8 ms·

After the recent Demonetization brouhaha, which led to over a 100 deaths[1], most of them from the lower strata of society, it makes sense for the current gover

After the recent Demonetization brouhaha, which led to over a 100 deaths[1], most of them from the lower strata of society, it makes sense for the current government to start off UBI whole heartedly, especially since they can tie in the entire demonetization/cashless economy/jan dhan etc. stories together. However, I sincerely hope that the execution is well planned, rather than hasty. This article though seems to be a marketing report for BIEN. Remember that with a country as large as India, Government reports are many in number but very few schemes having national level adoption. I can think of numerous states that would support doling out sops for the poor instead of UBI. Interesting times these are for the country. Let's hope sense prevails. [1] http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-demonetization-government-not-mourning-over-100-deaths-due-to-cash-crunch-says-opposition-2280902 http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-demonetization-governme...

shripadk 10y ago
I'll take liberty to correct your perspective: A demonetization move that directly affected livelihood of billion Indians, with a possibility of large-scale riots, but ended with only 100 deaths. I don't see how it cannot be termed a success. Can you think of any major move that directly affected the entire country but did not end in large scale riots? If you need to understand what a "hasty decision" means take a look at the Partition of India, where only a small fraction of the entire populace was displaced but ended up causing up almost 2 million deaths by some estimates.
- m_fam_wa_k 10y ago
  Let's compare that figure to say fatal accidents in Kathipara Junction, Chennai. It used to average more than one a day. OP is cherry picking.
  - madmax108 10y ago
    Just because there are deaths caused somewhere else doesn't legitimize these deaths. This is human life we are talking about mate. That's a basic logical fallacy, which seems to be the favorite tool in debates for supporters of the current government[1]. TBH if you spent 3600 Crore meant for a statue [2] for railway safety (and not just some namesake program but actual on the ground change), which I agree needs a upheavel, I'd be a much happier citizen of the country. [1] https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque [2] https://www.thequint.com/india/2016/12/24/mumbai-protest-3600-crore-chhatrapati-shivaji-memorial-vishal-dadlani-devendra-fadnavis-narendra-modi-maratha https://www.thequint.com/india/2016/12/24/mumbai-protest-360...
- thunderbong 10y ago
  brouhaha means - Loud confused noise from many sources. I don't think anything was said about it being a success or otherwise
  - shripadk 10y ago
    It implied otherwise. The OP tied an economic move (demonetization) to the death of a 100 people. That is a very narrow perspective to take, in my honest opinion.
- shabda 10y ago
  I'll take liberty to correct your perspective: A demonetization move that directly affected livelihood of billion Indians, but we don't know whether for good or for worse. I don't like Mr Modi, but I was cautiously optimistic the day it was announced. However over last two months, its been clear to me that no thought was put in the decision. If you want to look at a data driven journalism to the flip flops, you can start here: http://www.indiaspend.com/cover-story/how-modi-changed-and-changed-the-demonetisation-narrative-54391 http://www.indiaspend.com/cover-story/how-modi-changed-and-c....
  - shripadk 10y ago
    Then I'll take the liberty to correct your understanding of my comment: I spoke about: a move that directly affected livelihood of billion Indians, "with a possibility of large-scale riots". Since those large-scale riots did not happen it can be termed a success. Why am I talking about "large-scale riots"? Because the Opposition (even the Supreme Court of India) predicted large-scale riots: http://www.merinews.com/mobile/article/India/2016/11/22/notebandi--the-possibility-of-riots/15921058 http://www.merinews.com/mobile/article/India/2016/11/22/note... "Supreme Court says situation after demonetisation serious, fears riots": http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/demonetisation-sc-questions-reduced-limit-of-rs-2000-says-situation-serious/story-R50tMjtAdQLdZDmWXdwt8H.html http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/demonetisation-sc-q...
    - kranner 10y ago
      > Since those large-scale riots did not happen it can be termed a success. You can't be serious.
