona declared and left the forests. He was moved and grieved at his own action. But he was content that his promise to Arjuna was not broken. The Gods blessed Eklavya from above.

But despite his handicap, Eklavya continued to practice archery. How could he do so? When one is dedicated, one can make even mountains bow. With practice, Eklavya could shoot arrows with his index and middle finger and he became a greater archer than he was ever before. His renown spread far and wide. When Drona came to know this, he blessed the boy silently and begged for divine forgiveness.

And true to Drona’s blessing, Eklavya is still praised as the most loyal and brave student in the epic of Mahabharata.

click here for story three

No proof required: A data dependent MPC

The recent decision by the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) to lower the repo rate by 25 bps to 6.25 per cent has been met with criticism and skepticism(doubt,संशयवाद). Some analysts have gone as far as to assert that there has been faulty judgment.

This criticism and commentary is all part of a healthy democratic system. Also fair is that some critics (like myself) find fault with the criticism of the critics, and even find it unfair. As it happens, I also think that the RBI-MPC is unnecessarily using some very faulty tools. Just to put my cards on the table, I believe that the MPC and RBI Governor Urjit Patel have reached the best decision that was possible with the data they had. Historically, except for occasional lapses, the RBI has been a data dependent institution, and it is encouraging to see that the tradition is being strongly reinforced(strengthen,मजबूत) by the MPC.

Questioning of the MPC decision has proceeded along the following lines: First, and most importantly, that the inflation rate is too high to warrant a rate cut. The last four year-on-year headline inflation numbers have been as follows: 5.5 (April 2016), 5.8, 6.1 and 5.1 per cent (August 2016). The target of the RBI is five per cent for March 2017. So how can the MPC cut rates now, and that also with a unanimous(united,एकमत) vote?
Surely, and unlike Raghuram Rajan, the MPC is giving in to political pressure (Ministry of Finance) and major corporates (who always want interest rates to be cut). Further, the MPC is emphasising growth over inflation, that is, they have all turned doves.

It is likely that the unfortunate manner in which Rajan was not reappointed is colouring perceptions and interpretations of many commentators. For the fact remains that rather than being different than Rajan, the MPC (and Patel and RBI) are doing what Rajan would have done. How do we know that?

We know that from the second criticism by the “experts”. A popular conclusion of the experts is that the RBI has softened because it has reduced the real policy rate range from 1.5-2 per cent to 1.25 percent, that is the RBI was now targeting a 1.25 percentage points gap between the repo rate and CPI inflation. This was articulated(expressed,उल्लेख) by MPC RBI member Michael Patra in the press conference following the MPC decision.
So the experts are right in stating that the real policy rate is now 1.25 per cent.

But the experts are very wrong in deducing(conclusion,निष्कर्ष) that this is a change in policy. Look at the following headline after the June policy meeting of the RBI under Rajan: “Will have room to cut rates if inflation stays at 5 per cent” (IE, June 9). The article goes on to quote Rajan: “If we get confident of achieving five per cent inflation target by March 2017, then we will get more space to cut.” What the RBI and MPC did on October 4 was a continuation of the RBI policy. There has been enough data on food prices, especially of pulses (and fruits and vegetables), to suggest that the next six-month course of such prices is at best stable at current levels, and likely to be lower because of the influence of good weather and increased acreage, and prospects of higher yields(return,मुनाफा), for an “inflation-elastic” crop like pulses.

This assessment, and forecast, has no relationship with being dovish, or looking at growth more than inflation, or giving in to the demands of industrialists and/or the Ministry of Finance. Indeed, if the MPC members had not unanimously agreed to cut rates, they would likely have had egg (and worse) on their faces next week when the CPI data for September is scheduled to be released — a figure around 4.3 per cent year-on-year headline inflation will not be entirely surprising. The simple point is all of us are rightly expecting the MPC to be responsible — and when they do act responsibly, by cutting rates in the face of considerable evidence, let us not besmirch(disgrace,गन्दा) their honour, or intelligence, by attributing to them false motives.

