India Growth Model 03: Fix-Contest-Leapfrog-Prepare Growth Model for India

Indian growth model must have various components addressing local AND global demand. The window of opportunity is short, we need to develop faster. The growth needs to come from both public and private sector and must utilize the Indian human resources. I propose a four-way Fix-Contest-Leapfrog-Prepare model for growth.

Fix

For basic infrastructure and basic capacity building there is enough capital available globally and that capital is seeking low returns which is good.

We need to continue to fix basic infrastructure, from ports, roads, power, housing, etc. to law and legal systems, education, defense to modern infrastructure like telecom and digital infrastructure etc.

We need to continue the cleanup that began in 2014 which mean reformative laws need to be cleaned and reworked for example, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, GST Act, etc. needs to be shepherded through the legal institutions that are trying to muzzle it.

However, the most important part of this strategy is to create a proper social security framework. What demographic dividend we envisage, will turn into a demographic nightmare in about 40 years. The problems faced by pensions, medical insurance, health insurance etc. In the developed countries like US, Japan, Europe etc. Signal potential pitfalls for the Indian economy.

The Fix strategy focusses mostly on government action. While there is ample scope for Public-private participation or for divesting government created infrastructure to investment vehicles, the central focus of this strategy will be driven by government. It requires high quality last mile delivery. The strategy will depend on known and innovative models of government action.

Contest

The Contest strategy is relevant for industries operating currently. The catch-up will involve penetration, locally by global companies and globally by Indian companies, of known business models. It is spread of McDonalds and Sushi across the Indian hinterland. It is also the spread of Vada Pav and Fish curry across the remote corners of the world.

This strategy portends that we will liberalise and open the economy. At the time when trade wars are looming large, this will mean global corporates will focus on India intensifying the competition in the domestic space. This will be quick win for consumers and job creation but a difficult time for domestic industry. However, it is not all bad, things will improve for domestic industry also. Something similar to what we say between 1992-1994 and between 2002-2005 we can hope to achieve. This is domestic battle. Battle for Indian consumers by Indian and global companies.

However, we need to prevent the mistakes and learn from the experience of the world when we liberalise. Thus, we may want to regulate the propogation of Genetic modified foods, or hormonally treated meats etc.

The contest strategy focusses on private players and known business models. The role of government shall remain limited to regulation and monitoring. Coordinated export development strategy is required. This means industrial policy will be as important as Fiscal policy.

Leapfrog

Generating, lasting, fast paced private growth is quite difficult. Particularly at the time when trade wars are looming large where economies will try to protect their jobs and therefore their markets. It will come from those industries where we India can deliver susbtantive and impossible to replicate advantage that will remain exclusively tied to India. This will be the focus of the Leapfrog strategy.

The Leapfrog strategy will focus on IT/ITES, Food, Fashion, Jewellery, Movies, Music, Entertainment, Culture, medicine, among other sectors.

Leapfrog strategy will be driven by innovative private players. The role of government will be limited but innovative interventions. We also need champions for each of the industry clusters working in this area. Dewang Mehta is the name that immediately comes to mind.

Prepare

At the time we are developing this strategy, we need to keep an eye on emerging trends in distributed manufacturing, robotics, artificial intelligence, advances in biology, etc.

These opportunities are for the private sector. In this report we focus on what private sector can do to address these opportunities in the economy and market place and create value. This participation by the private sector will entail some innovative groundwork by the government. We highlight that in later section.

Model in summary

The Fix-Contest-Leapfrog-Prepare Model is meant to limit the role of the Government. It also recognizes that Government is also necessary and required to deliver certain services. Thus, the model is centrist in terms of economic leanings. It is meant to clarify the necessary reform that government needs to undertake and to underline its urgency.

It is also the aim of this model to enumerate some of the many opportunities open for private sector in India. It is the private sector that will create those jobs. The model is meant as a treasure map that hopes to inspire many private sector treasure hunters to go forth and seek this treasure of growth and prosperity for the economy.

It is also important for this model to highlight the nature and extent of coordination that will be required between government and private sector. Both these entities will be required to complement each other so that India can address these opportunities before us. Coordination is more important because, unlike between 2002-2007, the macro environment is volatile.

The Fix-Contest-Leapfrog-Prepare Model will be explained in detail in subsequent sections.

---

Buy my books "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" and "Understanding Firms"

India Growth Model 02: India needs a new Growth Model

India needs growth at a time when global growth is sluggish, globalization of trade and supply chains has plateaued and is likely to reverse. These headwinds are challenging for any economy. Therefore, the Indian model of growth has to be substantially different.

Proven business models are broken

Across times countries have deployed similar models for growth. They are based on trade to places that have demand for goods / skills available in your economy. This demand emanates from cost arbitrage or availability arbitrage. 

Early Europeans were seeking spices available only in the tropical Asia. At that point in history they did not have much to trade with Asia but Industrial Revolution changed all that. With use of force they were able to maintain demand side and supply side in control and make neat profits. This enrichment of Europe came at the expense of Asia and Africa. The armed control over markets and suppliers allowed Europeans to run a level of protectionism that is unparalleled and hopefully will never be repeated. Nevertheless it represents one model of growth.

In the pre-war era, America developed exporting to war torn Europe. Taking advantage of wage differential, higher risk tolerance thanks to innovative risk mitigation mechanisms, and a healthy domestic demand augmented by immigration, Americans were able to enrich themselves both at the expense of Europe in some cases and also in cooperation with Europe in others. American protectionism was more from the cost side. Using slave labor and forcibly usurping the land and other resources Americans were able to create value. The American growth model was thus based on military industrial complex.

