It pays. Or does it?

Now here's something that made me sit up and take notice. With a total of five years of economics behind me, I am, academically, considerably acquainted with the concept and the mechanics of taxation. There's a faint personal acquaintance, too - the sort engendered by eleven months of paying taxes and a week of running around like a headless chicken when it is time to file returns. And, of course, there's Marketing, the other love of my life. But this is the first time I have seen the two coming together, and to call the phenomenon merely interesting would definitely be an understatement.

The first thing we were taught about taxes was that there is no quid pro quo involved. Taxes are unilateral payments made by households and firms, which are meant for the government's coffers. That they form a substantial portion of the government's revenues goes without saying. And while it is implicit in Public Finance that proceeds from taxation are used for the benefit of the economy, no individual is entitled to ask for anything specific in return for the taxes he pays. That's what theory says, and that's exactly what is borne out - more emphatically than is needed, if you ask the average citizen - by the actions of the government.

So I'm sure we have all either been - or seen - the person who wonders exactly where his hard-earned money is going, every time he drives over a potholed road or glances at literacy or health-related data in journals and papers. There are ways of questioning the government about its measures and policies. But if Household A paid Rs 60,000 in taxes this financial year, they cannot go asking for benefits worth that amount, or even question the use of the funds.

Which is why I did a double-take when I first spotted a half-page ad in a national daily, reading "Have you paid your taxes yet? You pay - the country pays back!" Of course, there's absolutely no implication that there is any quid pro quo. But what is fascinating is the attempt to address the cynicism that has come to characterise the attitude of the average tax-payer, some of it justified, some not. There have been attempts and platitudes before...this one is a novelty simply because it has been put down in black and white. Positioning taxation as an activity with moral and patriotic appeal - that's a first! Undoubtedly, there are several reasons - the moral and patriotic included - why one should pay one's taxes. There is also, by corollary, an equal number of reasons why that money should be put to honest use by the exchequer.

That is what makes this campaign intriguing. One hopes to goodness that those who designed the campaign will also remember that the job isn't complete till the promised value is delivered. If, after a colossal exercise like this one - it must have cost them a pretty penny; guess where the money came from! - tax-payers don't get to see exactly how the country is "paying back", the campaign will backfire on a similar scale. Public memory, usually notoriously short, is not equally forgiving when money from its pockets is involved. One recalls a certain campaign that claimed India was shining. Appalling people with the enormous wastage of taxation money, it succeeded only in eroding goodwill away from the ruling coalition. So, yes, while it is great to be told that the country will pay back, some evidence that the promise is being kept will go a long way. Do I sound cynical? I'm afraid that's how I feel. :)

Over a Late Breakfast

You've got to be really well-prepared for your exam, or else really sure that you're beyond damage control, when you sit and ponder management theories a day before your Compensation & Benefits paper instead of dutifully revising Dessler and labour laws. And when you're cooking Maggi and writing this at the same time, you are beyond any help whatsoever, which is why you also grin like I am, and check your saucepan to ensure the seasoning is right.

But when I was boiling water for my coffee ten minutes ago, I hit upon some cardinal truths that I thought I must share. At this point, I must request all management purists and aficionados to exit the blog. I can feel irreverence bubbling over in me, and you are not going to be pleased. At the very outset, I remind you that I am a half-baked management graduate with very little knowledge to call my own. That probably explains the irreverence.

- More than once in the last eighteen months, I have found that most management theories are essentially common sense packaged in a fancy framework. Not to take away at all from all the contributors to the field, these are facts that have always, well, existed. That said, I do recognise the importance of realising that these facts exist, gleaning them from the everyday and the ordinary through intensive - and extensive - research, and presenting them to the world in a format that makes sense and is applicable, by and large, to most scenarios. As someone who intends to get into research herself eventually, I'd be the last to say that research in the field is irrelevant (why would I want to devote my life to something I don't believe in, now?), but there is also something to be said for the number of times I have heard people say (and felt myself), "Eh, this is what they're talking about? Of course there will be dissatisfaction if I pay one guy less than his counterpart doing the same work." Or "If you occupy a chunk of someone's mindspace for a reasonable while, he will, more likely than not, buy whatever it is that you're selling him". I could probably be charged with over-simplification. I'll cheerfully concede to the charges. :)

