4 ms·

> Jan Dhan Yojana I hate to break this to you, but most people don't actually have bank accounts, and if they do, they don't know how to use them. Most of thos

• shripadk 10y ago
  > Lastly, you're citing an article from December 2nd to prove that a lot of money that was outstanding on Nov 8th hasn't been collected. I linked one from January 4th. Which do you think has more up-to-date data? Your Jan 4th article has no data on the amount of money deposited. My advise to you is to go back and re-read that article. RBI has still not released the latest data. The last release was on December 13th. Articles written after that are just here-say and speculation. > I hate to break this to you, but most people don't actually have bank accounts, and if they do, they don't know how to use them. Most of those bank accounts that were opened in the Jan Dhan Yojana scheme have ₹1 ($0.015) or less in them [1]. That is not the Government's problem. The Government had already instructed owners of private and public companies to open Jan Dhan accounts for their laborers. The owners either failed to do it or purposefully chose not to open accounts to evade tax. Now they have no choice but to open for them. > These laborers mentioned in the article I linked did not have accounts which they could use. That's why they threatened to strike if they weren't paid in cash. In my comment in the previous reply I already mentioned that they did not have because the companies failed to open accounts for them. Don't skip reading my comments please. I can't answer the same point again and again. > You live in a bubble if you think lower income groups are rapidly adopting digital payments. Sure, the help at your place did, but I've met many people living in the heart of Bangalore who can't afford a smartphone. These same people also don't have a bank account. Or who knows, maybe they have a 0 balance account in their name somewhere. That is no excuse for not moving to digital payments. The same excuse was cited in the 1990's when the computer and telecom revolution was taking place in India. People were comfortable with typewriters and found computers intimidating. Today you find most of the workforce quite comfortable with computers. Even with telecom revolution the biggest beneficiaries were the lower income groups. They completely skipped fixed line telephony and moved straight to mobile phones. I agree with you that many find digital payments intimidating and many don't have smartphones but they have no choice but to adopt it now because of disruption in informal economy. You are on Hacker News. You should know better what is the outcome of disruption. There will always be a short-term negative impact followed by a long-term positive impact.
• shripadk 10y ago
  > Its quite easy to talk of "short-term impact" and "long-term gain" when you're not facing any of the short-term impact yourself. I doubt you or your family went to bed hungry on any day during November and December. Millions of Indian families did, while they didn't have to. This could have been executed better. Maybe not in November or December. But definitely in the past. But I did not and still do not hold any Government's policy decision accountable for my past situations. What I always look for is disruptions to existing systems. It doesn't matter who conducts these disruptions as long as it is done. These are very much necessary. For example, my father always says how lucky I'm that I now have access to computers and internet and he did not have any such facilities during his time. However, I realize that whatever I have today would not have been possible if not for bold reforms of the 1990s. Today I understand the necessity for disruptions. The longer you delay necessary disruptions the more hardship you create for future generations because innovations don't wait for you to catch-up.
• peteretep 10y ago
  > quite easy to talk of > "short-term impact" and > "long-term gain" when you're > not facing any of the short- > term impact yourself This all reminds me of when a bunch of middle class and rich commentators stopped Zuck giving free internet to the poor