Looks like Mastodon has lost its gas already, and it wasn’t even a month after Mastodon cashed in on the mass disillusionment of the Indian public with Twitter India. And to think, I gave Mastodon room till mid-2020 in my previous blog post. Looks like Mastodon fell out of favor even before November 2019 came to an end.
One of the users even called it a “hell site” and didn’t want to return there! Jeez, never seen any other company witness a meteoric rise followed by an almost immediate collapse.
That’s why you can’t run any business without a compelling narrative. Negative messaging (at least we’re not Twitter!) was the first red flag.
Looks like even India’s #1 attention whore (henceforth AW1) is back on the evil Twitter and has almost completely abandoned Mastodon. Only the hypocritical Indian communist continues to post trash on that site, and it looks like even they can’t tolerate him because he’s such a blowhard (despite AW1 barking at one of their mods over that). On the flip side, I suppose only Mastodon tolerates calls for violence among all social media platforms. Note that this guy was banned from Twitter long before it turned completely to the right in India.
This is what happens when you create an echo chamber, that too a left wing echo chamber where nobody else is even allowed to post their opinions without the risk of getting harassed by idiots at best or getting banned from the platform at worst. Eventually even the worst of the attention whores won’t last in your platform. After all, what’s life for AW1 and her cult-lings without bashing other people and crying victim when they respond no matter how polite? And what’s life without AW1 directing her frenzied mobs of psychos to attack hapless targets like journalist Swati Chaturvedi over trivial issues and crying victim all day long? All the action is still on Twitter.
And unless Eugen Rochko does something to change the way Mastodon works, and more importantly, gives a compelling narrative for it, it’ll remain a left wing echo chamber in the foreseeable future.
So I run an account with the handle HardFastAndFree on Twitter. I used the same name and started an account on Mastodon and Plurk in July 2019. So far so good. I was just looking at the various social media sites available at the time.
While Mastodon (as of 2019) looked simple and friendly and resembled Twitter circa 2011-12, it was still not my preferred platform since most of the action to date is still on Twitter. So I just left my account dormant after starting it and praising Eugen Rochko (@Gargron) before leaving and returning to Twitter.
Plurk to me looked interesting but still not appealing enough for my tastes so I didn’t last for a day before returning to Twitter.
Suddenly (November 2019), there was a mad rush of Twitter followers to Mastodon, particularly from India. The main reason Indians entered Mastodon en masse was Twitter India’s heavy handed censorship and bias towards the right wing there. Mastodon became an overnight sensation especially among Leftists and minority groups in India. While some people understandably moved to the platform due to the toxicity of Indian right wing trolls on Twitter, many others reported hardships while using Twitter and moved to Mastodon. Twitter’s attempted damage control didn’t help matters. Even I criticized Twitter India for their bias.
While Mastodon initially looked friendly, there’s a problem. You never know when you get suspended. While it’s understandable that it isn’t a full time platform unlike Twitter, the frustration that arises when you get suspended without an explanation twice is what literally throws the spanner in the works for Mastodon.
I created another account using another email ID, just to know why I was suspended, and like clockwork, I was suspended…. again. This time I was accused of ban evading.
Apparently it doesn’t appear to them that they’ve been evading my emails to them demanding an explanation for 2 days. And when I try to get to them on the platform again, for nothing more than to ask for an explanation for my suspension, the only response they give is another suspension.
Moreover, if I really wanted to evade a ban, why would I reopen an account and appeal against it in the first place, that too to the moderators?!? Note that I never used my original name and only opened another troll account. And I adopted a completely different imagery and pattern in my second troll account. It would’ve been easy to evade the ban.
And what was the content I posted over there under my first account? News related to protests in Iraq, Lebanon, Bolivia and Chile, and of course, economics. I didn’t use swear words when I was in Mastodon and I never harassed anybody. The last “toot” I posted was related to my skepticism of climate change. I asked Eugen Rochko and the mods working there if they had any objection to my posting content that denies climate change. That day, my account was suspended without an explanation to date.
Meanwhile, I’ve been bashing people left and right on Twitter, yet I haven’t been suspended. I’ve also been bombarded by trolls of all stripes: Saudi trolls, Russian bots, SJWs, “anti-imperialists”, the alt-right, Hindutva, Muslims from India, etc., and I’ve never had my account suspended. I also post and share a lot of stuff denying climate change. Twitter never objected to it (so far) but that was the last thing I asked Mastodon’s admin and mods after which I was suspended from the platform.
That for my experience on both platforms. Now on to the ten reasons why Mastodon can’t outlast Twitter.
1 – Negative Messaging
Any new enterprise will cash in on an existing enterprise’s shortcoming in order to capture a share of the market. While every enterprise has its own highs and lows, it’s the appeal and sentiment around them which keeps them going. Twitter has the appeal/narrative of microblogging and news breaking faster than anywhere else. Mastodon is basically trying to be the un-Twitter. Yes, you read that right. While Mastodon were good at their tactics, they’re terrible at strategics. What else do you call a platform that resembles Twitter circa 2011-12 but has no other special feature except labeling posts as toots instead of tweets? Negative messaging (i.e., at least we’re not Twitter!) isn’t really a good way to appeal to anybody, much less new users.
2 – It Takes Time to Grow Even With a Narrative
Any new venture will take time to grow. It first appeals to a small group of people before it gradually reaches a wider audience. Twitter took years to build from scratch. Yes, Twitter was founded back in 2006 while Mastodon is relatively new and started a decade later in 2016. So that makes Twitter a more experienced platform than Mastodon. So we can cut some slack for Mastodon in this regard, even though Mastodon has no major narrative except being the un-Twitter.
3 – Simplicity of Access
In today’s world, most people are tech savvy and can handle basic stuff on their PCs and mobiles. However making things harder to reach isn’t a good way to promote your business. Twitter has a particular app: Twitter. Meanwhile, Mastodon has plenty of instances and no centralized app. This is especially confusing to people who aren’t too tech savvy. To add insult to injury, their web server is easier to use and better than other servers. While Mastodon’s aim to decentralize social media is admirable, on this front, they’re a total train-wreck.
