5 ms·

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

by 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.
    - kranner 10y ago
      > Every Indian co-operated with the move. This is a no-true-scotsman argument. I am Indian. I was forced to co-operate with the move because of being an ordinary citizen. I had no choice but to go along.
      - shripadk 10y ago
        Then I'm thankful that you did not riot. Irrespective of your political inclinations. On a lighter note, the "large-scale riot" theory was not propagated by the Government but by the opposition. Read up articles by P Chidambaram and you'll know what I mean. So don't hold us guilty for using that term :)
        kranner 10y ago
        Of course I did not riot. I don't want to go to jail. That does not mean that I _co-operated_ with the move. Explain to me again how the move was a success. You are assuming a priori that it was a good decision as long as riots don't happen, which they didn't, hence it was good. But why was it good regardless of riots/no riots? I don't see how. So a few hundred crores of black money were caught in raids. That is a drop in the ocean. A hundred times more than that is caught in regular tax raids every year.* It has done absolutely nothing to curb future corruption. What it has done for sure is to reduce spending everywhere and cut down on industrial production and employment. You are welcome to believe it was successful, just like I believe it was a disaster. We'll find out at some point. * http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/cash-crunch-rs-242-crore-in-new-currency-seized-after-demonetisation/story-ZFidspQbfQqcIGbQPcgtPJ.html http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/cash-crunch-rs-242-... "Countrywide Rs 242 crore in new currency and jewellery worth Rs 15 crore has been seized. The amount is not abnormally high, as I-T sleuths annually unearth Rs 10,500 crore to Rs 11,000 crore in undisclosed income."
        shripadk 10y ago
        > Explain to me again how the move was a success. Because you are confusing demonetization with remonetization and post-remonetization. All are different. Demonetization ended on December 31st. The move was a success as no riots or coups took place. Why should I take that factor to gauge success? If you look at the history of demonetization, with the exception of Britain, 5 other countries either had large-scale riots or the Government's fell due to coups. The remonetization phase did not even commence and in some instances demonetization was also rolled back. Demonetization is just declaring currency as no longer legal tender. It has nothing to do with implementation or the after-effects. The actual implementation of replenishing cash is called "remonetization" and post-remonetization is the real impact. Now is remonetization a success? What about post-remonetization? Only the RBI final report as well as Income Tax assessment of those deposits made during November 8th to December 31st will be able to explain. This will take some time to come out. You are assuming that all money deposited in the banks are automatically converted to white. That is where your assumptions are wrong. The Tax authorities have already started auditing these deposits and are actively catching culprits who deposited huge amount of cash during the remonetization phase (see Mayawati's brother as well as her party being investigated for depositing 104+ crores). They'll start with the big fish and then catch the smaller fish.
  - geodel 10y ago
    Perhaps you are not in or have not been to India. Even minor situation can lead to deadly violence there. Associating those 100 deaths to demonetization is absolutely pushing a political agenda by media. Check how death of popular politicians can lead to 100s of ppl committing suicides in India. Or check how 1000s die every year in train accidents in just one city of Mumbai. The sad part is even most Indians I meet in US are mostly clueless about conditions of masses. They remain preoccupied with food/bollywood/cricket etc.
    - kranner 10y ago
      The criterion for success for an economic intervention cannot be "riots didn't happen." The only word for this reasoning is absurd. I'm not sure where the rest of your argument is going. You seem to be saying that Indian lives are cheap anyway. The declared criteria for the success of demonetisation has shifted twice so far. It started as "we'll stop corruption", then it was "we'll go cashless" and now it's "we've converted cash saved at home to cheap loans". But even the BJP has never claimed that it was "this will not cause riots".
      - geodel 10y ago
        I do not see any contradiction in pursuing all of them together: stopping corruption", "going cashless", "cash saved at home to cheap loans". And corruption is not something that a single step or policy can fix. It would be rather stupid of government or politicians to put all effort on a single goal. It seems to me critics show a deep disconnect with people when they claim failure due to inconvenience to people. In India riots can occur on far minor issues than demonetization. So yes people are willing to wait for results but critics are hastily jumping to conclusion that scheme has failed.