But the MPC has room to improve. A central feature of all inflation targeting regimes, and all bankers, and all economists, is that the key to lowering inflation rates is the lowering of inflation expectations. In the case of already low inflation, the goal is to keep expectations stable. And as we now know for some developed economies (Japan, Europe), the key to successful monetary policy is to raise inflationary expectations.
In the first MPC-RBI policy statement, one finds the following statement on inflationary expectations, and how important and influential they are: “Households reacted to the recent hardening of food inflation adaptively and raised their inflation expectations in the September 2016 round of the Reserve Bank’s inflation expectations survey of households.”

Given the importance of inflationary expectations, one would think, and believe, that central bankers would strive to make sure that they measure properly such expectations. Or at least measure them to the best of their ability. It is not clear that the RBI has ever fulfilled this mandate. In January 2015, at the beginning of this rate-cut cycle, the RBI cited(mentioned,उल्लेख)the results of its most recent inflation expectation survey (RBI-IES, December 2015), as supportive of a rate cut (25 bps from 8 to 7.75 per cent). This survey had shown a decline in one year forward expectations to 9.3 per cent from 13.5 per cent at the end of the previous quarter (September 2015). I had this to say: “Since when was high expectation of inflation of nine per cent low enough to warrant a rate cut? I fully agree that interest rates should be cut — but not because a junk RBI survey shows a decline in inflation expectations to a high nine per cent level. Better to junk junk than to offer it as an explanation — it makes all of us look bad”.

One and a half years later, and with an MPC in place, there is no change in this one bad habit of the RBI — the bad habit of using a junk survey, a junk result, to justify its otherwise very sound reasoning. Don’t take my word, or believe me, but do peruse(think,सोचना) the chart. There are two lines in the chart — actual year-on-year CPI inflation for each quarter, and the year ago forward expectation for the same quarter. For example, at the time Rajan cited the junk survey in January 2015, year-on-year inflation in 2014Q4 was 4.1 per cent. The forecast of the junk survey for this same quarter was 13.5 per cent!

Note also that there is no learning by doing on the part of the survey respondents. As inflation has declined, the forecast error (gap between forecast and actual) has widened, and to a near double-digit magnitude. It is intellectually embarrassing to even report these data, let alone use it.

The MPC is a new and progressive institution. The reasoning behind the vote, and the vote, of each MPC member will be made public 14 days after each meeting. We already know that it was a unanimous vote to cut. Let us hope that none of the members cite junk inflationary expectations.

courtesy:indian express
click here for official link

download monthly pdf of september

Keep up the fair exchange

Amid(between,के बीच) tensions between the two countries, it has been suggested that India should impose a trade embargo(restriction,प्रतिबन्ध) on Pakistan by suspending its most-favoured nation (MFN) commitment towards Pakistan in the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The MFN provision, given in Article I of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), 1994, puts every WTO member (including India) under an obligation to extend any benefit (say, lowering tariff rates) accorded to one member (say, the U.S.) to all other WTO members (including Pakistan). This core non-discrimination(unfair treatment,भेदभाव) principle is the cornerstone of the world trading system. Arguing for India suspending its MFN commitment towards Pakistan would mean India restricting imports from Pakistan without restricting imports of like goods from other countries, or/and India restricting exports to Pakistan without restricting the export of like goods to other countries. This can be achieved by imposing trade quotas, higher tariffs, taxes, or even totally banning some or all traded products. But is this economically and legally feasible(possible,संभव)?

Economic and legal feasibility 

Although bilateral trade between India and Pakistan has increased from $345 million in 2003-04 to $2.61 billion in 2015-16, it is abysmal(bad,निराशाजनक) compared to India’s total merchandise trade of $641 billion in 2015-16 and Pakistan’s total trade of around $75 billion, which includes exports worth $28.3 billion. India’s exports to Pakistan amount to $2.1 billion whereas imports from Pakistan are just $441 million, resulting in a trade surplus of $1.7 billion in favour of India. Given these numbers, assuming India were to suspend MFN status by stopping all imports from Pakistan, it would only result in a very marginal decline of Pakistan’s total exports and that too assuming that Pakistan is unable to find alternative markets. Even prohibiting all Indian exports to Pakistan, such as textiles, chemicals and agricultural products, will also not have any noticeable impact on Pakistan because Pakistan can always source these goods from other countries. On the contrary(against,विपरीत), restricting India’s exports, which have contracted considerably in the last 18 months, might hurt India more than Pakistan.