4 – Complexity of Usage
Any social media platform that’s easy to use will gain more popularity. For instance, you can easily follow anybody on Twitter. Meanwhile, in Mastodon, especially if you’re using a web browser, you can’t follow somebody, you can’t like or share a post, etc., without verifying yourself in each case. This isn’t just for people who register themselves in different Mastodon servers, sometimes, even people in the same servers need to verify themselves in a separate pop-up window before liking, boosting or replying to content, and in many cases, even simply following other users. Complicating simple tasks isn’t a winning strategy.
5 – Bias Is Deadly
How you treat customers of all shades determines your future. Discrimination is the surest sign of a failing enterprise. While it’s true that Twitter, once a center-left platform, is now swamped by all kinds of right wing trolls: The alt-right, Hindutva, Erdoğanistas, Saudi trolls, etc., Mastodon already looks like a cesspool of left wing/anarchist/SJW trolls. Banning people for voicing their opinions that appear uncomfortable doesn’t help matters either. At a time right wing populism is on the rise, having a platform that looks like a congregation of hippies isn’t really a good way to sustain your business as it won’t be that popular. For people who don’t want to be associated with either wing, life is hard, as always.
6 – Resources in Hand
While some businesses can be started with little or no resources at hand, all businesses definitely need plenty of resources in order to sustain. Twitter has plenty of resources. The House of Saud is one of its prime shareholders. Meanwhile, Mastodon looks like a hobby undertaken by individuals who want it to be the un-Twitter. Again, let’s cut some slack for Mastodon.
7 – There’s No Live Action
You need to keep up with the Joneses, especially if you’re running a social media platform. A viciously dull place with no awareness of what’s going on isn’t really gonna pull followers or retain existing ones. All the live action is on Twitter. Rugby World Cup (now over)? Live. Iraq protests? Live. Lebanon protests? Live. Bolivia protests? Live. Chile protests? Live. Meanwhile, in Mastodon, it’s viciously dull. You won’t hear anybody except SJWs, anarchists and left wing trolls. To be sure, I did try to contribute to it, but then after my suspension (twice), I don’t intend to return to the platform, at least for now. If all you’re gonna do is share cat videos and images, Instagram is a much better platform than Mastodon.
8 – Attitude Towards Customers
As businesses grow, all kinds of investments flow in. In some cases, govt entities from countries like Norway and Saudi Arabia will also invest in them. Due to huge investments and the need to retain their business, it’s natural for any platform to lean towards the govt of the host nation. Twitter, which was originally a center-left platform, is no exception. But at least you can voice your opinion in that platform without having to face a near-immediate suspension just because you’re left wing/liberal. While Twitter’s increasingly authoritarian approach towards the Left/center is worrisome, at least you don’t get suspended immediately. Meanwhile, Mastodon already appears to be absolutely intolerant of right wing views and suspends people at the drop of a hat. At least Facebook accommodated everybody during their initial years and became a big brand name before turning increasingly dictatorial. And that dictatorial attitude is starting to wear Facebook down. Creating an echo chamber isn’t gonna help anybody, least of all a new platform like Mastodon.
9 – Nature of Moderators
In an increasingly automated world, automated moderators bring no surprise. Twitter has automated moderators. Its automatic algorithms are more convenient. You can get back to business once your account is unlocked. In some cases, you might need to remove some tweets before your countdown starts. Mastodon has human moderators. So it’s understandably harder for Mastodon mods to get to you when you need help. So let’s cut some slack for Mastodon on this front…. for now.
10 – Second Chances
Last but not the least, some users are crazy and will abuse social media platforms. But some users might be curious. Nonetheless, giving them a second chance keeps them on your platform for longer. At least on Twitter, you can appeal against your suspension. Your account remains in their servers for 30 days after suspension/deactivation. In Mastodon, it’s impossible. Once you’re suspended, it’s the end of the road. In many if not most cases, you can’t even appeal against your suspension. In my case, I didn’t even get an explanation for my suspension! Suspending with no explanation is an awful way to run your business.
Conclusion
So there you have it. From what I could observe, Mastodon is good at market tactics but terrible at strategy, especially when it comes to the long term. This is a platform that tries to brand itself as the un-Twitter, except it’s just an SJW/left wing mirror image of Twitter. Nothing appealing except “toots” instead of “tweets” and being a rather silent place with little to no live action. Moreover they’re already showing signs of dictatorial behavior even though they’re just starting out. Look, you need both right wing and left wing in order to run and maintain your business. You can’t run a business based on self-righteousness by randomly ban-hammering people who hold inconvenient opinions. That’s the worst imaginable way to run a social media platform. I believe this platform will fade away and dissipate completely by mid-2020 with nothing new to bring to the table while Twitter will outlast this phase and come out stronger than ever.
Addendum
Update (November 19, 2019): 1. One of the moderators named “Luigi” replied by stating that I was suspended for my “repeated belligerent conduct” towards Mastodon moderators. What he conveniently ignores is that I used Mastodon only an hour or two a day, and on some days, I never even opened Mastodon. That, according to him, is “repeated belligerent conduct”. Another inconvenient fact Luigi might want to consider is that I never abused or harassed anybody on Mastodon, and if I happened to wrongly accuse some Mastodon moderator of something (I thought “citrustwee” was the one who locked my account a week before I was suspended, when she clarified that she wasn’t the one who locked me but rather unlocked me), I promptly apologized for it too. To be sure, this Luigi guy seems to behave like a tinpot dictator. He thinks asking mods something once every 2 days or so is “repeated belligerent conduct”. This despite my not resorting to swear words or hate speech was enough for him to suspend me. People like him are Mastodon’s bane and will eventually be its doom. It’s only a matter of time.
Not to mention one Indian Communist who (in his own words) can’t live in Cuba (because it’s too far away) or China (because material needs are different from ideology) but works in Dubai and Amsterdam is back to peddling conspiracy theories, smoking ganja (India is capitalist!!), railing against private property (will he give up his private possessions, for starters?) and passively aggressively calling for violence.
Hey Eugen Rochko, is your platform a hobo’s paradise? A Leftist/SJW Disneyland where sexism towards men is allowed, where abusing somebody is okay as long as one is Leftist, where calling for violence is okay as long as one is Leftist?
Because that’s how it looks to me. In a way I’m glad the tinpot dictator known as moderator Luigi suspended me not once but twice. I should remember to return to this blog post every time I think of opening a new account on Mastodon.
The Modi administration has no regard for procedures and formalities. If PM Modi wants something done, he simply bypasses all norms and gets it done. This post will cover how institutions were weakened and what the Modi administration achieved out of it.