The Post World War II development of Europe was entirely based on exploiting American demand augmented by domestic demand from rebuilding initiatives supported by low cost capital. This time, Europe was not able to run the kind of protectionism that had benefited them earlier. However, they benefited from twin protectionism. Europe enjoyed fortuitous financial protectionism based on low cost of capital thanks to Marshall Plan. It also engaged in currency management to help sustain the development. There were other factors allowing faster growth in Europe - lower population in all of West, new technologies from war for productivity enhancement and solid demand from rebuilding.

The Japanese growth which partly overlaps with European growth was also based on the same premise. Japanese fine-tuned this strategy by self-deprivation and focusing on exports to the West turning it into a protectionist advantage. Japan had another advantage, it did not need to spend on military and defense.

However, this dependency of Japan and Western Europe became unbearable for United States which was operating under the Gold Standard. It lead to abolishing of Gold Standard and start of modern finance driven development era. This is the time when John Connally made his two famous statements - “Dollar is our currency and your problem” and the ever prescient and my favourite “My philosophy is that all foreigners are out to screw us and it’s our job to screw them first.”

East Asian tigers and then China were the first to take advantage of the growth unleashed in this period. Using essentially the same model, these countries relied on pegged exchange rates and export demand to move out of poverty. By the time India joined the party in 1991, this model was quite well understood. The initial quirks were exposed during the South East Asian Crisis. The crisis led to refinement rather than correction of the model.

By 2002-03 this model became so well understood that most of the developing countries started using this model. Over-reliance on consumers from developed world and excessive constraints on domestic demand were norms of the day. This old model of development has finally broken or is in the process of breaking. In effect we will need a new model for growth.

Indian model of growth has to be substantially different. It has to withstand competitive forces right from the word go. India will not have any advantage of protectionism except what naturally accrues to it. Indian model must take advantage of the uniqueness of Indian demand in comparison with other countries. Given that Indian markets are not exactly uniform, India can become the hotbed for innovations that can be exported to the whole world.

The future is hypercompetitive

In the next phase of globalization, we are likely to encounter countries defending their domestic consumer. India has to withstand competitive forces right from the word go. India will face stiff competition winning in the markets outside India. India will not have any advantage of advantages except what naturally accrues to it.


Thus, India will have to fight for the global consumer,  some times on unfavorable terms, other times with entrenched players. India will face technological gridlock making innovation costly and product development long drawn. India will also have to face adverse tacit protectionism in the form of unreasonably demanding product/service quality or unreasonable punitive damages from product/service failure.

Within Indian markets too there will be intense competition. There is shortage of consumer demand globally. All the top companies will look to gain from addressing the Indian demand. This competition will be both - an opportunity and a threat. If this competition for domestic market creates jobless profitability then it is threat. If it creates vibrant ecosystem then it is an opportunity. Indian model must take advantage of the uniqueness of Indian demand in comparison with other countries. Given that Indian markets are not exactly uniform, India can become the hotbed for innovations that can be exported to the whole world. Thus, the ecosystem will create competency to win across the world.

In short, while other countries grew by looking outwards, India should grow looking inwards AND outwards. But, how will India grow? 

---

Buy my books "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" and "Understanding Firms"

India Growth Model 01: Introduction

Two forces help the arduous journey of a nation towards progress. The How force makes us confident to embark on the journey and reduces the risks associated with it through sheer details. The second force is the Where force. It is the lure of the dream of a new tomorrow. That dream makes us turn, it gives us energy, carries us through the tough times and gives our life meaning. A nation that knows its WHERE can bear with any HOW! (1)

I was a bit disappointed with the Niti Ayog released their report titled “Strategy for New India @75”. [Here is the the accompanying presentation.] It was a very detailed HOW. The WHERE is missing - not just from the report but even from discussions, research papers, media. It is as if our WHERE has not been conceived. And that is a problem as the “how” depends on WHERE you are and WHERE you want to go. Without the WHERE, everything seems important and when everything is important, nothing is.

Even now the Where is missing. What does this India of 2050 look like? What do people do in this developed India? Where do they work? Where do they live? What do they wear? What things do they buy? What is their relationship with their government? What is their relationship with other countries? What are they worried about? How are the cities? How is the countryside? We can imagine many questions and paint a picture of India at 2050. It is here we want to go. This is our WHERE.

When we know the WHERE, our entrepreneurs will start gearing up for the challenge. When we know the WHERE, we will know what to prioritise, what to speed up, where can we go easy.

In my mind, I have a WHERE and hence my HOW is a little different. So this effort is to paint a detailed picture of the WHERE and augment the picture of the HOW we have already seen.

This series of posts details my thoughts on vision of new India and how to get there. These thoughts I will compile into a report at the end. At present time, the thoughts come from a broad based thinking on the topic, the final report will differ from this but hopefully not by much.

Notes:

1. Alluding to the quote “Those who have a 'why' to live, can bear with almost any 'how'.” ― Viktor E. Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning

---

Buy my books "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" and "Understanding Firms"

Revenue Deficit vs Fiscal deficit and Fiscal responsibility

"Ballooning Revenue Deficit is far more worrisome than nominal slippage in fiscal deficit" said Mythili Bhusnurmath in ET. Her views are correct. But how to curb Revenue deficit. Let us understand the terms a bit more in detail.

Revenue deficit is amount by which Revenue expenditures exceed Revenues. 

What are revenues or Revenue receipts?

Revenues can be tax or non-tax. Tax component includes share of tax of Union Government in general taxes and "cess" or specialized taxes accruing to Union Government alone. [Refer Note 1]. Non-tax revenues includes interest on loans to various entities (state governments, etc.),  profits and dividends from enterprises, duties and fines received, grants from multilateral agencies or other governments etc.

What are revenue expenditures?

