A Bold Agenda for United Progressive Alliance (UPA)
Dost Mittar May 19, 2004
#164 Posted by dost_mittar on June 6, 2004 7:07:48 am
harimou#162
The best answer can be summed up in an urdu verse:
ibtidaye ishq hai rota hai kya
aage aage dekhiye hota hai kya
Roughly translated, it means that it is just the start of the affair, wait and see what happens next!
As the article says, there are too many unknowns at the present time. We can revisit this subject in six months. I hope that both of us hope that I am right and you are wrong!
The best answer can be summed up in an urdu verse:
ibtidaye ishq hai rota hai kya
aage aage dekhiye hota hai kya
Roughly translated, it means that it is just the start of the affair, wait and see what happens next!
As the article says, there are too many unknowns at the present time. We can revisit this subject in six months. I hope that both of us hope that I am right and you are wrong!
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#163 Posted by harimau on June 5, 2004 7:02:30 pm
Well, Mr. Dost-Mittar, let us see how bold Mr. Manmohan Singh and Mr. Chidambaram get in the face of the loonies of the Left wing.
From Rediff:
The core problem for Chidambaram
June 05, 2004
It is hard not to feel a little sorry for P Chidambaram. He had to contend with a very odd set of cabinet colleagues during his tenure as finance minister in 1996. This time the colleagues are odder still.
Since government is largely about teamwork, it will be interesting to see how things turn out for him. Much will depend on the sort of support he gets from his prime minister. He didn`t get any last time.
Neither Deve Gowda nor Gujral -- how does it feel to have such men as your boss, I wonder -- understood what Mr Chidambaram was attempting. In fact, Gujral let him down badly over the manner in which the Fifth Pay Commission`s recommendations were to be implemented.
That may not happen this time but, really, how much prime ministerial support can he count on? This is the million-dollar question. No answer is available as yet.
P V Narasimha Rao recently said that he stood ``like a rock`` behind his finance minister, Manmohan Singh. If so, he must have been a rather shaky rock because within three months of becoming finance minister, in September 1991, Manmohan Singh resigned over the fertiliser subsidy issue. (Rao, however, had turned down his resignation).
The prime minister had failed to back him against two of his own cabinet colleagues, who would not support any increase at all. One of those is back now and remains as populist as ever.
Mr Chidambaram is made of sterner stuff and will not quit easily. But it will take all his will power to, as the Americans say, hang in there. One wishes him luck. He is going to need rather a lot of it.
Some of it has already come his way. His predecessor, Jaswant Singh, has left him in clover. Mr Chidambaram has been gracious enough to acknowledge this. But, as everyone knows, it takes very little time to run through legacies.
The forex reserves could begin to trickle away, especially if the external affairs minister continues to irritate the US with such single-minded devotion.
With the Left in full flow, strikes could happen. High oil prices could end low inflation. Mani Shankar Aiyar, the petroleum minister, has already said that the government is not going to raise the price of petrol, diesel, kerosene and LPG.
Political compulsions could increase revenue expenditure and therefore the revenue deficit. In fact, with divestment cancelled, this is certain. The only question now is by how much.
In coalition cabinets, as Yashwant Sinha discovered, disasters lurk behind every file, especially in the beginning when everyone is trying out for size. It takes supreme prime ministerial tact, guile and determination to remove the veto and the accompanying demand that everyone sports in his or her pocket.
Dr Singh and Mr Chidambaram will have to deal with several of these vetoers, often simultaneously. Sharad Pawar, Laloo Prasad, Ram Vilas Paswan, T R Baalu, Dayanidhi Maran are all members of the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs. And as only three members of the CCEA are from the Congress, they are in a majority.
Mr Vajpayee`s CCEA had 14 ministers, 9 of them from the BJP. That made a difference when it was sought which, in the beginning, was not often.
Jaswant Singh was very lucky. He came into the finance ministry towards the end of the NDA government. By then Mr Vajpayee was in full control. Manmohan Singh is not, at least not yet. With the No 10 factor, he may never be.
Whence the biggest similarity between this government and the NDA -- if Mr Vajpayee had to contend with the Sangh Parivar, Dr Singh and Mr Chidambaram will have to contend with ``The Parivar`` at No 10. This could become their main problem.