Would India be able to justify its MFN violation if Pakistan were to challenge this in the WTO’s dispute settlement body (DSB)? First, India cannot justify this on the pretext that Pakistan does not honour MFN obligations towards India. The correct recourse to Pakistan’s action is to mount a legal challenge in the WTO and not indulge in tit-for-tat.

However, India can justify its MFN violation if it is able to make a case under any of the GATT exceptions such as the national security exception, most important in the current scenario. In the pre-WTO era, the U.S. in 1985 relied on this exception to defend its MFN violation when it imposed a trade embargo on Nicaragua to oppose the Sandinista government. However, given the weak and diplomacy-based method of resolving trade disputes then, the U.S. defence was never judicially tested. In the post-WTO era, in 1996, when the European Communities (EC) challenged the Helms-Burton Act of the U.S., enacted to strengthen the American embargo on Cuba, the U.S. again justified it as a national security exception. Even here, before the adjudicatory process could start, the U.S. and the EC reached a settlement.

Article XXI (b) of GATT provides the most important national security exception. It states that nothing in GATT shall be construed(understand,अर्थ करना) to prevent any country from taking any action that “it considers necessary” for the protection of its essential security interests. Three questions are pertinent(appropriate,उचित). First, do the words “it considers necessary” give full authority to India to enact any measure it likes without any scrutiny by WTO’s DSB? Although Article XXI (b) gives a country very wide discretion(judgement,निर्णय) to unilaterally(one sidedly,एकतरफा) decide its national security measures, a certain degree of “judicial review” is still possible. Thus, at a minimum, India will have to provide a reasonable explanation to the DSB as to why restricting export of cotton and tomatoes to Pakistan or/and restricting imports of dates, light oil and portland cement (these commodities constitute almost 50 per cent of India’s imports from Pakistan) is necessary to protect India’s essential security interests.

Second, is Article XXI (b) a general national security exception? No. This exception can be invoked only if the measure adopted relates to fissionable material, to traffic in arms or other related material, or is taken in time of war or other emergency in international relations (EIR). India will most likely try to make a case in the EIR category. Even here, though India will enjoy a wide discretion to define EIR, this cannot be unilaterally determined to ensure that Article XXI is not used for political or punitive purpose.

Third, does the current situation fall under an EIR? This is difficult to answer. Notwithstanding recent escalations(increase,बढ़ोतरी), both countries continue to have diplomatic relations, cultural and social ties have not been snapped, transport links continue to exist. Also, both countries have seen far worse days in the past and yet trade and economic ties deepened.

Free trade and peace

Therefore, given the negligible economic impact and potential legal problems, suspending MFN to impose trade sanctions on Pakistan will only escalate tensions without much benefit. Instead of weakening trade ties, India and Pakistan should pay heed to this famous claim that ‘when goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’. Free trade connects countries, and thus incentivizes(encourage,प्रोत्साहन) peace. Empirically(experimentally,अनुभव से), it has been shown that higher levels of free trade reduce military conflicts(battle,विवाद). India and Pakistan should boost free trade amongst themselves, Pakistan should honour its MFN commitment to India in the WTO, and India should use the SAARC platform to push for deeper trade ties.

courtesy:the hindu
click here for official link


download monthly pdf of september

know your english

“So, how was the meeting? Was it as dull as usual or did people...”

“It was quite lively for a change. A few old men whom I’d never seen before piped up. They had a lot of things...”

“Piped up? Does it mean that they spoke... they had things to say?”

“That’s right! When you ‘pipe up’, you interrupt others and say something. You speak quite unexpectedly. Someone from the back row piped up, ‘How long do we have to sit in these uncomfortable chairs?’ Everyone laughed.”

“I’m sure Rahul will pipe up when he realises that his letters are not being taken seriously. That reminds me, I need to call him. Can I borrow your phone?”

“Borrow my phone? Where’s yours? Did you lose it?”

“I don’t think so. It could be quite possible that I left it in Rahul’s house.”

“You don’t normally use ‘could’ or ‘can’ before ‘possible’. You normally say, ‘it is possible’ and not ‘could be possible’ — especially when you’re talking about a past event.”

“So, I have to say, ‘It’s quite possible that I left the phone in Rahul’s house’.”