- Ever notice how most revolutionary concepts come from the same set of countries? Japan, the U.S. and the U.K., among others. Japan has practically cornered the market on contemporary management practices. I'd give anything for a peek into the average Japanese brain. Those people astound me. I haven't heard of too many theories coming from, say, Italy or Spain or Russia. I wonder why. Of course, there are studies carried out by researchers from scores of countries. What makes it to most standard textbooks (not that that alone means that the research was any good), though, comes from the same handful of countries. I seriously wonder why.

- We in India have an inexplicable affinity for books and theories that originated abroad. There's nothing wrong with that. Management is about people, and people are - cultural and organisational and economic differences aside - essentially the same everywhere. So whether we use Blum & Naylor or T. Rao to aid our understanding of how they can be "managed" (I've never been very comfortable with the connotation) is not - or shouldn't be - so important. But the problem lies somewhere else. The problem lies in assuming that your education is incomplete if you studied only out of Indian authors' works. Sure, it is...but isn't it equally incomplete if you study only out of McGraw Hill and Prentice Hall versions of foreign authors' books? Why can't we study theories from wherever they are explained best, and allow ourselves the privilege of reading what people from our country have to say about people from our country? And I mean this not just individually, but also from our universities' point of view.


My coffee mug is empty, my Maggi cold, and I am beginning to panic slightly about Comp & Ben. Cheerio, then. And I wish Blogger would behave better on my computer. I can't italicize words, the spacing is awry, and my paragraphs refuse to be disciplined into justification.

P.S.: As on November 30, I've had a decent C&B paper, have also spun yarns on Organisational Psychology...and am really kicked because Blogger is back on its best behaviour. As you can see, my friend, my posts are all justified in alignment...again! :)

Leaps of Faith

There was this focussed, decided, determined, frizzy-haired girl who drank the occasional cup of coffee and got all her curls chopped off every ten weeks. Then there was a lost, bewildered child-woman, who would do anything that gave her some definition and identity for the confetti that had spilled out of her happy jar. Occasionally, as she gathered the confetti into damp fistfuls, she'd look up determinedly, muttering fierce promises to herself.

The next thing she knew, she was several years into adulthood, focussed in a lost sort of way, sure of only a few things - but very, very sure - and had discovered a new philosophy she liked to claim as her own. From twelve cups of coffee a day, she went to the other extreme and decided she'd never depend on a cup of anything to perk her up or keep her awake. She is still clueless about what to do with her curls, but they have a mind of their own now. And she likes to walk around with a tub of Play-doh, the book she's currently reading, and a small notepad and her crayons in her bag, for when time takes her unawares. Over several years, she suddenly found her best friend (they have the ugliest fights, but then both agree each was the best thing to happen to the other). They were neighbours and were hardly acquainted before this. Beat that!

I don't know how many of you remember this Lakme ad from some 18 years ago. It had a series of shots of Aishwarya Rai as (what was then) the perfect picture of urban chic, and (what still is and will always be) the ultimate essence of spunky, happy, vivacious girlhood. They had the refrain from She's Got the Look from Roxette's Look Sharp! in the background. I remembered the music - and I discovered the song recently. I don't know why, but I love the number. I could dance down the street to that one!

Has anyone out there ever done this - decided against doing something, ever again...and gone and done it on an impulse? I do it more frequently than I care to count - or than is good for my morale. And then, I stay mad at myself for quite some time...till I start getting mad at myself for being mad and wasting time and energy and not doing something more productive. That's how it goes...and then (no, don't say anything yet, I know a lot of us do this...what I'm asking you about is going to follow) I do something equally stupid...stupider, if possible, so that I can get mad at myself at that. That distracts me from the first bit of lunacy. Then I just get fed up of being mad and go find something productive to do.