      - shripadk 10y ago
        I am serious. If you live in India you would have heard of constant fear-mongering by the opposition parties about "large-scale riots" and "financial emergency". No such thing happened. Every Indian co-operated with the move. This is unlike any other demonetization that was carried out previously by 6 other countries which either lead to coup d'état or large-scale riots. Also, is the only counter one can come up with for an economic move is talk about "death of 100 people"? Seriously? In a populace of a billion the death of 100 people for such a huge economic move is close to nothing.
- peteretep 10y ago
  > I don't see how it cannot > be termed a success Has it actually cut corruption? If not, the last few days of pounding payment in Jodhpur trying to find working ATMs, and being stuck for 30m in queues when they finally got their money delivered all seems in vain. That, and, you know, the 100 deaths.
  - shripadk 10y ago
    > Has it actually cut corruption? Yes it has. It depends again on your perspective. Looks like you have only read news of 100 deaths but failed to read news of the many political babus, black money hoarders and tax evaders getting caught with huge amounts of cash (with both old and new notes).
    - _jgdh 10y ago
      > Yes it has It would be helpful if you cited your sources for this. From what I've seen and read, most people found a way to launder their black money through brokers. [2] That's not just speculation, most of the 17 trn rupees of cash has found its way back into legal channels. [1] You were also very cavalier about the downsides of this move. Yes, those 100 deaths are a loss, but far more people were affected. Many did not have any money for a month or more because their employers did not have cash to pay them. There were 8 million affected workers in the beedi industry alone, more in other sectors. These are daily wage labourers, remember. [2] Many farmers were forced to sell their crops for pittances to make ends meet. One example is cauliflower being sold for ₹ 1/kg. Its usually sold at ₹ 12. The prices of soyabeans was down by 77% [2] Judging by your comments on this thread, you neither know nor care about this. You speak as if the only downside to this entire affair was 100 people dying, all the while citing 0 sources. [1] https://espresso.economist.com/4cf0ed8641cfcbbf46784e620a0316fb https://espresso.economist.com/4cf0ed8641cfcbbf46784e620a031... [2] http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21711094-without-cash-indians-are-struggling-modis-attempt-crush-black-economy-hurting-poor http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21711094-without-cash-ind...
      - shripadk 10y ago
        > Judging by your comments on this thread, you neither know nor care about this. You speak as if the only downside to this entire affair was 100 people dying, all the while citing 0 sources. No I care about it. But the problem is that most of them did not cite sources and were rhetorical. So I had to reply back in rhetoric. Since you cite sources I'll reply with sources too: "It would be helpful if you cited your sources for this. From what I've seen and read, most people found a way to launder their black money through brokers. [2] That's not just speculation, most of the 17 trn rupees of cash has found its way back into legal channels. [1]" Sure. Firstly your news reports are based on here-say and incorrect data. The correct RBI data is available in this article: http://swarajyamag.com/politics/the-rs-11-lakh-crore-deposit-figure-is-incorrect-heres-what-the-rbi-data-says http://swarajyamag.com/politics/the-rs-11-lakh-crore-deposit... Always refer to RBI bulletins and press releases. Don't believe motivated reports. > You were also very cavalier about the downsides of this move. Yes, those 100 deaths are a loss, but far more people were affected. Many did not have any money for a month or more because their employers did not have cash to pay them. There were 8 million affected workers in the beedi industry alone, more in other sectors. These are daily wage labourers, remember. [2] Why are these daily wage laborers not paid through cheques or wire transfer? The Government of India already has a "Jan Dhan Yojana" which is a simple form that facilitates opening of bank accounts (along with e-banking facilities) for lower income groups without going through any hurdles (all you need is an Aadhar card to open the account). In fact, even the employers can do it for their laborers on their behalf (I have already done it for my maid servant). The real story is that the employers wanted to pay cash so they can fudge their Book of Accounts with a higher entry and claim tax deductions. There was no real-world transaction to back their claims and the Income Tax department had to take them at face value. > Many farmers were forced to sell their crops for pittances to make ends meet. One example is cauliflower being sold for ₹ 1/kg. Its usually sold at ₹ 12. The prices of soyabeans was down by 77% [2] I definitely sympathize with farmers. However, this is a short-term impact. Many of these farmers are adopting digital payments (PayTM, BHIM app etc) to transact and the Government is conducting camps educating farmers on digital payments. I recently bought bananas from a street vendor (who sell on carts and don't have a proper outlet) by paying through PayTM. You just need to wait for the long-term impact of this policy to play out.
