3 ms·
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
by 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 agoI 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.