In this government, elements like Laloo will want the lion`s share of the extra spending, either for their own states or for increasing the subsidies that their ministries dole out. This is precisely where the prime minister`s support would be needed.
It would be very surprising if it was forthcoming in the measure required. He knows that a dog with a bone in its mouth doesn`t bark.
For the first three years, Mr Vajpayee also did not support his finance minister, who was left to twist slowly in the wind. The result of being thus abandoned was that Mr Sinha ended up doing a lot of damage to the economy -- mostly, he says, against his will.
In that sense, the NDA government and this one are almost identical. Amongst other things, they are the first ones where the finance minister is starting from a weaker position than his cabinet colleagues.
This is because of two reasons. One, in both, to start with the prime minister was not fully in control. And, two, the political weight of Mr Chidambaram is equal to that of Mr Sinha, somewhere around zero but not negative.
Taken together this adds up to a great structural weakness in this government. Never have the PM and the FM combined been as weak as this. That is why shoulders are drooping. You can forget about investment as long this weakness persists.
But it need not, as we saw in the NDA government. There are two ways out of the problem. One is that, in due course, the country gets a new prime minister. There was a time, around 2001, when the first almost happened in the NDA government.
Or, alternatively, the one in office succeeds in gaining full control as Mr Vajpayee did. He cleverly used the NDA allies against his opponents to do this. Will Manmohan Singh be able to do the same thing? If he does, it will be as big a surprise as his becoming prime minister.
But that is in the future. For the moment, the NDA legacy has given Mr Chidambaram considerable room for manoeuvre. Only one finance minister before this, V P Singh, enjoyed a similar luxury, albeit on a much smaller scale. And he was very effective as long as he had the prime minister`s support.
This means that Mr Chidambaram doesn`t have to do anything other than give a long winded speech. But he need not raise taxes or even try to cut subsidies this time. All he has to do is to simply re-present Jaswant`s Singh`s interim budget after attaching a few knobs and bells to it.
If nothing else, it will be consistent with the minimum part of the Common Minimum Programme.
From Rediff:
The core problem for Chidambaram
June 05, 2004
It is hard not to feel a little sorry for P Chidambaram. He had to contend with a very odd set of cabinet colleagues during his tenure as finance minister in 1996. This time the colleagues are odder still.
Since government is largely about teamwork, it will be interesting to see how things turn out for him. Much will depend on the sort of support he gets from his prime minister. He didn`t get any last time.
Neither Deve Gowda nor Gujral -- how does it feel to have such men as your boss, I wonder -- understood what Mr Chidambaram was attempting. In fact, Gujral let him down badly over the manner in which the Fifth Pay Commission`s recommendations were to be implemented.
That may not happen this time but, really, how much prime ministerial support can he count on? This is the million-dollar question. No answer is available as yet.
P V Narasimha Rao recently said that he stood ``like a rock`` behind his finance minister, Manmohan Singh. If so, he must have been a rather shaky rock because within three months of becoming finance minister, in September 1991, Manmohan Singh resigned over the fertiliser subsidy issue. (Rao, however, had turned down his resignation).
The prime minister had failed to back him against two of his own cabinet colleagues, who would not support any increase at all. One of those is back now and remains as populist as ever.
Mr Chidambaram is made of sterner stuff and will not quit easily. But it will take all his will power to, as the Americans say, hang in there. One wishes him luck. He is going to need rather a lot of it.
Some of it has already come his way. His predecessor, Jaswant Singh, has left him in clover. Mr Chidambaram has been gracious enough to acknowledge this. But, as everyone knows, it takes very little time to run through legacies.
The forex reserves could begin to trickle away, especially if the external affairs minister continues to irritate the US with such single-minded devotion.
With the Left in full flow, strikes could happen. High oil prices could end low inflation. Mani Shankar Aiyar, the petroleum minister, has already said that the government is not going to raise the price of petrol, diesel, kerosene and LPG.
Political compulsions could increase revenue expenditure and therefore the revenue deficit. In fact, with divestment cancelled, this is certain. The only question now is by how much.
In coalition cabinets, as Yashwant Sinha discovered, disasters lurk behind every file, especially in the beginning when everyone is trying out for size. It takes supreme prime ministerial tact, guile and determination to remove the veto and the accompanying demand that everyone sports in his or her pocket.