- rm2889 10y ago
  Your metric for success seems to be "not enough people died relative to previous such moves, hence its a success", which is rather morbid. Also your point about "major move that directly affected the entire country but did not end in large scale riots" is vague in its definition of "major move". During the partition, people were forced to leave their homes, belongings, ALL material wealth in the name of religion/politics/whatever and move to a different location in fear for their lives and the lives of their loved ones. Does demonetization compare to this? During demonetization, among other things, all the honest Indian had to do was wait in long queues to exchange cash (which is not convenient by all means - its very very harrowing), and the dishonest Indian figured out how to convert their cash to the new currency through the black market. We can debate about the pros and (many many more) cons about demonetization, but thats another topic. Overall, India today is very different from the India 70 years ago when the partition took place, so I disagree with your comparison as well as your metric for success.
  - shripadk 10y ago
    > Your metric for success seems to be "not enough people died relative to previous such moves, hence its a success", which is rather morbid. Why is it "morbid"? Did you call out the OP for associating the death of a 100 people due to an economic move like demonetization morbid? If not, then why am I being singled out? Just because my opinion doesn't fit your narrative? > Also your point about "major move that directly affected the entire country but did not end in large scale riots" is vague in its definition of "major move". During the partition, people were forced to leave their homes, belongings, ALL material wealth in the name of religion/politics/whatever and move to a different location in fear for their lives and the lives of their loved ones. Does demonetization compare to this? Yes it does. Because the OP was talking about "implementation" of the move and not about "intent". The displacement of people during the Partition was of a small percentage of the entire populace. Yet it was not managed properly at all. Did it not result in the death of close to 2 million people by some estimates? Or is the death of 2 million people due to Partition not as morbid as the death of 100 people due to demonetization? According to me, demonetization should have resulted in large-scale riots. Even the Supreme Court of India concurred: http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/demonetisation-sc-questions-reduced-limit-of-rs-2000-says-situation-serious/story-R50tMjtAdQLdZDmWXdwt8H.html http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/demonetisation-sc-q.... In other countries where demonetization took place there were large scale riots and huge political instability. Read up on Myanmar demonetization which led to large-scale riots leaving thousands of people dead. The very fact it did not end in large-scale riots leads me to believe that it was a success. Whether there are any long term benefits to the move economically remains to be seen. > During demonetization, among other things, all the honest Indian had to do was wait in long queues to exchange cash (which is not convenient by all means - its very very harrowing), and the dishonest Indian figured out how to convert their cash to the new currency through the black market. And most of those converting their cash were caught and the rest are still being caught. Did you fail to read the news?
- RealGeek 10y ago
  > a possibility of large-scale riots, but ended with only 100 deaths. I don't see how it cannot be termed a success. What is the upside we got with demonetization that we can call success? Did it end black money? No. Will it end counterfeit currency? No. Does it help citizens in any way? No. Then what exactly is the success we achieved here? Modi have blood of 100 citizens on his hands this time instead of thousands like it was in Gujarat riots under his leadership. Is that the benchmark of success?
  - lenkite 10y ago
    It has reduced black money significantly. Especially for terrorist and militant groups - both Pakistan sponsored and home grown Naxalites. They are now being forced to raid banks for new cash. The new notes are also much more difficult to counterfeit. That's two points crossed in your list.
    - RealGeek 10y ago
      They have been able to convert their cash to new Rs. 2,000 notes through the underhand deals with corrupt Government and Banking officials.