A good example of this is the Rafale deal which is highly dubious. This highlights how the defense ministry was subverted.
Flashback to 2015. Dassault CEO Eric Trappier announced that the Rafale deal between Dassault and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL, a govt owned enterprise) was 95% complete. But PM Modi pressured Dassault and then President of France, Francois Hollande, to scrap the deal and make a new one with a company owned by a crony capitalist close to him and replaced the original deal of 126 aircraft with 36 aircraft in flyaway condition. In the process, each Rafale in the new deal cost 41% more than the original deal. The defense ministry protested against the PM’s undermining the Rafale negotiations but to no avail, with then defense secretary G Mohan Kumar writing a note warning then defense minister late Manohar Parrikar that it seriously undermines India’s position. The Modi administration also waived all anti-corruption clauses in the deal. The deal was exempted from sovereign/bank guarantee and financial advisers’ recommendation of an escrow account after the PM forced a waiver of sovereign guarantee was also overruled. What makes this worse? The new deal was not on better terms than the previous deal. Three domain experts in the Indian negotiating team wrote a dissent note highlighting, among many issues, how the Modi govt accepted a “Letter of Comfort” in lieu of a sovereign guarantee. The waiver of a sovereign guarantee essentially meant that the new deal was more expensive. Apart from a sovereign guarantee waiver, unprecedented waivers were offered to France in offset agreements.
The first institution to be destroyed was the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), twice.
The second attack on RBI started in 2018. The govt wanted RBI’s cash reserves since 2017. Though initially handpicked by PM Modi, then Governor Urjit Patel refused citing that it would affect India’s financial stability. The rift between the RBI and the Modi regime got so bad that the latter appointed quacks who gave excuses for demonetization to the RBI board as part time directors. Due to the continuous pressure exerted by the regime, Urjit Patel, who served PM Modi meekly through demonetization, finally resigned and left. He was replaced by Shaktikanta Das, a tainted official who is also a close friend of IL&FS’ Ravi Parthasarathy (who fled India) and Hari Sankaran. Under Das, RBI gave the Modi regime the money it demanded from its cash reserves.
The second institution to be destroyed was the Supreme Court of India.
In early 2018, 4 judges came out in a public meeting and said that the SC was not in order under then CJI Deepak Misra and that democracy was at stake due to the weakening of the SC. This was the first time such an incident happened in the country. The controversy erupted when a case pertaining to the death of CBI Judge Loya who was hearing the Sohrabuddin encounter case involving BJP party president Amit Shah (also known as King Kong) was shifted to a lower bench.
The third institution to be destroyed was the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
The fifth institution to be destroyed was the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO) and by extension the National Statistical Commission (NSC).
The Modi regime performed poorly on the economic front and unemployment was at its highest in 45 years in 2017-18 as per a report by the NSSO. But the regime refused to release the data in order to avoid a bad reputation. This prompted members of the NSC to resign.
The sixth institution to be destroyed was the Election Commission of India (EC).
The PM engaged in vitriolic speeches again and again but every time the EC under Sunil Arora gave him a clean chit saying that he never violated the Model Code of Conduct. Senior Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa dissented due to the bias of the EC. Indeed, he was the only one who stood up to the indiscriminate clean chits, but to no avail, since the EC continued its course.
These are the six major institutions destroyed by the Modi regime in an attempt to consolidate its hold on power. Civil society, activists and institutions managed to mitigate the impact of the regime’s onslaughts, sacrificing themselves in the process. If the regime returns to power, and it looks highly likely, probably there would be nobody to stop them.
But what is the real face of India’s economic “reforms” and the state of the economy under PM Modi? Let’s have a look.
A good place to start would be the Center for Monitoring the Indian Economy (CMIE, their twitter ID is @_CMIE). https://www.cmie.com/
They have repeatedly reported on the pitfalls faced by the Indian economy. In 2019, the rate of unemployment fell to 7.2% in February and even crossed 8% in April before falling back to 7.6%. A report by the Hindu reveals that unemployment has doubled since 2011. The National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO) reported that in 2017-18, unemployment hit a 45 year high.
So what caused this situation? For that, one has to look into the Indian economy’s performance in the past 5 years.
Even the Congress party is guilty of favoritism. But the big difference between then and now is that others could also start and run businesses even if the regulations were daunting. Indeed, some of them like BigBasket, Zomato, Myntra, Snapdeal, Jabong, etc., have become household names. Today such companies can’t thrive due to the odious regulations imposed by the Modi govt. 1. A startup company was left with no money due to the “Angel Tax” imposed by the Modi govt. 2. A long term capital gains tax was imposed by the govt on both Indians and foreigners. 3. The government’s regulations are so odious that it’s being called “Tax Terrorism“. 4. The Goods and Services Tax (GST) which is crushing and destroying businesses. 5. Demonetization which wrecked the economy.
The Modi govt tried to launch various programs in an attempt to bolster India’s manufacturing and MSME sectors. 1. Make in India – Failed. Yashwant Sinha and Aditya Sinha have written more extensively on it in a book. 2. Startup India – Failedbadly. 3. Stand Up India – Failed. 4. Mudra loans for small businesses – Failed and ended up saddling Indian banks with more non-performing assets (NPAs). Giving a paltry amount to start a business clearly didn’t work. Former RBI Governor and noted economist Raghuram Rajan warned that NPAs could go out of control due to Mudra loans. Mudra loans could spark off a 2008 on the Indian economy. 5. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code which was looked to as a reform also turned out to be a ruse.
This is a short list in a possibly bigger list of policies that hurt India’s private sector and entrepreneurs. Now on to the public sector.
Indian State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) have faced a carnage in the past 5 years. They’ve all plummeted to the ground under the Modi regime. There are better ways to privatize giant SOEs but using them as a vehicle to hide past shady deals isn’t the way.