Revenue expenditures includes:

1. Salaries and pension paid to government employees
2. Subsidies
3. defense expenditure (relates to national security)
4. Government procurement from stationery to vehicles to arms and ammunition for police (internal security)
5.  Expense required for running government schemes and programs
6. Interest paid on borrowings - domestic and external.
   

Fiscal Deficit is more like capital account deficit.

Capital Account Receipts side includes recovery of loans to States etc., receipts from disinvestment or privatization and borrowing (external and domestic). Capital expenditures includes investments in Public sector companies, investments in public projects, etc.

Further, accounting 101 will tell you that revenue deficit accumulates in the Fiscal side and it has to be financed through borrowing which sits on the capital account. The servicing of this borrowing is done through revenue expenditures. These twin deficits thus, are quite interlinked. Mathematically, it is true that we can reduce Fiscal deficit (FD) while Revenue Deficit (RD) remains high. But it is true only for small values of RD. But a more ideal situation is when FD is higher (though less than the 3%) and RD is zero or lower. Then, one presumes, your excess FD would be mostly because of high quality capital expenditure. This capital expenditure will yield more Revenues and thus lower RD in the future. [Refer Note 2].

The Problem

For past decade or more, reverse is true. Most of borrowing is used for revenue expenditures - i.e. payment of salaries to bureaucrats. In return, bureaucrats and government employees have stifled any possible revenue growth for citizen or companies thereby reducing the revenues. This widens the revenue deficit and pushes the system into a negative spiral.

It is clear that the present malaise is largely self-inflicted. Imposing FRBM target without first having a RD at zero or lower is a recipe for disaster. At present, government appears to throw disinvestment money after revenue expenses and that is very bad idea. It erodes the structure of the economy.

How to kickstart the positive spiral?

The government is now required to first ensure that RD is reduced to zero but using revenue receipts. That requires expansion of tax base which is impossible without taxing agriculture. Thereafter, using asset sales i.e. disinvestment or privatization route, reduce the lower quality borrowing. Most of the borrowing by the government should be directed towards investments that yield revenues in the future and thus create structural zero- revenue deficits or revenue surpluses. This is the improvement in quality of budget is what prudent observers seek.

Notes:

1. Indian federal structure implies that both center and states have power to tax and they have share in the tax. Most of the taxes are shared and go into "consolidated fund of India" for central share and "consolidated fund of the state" for state taxes.
2. Ideally, the any borrowing or loan or debt should create more revenue than expenses required to service it. To do that, borrowing must be invested in revenue boosting ventures. Companies borrow to buy new machine that can increase production. Similarly nations should invest in those assets that will increase profits for citizens and companies and thus improve tax receipts.

---

 Buy my books "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" and "Understanding Firms".

Unmanufacturing Revolution - Is it the future?

Today I came across an article about Apple wanting to sell refurbished iPhones in India. The author, Tim Culpan, goes on to state that India could disassemble the iPhone for Apple. In this, there could be much more value. I agree.

Unmanufacturing is organised processing of manufactured products to their basic salvageable state. It is not new. India is a leader in Ship-breaking. There is no reason to believe we can do far better in unmanufacturing for electronic goods too. For quite some time we have focussed on manufacturing jobs and manufacturing contributing to the GDP. There could be substantial value in this activity too. 

Electronic waste processing is just one aspect of the work. As companies focus more on sustainability and recycling, we should be able to process all products - automobiles (cars, ships, aeroplanes), electronic goods (computers, phones etc.) durables (washing machines and etc.) to demolition (processing of buildings etc.).

This is not waste processing - which is a different and also lucrative business. This is about high-value items being disassembled to recycle the critical parts such as precious metals etc.

Done at a large enough scale, in a proper systematic manner, it can open up huge opportunities for employment.

  

---

Buy my books "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" and "Understanding Firms".

Is India still rising?

I came across this superb talk by David Mulford, former US Ambassador to India given in October 2016. Some positive highlights (I paraphrase):

1. India is a genuine democracy unlike China or such other countries. The data is more dependable and governance is more transparent, unlike non-democratic countries.
2. India has leapfrogged the fixed line telecom revolution by going to mobile directly.
3. India is also likely to leapfrog the credit card system.
4. India had the best monsoon 1954 this year.
5. The way to look at India is not to compare it with China, Singapore and others but to think of India as 19th Century America with robber barons. 
6. India has a service-oriented economy but Modi is pushing for manufacturing. Many of these projects particularly in defence and technology will materialise sooner.
7. By the enhanced transfer of funds to State Modi is trying to create competition between States for growth. Young people are joining the state politics and the political climate is likely to see a drastic change. India constitution is explicit as to the division of powers between State and Center and that helps the political leadership in the states to set correct goals.
8. Religious stability is high in India. Despite having about 250 million Muslims, Indian Islam seems to be softer and therefore radicalisation is much lower.
9. Cooperation between US and India increased after the 26/11 attacks (hotel attacks as he calls them). FBI teams from US helped Mumbai police. Some cooperation as to how to coordinate intelligence between local-central agencies is being shared.
10. India's Nuclear disaster liability law is not correctly worded which has prevented capital from coming into the country for nuclear power. The liability currently is on the suppliers and not the operators.

It is a must watch.

---

Buy my books "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" and "Understanding Firms".

Demonetisation - What if deposits in banks are greater than 15 Lac Crores?

On November 28th the Reserve Bank of India stated that

Banks have since reported that such exchange/deposits effected from November 10, 2016 upto November 27, 2016 amounted to ₹ 8,44,982 crore (exchange amounted to ₹ 33,948 crore and deposits amounted to ₹ 8,11,033 crore). They have also reported that the public have withdrawn, during this period, ₹ 2,16,617 crore from their accounts either over the counter or through ATMs.