Dr Singh and Mr Chidambaram will have to deal with several of these vetoers, often simultaneously. Sharad Pawar, Laloo Prasad, Ram Vilas Paswan, T R Baalu, Dayanidhi Maran are all members of the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs. And as only three members of the CCEA are from the Congress, they are in a majority.
Mr Vajpayee`s CCEA had 14 ministers, 9 of them from the BJP. That made a difference when it was sought which, in the beginning, was not often.
Jaswant Singh was very lucky. He came into the finance ministry towards the end of the NDA government. By then Mr Vajpayee was in full control. Manmohan Singh is not, at least not yet. With the No 10 factor, he may never be.
Whence the biggest similarity between this government and the NDA -- if Mr Vajpayee had to contend with the Sangh Parivar, Dr Singh and Mr Chidambaram will have to contend with ``The Parivar`` at No 10. This could become their main problem.
In this government, elements like Laloo will want the lion`s share of the extra spending, either for their own states or for increasing the subsidies that their ministries dole out. This is precisely where the prime minister`s support would be needed.
It would be very surprising if it was forthcoming in the measure required. He knows that a dog with a bone in its mouth doesn`t bark.
For the first three years, Mr Vajpayee also did not support his finance minister, who was left to twist slowly in the wind. The result of being thus abandoned was that Mr Sinha ended up doing a lot of damage to the economy -- mostly, he says, against his will.
In that sense, the NDA government and this one are almost identical. Amongst other things, they are the first ones where the finance minister is starting from a weaker position than his cabinet colleagues.
This is because of two reasons. One, in both, to start with the prime minister was not fully in control. And, two, the political weight of Mr Chidambaram is equal to that of Mr Sinha, somewhere around zero but not negative.
Taken together this adds up to a great structural weakness in this government. Never have the PM and the FM combined been as weak as this. That is why shoulders are drooping. You can forget about investment as long this weakness persists.
But it need not, as we saw in the NDA government. There are two ways out of the problem. One is that, in due course, the country gets a new prime minister. There was a time, around 2001, when the first almost happened in the NDA government.
Or, alternatively, the one in office succeeds in gaining full control as Mr Vajpayee did. He cleverly used the NDA allies against his opponents to do this. Will Manmohan Singh be able to do the same thing? If he does, it will be as big a surprise as his becoming prime minister.
But that is in the future. For the moment, the NDA legacy has given Mr Chidambaram considerable room for manoeuvre. Only one finance minister before this, V P Singh, enjoyed a similar luxury, albeit on a much smaller scale. And he was very effective as long as he had the prime minister`s support.
This means that Mr Chidambaram doesn`t have to do anything other than give a long winded speech. But he need not raise taxes or even try to cut subsidies this time. All he has to do is to simply re-present Jaswant`s Singh`s interim budget after attaching a few knobs and bells to it.
If nothing else, it will be consistent with the minimum part of the Common Minimum Programme.
#162 Posted by harimau on June 5, 2004 7:02:30 pm
More from Rediff:
False debate on `India shining`
June 05, 2004
It is an old trait: lots of people actually like bad news, and they don`t treat the good news as a welcome development. Indeed, good news makes many people who run what one might call the ``bad news industry`` get very upset indeed.
Perhaps breastbeating gives some of us greater satisfaction than the thought of economic well-being. And so it is that if the National Sample Survey tells us that poverty increased in the reform years, a whole army jumps at it as proof that something terrible is going on in the name of reform.
If the NSS says the opposite, that poverty has come down, people think the government is fabricating the statistics. If the stock market drops 3 per cent of its value, the headlines are bigger than when the market climbs by the same percentage.
In the days when the advent of the Indian middle class was still a novel subject, anyone touting the thesis had to counter not just criticism but even hostility.
It is another facet of the same syndrome that makes it politically incorrect now to argue that India is in fact ``shining`` (to use the ad man`s phrase).
To make this claim does not mean that everyone in the country is having a good time, or that all our age old problems have been solved.
But it is fair to say that things are getting better, and as Mr Chidambaram is willing to testify, the economic situation that he has to handle is quite comfortable. But woe betide the old government for having said so. It deserved to lose the election for its effrontery.
The context here is the assumption by the Congress-led alliance that job growth in the reform era has been poor, that unemployment has grown and that something needs to be done about it.