  - shripadk 10y ago
    > Did it end black money? No. > Will it end counterfeit currency? No. > Does it help citizens in any way? No. 70% of those polled (average of all polls conducted by media and independent media houses) disagree with you. I, as a Free Citizen of India, disagree with you. You fail to mention about all those getting caught with counterfeit currency and black money and still continue to be caught. Are those the figments of my imagination? Or are you only seeing one side of the coin? The side that suits your narrative? > Then what exactly is the success we achieved here? Modi have blood of 100 citizens on his hands this time instead of thousands like it was in Gujarat riots under his leadership. Is that the benchmark of success? This is a ridiculous and a very weak argument to counter an economic move. I'm sorry that you are incapable of understanding a perspective beyond the deaths of 100 people.
    - 10y ago

shripadk 10y ago

I'll take liberty to correct your perspective: A demonetization move that directly affected livelihood of billion Indians, with a possibility of large-scale riots, but ended with only 100 deaths. I don't see how it cannot be termed a success. Can you think of any major move that directly affected the entire country but did not end in large scale riots? If you need to understand what a "hasty decision" means take a look at the Partition of India, where only a small fraction of the entire populace was displaced but ended up causing up almost 2 million deaths by some estimates.

m_fam_wa_k 10y ago
Let's compare that figure to say fatal accidents in Kathipara Junction, Chennai. It used to average more than one a day. OP is cherry picking.
- madmax108 10y ago
  Just because there are deaths caused somewhere else doesn't legitimize these deaths. This is human life we are talking about mate. That's a basic logical fallacy, which seems to be the favorite tool in debates for supporters of the current government[1]. TBH if you spent 3600 Crore meant for a statue [2] for railway safety (and not just some namesake program but actual on the ground change), which I agree needs a upheavel, I'd be a much happier citizen of the country. [1] https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque [2] https://www.thequint.com/india/2016/12/24/mumbai-protest-3600-crore-chhatrapati-shivaji-memorial-vishal-dadlani-devendra-fadnavis-narendra-modi-maratha https://www.thequint.com/india/2016/12/24/mumbai-protest-360...
thunderbong 10y ago
brouhaha means - Loud confused noise from many sources. I don't think anything was said about it being a success or otherwise
- shripadk 10y ago
  It implied otherwise. The OP tied an economic move (demonetization) to the death of a 100 people. That is a very narrow perspective to take, in my honest opinion.
shabda 10y ago
I'll take liberty to correct your perspective: A demonetization move that directly affected livelihood of billion Indians, but we don't know whether for good or for worse. I don't like Mr Modi, but I was cautiously optimistic the day it was announced. However over last two months, its been clear to me that no thought was put in the decision. If you want to look at a data driven journalism to the flip flops, you can start here: http://www.indiaspend.com/cover-story/how-modi-changed-and-changed-the-demonetisation-narrative-54391 http://www.indiaspend.com/cover-story/how-modi-changed-and-c....
- shripadk 10y ago
  Then I'll take the liberty to correct your understanding of my comment: I spoke about: a move that directly affected livelihood of billion Indians, "with a possibility of large-scale riots". Since those large-scale riots did not happen it can be termed a success. Why am I talking about "large-scale riots"? Because the Opposition (even the Supreme Court of India) predicted large-scale riots: http://www.merinews.com/mobile/article/India/2016/11/22/notebandi--the-possibility-of-riots/15921058 http://www.merinews.com/mobile/article/India/2016/11/22/note... "Supreme Court says situation after demonetisation serious, fears riots": http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/demonetisation-sc-questions-reduced-limit-of-rs-2000-says-situation-serious/story-R50tMjtAdQLdZDmWXdwt8H.html http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/demonetisation-sc-q...
  - kranner 10y ago
    > Since those large-scale riots did not happen it can be termed a success. You can't be serious.
    - shripadk 10y ago
      I am serious. If you live in India you would have heard of constant fear-mongering by the opposition parties about "large-scale riots" and "financial emergency". No such thing happened. Every Indian co-operated with the move. This is unlike any other demonetization that was carried out previously by 6 other countries which either lead to coup d'état or large-scale riots. Also, is the only counter one can come up with for an economic move is talk about "death of 100 people"? Seriously? In a populace of a billion the death of 100 people for such a huge economic move is close to nothing.
peteretep 10y ago
> I don't see how it cannot > be termed a success Has it actually cut corruption? If not, the last few days of pounding payment in Jodhpur trying to find working ATMs, and being stuck for 30m in queues when they finally got their money delivered all seems in vain. That, and, you know, the 100 deaths.