The expectation was that thereafter the RBI will release similar data every Monday. On Dec. 5th, when RBI did not release the data for the week past, speculation was rife that most of the money may have actually returned to the RBI. And further that it amounts to a failure of the policy and that there is no black money at all. 

The amount forecasted / estimated by sources of journalists is Rs. 12.6 Trillion. has been deposited in banks till Dec 6. Total bank notes in circulation as of Nov. 8 was about Rs. 15 Trn. We still have about 3 weeks to go. 

The correct way to establish how much money has returned is to look at this 8.44 Tr figure. That is the focus. 

So weekly average is about Rs. 2.8 Trn as per RBI and as per Moneycontrol it is about  Rs. 3.15 Trn per week. Going by the same run-rate estimates we can get at least Rs. 19.64 Trn to Rs. 22.46 Tr. If you understand the "last-minute" psyche of Indians, I think last week will get at least twice the weekly deposits. Then you will get between Rs. 22.4 Tr to Rs. 25.2 Tr. 

Please note that these numbers are more than Rs. 5Tr  to Rs. 10 Tr more than what RBI has printed. 

So here are my thoughts on this:

1. It is OK if all the money comes back to the RBI and either gets changed or deposited in the banks. It means there won't be any disinflation because of loss of currency. 
2. If money is deposited in the bank that does not make it white money. It merely becomes visible black money as opposed to invisible black money. Knowledge of the quanta so revealed that itself is a benefit. Further, it is open for authorities to review and tax these proceeds accordingly. So it is ok if the deposits reach Rs. 15 Tr. 
3. The problem is what happens when the total deposits/exchanged amount exceeds Rs. 15 Trn. Once it reaches 15 Trn can RBI tell banks now don't accept any more notes? Or it accepts and asks Government to pay (reverse of dividend)? [Please refer to my previous blog-post on Black money and demonetisation before demonizing me.]
4. I would say, the fact that entire Rs. 15 Trn comes back itself means that the problem of Fake Indian Currency Notes (FICN) was more potent than was admitted previously. If our run-rate calculations turn out correctly, FICN could be between 33% and 66% of legitimate Indian Notes. That is not a joke. It is also a success of the Demonetisation drive.
5. I would say about 20-25% of the notes would have been definitely destroyed. But given the tax amnesty announced let us assume about 10-15% were destroyed. The black economy was estimated at 20-25%. Assuming some can be dissipated as white (through jan-dhan and other tricks) we can say at least 10% would be black. Still about 20% of the currency in circulation could be FICN. Compare this with estimates of about 2-5%. 

To top it all Modi did not ask for 50 days to clean up the black money he asked for 17 months. So there will be more action coming. This will be interesting, to say the least.

---

Buy my books "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" and "Understanding Firms".

Idiotic debate on Demonetization

Since the announcement of demonetization we have quite a lot of noise but no analysis. I am on the look out for genuine criticism of the policy.

Semantics of false criticism

There is a lot of criticism of the government's policy. The international criticism is uninformed and disconnected from Indian ground realities. Quite a bit is a shallow analysis of Nigeria, USSR and some other countries which had demonetized previously. Generally, the criticism falls into the following buckets:

1. Demonetization alone will not stop black money: That is not proper criticism. 
1. The government never maintained that it will. 
2. In fact, Finance ministry circular highlights various measures undertaken by the government till date. 
3. Further, the prime minister indicated that this was just the beginning and more announcement will come.
2. Removing 85% of the currency will cause a lot of pain to the people: 
1. Well when you ask the people, most are happy with it. Some are very angry. In a country of 1.2 billion you will have voices. 
2. The prime minister took a smart-phone based app poll which revealed 90% approve of the move. Media quickly jumped up stating the questions are biased. I myself took the poll. The questions were not as biased as media made them out to be. It is a fair poll - you CAN express dissent if you don't like the move.
3. But the fact remains none of the media channels or anyone tried to do a sms-based poll. We can have a poll for Indian Idol or some crazy show, can media people not fashion a proper poll and report if people are indeed pro- or against.
4. I tried to go through You-Tube videos about demonetisation uploaded after November 28. I suspected people will give proper reaction once they have been in ATM lines for a few days. I left out videos uploaded by news channels and focussed on videos uploaded by general people. Not many have uploaded but I found one by Roshini Ali & her friend exploring the poor of Kolkata informative. One other fellow explored Mumbai and Aurangabad but he wasn't as comprehensive as Roshini Ali.
3. Economy will be hurt as currency is withdrawn from circulation
1. This is the closest people have come to making rational arguments. I don't mind general public making this argument. But from experts, I expect more.
2. Many experts confuse the measured part of the economy (GDP etc) with unmeasured part (black economy). In an extreme view, since the black economy is not measured its destruction won't affect measured economy. That is flawed as black and white economies intermingle often. Yet they are not quite as intermingled as people make it out to be.
3. A substantial part of the black economy comes from tax evasion. For example, sales without bill are quite rampant in India. Over billing (for cold drinks) is also rampant. These are black transactions. With proper triggers, these transactions will come to the white economy. (Though demonetization is not that trigger).
4. Only time will tell if it works:
1. I understand general public expressing this sentiment. It is a healthy attitude to take.
2. But when experts take this position, I don't like this. I expect the experts to define their goals for the policy - when will they say it worked. 
3. And I want them to state it now not once results are out. Because once data is available the narrative will be tailored to the outcome.
4. Further, be realistic as to what can be achieved by demonetization. I don't want people setting targets "I want black money to become zero".
5. I want to see the goal post that is set out by all these experts.
5. Bull-shit interviews/feedback:
1. Many interviews of government officials and supporters of policy are quite brash. The interviewer does not want to know the policy but instead he wants to hammer the expert. Karan Thaper did that to Bibek Debroy (who I don't really admire - but he is most lucid in the lengthy Ashok Malik interview).
2. Most media reporting is negative and most general people reporting is positive. One TV channel interviewed a Hindi Speaking shopkeeper in Chennai.
3. If I watch TV channels interviews then I get different pictures. Pro-government channels say good things and anti-government channels always highlight bad things.
4. Some channels have shown non-working ATMs quite a few times. And others have shown longer queues giving impression that the queues are that long all the time. People who are on the ground dont find that many long queues all the time.
5. I have concluded that most of the people do not yet understand what exactly the possible strategy is. None have read the Arthakranti proposal even those who have interviewed the founder Anil Bokil.