In short, there is bad news and we need correctives. The correctives are spelt out in the ruling alliance`s Common Minimum Programme: employment guarantee programmes, possibly job reservation in the private sector, sticking with the existing labour laws (UPA`s short-hand being ``no hire and fire``), and so on.
Sunil Jain in his columns had punctured this whole ``bad news`` thesis. He pointed out that if job growth slowed in recent years, so did population growth -- and the wage trends do not suggest rising unemployment.
He also pointed out that job growth has been good in the manufacturing sector, which has seen reform; and poor in the agriculture sector, where there has been no reform.
He quoted both statistics and the experts to show that India has been missing the job growth opportunities that come with more foreign investment in labour-intensive export activity -- which China has capitalised on.
That India`s counter-productive policies in areas like weaving and infrastructure have prevented the growth of jobs in these sectors. Indeed, the Left-ruled states (and the Left is in the forefront of the jobs debate) have so far had slower job growth than more capitalist states like Gujarat.
Most of all, there is the bald truth that rapid growth by itself achieves quite a lot on the employment front. All of this could perhaps be short-handed to argue that there is precious little that is wrong with the reform programme, except that there hasn`t been enough of it.
This is certainly not to argue that there is no unemployment in India, but to suggest that the UPA`s understanding of this very important problem is defective and probably born out of the syndrome that makes people dislike good news.
The result is that it is barking up the wrong tree with its preferred solutions, when the old arguments of reformers probably hold more water: create a flexible labour market instead of trying to protect the high-wage islands, get rid of small-scale reservations so as to allow the growth of labour-intensive industries, reform agriculture and create the infrastructure to support rapid economic growth.
The reformers in the UPA government may have exactly these policies and objectives in mind, but they will be hamstrung by the assertions of the Common Minimum Programme. More`s the pity.
False debate on `India shining`
June 05, 2004
It is an old trait: lots of people actually like bad news, and they don`t treat the good news as a welcome development. Indeed, good news makes many people who run what one might call the ``bad news industry`` get very upset indeed.
Perhaps breastbeating gives some of us greater satisfaction than the thought of economic well-being. And so it is that if the National Sample Survey tells us that poverty increased in the reform years, a whole army jumps at it as proof that something terrible is going on in the name of reform.
If the NSS says the opposite, that poverty has come down, people think the government is fabricating the statistics. If the stock market drops 3 per cent of its value, the headlines are bigger than when the market climbs by the same percentage.
In the days when the advent of the Indian middle class was still a novel subject, anyone touting the thesis had to counter not just criticism but even hostility.
It is another facet of the same syndrome that makes it politically incorrect now to argue that India is in fact ``shining`` (to use the ad man`s phrase).
To make this claim does not mean that everyone in the country is having a good time, or that all our age old problems have been solved.
But it is fair to say that things are getting better, and as Mr Chidambaram is willing to testify, the economic situation that he has to handle is quite comfortable. But woe betide the old government for having said so. It deserved to lose the election for its effrontery.
The context here is the assumption by the Congress-led alliance that job growth in the reform era has been poor, that unemployment has grown and that something needs to be done about it.
In short, there is bad news and we need correctives. The correctives are spelt out in the ruling alliance`s Common Minimum Programme: employment guarantee programmes, possibly job reservation in the private sector, sticking with the existing labour laws (UPA`s short-hand being ``no hire and fire``), and so on.
Sunil Jain in his columns had punctured this whole ``bad news`` thesis. He pointed out that if job growth slowed in recent years, so did population growth -- and the wage trends do not suggest rising unemployment.
He also pointed out that job growth has been good in the manufacturing sector, which has seen reform; and poor in the agriculture sector, where there has been no reform.
He quoted both statistics and the experts to show that India has been missing the job growth opportunities that come with more foreign investment in labour-intensive export activity -- which China has capitalised on.
That India`s counter-productive policies in areas like weaving and infrastructure have prevented the growth of jobs in these sectors. Indeed, the Left-ruled states (and the Left is in the forefront of the jobs debate) have so far had slower job growth than more capitalist states like Gujarat.
Most of all, there is the bald truth that rapid growth by itself achieves quite a lot on the employment front. All of this could perhaps be short-handed to argue that there is precious little that is wrong with the reform programme, except that there hasn`t been enough of it.