- shripadk 10y ago
  > Has it actually cut corruption? Yes it has. It depends again on your perspective. Looks like you have only read news of 100 deaths but failed to read news of the many political babus, black money hoarders and tax evaders getting caught with huge amounts of cash (with both old and new notes).
  - _jgdh 10y ago
    > Yes it has It would be helpful if you cited your sources for this. From what I've seen and read, most people found a way to launder their black money through brokers. [2] That's not just speculation, most of the 17 trn rupees of cash has found its way back into legal channels. [1] You were also very cavalier about the downsides of this move. Yes, those 100 deaths are a loss, but far more people were affected. Many did not have any money for a month or more because their employers did not have cash to pay them. There were 8 million affected workers in the beedi industry alone, more in other sectors. These are daily wage labourers, remember. [2] Many farmers were forced to sell their crops for pittances to make ends meet. One example is cauliflower being sold for ₹ 1/kg. Its usually sold at ₹ 12. The prices of soyabeans was down by 77% [2] Judging by your comments on this thread, you neither know nor care about this. You speak as if the only downside to this entire affair was 100 people dying, all the while citing 0 sources. [1] https://espresso.economist.com/4cf0ed8641cfcbbf46784e620a0316fb https://espresso.economist.com/4cf0ed8641cfcbbf46784e620a031... [2] http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21711094-without-cash-indians-are-struggling-modis-attempt-crush-black-economy-hurting-poor http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21711094-without-cash-ind...
    - shripadk 10y ago
      > Judging by your comments on this thread, you neither know nor care about this. You speak as if the only downside to this entire affair was 100 people dying, all the while citing 0 sources. No I care about it. But the problem is that most of them did not cite sources and were rhetorical. So I had to reply back in rhetoric. Since you cite sources I'll reply with sources too: "It would be helpful if you cited your sources for this. From what I've seen and read, most people found a way to launder their black money through brokers. [2] That's not just speculation, most of the 17 trn rupees of cash has found its way back into legal channels. [1]" Sure. Firstly your news reports are based on here-say and incorrect data. The correct RBI data is available in this article: http://swarajyamag.com/politics/the-rs-11-lakh-crore-deposit-figure-is-incorrect-heres-what-the-rbi-data-says http://swarajyamag.com/politics/the-rs-11-lakh-crore-deposit... Always refer to RBI bulletins and press releases. Don't believe motivated reports. > You were also very cavalier about the downsides of this move. Yes, those 100 deaths are a loss, but far more people were affected. Many did not have any money for a month or more because their employers did not have cash to pay them. There were 8 million affected workers in the beedi industry alone, more in other sectors. These are daily wage labourers, remember. [2] Why are these daily wage laborers not paid through cheques or wire transfer? The Government of India already has a "Jan Dhan Yojana" which is a simple form that facilitates opening of bank accounts (along with e-banking facilities) for lower income groups without going through any hurdles (all you need is an Aadhar card to open the account). In fact, even the employers can do it for their laborers on their behalf (I have already done it for my maid servant). The real story is that the employers wanted to pay cash so they can fudge their Book of Accounts with a higher entry and claim tax deductions. There was no real-world transaction to back their claims and the Income Tax department had to take them at face value. > Many farmers were forced to sell their crops for pittances to make ends meet. One example is cauliflower being sold for ₹ 1/kg. Its usually sold at ₹ 12. The prices of soyabeans was down by 77% [2] I definitely sympathize with farmers. However, this is a short-term impact. Many of these farmers are adopting digital payments (PayTM, BHIM app etc) to transact and the Government is conducting camps educating farmers on digital payments. I recently bought bananas from a street vendor (who sell on carts and don't have a proper outlet) by paying through PayTM. You just need to wait for the long-term impact of this policy to play out.