Basic framework

Just wanted to clarify one thing here.

Tackling Black money requires a repository of measures. Yes many measures together will help reduce black money. Black money cannot be eliminated completely, it can be reduced drastically.

Demonetisation results in many things out of which one is hurting black money transactions. It freezes the black money transactions and not the assets created out of black money. It also results in other effects - anti-counterfeiting, promoting cash-less transactions etc.

The two are only slightly overlapping. Government hasn't claimed that demonetisation is only aimed at black money. It has correctly stated the what demonetisation can achieve. To confuse the two only shows your ignorance.

Policy Details - possible and others

For interested readers who want to know what is the possible logic behind Government's measures, you can parse some of the links here:

1. Amithabh Kant on CNN (focusses on going cash-less)
2. Anil Bokil on ABPMaza (in Marathi) in Anil Bokil in Hindi
3. Arthakranti Proposal (click here for benefits, benefits to individuals, objections)
4. Bibek Debroy on Demonetisation and other issues
5. Ken Rogoff author of The curse of Cash advises gradual demonetisation of high-value notes.
6. James Henry's article calling for surprise currency recall (from Ken Rogoff)

Setting Goalposts

It is important to set out clear goals when we announce the success of a measure. My goalpost is thus:

1. I want to evaluate current demonetisation on following parameters:
1. Total amount deposited with banks / total currency in circulation: I suspect we will get close to entire currency in circulation back into the bank accounts/exchanged. This is because I suspect counterfeit currency in the system is to the tune of 40% i.e. ~ Rs. 6 Trillion making total currency in circulation at ~Rs. 20Trillion.
2. GDP in Q3 and Q4 of FY 2017 should not reduce more than 1.5%. Thus I expect Q3 and Q4 to be at least 5.8%
3. Net bank deposits gain: After stabilization, i.e. say by Sep 2017, bank deposits should appreciate by at least 40% of currency in circulation i.e. Rs. 6 Trillion. This is figure after deposits and withdrawals have stabilized.
4. Share of E-transactions: As per Mastercard data 2% of transactions (number) are cash-less. I would like this number to be around 33% ~ 1 of every 3 transactions should be cashless. 
2. With respect to Black Money targeting, there should be a continuous targeting of black money holders and black economy.
3. Tax simplification and rationalization proposal in Union Budget 2017 (which will be in January). I think we should try Banking Transaction Tax once 2 out of 3 transactions are cashless.

---

Buy my books "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" and "Understanding Firms".

Destabilised Eurasia and possibility of War - The SE Asia - East Asia equation

The events of the past few weeks and years have had a decisive geo-political point to them particularly concerning South-East and East Asia. Let me enumerate a few here. 

1. In 2015 Japanese parliament permitted their army to go aggressive( with US blessings). They have been making ships and aircraft carriers since few years ago  displayed in Aussie, Singapore, Japan and US joint exercise - small allegedly helicopter carrier or something.  
2. Last week I was seeing Singapore Air Force Fighter planes on evening patrols. Also every day they have the another surveillance plane - it is not the boeing posiedon in the air. 
3. On friday, India announced surgical strikes on terror bases in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. 
4. Last week, Singapore PM met Japanese PM Abe. Last month he met Obama. Chinese news paper is accused Singapore of siding with US. This week Singapore PM is meeting Narendra Modi.
5. Last week Japanese PM Abe met Narendra Modi and promised him some military tech and other assistance including manufacturing assistance.
6. Phillipines has abandoned US and is courting China. Durtete made a statement that he received encouragement from China and Russia on his anti-US remarks.
7. Last month the International Arbitration Tribunal restrained China from claiming rights on South China Sea.
8. Last month Austrailia published a white paper on maritime defence highlighting the need to protect the interest in the northern coasts and in the Pacific. Australia does not have any threat from any country in the Pacific save China. It is way far out and super friendly with most of the major powers. It has a love-hate relations with some island countries where China has become active.
9. US is offering F-16 (yeah the old ones) to India for make-in-India option. (The tech is old but the offer is quite lucrative)

So what is happeneing?

China is being encircled. Japan south Korea Taiwan Singapore, Australia and India are coming together step by step. South Africa is in the mix too. Philippines has chosen to side with China - or so it seems. Vietnam is on the fence blowing hot and cold. Laos is stuck between Vietnam and China but I sense it is more pro-china. Thailand is becoming more democratic but depends on their king who is about to die or may have died. 

Since China is being encircled, it thinks it can break the mix by encircling India. China thinks it can corner India because of its alliance with Pakistan. So Pak will keep India engaged on west and china will keep it busy on the east taking India out of the equation. So a day after announcement of surgical strikes we had reports of China reducing Bramhaputra waters for dam construction.

But, on day of surgical strike Iran attacked pakistan (which is weird). Afghanistan is already sick of  Pakistan. Now Pakistan thinks it too is being encircled by adversaries. Tajikistan is not really happy with Pakistan either. But it is more worried about China. So goes for Kyrgyzstan and we come to Mongolia and Russia which surround China. 