This is certainly not to argue that there is no unemployment in India, but to suggest that the UPA`s understanding of this very important problem is defective and probably born out of the syndrome that makes people dislike good news.
The result is that it is barking up the wrong tree with its preferred solutions, when the old arguments of reformers probably hold more water: create a flexible labour market instead of trying to protect the high-wage islands, get rid of small-scale reservations so as to allow the growth of labour-intensive industries, reform agriculture and create the infrastructure to support rapid economic growth.
The reformers in the UPA government may have exactly these policies and objectives in mind, but they will be hamstrung by the assertions of the Common Minimum Programme. More`s the pity.
#161 Posted by harimau on June 4, 2004 6:03:15 pm
Ref AlephNull #160
It is not a Common Minimum Program, it is the Lowest Common Denominator!
When Judge Carswell was rejected by the US Senate for the US Supreme Court on the basis that his judicial record was mediocre, Sen. Roman Hruska of Nebraska protested saying that mediocre people need representation too.
In India, it seems like stupidity needs more than its share of representation!
It is not a Common Minimum Program, it is the Lowest Common Denominator!
When Judge Carswell was rejected by the US Senate for the US Supreme Court on the basis that his judicial record was mediocre, Sen. Roman Hruska of Nebraska protested saying that mediocre people need representation too.
In India, it seems like stupidity needs more than its share of representation!
#160 Posted by AlephNull on June 4, 2004 7:17:06 am
#159 Posted by nb on June 2, 2004 7:15:26 am
Oh dear, Harimau
I know you`re talking to someone else, but where`s the need to even bring up rape? No one denies that it has traditionally been used as an instrument of power, to subdue the conquered and generally make a point. Nor should anyone deny that it was used by Muslim invaders in India over centuries, but we know all this....it is part of our racial memories. Why go on? Why talk of eunuchs? I may not agree with all you say, but you seem like a smart man, why this?
I know you`re talking to someone else, but where`s the need to even bring up rape? No one denies that it has traditionally been used as an instrument of power, to subdue the conquered and generally make a point. Nor should anyone deny that it was used by Muslim invaders in India over centuries, but we know all this....it is part of our racial memories. Why go on? Why talk of eunuchs? I may not agree with all you say, but you seem like a smart man, why this?
#158 Posted by harimau on June 1, 2004 10:32:27 am
Ref sadna #155
[....what is next, harems of concubines?]
Unfortunately, since you are female, we can`t have you castrated and serve as the eunuch guard of the harem.
[....what is next, harems of concubines?]
Unfortunately, since you are female, we can`t have you castrated and serve as the eunuch guard of the harem.
#157 Posted by dost_mittar on June 1, 2004 8:51:25 am
Will the left have more influence on Manmohan Singh than the RSS outfits had on the Vajpayee govt.? Watch and see!
``Sangh Parivar outfit praises UPA`s CMP
June 01, 2004 19:53 IST
The Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government on Tuesday received commendation for its Common Minimum Programme from an unexpected quarter as the Swadeshi Jagran Manch hailed the document as `a good beginning`.
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh-affiliated organisation said the new coalition had `attempted to reflect the aspirations of the common man and balance the growth imperatives`.
``The Common Minimum Programme appears to disseminate the message that the government is serious about welfare of farmers, artisans, workers and weaker sections of society,`` SJM national convener Muralidhar Rao told reporters in Delhi.
Also Read
Common Minimum Programme
``It can be called a good beginning but there is a long road to be travelled between promises and implementation,`` he said.
Claiming that the economic policies of the National Democratic Alliance government were largely responsible for its defeat, Rao said, ``Except for its stand on WTO issues, NDA`s economic policies were rejected by the electorate.``
The divestment of PSUs `definitely` played a part in NDA`s debacle as `even those who support divestments think it was done wrongly`.
Rao said the electorate had given a `mandate` for greater focus on agriculture, unorganised and small-scale sectors and development with employment.``
``Sangh Parivar outfit praises UPA`s CMP
June 01, 2004 19:53 IST
The Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government on Tuesday received commendation for its Common Minimum Programme from an unexpected quarter as the Swadeshi Jagran Manch hailed the document as `a good beginning`.
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh-affiliated organisation said the new coalition had `attempted to reflect the aspirations of the common man and balance the growth imperatives`.