“Good! It’s quite possible that they went to the wrong hotel.”

“Talking about hotels, did you and Ajit go to the new restaurant yesterday?”

“Yes, we did. The food wasn’t anything great, but we managed to...”

“You should worry about the food only when you are paying for it. Last night’s dinner was Ajit’s treat, wasn’t it?”

“That’s what I thought. But when the bill arrived, he said we should go Dutch.” “Go Dutch? What does it mean?”

“When you go Dutch, you agree to share the cost of something with someone. You end up paying half the amount.”

“I can understand college students going Dutch when they go to a restaurant. But why would people with good jobs go Dutch? It doesn’t make sense. Both of you have money.”

“Let’s just say that Ajit is very careful with his. He always insists on going Dutch.”

“When Shekar took Gayathri to a movie, she insisted that they go Dutch.”

“Good for her. Is Gayathri the person who keeps saying ‘good morning’, no matter...”

“That’s right! Like many people in our country, she says ‘good morning’ at three o’clock in the afternoon. But it’s okay, right? Especially, if you happen to be seeing the person for the first time that day.”

“No, it’s not okay. You usually wish someone ‘good morning’ before noon. Anything after twelve o’clock, you usually say ‘good afternoon’ or good evening’. Depending on what time of day it is.”

“So ‘good morning’ has nothing to do with whether you’re seeing a person for the first time or not?”

“No, it doesn’t! If I see you for the first time at two o’clock in the afternoon, I have to wish you ‘good afternoon’, and not ‘good morning’. That’s what a native speaker would do. If you wish someone ‘good morning’ at three o’clock in the afternoon, he’ll probably think you’re trying to be funny!”

courtesy:the hindu

download monthly pdf of september

Railway Budget, a vanishing trick

So finally, the almost century-old practice of presenting a separate Railway Budget ahead of the General Budget is to be dispensed with from the next financial year (2017-18), and the Railway Budget “merged” with the General Budget. The Union Cabinet has just cleared the proposal.

What are the reported reasons for this merger? According to earlier media reports, a separate Railway Budget is being dispensed with so that the Indian Railways need not pay the annual dividend to the Government of India on the budgetary support given each year, saving the financially stressed Railways about Rs.10,000 crore annually; over the years, the Budget has been misused by politicians as a populist platform to enhance(increase,बढ़ाना) their own image; no other Ministry has a separate budget and the practice exists in no other country today; the Bibek Debroy Committee has recommended discontinuance of a separate Rail Budget and it is part of the Prime Minister’s reform programme. Besides, it is a colonial legacy.

A point particularly stressed by the Finance Minister in the press conference announcing the Cabinet decision was that the Railways’ share in the General Budget has progressively reduced over the years, making a separate budget an anachronism.

Each of these “reasons” does not present the true or complete picture. It is necessary to separate fact from fiction.

It is a review

There have been sporadic(periodic,छिटपुट) calls in the past for doing away with a separate Railway Budget for various reasons, but the matter was never pursued seriously. One of the more publicised reasons is that it will free the Railways of the obligation of paying the annual dividend, as mentioned earlier. This is only partly true. The dividend is paid not only on the budgetary support extended during a year but also on the total “capital at charge” which includes the gross budgetary support (GBS) of previous years. By this merger, a “loan-in-perpetuity” is converted to a grant. Shorn of officialese, it is a loan waiver; and loan waivers are granted to individuals or institutions in extreme financial distress — something not to go to town about.

In popular imagination, the Railway Budget was seen as a grand spectacle, with the Railway Minister using it as a platform for populism and political grandstanding. What is not appreciated is that the Budget is not merely a statement of allotment of funds to various projects and programmes, unlike other ministries, but comprises a fairly detailed performance review, physical and financial, of the previous year and prospects for the current (Budget) year. Perhaps nowhere in the world is a political functionary called upon to present a financial report card of the country’s largest public undertaking in the full glare of publicity. A separate post-Budget discussion in Parliament on the Railways, as indicated by the Finance Minister, is no substitute, as the focus most likely will be on allotments to various projects, not on financial performance.

Talking of populism, the recent announcement by the Finance Minister of the proposal to set up a new Railway zone to placate(calm,तसल्ली) a State government as part of a “special package” is proof that it is possible to be “populist” outside a separate budget.