1. The first to suffer was ONGC (Oil and Natural Gas Corporation). ONGC had a market capitalization of 3.56 trillion rupees (over $50 billion) with no debt. Today it’s just 2.05 trillion rupees ($29.31 billion) with humongous debts, also caused due to the HPCL merger and the takeover of GSPC (Srivatsa YB has taken down the hidden scam in an elaborate twitter thread). ONGC’s cash reserves are now very low and it takes loans in order to pay salaries. 2. The next to suffer was the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC). LIC, which was very rich in 2014, was forced to buy up stakes of a debt-ridden bank IDBI and lost money. LIC was also forced to buy stakes of the heavily debt-ridden IL&FS. A few people have probably been scapegoated in the scandal which also affected British Airways and Philips. Basically the govt bailed out IL&FS through LIC and is now looking for scapegoats. The govt stepped in last year. Meanwhile, the Chairman of IL&FS, Ravi Parthasarathy, resigned and escaped from India. 3. Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) was sidelined by the Modi govt in favor of a crony capitalist friend close to the govt. The deal for 126 aircraft for the Indian Air Force was 95% complete back in 2015 but it was scrapped for a new deal with one of Modi’s crony friends. Former French President Francois Hollande admitted that they were given no other choice. N Ram (twitter id is @nramind), editor of the newspaper “The Hindu”, has published a series on this matter. HAL was also dried of cash by the govt and had to borrow money in order to pay salaries.
The final part: How did the Modi regime utilize all the money? What were its expenditures and wastage?
1. Building statues. The Shivaji statue cost 34 billion rupees ($490 million). The Statue of Unity cost 30 billion rupees (430 million). Oil companies were forced to pay for it too. 2. More than 50 billion Rupees (710 million) was spent by the govt on advertisements. 3. Demonetization cost the economy 3.75 trillion Rupees ($53.62 billion). 4. NPAs have risen sharply since 2014. The govt is also writing off loans literally breaking records. 5. $3 billion was lost in a bitcoin scam in Gujarat. 6. 70 billion rupees ($1 billion) was wasted on cleaning the Ganges river but with no effect. 7. A scheme for encouraging girl children was mostly on paper. 56% of its budget was spent on advertisements. 8. After draining SOEs of money, the govt was considering another 20 billion rupees to “recapitalize” the SOEs already destroyed. 9. With all options possibly destroyed and no more SOEs to loot or people to tax to death, the govt forced the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), India’s equivalent of the US Federal Reserve, to pay dividends worth $4 billion from its cash reserves. Economist Raghuram Rajan warned that it would affect India’s macroeconomic stability but then who’s listening?
Meanwhile, apart from Ravi Parthasarathy, many other economic fugitives such as jeweller Nirav Modi, Mehul Choksi (he even became a citizen of Antigua and Barbuda), Nitin Sandesara of Sterling Biotech and C Sivasankaran among others have also fled India. 36 economic fugitives were allowed to flee India by the Modi regime. Whistle blower SV Hari Prasad had warned the regime of the fraudulent practices of both Nirav Modi and Mehul Choksi back in 2016 but the PM refused to act. But why would he? He hosted “Mehul Bhai” (as he called Mehul Choksi) in November 2015 and took a group photo with Nirav Modi at the World Economic Forum in Davos just before he fled India.
Now coming to American political scientist Ian Bremmer, one can safely assume that he hasn’t really looked too deep into India’s economy beyond the flashy advertisements of the Modi regime. The only big development that comes to mind is BJP’s new headquarters and the two huge statues of Shivaji and Sardar Patel. BJP’s development (as well as running down opponents) is mostly with the help of Photoshop.
To sum up the economic agenda of BJP, here’s their agenda: They have no agenda.
To sum up the political agenda of BJP: Of the cronies, by the cronies, for the cronies.
This is the second part in a series. So how did BJP storm to power in 2014? Was it a surprise victory or was it well coordinated?
While PM Vajpayee subsidized travel for Hajj pilgrims and included Muslims, Christians and Sikhs in his cabinet, in the state of Gujarat, Chief Minister Narendra Modi had become infamous for the riots that took over a thousand lives. His venomous diatribe had garnered widespread notoriety. I had previously mentioned that he started working on his PR and image. After being banned from entry by the US and several other countries, he was still welcomed in Israel, China and Japan. That helped him wade through the stormy waters. Doing things like giving undue favors to businessmen close to him also helped him project an image of growth and development.
When BJP lost the 2004 general elections, it shocked political observers. The party lost steam for sometime. It was at this time that they started working on their IT cell. Indeed, BJP sympathizers started getting involved online in 2005. They were the earliest to adopt Facebook and Twitter. This gave them a leg up in propaganda while other parties including Indian National Congress didn’t even know about it.
The Congress government continued some of the good work of the previous government while starting their own programs. The economy was taking off. In 2008, despite the recession that slowed down advanced economies, India managed to keep afloat. Dr. Manmohan Singh was so popular that even 26/11 did nothing to dent the fortunes of the Congress party.
But that was not to be for long. In 2010, a report by then Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) Vinod Rai said that 1.76 trillion Rupees had vanished from the exchequer in the telecom sector and 1.86 trillion Rupees had vanished from the exchequer in the coal sector. This was made public by BJP later who stalled the parliament for a few weeks alleging corruption. It also had political ramifications in the southern state of Tamil Nadu where the party DMK (the then telecom minister A Raja is DMK) lost big.
Of course, it was later revealed that none of the scams was real, or if they were, they weren’t major (references here and here).
But it caused a nationwide furor back in the early 2010s. The poor way in which the commonwealth games were prepared and conducted in Delhi in 2010 didn’t help matters either. So people started getting disillusioned with the center.
In April 2011, a man named Anna Hazare started a movement called “India Against Corruption” and was joined by Arvind Kejriwal (who later formed the party Aam Aadmi Party aka AAP and became the Chief Minister of Delhi), Kiran Bedi (present governor of the Union Territory Puducherry), Prashant Bhushan, Shanti Bhushan and Yogendra Yadav. The movement was backed by RSS and many spiritual and Hindu religious organizations giving middle class Indians the thrill of toppling a rotten regime and replacing it with a better one. Imagine Iranians protesting against the Shah with Ayatollah Khomeini leading them back in 1978-79. Indians were more or less taken in by Anna Hazare and gang. Anna Hazare threatened to fast unto death if his demands weren’t met by the parliament. Basically Hazare and gang wanted to entrust as much power with unaccountable entities instead of the elected parliament. BJP which was the opposition back then supported him all the way. Anna Hazare went on a fast but after 13 days he looked very fit and when asked about it boasted that he once fasted for 23 days straight. All this high voltage drama made people suspicious, and when his tinhorn dictatorship back in his village of Ralegan Siddhi was exposed (flogging those who dared to drink alcohol or eat meat, banning elections in his village, etc.), he lost steam but the damage was done. Previously apolitical middle class people became bhakts (meaning devout followers in Hindi but in the political sense supporters of BJP) via inception. The ruling Congress party at the time was totally clueless and didn’t realize the changing dynamics on the ground. The introduction of the Communal Violence Bill in 2011 (which was eventually squashed) was one such indicator to the detachment of Congress from the public.