Within China too,  in Hong Kong separatist sentiment is acting up, mostly without encouragement of the west. Then there are other prennial problems in China - including Tibet, Uyghurs and others.

So we have China trying "string of pearls" strategy around India. World trying "string of pearls" around China. 

Why India is crucial element in the mix?

India is important because it is a navy that controls the major trade routes to Europe and East america. It saves a trip across Africa. So China wants to circle indian ocean by involving Africans - twin benefits resources and strategic support. So this is a move-counter move strategy. India is but small player if you ask me. I think US is the big bro here. We are seeing Obama's east pivot in action. 

Why is China all riled up?

China is being choked economically by all - sort of as a payback for its merchentilist begger thy neighbour policy. Actually when Milton Friedman was asked about dumping of low cost products, his argument was simply it benefits the importer. It means (to me, Milton did not say it so) that after the value is over you can reverse the equations by ring-fencing the excess capacity from creating problems for you.

The second narrative Chinese use is that its almost $4Trillion US Dollar reserves may lose value and thus cause wealth loss. This narrative is easy to sell to general pulic and it will make for a good anti-US story.

This has a lot of implications for China. It may wreck it from within. An empowered peasantry   / rural-folk may bring down the corporates to its knees using exactly the same arguments that Mao used. The citizenry may become subversive when faced with no jobs, or rapid decline in wealth as a result of capacity destruction. These will be difficult to control in a country of 1.6 billion. The cost of political unrest for Chinese Communist Party is too high. That could be one reason for Chinese aggression.

The first narrative fits the bill better because of the related developments. There was no reason for announcing a "make in India" policy when there is excess global supply. Not unless the Chinese capacity was suddenly going to be unavailable. And someone could pick up the slack. Indian PM Modi saw an opportunity in this and embarked on the picking up pieces. FYI none of the Chinese investments into Make-in-India have materialized. Foxconn which promised to set up an iPhone factory has backed out. Others are mostly European and american cos who continue on.

Is China a potent threat to US?

At present China is not a threat to the US. 

It does not have a wherewithal to pick up a fight with US. At least that is the public view. China needs at least 5 aircraft carrier units to be as aggressive as they are trying to be. It has none at the moment. Big daddy US has five major assets in Pacific including Okinawa. US also has two Aircraft carrier groups in Mediterranean Sea and Indian Ocean. India has two in the Indian ocean. 

China is a threat to India. It is an ally of Pakistan and has a long border-dispute with India. India needs to be wary and after fall of Soviet Union there is no regional counter-balance. India must ally with US. There is no other way. US knows this and promoting technology transfer to Indian defence. 

China is also a threat in South China sea. It is here that US is more worried. It is claiming more land and nautical area and becoming more assertive.

The least-expected strategy for China will be to challenge US. That will be a surprise and alter the military-power equations. For this it needs some greographical spread. By itself, China has tough geography which makes it difficult for it to create big trouble that could alter global balance of power equations.

The solution - A China circle

The Chinese circle comprises China, Pakistan, North Korea, some countries in Africa, some in Pacific Oceans including Laos. These countries have received heavy Chinese aid and China supports some questionable regimes in certain regions. Phillipines is becoming a China ally. The Burmese junta enjoys some support from the Chinese.

Clearly with this motley crew China cannot take on US or other major country. But what it can do is create strategic assets in these countries from where it can create trouble. The dirty work still comes to China's share. 

The tools

If China wanted to be a credible threat it should be building at least 10 Aircraft carrier units (including cruisers, frigates, destroyers, submarines, logistics ships). A better strategy would be to build them inland somewhere in Hainan (lake) or more likely in Sichuan (totally on dry land). Then one fine day plonk these in the sea. An event like that could alter the geo-political equations quite rapidly.

Yet such kind of shifting of balance of power is not possible easily. There are pretty unpredictable players in the mix.

The no-nonsense player -Russia

Russia is sitting on the fence. The Russian approach is just like in world war 2 - corrupt but away from the mess. It will take sides when it is forced to take sides. It has hinted that it may start supplying aircrafts to Pakistan and may have helped china build their J20 fighter which is copy of the F22 raptor. Russians are playing both sides as of now. They are cooperating with the West in Arabian geographies and counter-balancing them in Asian geographies.

Their problem is that they are too close to conflicts but not too powerful to force a resolution anywhere. Even Soviet Russia would have found difficult to contain China in its present state.

Pakistan the unpredictably-unpredictable player

The issue was easy to solve if Pakistan was not a long-term US ally. Because Nehru sided with Russians, Pak went to the US and US is feeling guilty of abandoning pak even when it housed Osama. If Pakistan was just another country in the equation, the US policy would have tilted pro-India by now and we would have been in a new stable-stalemate situation. The world would be chugging along by now.

The problem is that US would always help build Pakistani capability to counter-balance India. To the US, pakistan-India parity was the policy objective. US realised it late that Pakistan was playing double game. With US technology seeping into China and the inventory falling into the terrorist hands, US realised Pakistan is not a strategic asset but a mere pawn. It is China that was the new threat.

My guess

It is possible that the China is using the uncertainity related to US presidential election to test some destabilisation strategies. They see a window of opportunity and it expires on November with elections in US as the new president (even if Trump wins) will be briefed about all important issues and most likely toe the usual line. The uncertainty will reign till November as Obama may not be able make longer term commitments right now. So we have to sit tight for 1or 2 months. This is peak of crisis as we get to see. Then big daddy will be back in the saddle and world will be back to its normal stalemate situation. If this is indeed correct, then we should see a major policy decision by the new US President immediately upon taking office. It could be a pro-India change or opening of a full-functional base in South East Asia augmenting the one in Singapore and Okinawa.