Why should there be a separate budget for the Railways? The fact is that the Railways is indeed unlike any other Central ministry in size and scope: It is an operational ministry; it earns as well as spends, unlike other ministries that only spend. Its gross earnings (Rs.1.68 lakh crore in 2015-16) are among the highest for any Indian organisation, public or private; it has a staff strength (13.2 lakh) that exceeds that of the Indian Army; it fully meets the pension liabilities of its retired employees (13.8 lakh) out of its own earnings unlike other ministries; it follows an accounting practice, though not up to the standards of a purely commercial establishment, that has a number of features of a commercially-run organisation. So, if the Railways is to be treated like other ministries, will the government also fund its pension liabilities which are estimated to be about Rs.45,500 crore in 2016-17? That should be some “savings” indeed!

Part of a package

Perhaps the most misquoted reason given for the merger is that the Bibek Debroy Committee has recommended it. That is being economical with the facts. The committee has recommended it not as a stand-alone step, but as part of a slew of measures such as: complete overhaul of the project financing architecture of the Railways involving ruthless weeding out of unviable/long-pending projects; comprehensive accounting reforms; separation of infrastructure and operations; and setting up of a rail regulatory authority. Pending these steps, each of which is a major project in itself (some politically sensitive), the move to give a hasty send-off to the Railway Budget is perplexing(baffling,हैरान करने वाला).

The Railway Budget is indeed a colonial legacy; but so are English, the Railways, Rashtrapati Bhavan and the sedition law. Enough said. All this is not to say that the Railway Budget is a holy cow that cannot be touched. Far from it. The question is not “why”, but “why such a hurry to bury it”?

The answer, in one word: Obfuscation(anxiety,घबराहट). By all accounts, the Railways’ financial position is precarious(uncertain,अनिश्चित) due to the triple whammy of a fall in revenues, a sudden spike in expenditure due to implementation recommendations of the Seventh Pay Commission, and an increasingly unsustainable interest burden on market borrowings. A separate Budget would have meant having to openly declare an operating ratio in excess of 1.0 (in layman’s language, that means one is living beyond one’s means): not a very good advertisement for a system that aspires to have high-speed tilting Talgo trains shortly and Bullet trains in the not-too-distant future. So why not banish and “vanish” the Railway Budget into anonymity as one of the myriad(infinite,असंख्य) annexures in the General Budget and earn a fat “bonus” of about Rs.10,000 crore in the bargain? A smart move indeed! It seems now the Budget is more valuable dead than alive. However, what should be a matter of serious concern to the aam aadmi is that the Railways’ finances are sought to be shored up, not by improving efficiency, increasing revenues and cutting costs, but through a dexterous(skillful,कुशल) bureaucratic sleight of hand, taking cover behind the smokescreen of “reforms”.

Finally, a suggestion to the government: Do not throw the baby out with the bathwater; table an annual “Indian Railways Report” in Parliament on the lines of the Economic Survey prepared by the Chief Economic Advisor under the Ministry of Finance. That will signal reforms with transparency.

courtesy:the hindu

click here for official link

download monthly pdf of august

An uneasy buzz

“That which bends up” is what the word “Chikungunya” means in Kimakonde, an African language. It’s quite an apt word considering the effect this infection has on those affected by it!

Chikungunya is a fever spread by a virus that is transmitted by the female mosquito. Female mosquitoes need proteins from mammalian blood for their eggs to develop, which is why they bite humans. Certain viruses like the dengue and chikungunya viruses collectively called arboviruses (ARthropod BOrne viruses) make use of this requirement of the mosquitoes to ensure their own survival. These viruses were originally present only in the forest areas infecting primarily monkey species. Humans were just incidental hosts. But now due to the impact of industrialisation and loss of forest cover, these viruses have made humans as their permanent hosts. The virus cannot spread from one human to another but can spread only by mosquitoes which get infected while biting an infected individual, thereafter transmitting the virus by biting an uninfected individual.