The other day, someone said, you know, you ought to befriend and keep in touch with people you can ask for help later. I thought that wasn't only selfish and pig-headed, but also really sad. What, all your friends are people you may or may not like or have something in common with, but who can do things for you? Eh, I'd like to think I'm more self-sufficient than that. Not a saint, just self-sufficient and perpetually short on patience.

And so I wander down life's lanes, going wherever, doing whatever. And when I am - often, deliberately - clueless, I sit and write a post about this, that and the other.

What paracetamol is to fever, chocolate is to the blues.

There's no two ways about it! I believe chemistry has something to do with it. I call it the ultimate quick-fix.

Genda Phool!

I think this track deserves a post to itself.

From surprise to dubious trials to bemusement (is that a word??) to helpless laughter to appreciation of the expert melding of genres to reflexive jigging and foot-tapping to finding it, one fine day, on my '25 Most Played' list, I've had one hell of a trip with Genda Phool. I find it as incredible as hilarious that, at one point long, long ago, I thought this song wasn't exactly worth an opinion. It is an interesting track alright, but also endearingly funny, even absurd, at places. That nasal oye hoye hoye - a very clever prelude and interlude - is surpassed only by the hip hop rhythm that barges in where you thought it least belonged, before proceeding to make itself right at home with the folk song from Chhattisgarh. Makes you wonder why no-one ever thought of this before. And like all things nice, this one's also short and sweet. I don't know the first thing about the nuances of classical or folk music or hip hop, but here's a big thumbs up to Genda Phool from a layperson bopping merrily to the music!

...jiski zubaan urdu ki tarah...

Coming, as it does, several days later than it was meant to, this post does not claim a critical analysis of the movie, or of Rahman's or Gulzar's work. I ran out fifteen minutes into the movie (not necessarily the first 15 minutes of the film), and am way too great a Rahman fan, and too much in awe of Gulzar, to presume to analyse their work.

There are better A.R.R. songs, not that Jai Ho isn't great. And if I've spent the last fifteen years spellbound by every Gulzar song I've heard, Jai Ho was no different. No, I'm just plain happy that, for once, award-winning work is work that I understand! (Blame it on the limited gray matter. I read The God of Small Things three times before I could begin to understand it - maybe it was partly because I was 13 at the time; I never got past page 40 of The Inheritance of Loss. At the risk of sounding like I have neither understanding nor appreciation of good literature, I have to confess that the latter bored me to tears.)

Gulzar's lyrics are poetry. He doesn't simply write a song - he writes a nursery rhyme, or a dirge, or a lampoon, or a prayer...I've loved it all since the time I couldn't understand it. Simple, meaningful, beautiful, tongue-in-cheek, heartwarming, playful, natural...I've grown up on his lyrics. Every song a slice of life, every word deceptively simple.

And as a total layperson, I wouldn't even dare evaluating Rahman's music - except to say that it's the sort you want to listen to endlessly when you first hear it - and that you'll want to keep going back to it later too...and that is more than one can say about a lot of other music.

Anyway, the whole point of starting this post was to celebrate two of my favourite artistes getting the Oscar. Yipee!

P.S. Rahman and Gulzar together at their best - try Ae Ajnabee from Dil Se on a quiet evening, and Chhaiya Chhaiya on the highway.

Q.

Is there anyone out there who feels the way I do about cellphones? Anyone who, like me, would trade their phone for a fishing rod at the first opportunity? Anyone wishing the "Mobile Number" field on all application forms didn't have that darned asterisk next to it?

Tell me!

Love? Actually!

So, it's Valentine's Day. The economy needs all the help it can get, so here's my bit for the Gibsons, Archies and Hallmarks of this world - Happy Valentine's Day to you! I won't buy heart-shaped candy or massacre masses of orchids, but this much I can, and will, do.

I have nothing for or against the day, really. I had classes all morning, and am back in my room now. Last year, I was at work, researching transactions I knew nothing about. The year before that, I spent all day panicking and doing little else about a tute that was due two days before. You get the drift.