In Sum

Something is definitely going on in the SE Asia / East Asian region. 

---

Buy my books "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" and "Understanding Firms".

To RBI: A Case against Rate Cut

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) is under considerable pressure to reduce its benchmark interest rates in its upcoming monetary policy meeting. However, prudent monetary policy needs to keep rates at the current level rather than a premature easing for various reasons.

First, the present high inflation problem was caused by supply-side constraints combined with demand-side factors induced by rural wage growth. Over the past few months, rural wage growth has moderated and the government is also prudent and is not increasing MSPs. This has eased demand-side pressures and hence the recent inflation strength can be attributed primarily to supply side factors. 

Our strategy to counter supply-side inflation has been to boost supply through increased infrastructure investment coupled with measures to improve ease of doing business. To make it work, we must let supply overtake the latent demand by such a margin that any easing thereafter should unleash a positive demand catch-up spiral. The risk with a premature rate cut is that it creates demand even before supply-side catches up, in turn pushing the inflation trajectory higher. Therefore it is better to err on the side of caution and reduce rates later rather than risk another inflation spurt.

Second, higher interest rates combined with lower inflation augur well for positive real savings return. This has twin benefits. On one hand it redirects household incomes away from consumption into savings; and on the other hand it will creates a corpus of domestic saving that can be re-invested into the economy making Indian investments less dependent and more resilient to external / global shocks. 

Third, high asset prices, particularly real estate prices, are a more substantive burden on economic growth than interest rates. A premature cut can re-invigorate the real estate cycle, adding to the countries financial vulnerability. As the BIS has stated, central banks should focus not just on the business cycle, but also the financial cycle. Higher real interest rate will maintain a pressure on asset prices thereby creating beneficial conditions for sustainable economic growth.

Fourth, higher interest rates (more capital inflows) coupled with exchange rate sterilization measures are helping the RBI create a war chest to counter any external currency shocks. This was indeed the learning from the South East Asian crisis of 1990s – make hay while the sun shines. The RBI, rightly so, expects the near future to be tumultuous in light of US Fed tightening and changes in divergent monetary policies in developed countries. Higher rates will ensure that the RBI has enough dry powder in case of a global economic shock.

In sum, calling for the RBI to cut interest rates – just when the inflation battle is being won- is premature, short-sighted and tantamount to declaring a victory even before the enemy has been defeated. In a world where global central banks are creating conditions for future instability, the RBI should remain a beacon of stability.

---

Buy my books "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" and "Understanding Firms".

Reducing Importance of the budget

The first budget of the new Indian government is scheduled to be announced in a few hours. However, I believe budget announcement has outlived its excitement value.

I would rather see the past expenditure analysis session and a strategic planning session replace what is currently made into a single event. 

There is absolutely no discussion about effectiveness of past expenditure as against their objectives. I don't want to see how welfare expenditures have contributed to the economy as it would be too premature to so such analysis making the budget useless. I would rather see how effectively were the cash transfers were made, what was the loss, what was the cost required to transfer that cash, etc. I also want to know that how fiscal deficit target was achieved using cash accounting jugglery by simply delaying payments. 

Similarly, we do not have a strategic planning session. The presidential address to both houses intends to do that but is hardly ever used that way. The election manifesto is the strategic plan we look to. I think that is inadequate. However given the level of understanding in the houses of the strategic issues, one wonders if it is better to not let the parliament do strategic planning. Most of the MPs are "knowledge proof" as the popular adjective goes. 

In sum in a few hours you will see much hula boo about a non event. Let us hope Arun Jaitley breaks another norm. 

---

Buy my books "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" and "Understanding Firms".

Problem of Indian Economy

The problem of Indian Economy needs to be explained better.

Imagine the economy as a car (favourite of economists). The car has an engine of 4 cylinders (say). Then process of policy development adds cylinders to the engine. Thus, with prudent reform and policies the 4-cylinder engine economy can grow to become 6-cylinder engine economy. This is achieved while the 4-cylinder engine is still working and therefore is a complicated process.

First set of problems

Indian Economy is a car with 4 cylinder engine (as against US economy which could be 16 cylinder or China could be 12-cylinder etc). This engine is capable of growing at ~7% steadily. But to grow at 9-10% we need a bigger engine. Sadly, the Indian politician has no inclination to undertake these reforms.

Second set of problems

To add to our woes, the 4-cylinder engine itself is not running to its capacity. Not all cylinders are firing, brakes are engaged slowing the economy and there isn't enough lubrication to transmit all the engine power to the wheels. As a result we are finding it difficult to hold on to 6% GDP growth. Here again the problems are created by political class.

Solutions

In times of global macro-economic distress, one expects politicians to at the very least avoid second set of problems. In corporate lingo, these can be solved by "de-bottlenecking". In other words just simplify the procedure and keep policy clear and simple and you will have solved second set of problems.

Tackling first set of problems is going to be difficult and will need decisive political leadership that sadly is not even available on the far horizon.

 

---

My book "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" is available on Amazon and Kindle.

The Value of Indian Rupee

The Economist recently published the Big Mac Index that shows Indian Rupee as most undervalued currency contrary to the popular perception of its value. The Big Mac is priced at $1.62 in India vs. $4.2 in the US thereby giving undervaluation of 2.6x.