So, how does chikungunya virus spread and act on the body? Once a mosquito bites, the virus spreads through the epidermal cells of the skin and reaches the inside of the body through the blood stream. The virus primarily targets muscle, joint and skin fibroblasts where the maximum damage occurs. This is the reason why patients experience intense joint pain and swelling along with rashes and acute(intense,तीक्ष्ण) fever. Apart from the tissues, a person’s immunity-mediated response is another important factor that dictates the severity of the disease. This explains why immune-compromised individuals such as very young children and elderly persons are more severely affected by this virus. This is also the reason why individuals with other underlying health complications such as like diabetes and cardiovascular diseases experience have more drastic effects due to the infection. It has to be emphasised at this point thatwhile chikungunya results in extreme morbidity(illness,रुग्णता) and a prolonged(long,लम्बा) phase of physical disability, it is not a fatal disease.

Patient management

A primary concern with respect to chikungunya treatment is effective diagnosis. At present there are no virus-specific detection methods and we have to resort to employing antibody-specific testing which delays diagnosis by a great extent. A study conducted by our group and our collaborators at Nair Hospital in Mumbai showed that almost 10 per cent of dengue patients were co-infected with the chikungunya virus but they were not even treated for the disease. This is a big blow to patient management and disease management. While we were able to detect these co-infections because we employed reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to detect both the viruses, this is not practical in a hospital setting with a huge patient load and the lack of trained personnel. One may argue that dengue is more dangerous than chikungunya due to the complications of dengue as opposed to the non-fatal condition of chikungunya. But one must remember that patient management is quite different for both these infections and has several implications on disease prevention.

The vector plays an extremely important role in the spread of the chikungunya virus. When chikungunya struck in 2005, the reason it was such a huge pandemic was because the virus had mutatedtransform,रूपांतरित) its outside coat protein by a single amino acid that allowed it to replicate faster in another species of Aedes. This allowed the vector to transmit the virus more effectively. In the 2010 outbreak, virus strains sampled from different parts of the country were found to contain mutations on precisely(clearly,स्पस्थ्तया) three sites on their genomes. Sequencing the genome of the virus associated with the current outbreak in North India may reveal new information as to why the outbreak has been so explosive this time. Has the virus mutated again to become more virulent(poisonous,विषैला)?

Control the key

Whatever be the nature of the virus, the only effective method to control this hugely debilitating(weak,दुर्बल) infection is intense vector control and public health awareness programmes. The Mosquitoes serve as reservoirs for these viruses where the viruses survive in low amounts until they can infect a population. Having said this, we are talking of multiple issues here — the number of mosquitoes in nature at a given point in time and the amount of chikungunya virus within these mosquitoes. We recently conducted a survey where we addressed both these issues. We observed that the Aedes mosquitoes were present in small numbers even during the dry season and the viruses were present in these mosquitoes through generations. A single heavy shower was enough for the mosquito population to explode and along with it the virus populations within the mosquitoes. Every time it is a disaster waiting to happen. When the mosquito and the virus population reach a critical number, it results in outbreaks. Therefore, the only way to prevent this by is curbing(control,नियंत्रण) the mosquito population before the monsoon starts.

We face multiple issues with respect to chikungunya disease control in our country. A lack of sensitive virus-specific diagnostic tools, an absence of drugs/vaccine, poor vector control measures and public awareness contribute tremendously in escalating the problem. It is no surprise then that India is considered as the hub for chikungunya spread across the globe.

 courtesy:the hindu

click here for official link

download monthly pdf of august

dalit is right enough

On July 11, 2016, a video of cow vigilantes mercilessly beating up seven Dalit men for skinning a dead cow in Una district, Gujarat, came to light. In protest against the incident, many Dalits have refused to handle cow carcasses(body,शवो). The gau rakshaks should be happy, but they are not. Non-Dalits, presumably including gau rakshaks, have retaliated(react,प्रतिकार) with more violence against Dalits — this time for not picking up cow carcasses — in Samter (August 16), Bhavra (August 20) and Rajkot (August 24), all in Gujarat.

Herein lies the Dalit dilemma(doubt,दुविधा) — he is damned if he does and he is damned if he doesn’t.

The bane of Hindu society is varna, the four-tier arrangement said to be sanctified(holy,पवित्र) by the scriptures. The arrangement encompassed the majority and assigned them places, but it also excluded a large number. The excluded were the outcasts or the untouchables. Inequality by birth was the basis of the arrangement. That inequality stayed with you throughout your life. Violence against Dalits is the punishment for disobeying the rules of the arrangement. Rohith Vemula summed it up: “My birth is my fatal accident.”

