Not complicated. Many factors but comes down to Hindu unity. Dharmic unity's point is to defend pluralism, yet to sustain it - it has to be rooted in dignity, opportunity, mobility. Our Gods overlap but some of us want to be in watertight compartments. #DharmaSangathan#Karnataka
Beyond creating some awareness in all sincerity, there is no point bemoaning it. Socio-econ trends vary from country to country but they aren’t completely unique either. Here too, it will play out well over time. Modernity suits Dharmic values/polities in a way feudalism doesn’t.
Whenever BJP seems more secure, certain type surfaces saying X and Y same, Hindu unity meaningless, first remove quotas etc.
But with INC get more caste *and* religious quotas. If you want to vote your caste etc, fine. If you want to vote as a Hindu, please do not fool yourself.
The idea of India debate is not yet settled. Against a centrifugal one you have centripetal one. Latter more OK w/ individual rights. Once this becomes bipartisan etc consensus, then less urgency to vote as a Sangathanist. Our society is not there yet hence neither is our polity.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Anything that can be taxed in a global context can be tracked by definition. Additional TCS on tax-paid money which you will then recover during tax filing achieves what? Working capital for Govt? TDS is on what you owe-one doesn't owe anything here. Even so, 20%? Makes no sense.
This is classic Yes Minister move. First, it is backward looking. India’s CAD stress was last year - this year and ahead it is rather benign. Second, once they started with a wrong premise (high TCS) then it becomes easy to add: but what about credit cards? No, premise is wrong.
20% TCS LRS already partially impacted one of PM’s key projects. GIFT City as India’s “Hong Kong” needs mainland’s liquidity to anchor it as an offshore yet onshore financial global centre. At least we should exempt our own projects. IMHO wrong technocratic counsel to leadership.
There was a time when India joined WTO's ITA without applying its mind. Here we are learning from the OGs - Hamilton, List, Clay, Lincoln, Bismarck, Deng - and going one better :)
What I find really admirable about the PM is his immense pragmatism. Somewhere in the middle of his first term he realised that 'Washington Consensus' on trade and industry was not fully working for Make In India. He then did a gradual pivot despite criticism from few supporters.
His immense capacity to listen and reorient, honed no doubt in Gujarat as CM if not earlier, is visible in so many different decisions. Bit cliched, but truly Hard Work vs Harvard. Very LKY-sque. Or as the Chinese would call it-crossing the river by touching the stones. Bayesian.
Younger, educated in India vote “rightist” BJP more whereas in “US” they vote “left-liberal” [LT @arpitrage]
‘West/Liberalism’, ‘Dharma/Indicness’ are only sustainable universalisms. Not Christianity, Islam. Certainly not CCP. Even West, India complement as much as they compete.
Both fundamentally represent integrationist mindset more than expansionist or isolationist ones. You can use the word syncretic if you want. Some have even used the term “boa constrictor”. The difference anxiety both create is something to behold. One is just more prominent now.
But complementary part is more important than the competitive part between the two.
In a slightly different context Swami Vivekananda had written about the Vedantic mind and the Muslim body.
That is how I think of “Western organisation”, “Dharmic pluralism”. Work well together.
One has to wonder why did we go through Partition in 1947 and a genocide in East Bengal in 1971 - where Hindus were disproportionately murdered/raped? If after all that, we cannot even screen a movie that denounces ISIS. Remember it is “West” Bengal in East of India for a reason.
Not only does this regressive minority street veto get normalised by the opposition (governing some of the states) - worse, Hindu “fundamentalism” gets a bad name.
Well, Hindu fundamentalism is glorious because Hindu fundamentals are glorious.
Not all fundamentals are the same.
It is pertinent to point that majority of the majority of West Bengal voted for the party which lost the last assembly elections due to much bigger majority of the minority voting against it.
It is relevant because of the blatant appeasement of the mindset that led to 1947/1971.
Goods trade -$267B
Service trade +$142.5B
Net trade -$124.5B
Remittances +$100B (arguably akin to service exports)
Gold trade: -$35B (arguably capital not current a/c).
Adjusted trade FY23 surplus. If you subtract royalties, much smaller deficit.
Some of the gold imports would be re-exported after value add, but a lot of the jewellery exports are also diamond etc based (both natural and artificial)
In any case, broader point that India is somehow a chronically trade deficit country is not true anymore way some assume it.
Current, capital a/cs (depends on definitions) mirror each other. Stable polities often attract capital flows. If someone buys INR bonds they lend money say to Indian govt/co. If they buy Indian shares, capital inflow will lead to trade outflow (reserves nuances notwithstanding.)
I have not read any recent coherent piece why India should not have a more open capital account. Debate has been going on for a generation; much has changed for the "for" side. "Against" side has vague fears. Not exaggerating: no point-by-point argument which one can engage with.
Except for less than 2 years - India has been a democracy since Independence, Partition. That is ~75 years. No default. No hyperinflation. Has added territory net not lost. Soon to be 3rd largest GDP by both $ and PPP. Solid macros, growth. You can get 40y at 7.2% in a cheap INR.
China, Indonesia both wrong comparisons for different reasons. India already has very liberal equity markets. The bond markets are less so.
And even for outbound flows, monitoring/bilateral treaties are key. Gradually liberalise. Let Bhavesh in Surat buy US/Canadian oil stocks..