It raises some hard questions:

1. Has Indian Government absorbed substantial part of costs? Indian government subsidizes diesel and that could show up as mark down. This bloats the government balance sheet but keeps inflation from showing up in consumer goods prices. This has double effects, when high oil prices are absorbed by the government, Indian prices languish. Further, when the global prices start correcting, Indian prices tend to remain firm.
2. INR is undervalued because Indian government finances are not in good shape. India's government finances look more like developed countries than developing countries. To compound the problems, Indian export basket is quite price sensitive while import basket is not. So then does it mean Indian inflation has substantial way to go? 
3. Does it mean that Big Mac Index works better when government budget is nearly balanced?
4. Another important thing is that the price of entry-level burger at McDonalds has been coming down since McDonalds came to India. Part of the reason is product development, but significant part is because of raw material efficiency. This latent competitiveness has not yet been harnessed, but if done so, will make India more resilient to global factors. It may even make Indian exports more competitive.

---

My book "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" is available on Amazon and Kindle.

Types of Investment and India's low-hanging fruit

I think India is much better placed at the moment primarily because there is lot of low hanging fruit. I attempt to list a few. When it comes to investment we have two kinds of investment. 

1. The first represents fairly well understood investments where there is ample evidence of cost and benefit and technology is available from the experience of the first world countries. The road-map for development of such infrastructure, its costs, pay-off timelines etc. is well known.
• Agricultural productivity
• Basic Infrastructure - roads, power
• Second-level infrastructure like cold chains, transportation hubs etc.
2. The second is complicated and more like venture capital where risks are higher. Here the objective is to invest in areas that will value-drivers of the future. Here we are breaking new ground and the pay-offs are not clear. US and first world countries are required to invest in such type of infrastructure.
• Alternate energy
• New types of infrastructure including 4G telecom and other related such as NFC payments
• High-end infrastructure e.g. intelligent Highways etc.

  

For India, substantial opportunities exists in the first part. This is what makes India an attractive destination. Starting around 1995, a lot of attempts have been made in estimating this demand. Most have been unsuccessful, but a substantial body of knowledge has emerged in this process. Today is the best time of all for companies to undertake massive infrastructure building projects. The question really is, will government facilitate the process balancing protection of citizen's rights and goals of developments.

---

My book "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" is available on Amazon and Kindle.

Why RBI could not raise interest rate more than 25bps?

Yesterday the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) announced hike in Repo and reverse repo rates by 25bps each. Some commentators argued that RBI is behind the curve and should be aggressive in rate hikes. I disagree.

India is not entering the Volcker age

The question of aggressive RBI puts the Indian economy in some ways (not in magnitude) similar to US when Paul Volcker became the Fed chairman. There is high demand side pull and supply side needs catch up. But there is a key difference in India's position.

India needs investments in supply infrastructure

India needs more than INR 2 Trillion worth of investments to de-bottleneck the supply side. I am not talking about creating supply but simply reducing wastage and time lags to ensure supply gets to consumer. This investment is required in roads, cold-chains, food processing, storage and markets etc. This infrastructure is government responsibility. Either government create this infrastructure or create conditions in which private player can create it. Without this not much can be achieved on supply side.

Interest rate puts pressure on this investment

By increasing interest rates in arbitrary manner RBI will create uncertainty that will impact these investments in two ways. First, it will postpone the investments because of uncertain business environment. Secondly, it will increase the cost of capital and thus reduce profitability of these investments.

Hence, I believe, the RBI acted prudently to signal inflation concerns but allow markets to steadily adjust to higher interest environment. 

Cannot group India with other Emerging market

Over the past years, I spend part of time explaining this fact. India's economic structure is not like other emerging markets and hence we should not club those together. This goes when you are looking at bond yields, currency forecast or simply equity market valuations.

First, India is a consumption economy. Unlike other emerging markets that depend on US consumption, India is driven mostly by domestic consumption. Sectors like IT/ITES do have significant employment here and thus they do contribute indirectly to the consumption. However, the overall impact of IT/ITES is not as substantive as exports are to other emerging markets. Thus we need to look at India through a developed world lens.

Second, India functions despite of its government, again unlike other emerging markets. In other EMs government is a driver or enabler of growth. Not in India. In fact, wherever government interferes you have problems. So in that aspect too India is unlike other EMs.

Third, India has more efficient capital utilization pattern. Overall, the incremental Capital output ratio, ICOR, is higher in India. While a group of economists believe this is reflection of the stage of the economic development rather than character trait of India, I disagree. While the high level of ICOR is misleading, India will have better ICOR than comparable country at similar economic development level. However, this also means India will pay lesser for everything. In other words, if you expect certain demand at a price point in other countries, expect half that demand in India. MNCs found this very challenging at first. But at the right price point, there is ample demand than you can cater to.

Fourth, Indian banks, thanks to RBI's watchfulness, are very conservative. Even in Real estate lending, thanks to the black economy percentage charged by developers, the individual has higher skin in the game than in other markets. 

So during the next year when you look at investing in India, bear in mind that India is a consumption economy like the west. 

But what does this mean?

To me it implies some direct conclusions.

First, India can sustain a higher Debt-GDP ratio than other EMs. Since the payback comes from internal demand generation, the debt is likely to be more robust than other EMs. 

Second, it also means that India's economic model is directionally right, i.e. correct in intent, but low on scale, i.e. India is slow - very slow. This may mean higher stress on currency. Popular opinion on this topic is against me. People expect INR to continue to become cheaper vs. USD because of national debt. However, over time, people will realize the difference and try to flock into the INR. I do not expect it to happen in 2011 or 2012 but I have been wrong before. In any case, if it were to happen expect capital controls and regulation to manage the currency.

Third, infrastructure payback is likely to be longer. With India infrastructure story being marketed to death, I expect lot of infra-investment to come in without acknowledging this fact. Please expect payback to take longer than your models indicate.

Fourth, India may become a consumption driver of the world sooner than other EMs. It might take two decades more, but India may be first to contribute to global consumption rather than other EMs.

In sum

India is unique, it is a culturally in the middle. It is slow, but it is going the right way.

---

My book "Subverting Capitalism & Democracy" is available on Amazon