Meanwhile, Subramanian Swamy filed a case in Supreme Court using CAG Vinod
Rai’s report and in 2012 the Supreme Court canceled all spectrum
licenses allocated to various industries since the 1990s thus destroying the
economy in one swoop. India which survived the 2008 global financial crisis was
done in by the game of deceit played by BJP and RSS. High crude prices at the
time didn’t help matters either. Indeed, BJP attacked the Prime Minister for
international crude prices being high and regularly mocked him for the Rupee
depreciating internationally vis-à-vis the US Dollar. BJP were joined by wannabe
intellectuals like Chetan Bhagat (he tried to spin
a different story later when Modi
was PM).
The cancellation of spectrum licenses in 2012 and coal
licenses in 2014 paralyzed the Indian economy and rendered it handicapped.
If not for IT and IT enabled Services, India would’ve been in a decade long
recession now.
Narendra Modi was being groomed by BJP as their PM candidate. He unleashed
an orgy of propaganda which was swallowed by Indians uncritically. Indeed, some
of the funniest Photoshopped images can be found here.
Of course, that didn’t stop when Modi became PM but rather went overboard and
also included fake news (see this
and this).
Fake news and Photoshopped images infected even the government (see this).
One particular minister named Piyush Goyal, the blue eyed boy of PM Narendra
Modi, is nicknamed the Photoshop minister for a reason (see this
and this).
Of course, Mr. Goyal also sped
up the video of a train named Vande Bharat Express (that ill-fated
train was subjected to stone
pelting quite a number
of times and broke down twice
due to cattle)
and was subjected to ridicule.
Back to Narendra Modi’s campaign. The Gujarat Model was touted as the
national development model and BJP won the 2014 elections in a big way.
Congress had no idea what hit it and lay on its back through most of the past 5
years.
This is the end of Part II. Part III will focus on the cast and crew of BJP
and its performance in the past 5 years with more focus on financial
improprieties that occurred during the era.
India – home to 1.237 billion people and 2,200 ethnic groups with a GDP of over $2 trillion – it’s election season and the winners will be announced in May.
This post focuses on the general character of Indians as a people.
For anybody who walks across major cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Hyderabad or Chennai, one common book you can find even in small street side bookstores is the book Mein Kampf (my struggle) written by German dictator Adolf Hitler.
This isn’t a joke. Many people have noted this, including Haaretz.
So what is this fascination with Hitler that Indians seem to hold on to?
Simply put, Indians are totalitarian in their instincts. If right wingers admire the likes of Hitler and even China for persecuting Uighur Muslims, left wingers keep names like Stalin, Lenin and Che Guevara for their sons. Again, this isn’t a joke. References here, here, here and here. I suppose the only exception is Mao Tse-tung due to India’s uneasy relationship with China. Oh wait….
Feminists are yet another set of totalitarians but their stupidity would make even Mr. Bean cringe (IRL, Rowan Atkinson is a genius, I don’t talk about him but the character Bean).
As if left, right and feminists weren’t crazy enough, Muslims in India have their own infatuations with tyrants too. Sunni Muslims love Saddam Hussein. Shia Muslims love Ayatollah Khomeini.
Frankly I’ve no idea regarding who’s not fascist or totalitarian in India. This mindset in a normal scenario would be considered fascist!
Tossing their role models aside, nobody in India would be comfortable with hard questions. And now we come to the name calling part. Anybody who disagrees with an Indian will be quickly put inside a box. For instance, if you disagree with a Hindutvadi, you’ll be labeled a Jihadist (Jihadan for women), a mullah (mulli for women), katwa (mocking circumcision, katwi for women), a rice bag convert (mocking Christians by saying that their ancestors converted to Christianity for a bag of rice from the British), sickular (portmanteau for sick and secular), anti national (the most favorite term of Hindutvadis), LTTE (referring to the militant organization that wanted a nation for Tamils in north and East Sri Lanka, a term used to run down Tamils), Lemurs (an insult targeted at Tamils because some crackpot many decades ago said that Tamils had a country spanning across the Indian Ocean and connected India, Australia and Africa) and so on. Apart from Hindutvadis, Even leftists have their own pejorative terms: Sanghi (follower of RSS – Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, sometimes known as Sangh, hence the name Sanghi), cow piss drinker, chaddi (shorts, referring to RSS’ dressing style until very recently) and so on.
Image: RSS cadres led by leader Mohan Bhagwat (center). Mohan Bhagwat is also known as walrus.
But for all of them, “liberal” is a pejorative term. Anybody who disagrees with them and they can’t put in any box, there’s always the liberal box which is basically a code word for miscellaneous outcasts.
Now we’ll move on to Hindutvadis. So what’s their history?
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) was formed in 1921 and their ideology was known as Hindutva which means Hinduness. This organization was formed after some disgruntled Hindus lamented that the Indian National Congress wasn’t helping Hindus enough and was silent to Muslim League. Sir Muhammad Iqbal who wrote the patriotic Indian song Saare Jahan se Accha wanted a separate country for Muslims, a sly game of divide and rule played by the British. Congress was trying hard to play the balancing act but failed every time. Iqbal wanted a separate Muslim nation since at least the 1910s. The teetering of Congress enabled the formation of RSS and the rise of Hindutva. This organization aimed at the militarization of Hindus. Veer Savarkar lamented that Hindus had become too soft and wanted them to engage in martial arts, hunt animals and eat all kinds of meat includingbeef in order to let go of their pacifism à la Mahatma Gandhi. He even ridiculed India’s beliefs in astrology by pointing that the USA and the USSR were launching rockets into space while Indians were wasting their time with astrology. But his successors have grown insular and diluted those ideals for their cow worship and uber vegetarianism.
Back to the pre independence era. It was the leftists such as Subhas Chandra Bose and Bhagat Singh whonacrively fought against the British while the Congress was busy with their nonviolent struggle. Bose formed the Azad Hind Fauj aka Indian National Army and allied with he Axis powers during WWII in an effort to free India of British rule. The INA was composed mainly of Muslims, Tamils and Bengalis. Meanwhile, neither RSS, Hindu Mahasabha nor Muslim League participated in the freedom struggle. They chose to sit out and do the dirty work for the British. The efforts of Bose who had died in an air crash over Taiwan in 1945 went in vain with the birth of Pakistan in 1947.