``The Common Minimum Programme appears to disseminate the message that the government is serious about welfare of farmers, artisans, workers and weaker sections of society,`` SJM national convener Muralidhar Rao told reporters in Delhi.
Also Read
Common Minimum Programme
``It can be called a good beginning but there is a long road to be travelled between promises and implementation,`` he said.
Claiming that the economic policies of the National Democratic Alliance government were largely responsible for its defeat, Rao said, ``Except for its stand on WTO issues, NDA`s economic policies were rejected by the electorate.``
The divestment of PSUs `definitely` played a part in NDA`s debacle as `even those who support divestments think it was done wrongly`.
Rao said the electorate had given a `mandate` for greater focus on agriculture, unorganised and small-scale sectors and development with employment.``
#156 Posted by dost_mittar on June 1, 2004 7:22:10 am
mohar11#153:
``I am not sure why you are giving these folks the benefit of doubt.``
You may call it wishful thinking.:).
But seriously, there is reason to believe what I do. Given the nature of the mandate and the role of the leftists in the formualtion of the CMP, those kind of platitudes were inevitable even if the job of writing it were to be given to arjun-m. But the drivers of the policy and programs are going to be the likes of Manmohan Singh and Chidambram and they have kept those loopholes to ensure that they will be able to drive their trucks through them whenever needed.
``I am not sure why you are giving these folks the benefit of doubt.``
You may call it wishful thinking.:).
But seriously, there is reason to believe what I do. Given the nature of the mandate and the role of the leftists in the formualtion of the CMP, those kind of platitudes were inevitable even if the job of writing it were to be given to arjun-m. But the drivers of the policy and programs are going to be the likes of Manmohan Singh and Chidambram and they have kept those loopholes to ensure that they will be able to drive their trucks through them whenever needed.
#155 Posted by sadna on June 1, 2004 4:33:34 am
harimau #154
``Historically, any slave consignment would have been the province of the Islamist thugs.``
Precisely. The extent to which loser Sanghis strive to be like their purported enemies of the past, it looks suspiciously like pure jealousy. We have seen rampages of destruction, rape and murder by these wannabes, what is next, harems of concubines?
``Historically, any slave consignment would have been the province of the Islamist thugs.``
Precisely. The extent to which loser Sanghis strive to be like their purported enemies of the past, it looks suspiciously like pure jealousy. We have seen rampages of destruction, rape and murder by these wannabes, what is next, harems of concubines?
#154 Posted by harimau on May 31, 2004 9:56:55 pm
Ref sadna #152
[Your concern for bhajan singing does not fool anyone here - it is clear that in common with loser Sanghis of your kidney, you are waiting for the day when you get your pick of the latest slave consignment.]
Historically, any slave consignment would have been the province of the Islamist thugs, which conveniently escapes your attention.
Yaaaaawn.
[Your concern for bhajan singing does not fool anyone here - it is clear that in common with loser Sanghis of your kidney, you are waiting for the day when you get your pick of the latest slave consignment.]
Historically, any slave consignment would have been the province of the Islamist thugs, which conveniently escapes your attention.
Yaaaaawn.
#153 Posted by mohar11 on May 31, 2004 6:10:44 pm
DM
//...Those loopholes have been put there for a purpose! ...//
Yes - the purpose is to fend off criticism from people who know better.
These folks have no intention of following the right policy. Protecting steel plants and car makers doesn`t serve poor or rural sector - it in fact acts against their interests - like it has for last 50 years.
I am not sure why you are giving these folks the benefit of doubt.
//...Those loopholes have been put there for a purpose! ...//
Yes - the purpose is to fend off criticism from people who know better.
These folks have no intention of following the right policy. Protecting steel plants and car makers doesn`t serve poor or rural sector - it in fact acts against their interests - like it has for last 50 years.
I am not sure why you are giving these folks the benefit of doubt.
#152 Posted by sadna on May 31, 2004 6:10:04 pm
harimau #150
Your concern for bhajan singing does not fool anyone here - it is clear that in common with loser Sanghis of your kidney, you are waiting for the day when you get your pick of the latest slave consignment.
Your concern for bhajan singing does not fool anyone here - it is clear that in common with loser Sanghis of your kidney, you are waiting for the day when you get your pick of the latest slave consignment.