×

The Dalit Mobilisation

The Dalits have decided that enough is enough. They have decided to mobilise. The scale of social mobilisation of Dalits in Gujarat and Maharashtra, and to some extent in other parts of the country, has not been seen in recent times. Although much of the media is not covering them, massive rallies and marches are being held. There is palpable(clear,स्पस्थ)anger in the community because of the sense of impunity(free from blame,दंडमुक्ति) with which they are being subjected to violence in certain parts of the country. According to the National Commission for Scheduled Castes, in 2015, Gujarat reported the highest crime rate against Dalits, followed by Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan.

Dalits are angry about the hollowness(falseness,खोखलापन) of the current hyper-nationalism where everything about India is called great and every criticism is labelled as anti-national. They are angry about the way the Una incident and other such incidents are being dismissed as isolated or as conspiracies. It is noteworthy that the boycott of cow carcasses, the rallies and the marches have happened through social, not political, mobilisation.

After a long period of silence, the Prime Minister spoke on August 6. He said, “I get so angry at those who are into the gau rakshak business… I have seen that some people are into crimes all night and wear the garb of gau rakshaks in the day.” The very next day, at a rally, he said, “You can shoot me rather than target the Dalits.” This is a strange statement for a Prime Minister: he should use the enormous(big,बड़ा) powers of his office to punish the perpetrators(criminal,अपराधी) of violence.

Change Agonisingly(painful,पीड़ाजनक) Slow

Change is taking place, but it is agonisingly slow. In urban areas, where economic and professional identities usually take precedence(priority,तरजीह), and in parts of India where social movements have brought about change, a majority of Hindus do not feel passionate about the caste order. Many Hindus may still prefer marriages within the caste, but have friends among Dalits. Many may express angst about the reservation system, but do not begrudge(envy,ईर्ष्या) the limited preference to Dalits in educational institutions and in some jobs.

However, there is a section of Hindu society that continues to look back with nostalgia(regret,खिन्नता) at the days of caste domination. Many of them have read a sign of approval in the BJP’s victory in 2014. The cow vigilantes are the latest manifestation of centuries of a supremacist ideology. The flurry of bans on cow slaughter and beef consumption, and the aggressive majoritarian narrative, have given them fresh wind.

Few people saw the casteist agenda more clearly than Dr Ambedkar and ‘Periyar’ E V Ramasamy. Both were pessimistic(negative,निराशावादी) about the reformation of Hindu society. Dr Ambedkar did not think that Dalits could find dignity within the fold of the Hindu religion and urged(forced,मजबूर) them to convert to Buddhism. Periyar’s way was atheism and rationalism. The third way is reform of the Hindu social order and accelerating the trends that will usher(show,दिखाना) in a new social order — education, industrialisation, urbanisation, communication and technological advance.

The Constitutional Goal

For the Hindu hyper-nationalists, the idea of a ‘Hindu’ nation is superior to the idea of a constitutional democratic republic. They will sweep the pains of caste history under the carpet. They think that to uphold the idea of a ‘Hindu’ nation it is necessary to underplay its flaws and hide the price that is paid by millions of Dalits and the minorities. On the other hand, the Constitution-makers did not deny the existence of these problems: they acknowledged the prevalence(spreading,प्रसार) of caste differences and discrimination(unfair,भेदभाव) and formulated what they believed would be intermediate solutions, such as reservation for the Scheduled Castes and rights of minorities.

The real focus of the Constitution is to secure a set of natural rights that every Indian should enjoy, irrespective of the historical injustices. It is to make caste, religion and gender irrelevant to citizenship and citizens’ rights.

The project of creating this sense of equal citizenship is still a work-in-progress in this vast and complex land. Hindu hyper-nationalism, which is a form of majoritarianism, is at odds with the constitutional project. The conflict(battle,विवाद) is playing out, in an increasingly violent manner, before our eyes. The consequences(result,परिणाम) of a long-drawn conflict will be terrible for the country and its progress toward the goal of a peaceful and prosperous nation.

courtesy:indian express

click here for official link