After independence, Mahatma Gandhi was killed less than a year later by a close friend of Savarkar named Nathuram Godse who was also linked to RSS. After he was tried and hanged, Sardar Vallabhai Patel, the iron man of India, banned RSS. After RSS apologized and promised not to engage in politics, the ban was lifted.
Post Savarkar, RSS diluted its Hindutva ideals but made it more venomous. Its political wing during the early years of independent India was the Bharatiya Jana Sangh which didn’t gain much traction due to the popularity of Jawaharlal Nehru and his daughter Indira Gandhi. It was replaced by the Janata Party which also lost steam and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) took over with RSS as its mother-ship. They started off with 2 MPs in Maharashtra before gaining traction in the late 1980s due to the general public frustration with then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s extravagant lifestyle and foreign trips at a time Indians could barely make ends meet. Jan Morcha, Rashtriya Samajwadi Janata Party, Communists and BJP made an alliance and ruled for just one year from 1989 to 1990 before BJP pulled out. The unstable government continued till 1991. In 1990, BJP leader Lal Krishna Advani started the Ram Rath Yatra igniting riots through many parts of India. On December 6, 1992, the Babri Masjid was demolished. BJP leader and later Prime Minister of India Atal Bihari Vajpayee also incited mobs. In 1996, BJP emerged as the single largest party in parliament. But it was only after two more years that BJP formed the government, in 1998. The government was toppled by the pull out of AIADMK but BJP won again in 1999 with DMK’s support after India’s victory in the Kargil war against Pakistan. Although Vajpayee wasn’t as venomous in power as he was years earlier, it was still a charged atmosphere with riots going off randomly. In 2002, a train in Godhra, Gujarat, was burned killing 59 Hindu pilgrims. It was followed by gruesome riots which led to the deaths of 769 Muslims and 257 Hindus. BJP won the Gujarat assembly elections in a big way. PM Vajpayee was dumped by big Gujarat industrialists who sided with then Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi and threatened to boycott the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII). LK Advani also shielded Modi at the time. Ever since then, Narendra Modi, who was now an international pariah due to the riots, started working assiduously on his Public Relations and image building. Examples of this are the bi-yearly Vibrant Gujarat summits, APCO branding (for which the Gujarat govt under him paid $25,000 every month to APCO since the mid-2000s), etc. This greatly helped him in the 2014 general elections which saw BJP win a brute majority, the first time any party won so many seats since Indira Gandhi’s Congress won a brute majority back in 1984.
This is the end of Part-I. Part-II will focus on BJP’s road to victory in 2014 and the performance of its government in the past five years.
What are tax havens? What are the reasons behind some people in other countries opposing them? What are some of the reasons free people should support them, especially against international bureaucracies such as the IMF and the OECD?
First, let’s define a tax haven.
From Wikipedia: A tax haven is a country that offers foreign individuals and businesses little or no tax liability in a politically and economically static environment. Tax havens also share limited or no financial information with foreign tax authorities. In other words, a tax haven is a place which offers financial security to foreigners.
What makes tax havens really attractive? 1. Low (or zero) taxes that attract businesses and investments. 2. Repudiation of foreign tax laws, i.e., financial privacy for clients.Both these points make oppressive governments and advocates for higher taxes fume through their noses. Especially #2. When oppressive tax regimes can’t collect the money that businesses/individuals store there, they can’t satiate their big appetite and greed.
Who are the ones opposing tax havens? 1. Genocidal/dictatorial regimes: Turkey under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Iran, Cuba and Venezuela stand out. 2. High tax jurisdictions: The European Union and India stand out. 3. International bureaucracies/bodies like IMF, OECD and UN. Indeed, the UN has even set up an international body in order to combat tax avoidance! 4. Almost all Left wingers everywhere. 5. Interest/lobby groups that rely on governments to get their way(s).
As you can see, opposition to tax havens is heavy.
Now let’s move on to the final part: What are some valid reasons to support tax havens? Why should lovers of freedom and prosperity support tax havens that apparently help some people fail in their patriotic duties by evading taxes? Why is it more than essential today?
From an economic perspective: 1. Tax havens take away all investments, jobs, etc., from high tax jurisdictio ns. As you can see, investors will more likely invest in Switzerland or Luxembourg than France or Greece. Smart governments will reduce taxes in order to avoid losing out. Smart governments will make it easier for investors and businesses to set up shop in their nations so that they don’t lose out to tax havens. This is a win-win for every side: citizens and businesses/investors. Governments also gain credibility. Spending and debt will be low. 2. Tax havens help improve living standards. The richest countries are tax havens. Be it Hong Kong, Liechtenstein, the US, the UK, Switzerland, Channel Islands, Bermuda or Luxembourg. All of them are tax havens and they’re very rich. They outnumber others at the top. 3. Tax havens help improve the quality of govt. Property rights, rule of law, regulations, sound money and freedom to trade internationally are important parameters apart from taxes that determine a nation’s prosperity. More countries would work towards improving themselves. 4. Tax havens help even those in high tax jurisdictions. For instance, Indians hide their money in Mauritius. That money comes back to India in the form of FDI. Would it be possible without Mauritius? I don’t think so. Mauritius is the global gateway to India. To be sure, Mauritius-India is not a very good example due to cronyism (cronies/bureaucrats are the main investing parties). Jersey-United Kingdom are a better example. Apply the same logic to Monaco-France and Hong Kong-China. In other words, tax havens are sustaining high tax jurisdictions.
Furthermore, poor nations in the developing world that adopt tax haven policies become richer over time. They attract multinational companies and investors.
The best recipe for eliminating poverty is economic growth, not govt backed redistribution, welfare, etc. Tax havens by providing financial security to clients prevent greedy politicians in high tax jurisdictions from taxing their citizens to death and destroying their economies. Without these jurisdictions, the global economy would collapse and people would be poorer.
Even though OECD and IMF are trying to say otherwise. Look up “OECD Multilateral Instrument” for more on OECD’s consistent efforts to penalize tax havens and stifle tax competition.
What’s even more annoying is that IMF/OECD bureaucrats receive tax-free salaries!