rm2889 10y ago
Your metric for success seems to be "not enough people died relative to previous such moves, hence its a success", which is rather morbid. Also your point about "major move that directly affected the entire country but did not end in large scale riots" is vague in its definition of "major move". During the partition, people were forced to leave their homes, belongings, ALL material wealth in the name of religion/politics/whatever and move to a different location in fear for their lives and the lives of their loved ones. Does demonetization compare to this? During demonetization, among other things, all the honest Indian had to do was wait in long queues to exchange cash (which is not convenient by all means - its very very harrowing), and the dishonest Indian figured out how to convert their cash to the new currency through the black market. We can debate about the pros and (many many more) cons about demonetization, but thats another topic. Overall, India today is very different from the India 70 years ago when the partition took place, so I disagree with your comparison as well as your metric for success.
- shripadk 10y ago
  > Your metric for success seems to be "not enough people died relative to previous such moves, hence its a success", which is rather morbid. Why is it "morbid"? Did you call out the OP for associating the death of a 100 people due to an economic move like demonetization morbid? If not, then why am I being singled out? Just because my opinion doesn't fit your narrative? > Also your point about "major move that directly affected the entire country but did not end in large scale riots" is vague in its definition of "major move". During the partition, people were forced to leave their homes, belongings, ALL material wealth in the name of religion/politics/whatever and move to a different location in fear for their lives and the lives of their loved ones. Does demonetization compare to this? Yes it does. Because the OP was talking about "implementation" of the move and not about "intent". The displacement of people during the Partition was of a small percentage of the entire populace. Yet it was not managed properly at all. Did it not result in the death of close to 2 million people by some estimates? Or is the death of 2 million people due to Partition not as morbid as the death of 100 people due to demonetization? According to me, demonetization should have resulted in large-scale riots. Even the Supreme Court of India concurred: http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/demonetisation-sc-questions-reduced-limit-of-rs-2000-says-situation-serious/story-R50tMjtAdQLdZDmWXdwt8H.html http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/demonetisation-sc-q.... In other countries where demonetization took place there were large scale riots and huge political instability. Read up on Myanmar demonetization which led to large-scale riots leaving thousands of people dead. The very fact it did not end in large-scale riots leads me to believe that it was a success. Whether there are any long term benefits to the move economically remains to be seen. > During demonetization, among other things, all the honest Indian had to do was wait in long queues to exchange cash (which is not convenient by all means - its very very harrowing), and the dishonest Indian figured out how to convert their cash to the new currency through the black market. And most of those converting their cash were caught and the rest are still being caught. Did you fail to read the news?
RealGeek 10y ago
> a possibility of large-scale riots, but ended with only 100 deaths. I don't see how it cannot be termed a success. What is the upside we got with demonetization that we can call success? Did it end black money? No. Will it end counterfeit currency? No. Does it help citizens in any way? No. Then what exactly is the success we achieved here? Modi have blood of 100 citizens on his hands this time instead of thousands like it was in Gujarat riots under his leadership. Is that the benchmark of success?
- lenkite 10y ago
  It has reduced black money significantly. Especially for terrorist and militant groups - both Pakistan sponsored and home grown Naxalites. They are now being forced to raid banks for new cash. The new notes are also much more difficult to counterfeit. That's two points crossed in your list.
  - RealGeek 10y ago
    They have been able to convert their cash to new Rs. 2,000 notes through the underhand deals with corrupt Government and Banking officials.
- shripadk 10y ago
  > Did it end black money? No. > Will it end counterfeit currency? No. > Does it help citizens in any way? No. 70% of those polled (average of all polls conducted by media and independent media houses) disagree with you. I, as a Free Citizen of India, disagree with you. You fail to mention about all those getting caught with counterfeit currency and black money and still continue to be caught. Are those the figments of my imagination? Or are you only seeing one side of the coin? The side that suits your narrative? > Then what exactly is the success we achieved here? Modi have blood of 100 citizens on his hands this time instead of thousands like it was in Gujarat riots under his leadership. Is that the benchmark of success? This is a ridiculous and a very weak argument to counter an economic move. I'm sorry that you are incapable of understanding a perspective beyond the deaths of 100 people.
  - 10y ago