5 ms·
> 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
by 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.