Now let’s go to the final and (in my view) the most important part: Moral reasons to support tax havens: Imagine yourself as an ethnic Chinese person somewhere in the Philippines or Indonesia with a lot of wealth. What would the governments in those nations do?As is, both nations are quite hostile to minorities not of their race. Wouldn’t they try to confiscate the wealth of their ethnic Chinese citizens? Apply the same logic to: Tamils in Sri Lanka. Hindus in Pakistan/Bangladesh. Indians in Fiji Islands. Rohingyas (if there are).White farmers in Zimbabwe and South Africa. Papuans in Indonesia. LGBT in Iran. Entrepreneurs in Venezuela/Cuba/Zimbabwe. Jews in the Middle East. Christians in North Korea and Cuba. Political dissidents in Russia, China and Venezuela. Families under the threat of kidnappings in countries like Mexico.
These people will especially be targeted if they have money. For persecuted communities, tax havens are a matter of life or death.
But then some people would have doubts: Wouldn’t tax havens be used for money laundering? Shouldn’t we consider this fact?
Yes but let me explain.To be sure, tax havens are very strict when it comes to storing money. They don’t want their credibility sabotaged so money laundering for terror is out of question.
Here’s a map showing money laundering hot spots.
There are no tax havens in this list except Antigua & Barbuda.
Indeed, Cayman Islands has very strict laws against corrupt officials and terrorist proxies laundering money.
So in this scenario, the Mallu/North Indian bureaucrat in India who would’ve looted money for 3-4 generations would actually find it very hard. No wonder high-tax jurisdictions oppose tax havens!
I digress.
Persecuted communities could also invest in their host nations thus making themselves and the host population richer. This is a win-win for all sides. There’s no bigger defense of human rights than tax havens.
This is the reason I’m a big fan of Switzerland, Hong Kong, Bermuda, Luxembourg, Cayman Islands, etc., and all other jurisdictions that offer financial privacy and security.
As a half-Indian (Kannada/Tamil mix), whenever I see Indians bringing up new economic ideas that don’t work for too long even in rich societies, I don’t know whether I want to laugh or cry. The recent debate on the Universal Basic Income is one such time another poorly thought out idea has come to the forefront. So it’s only right to put out the fire when it’s small.
So what is the Universal Basic Income (UBI)? I shall address the same in this post. First, let’s define UBI. From Wikipedia: UBI is a periodic cash payment delivered to all on an individual basis, without means test or work requirement. What does that mean? Every citizen, employed or unemployed, working or retired, receives some minimum money from the govt in order to meet expenses. Sounds good, right? But it’s impractical. How? I already explained why the Nordic “socialist” model won’t work in countries like India. Why? Big welfare doesn’t give incentives for people to work. It tends to make people lazy. UBI will more or less fail for the very same reasons.
But automation is eliminating jobs previously done by humans. How do we compensate them? Automation is supposed to be welcomed with open arms. Sure, it’ll destroy jobs that exist today but it’ll create jobs which we can’t even imagine today. Thanks to automation, we as a society are moving away from redundant jobs and entering an era where creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship will play an even bigger role than before.
With that said, let’s see some of India’s present stats. 1. Indians earn just $2,000 per capita on an average. 2. 11 million jobs were lost in 2018. 3. Unemployment rate is now 7.3%. 4. Plenty of projects worth 3 trillion Rupees have been stalled. 5. Companies, financial and non-financial, are operating in the red.
So the pool of taxpayers keeps shrinking whilst those who are unemployed and also retired keeps increasing. This isn’t a good sign.
69 million people have no jobs. Only 42% in the working age group are getting jobs. This is enough to do a simple preliminary math calculation.
What is 42% of 69 million? Roughly 29 million will find jobs. The remaining 40 million will be jobless. Remember India doesn’t have the economic wit of Australia, Chile or Hong Kong. Indians don’t have personal savings accounts in which they deposit 10-15% of their income to use after retirement. So senior citizens will have to rely on pensions from the govt.
Tossing that aside, the economy will have to rely on a smaller number of taxpayers in order to fund UBI. Though the UBI is being proposed so the govt can eliminate other subsidies, there are 2 caveats. 1. The UBI scheme could increase the burden of govt spending by itself. It’s already a hard bargain for the United States and it’s estimated to be more expensive than its current welfare programs. 2. The poorest of the poor who could get some free healthcare via govt hospitals won’t be able to get anything with UBI. And the UBI will also be a bigger burden to the economy.
What about the other expenses of the Indian govt? 1. India also has military expenditures of roughly $50 billion. That and public enterprises and bureaucracies to run. 2. If people find living off the govt easier than going to work, and more people start depending on the govt, this scheme will fail. 3. Most people won’t pay taxes if they’re too high. They’ll simply evade taxes. See GST. 4. Already working people will have responsibilities like educating their kids, paying rents, buying houses and vehicles, etc., and everyday expenses. If they keep paying taxes, they will be reduced to starvation levels of existence. 5. UBI will cost much more than my preliminary skeletal calculation. For it to remain affordable to India, it will have to be extremely low. 6. Lazy people will start demanding more money from the govt in order to meet their expenses if UBI is very low. This will strain the economy even further.
There could be other unforeseen side effects of this scheme. Here’s the paradox. 1. If UBI is too low, people will starve. They can’t work if they’re hungry or weak, so UBI will have to be increased to reasonable levels. 2. But if UBI is too high, people will be okay living off the govt. This could ruin people who otherwise go to work. 3. India is not a mono-ethnic nation. Assuming UBI for UP/Bihar will be much lower than Karnataka/Tamil Nadu, what will happen? Lazy bums and criminals (not all UP/Bihar people) will migrate en masse to the latter, adding further strain on the latter’s economies and societies. 4. More on #2/#3: UBI will vary for each state, district, city/town, locality, heck even person. How will the govt identify that effectively?
I just don’t see the upsides to this scheme. However I see it, it seems to create more problems, now forget alleviating existing ones.
Here’s why the UBI will ultimately fail in India. 1. As stated before, it’ll be much more expensive than India’s present govt schemes. 2. In India’s case, the govt can’t afford UBI for all so people who enter the workforce would automatically stop receiving UBI. But what if their income is lower than the UBI (not my estimated BPL level) they received? Will they work or will they prefer UBI? 3. Even if people can earn much more than UBI, if they feel comfortable with free money, would they work? In most cases, no. They would simply take money from the govt and waste their time. 4. Since taxes will be high, what will happen? Businesses will stop investing and leave. That will create more unemployment and more people will be on the dole. Ultimately it’s unsustainable. 5. The most important point: The poor will be hurt the most due to UBI. Poor people usually get support from the govt in India in reasonable states in the form of healthcare, education, etc., which would otherwise cost a lot. How exactly would replacing them with UBI help?