by shabda 10y ago

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.
  - kranner 10y ago
    > Every Indian co-operated with the move. This is a no-true-scotsman argument. I am Indian. I was forced to co-operate with the move because of being an ordinary citizen. I had no choice but to go along.
    - shripadk 10y ago
      Then I'm thankful that you did not riot. Irrespective of your political inclinations. On a lighter note, the "large-scale riot" theory was not propagated by the Government but by the opposition. Read up articles by P Chidambaram and you'll know what I mean. So don't hold us guilty for using that term :)
      - kranner 10y ago
        Of course I did not riot. I don't want to go to jail. That does not mean that I _co-operated_ with the move. Explain to me again how the move was a success. You are assuming a priori that it was a good decision as long as riots don't happen, which they didn't, hence it was good. But why was it good regardless of riots/no riots? I don't see how. So a few hundred crores of black money were caught in raids. That is a drop in the ocean. A hundred times more than that is caught in regular tax raids every year.* It has done absolutely nothing to curb future corruption. What it has done for sure is to reduce spending everywhere and cut down on industrial production and employment. You are welcome to believe it was successful, just like I believe it was a disaster. We'll find out at some point. * http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/cash-crunch-rs-242-crore-in-new-currency-seized-after-demonetisation/story-ZFidspQbfQqcIGbQPcgtPJ.html http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/cash-crunch-rs-242-... "Countrywide Rs 242 crore in new currency and jewellery worth Rs 15 crore has been seized. The amount is not abnormally high, as I-T sleuths annually unearth Rs 10,500 crore to Rs 11,000 crore in undisclosed income."
        shripadk 10y ago
        > Explain to me again how the move was a success. Because you are confusing demonetization with remonetization and post-remonetization. All are different. Demonetization ended on December 31st. The move was a success as no riots or coups took place. Why should I take that factor to gauge success? If you look at the history of demonetization, with the exception of Britain, 5 other countries either had large-scale riots or the Government's fell due to coups. The remonetization phase did not even commence and in some instances demonetization was also rolled back. Demonetization is just declaring currency as no longer legal tender. It has nothing to do with implementation or the after-effects. The actual implementation of replenishing cash is called "remonetization" and post-remonetization is the real impact. Now is remonetization a success? What about post-remonetization? Only the RBI final report as well as Income Tax assessment of those deposits made during November 8th to December 31st will be able to explain. This will take some time to come out. You are assuming that all money deposited in the banks are automatically converted to white. That is where your assumptions are wrong. The Tax authorities have already started auditing these deposits and are actively catching culprits who deposited huge amount of cash during the remonetization phase (see Mayawati's brother as well as her party being investigated for depositing 104+ crores). They'll start with the big fish and then catch the smaller fish.
- geodel 10y ago
  Perhaps you are not in or have not been to India. Even minor situation can lead to deadly violence there. Associating those 100 deaths to demonetization is absolutely pushing a political agenda by media. Check how death of popular politicians can lead to 100s of ppl committing suicides in India. Or check how 1000s die every year in train accidents in just one city of Mumbai. The sad part is even most Indians I meet in US are mostly clueless about conditions of masses. They remain preoccupied with food/bollywood/cricket etc.
  - kranner 10y ago
    The criterion for success for an economic intervention cannot be "riots didn't happen." The only word for this reasoning is absurd. I'm not sure where the rest of your argument is going. You seem to be saying that Indian lives are cheap anyway. The declared criteria for the success of demonetisation has shifted twice so far. It started as "we'll stop corruption", then it was "we'll go cashless" and now it's "we've converted cash saved at home to cheap loans". But even the BJP has never claimed that it was "this will not cause riots".
    - geodel 10y ago
      I do not see any contradiction in pursuing all of them together: stopping corruption", "going cashless", "cash saved at home to cheap loans". And corruption is not something that a single step or policy can fix. It would be rather stupid of government or politicians to put all effort on a single goal. It seems to me critics show a deep disconnect with people when they claim failure due to inconvenience to people. In India riots can occur on far minor issues than demonetization. So yes people are willing to wait for results but critics are hastily jumping to conclusion that scheme has failed.