#151 Posted by dost_mittar on May 31, 2004 10:26:01 am
harimou#149
I think that you meant suzuki and not subaru.
mohar11:
Those loopholes have been put there for a purpose!
I think that you meant suzuki and not subaru.
mohar11:
Those loopholes have been put there for a purpose!
#150 Posted by harimau on May 31, 2004 6:12:41 am
Ref dost-mittar #146
[arjun-m:
I do not see any problem in having a profit making unit in the public sector as long as it is subject to the market discipline. Take for example the Maruti Enterprise; as long as it has to compete with other car makers without any subsidy or preferential treatment by the government, selling it or not should be governed only by the interest of the public as a shareholder in that enterprise, which would include the alternative use of the potential proceeds of sale by the public.]
Well, there is only so much Maruti can do to sell a 1985 Subaru in competition with a 2000-or-later Hyundai, Indica, Daewoo, Mitsubishi, Skoda, Toyota, Ford or GM. Lower price isn`t the only answer. Nor is that breadbox on wheels known as the Maruti van. Particularly when people are lusting after Mercedes-Benzes.
So a few months back, the company sold a substantil portion of its outstanding shares to Subaru of Japan. If I recall correctly, Subaru now is the majority shareholder in Maruti Udyog.
PS. We have a saying in Tamil about trying to make a (clay) Ganesh and ending up with a monkey... sort of a comment about poor workmanship or unintended consequences. I think in this case Sanjay Gandhi started out trying to make a monkey (Maruti = Hanuman) so we all know what kind of an abortion resulted until Subaru was brought in to rescue the project.
[arjun-m:
I do not see any problem in having a profit making unit in the public sector as long as it is subject to the market discipline. Take for example the Maruti Enterprise; as long as it has to compete with other car makers without any subsidy or preferential treatment by the government, selling it or not should be governed only by the interest of the public as a shareholder in that enterprise, which would include the alternative use of the potential proceeds of sale by the public.]
Well, there is only so much Maruti can do to sell a 1985 Subaru in competition with a 2000-or-later Hyundai, Indica, Daewoo, Mitsubishi, Skoda, Toyota, Ford or GM. Lower price isn`t the only answer. Nor is that breadbox on wheels known as the Maruti van. Particularly when people are lusting after Mercedes-Benzes.
So a few months back, the company sold a substantil portion of its outstanding shares to Subaru of Japan. If I recall correctly, Subaru now is the majority shareholder in Maruti Udyog.
PS. We have a saying in Tamil about trying to make a (clay) Ganesh and ending up with a monkey... sort of a comment about poor workmanship or unintended consequences. I think in this case Sanjay Gandhi started out trying to make a monkey (Maruti = Hanuman) so we all know what kind of an abortion resulted until Subaru was brought in to rescue the project.
#149 Posted by harimau on May 31, 2004 6:12:41 am
Ref sadna #119
[`` it should be okay for Congress thugs to target Indian Muslims and Sikhs while simultaneously cheating the Hindus for personal enrichment and continuation of dynastic policies. ``
Yup, you personally prefer that the BJP does this instead.]
You on the other hand would prefer that Hindus be burnt alive for the crime of singing bhajans in public in India.
It seems you just can`t wait for the return of the Golden Age of Aurangzeb.
[`` it should be okay for Congress thugs to target Indian Muslims and Sikhs while simultaneously cheating the Hindus for personal enrichment and continuation of dynastic policies. ``
Yup, you personally prefer that the BJP does this instead.]
You on the other hand would prefer that Hindus be burnt alive for the crime of singing bhajans in public in India.
It seems you just can`t wait for the return of the Golden Age of Aurangzeb.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- CreateAlpha: Lawyers movement was a... Morality of Lawyers' Movement
- tahmed32: jay thakery: you were... I Want Jinnah's Pakistan
- CreateAlpha: Oh and one other... Uneven Democracy : The
- Skeptical: I really do not... Morality of Lawyers' Movement
- tahmed32: So the lawyer's movement... Morality of Lawyers' Movement
- CreateAlpha: I think Romair has... Uneven Democracy : The
- muqaddam: A simplistic view of... Crowning of a Crony
- nemesis3: #38 Posted by Pardesi... Uneven Democracy : The
