To what extent does the path dependence of events cause us to take the "status quo" as inevitable?
Did Jairam Ramesh support bank nationalization as a sophomore in IITB in 1970?
Did Jairam Ramesh support bank nationalization as a sophomore in IITB in 1970?
We tend to take a certain state of affairs as "unchangeable" and make all sorts of arguments to keep it as-is, because of inertia
E.g. Many people who in principle may dislike the idea of Europe, would've voted "Remain" in the Brexit vote
Because it's too hard to change things
E.g. Many people who in principle may dislike the idea of Europe, would've voted "Remain" in the Brexit vote
Because it's too hard to change things
So the position is -
Hey...maybe the idea of Europe was wrong to begin with
But we are in it now...it's too difficult to get out of this mess..
So let's keep it as is.
Hey...maybe the idea of Europe was wrong to begin with
But we are in it now...it's too difficult to get out of this mess..
So let's keep it as is.
Similarly in India there are lots and lots of people who would've found Indira's decision to "nationalize" banks terrible in 1969-70
But today they make arguments on why we should be skeptical about the virtues of privatization
Because it's hard to change things
But today they make arguments on why we should be skeptical about the virtues of privatization
Because it's hard to change things