But wait, there’s already a program in action in Kerala and Tamil Nadu: Employment exchange offices giving money to unemployed people.
UBI is just its turbocharged insane version.
Ultimately it ends up hurting the entire economy. The poor will be the worst hit, as always.UBI will work for a short time only if: 1. Majority of the people are well off and only the minority is poor. 2. UBI levels are very low.
Ultimately the best recipe for growth and wealth creation is reducing govt involvement except where direly needed. Let markets work.
UBI has been rejected by both Finland and Switzerland (though they’re trying again). This is the end of my post on the unsustainable nature of Universal Basic Income.
Good evening everybody. This is my first blog post on this site.
Seeing as I’m (part) Norwegian, I shall address the drawbacks of the Nordic “socialist” model admired by (mostly leftist) intellectuals in the US, Canada and even in India(!).
This model is unsustainable even though the majority of Scandinavians are rich and Norway even has oil.
First things first, this model is not socialist in the true sense. It’s just big welfare/redistribution. Nordic nations have: 1. A strong legal system and property rights. 2. Sound money. 3. Little to no regulation of business. 4. Absolute freedom to trade internationally.
All perfect capitalistic traits. What’s even more appealing is that there’s no “minimum wage” law that wreaked havoc in cities like Seattle, Washington in the US, yet even the poorest in Scandinavia earns more than his counterparts elsewhere.
But the size of the govt is huge due to a lot of taxes. The cost of living in Norway is 42% higher than the United States whereas in Iceland it’s 46% higher than the US. Why? Because Scandinavian governments intend to support poor people on welfare with all the taxes collected. But there’s a problem: It might be intended as a safety net but some people don’t use it to educate/train themselves and get a job, instead, they turn this safety net into a hammock and live off the govt. This behavior is contagious and could spread to otherwise hardworking folks who actually pay taxes to fund this profligacy!
This man could’ve been a productive member of Danish society but he was lured into dependency due to the generosity of the govt of Denmark. But wait, it doesn’t end there.
So what are the causes behind the failure of the Nordic socialist model which was supposed to be a grand success emulated by all, including poor countries like India?
Costs of living are astronomically high: Imagine spending $2 for a liter of milk, $1.83 for a liter of gasoline, $1.80 for a liter of diesel, $20 for a meal at an inexpensive restaurant, $100 for a pair of jeans, $107 for Nike sports shoes and $146 for leather shoes. All the taxes we pay goes for welfare. Not admonishing those people who genuinely need help but that’s not the topic here. No doubt one earns higher in Norway than in the US, Australia or New Zealand, but when costs of living are brought up, Norway is a deal breaker.
Welfare is supposed to be a safety net in order to help people in need. But what happens when it becomes too generous? People exploit it. That’s exactly what’s happening in Scandinavia. Some people don’t educate/train themselves and go to work but instead keep drawing welfare checks. Here are the unemployment rates in Scandinavia: Norway: 4%, Sweden: 6.6%, Finland: 7.6%, Denmark: 4.9%, Iceland: 2.9%. The other free market policies in Scandinavian nations are the reason unemployment isn’t at unhealthy levels like in Spain, France, Italy, Greece or Turkey.
The unwillingness of some immigrants to integrate with our societies is another cause for concern. This in addition to crime, creation of no-go zones for native Scandinavians, running parallel societies, etc., are an important factor. Immigration to another nation is a privilege, not a right.
Big welfare hurts businesses and investments. People will not invest if their returns don’t match their expectations. They aren’t running charities.
Big welfare inadvertently fuels terror. Britain has Anjem Choudary types. Scandinavia also had/has plenty of them.
These are just a few examples of how big welfare penalizes taxpayers. To be sure, not all welfare recipients are terrorists or useless bums but some of them are. This also affects people who would otherwise skill themselves and go to work thus perverting society.
Now let me move on to other aspects of the big welfare model. I shall make a comparison between Scandinavia, the US and India in order to make a clear distinction.
It works (for sometime, not forever) when the majority of the people are rich and well off while the minority is helpless. When Americans and Indians(!!) propose emulating this model, it scares the wits out of me. Because the US already has too many welfare schemes that have no doubt destroyed entire cities and in some cases entire states like California. In India, the majority is barely able to make ends meet while a small minority is rich. While the US and Scandinavia could withstand for a long time, in India, it’ll collapse in record time if implemented.
It works if the govt is run by somewhat responsible politicians and the society itself believes in earning their living. Irresponsible politicians in the US have plunged entire demographics into dependency. In India, the poor are simply left to starve to death.
Nordic countries score very high on market oriented policies and so does the US. Safe to say the US is as socialist as Scandinavia. In India, a bloated bureaucracy, oppressive govt intervention, the total absence of the rule of law in some cases, etc., are deal breakers.
Bureaucracies are already big in Nordic nations, the US and India. When this is the case, shouldn’t our focus be on reducing them instead of adding more people? Big welfare involves big bureaucracy funded by taxpayers’ money. Don’t Americans and Indians pay enough already?
It works when the society is resilient. Nordic nations may have gotten lazy but we’re ready to bounce back and become active if need be. The US is also resilient. But India? Big welfare also carries a moral baggage. One doesn’t have a right to other people’s money. Big welfare has the power to pervert the work ethics and culture of a society. Only the most resilient survive. India has cultural problems which will be exacerbated by big welfare. Moreover Indians are in a state where they accept filth as long as they can kick others down. When this is the case, the Nordic model is India’s guaranteed road to total ruin. India doesn’t have the cultural, social or political resilience of Scandinavia in order to adopt their model. As for the US, they can emulate Switzerland, Hong Kong, Singapore or Australia. Developing countries like Brazil and Viet Nam can also do the same: adopt Switzerland’s development model which is among the best on earth along with Singapore, Hong Kong and New Zealand. That is the recipe for success given they don’t have India’s baggage of cultural problems.
This is the end of my take on the Nordic “socialist” model. If need be, more shall be added to this post.
Clear as Daylight 