But I refuse to take a detour and walk an extra kilometre to 32 UB simply because all of Bungalow Road, from Reebok to Barista, Archies and the florist's included, is off limits for the ordinary junta. I've always thought that the saffron brigade was a bunch of jobless jackasses, but, honestly, the deployment of close to 500 policemen and the barricading of the entire street only because the custodians of our morality choose to demonstrate against teenagers holding hands is patently stupid. Traffic clogs the road, irritated pedestrians have to go hunting for the bylane that opens at the back of beyond, and everything is unnecessarily tense.

Are they trying to tell us that youngsters out together are a more serious issue than the kids forced into begging at NDLS? A bigger problem than the homeless that line the streets? Illiteracy, corruption, unemployment, terrorism?? No, other than volunteering to teach kids or arrange for temporary shelters, I haven't done much towards allaying any of these issues in my 23 years...but then I don't take the moral high ground on people exercising their rights in a democracy either. I'm no expert on the Constitution, but as I recall from tenth grade Civics, there wasn't anything in it about stocking greeting cards and presents, or hanging out together at the movies or in a coffee shop being a punishable offence. I'm very interested in getting to know what reasoning these jobless morons use in arriving at the conclusion that their imagined interpretation of our "culture" holds greater weightage than the Constitution. Also, since I haven't, in 18 years of formal education, been taught anything about beating innocent people up as part of our culture, I'd appreciate a chance to learn. I doubt that any of these saffron-clad idiots knows how to spell 'culture', to begin with, or ever studied beyond second grade. And by wringing its hands helplessly (if it is even doing that much) and actually deploying policemen to curb the violence, instead of having the whole lot of these people thrown into prison, the Government only endorses the absurdity.

The economist in me tells me this is basically because these scruffy, loud, blindly "ideological" men are unemployed - which means we have a bit of a trade-off between keeping inflation in check and living in sanity.

Here's a humble suggestion to the RBI, then : We can live with the inflation for a bit.

I'm glad!

Glad, that our Prime Minister is an economist!

Looking back

I catch myself wondering, as I have so often, if we aren't putting the cart before the horse in our quest for development. Is there a possibility that we have got the equation all wrong? In a country of over a billion people, wherein the top 2-3% still likes to call itself the "middle class", and academicians, policy makers and MNC market researchers alike comfortably calculate the population above the poverty line with the aid of a definition that compresses standard of living and quality of life into one little figure (in USD, no less), in practice, at least; in a country where categorisation on "social" bases is not only par for the course, but also legalised, where "ownership" of land takes precedence over opportunities for employment, and where sweeping changes are made in the name of development without adequate measures for those who will bear the real cost...a country that is centuries old and has been an independent nation state for over six decades, but must still rely on stopgap measures for its security, and will spend months and millions "saluting" the spirit of her people, but will never actually get around to putting the required infrastructure into place...in a country where the homeless elderly crouch in the nooks and crannies of posh residential areas, how do you define terms like 'growth', 'development' and 'prosperity'? For heaven's sake, these terms have been the focus of decades of research and discussion; isn't it just a tad presumptuous to claim that we've got it right already?

Acres and acres of land may lie wasted in certain parts of the country, but it mustn't be used to set up a plant that could feed hundreds of mouths, create hundreds of jobs, educate hundreds of children, and (finally) put a region on the road to development. We will cling to our assertion that we are a primarily agricultural economy, never mind how (un)productive our land is, and that the land is ours. God forbid that someone should come up with a plan that will actually put a scarce resource to good use. We will cling desperately to our belief in what has always been, and our mistrust of what can be, because we are still busy dwelling in the past - culture, systems, ideology. The old may be crumbling right before our eyes - not that we aren't picking at it ourselves - but we will block the road for any new ideas and systems trying to make their way in.

Expressway after expressway, mall after mall, SEZ after SEZ, we are basking in the glory of a new, developed India. We're as good as anyone, anywhere...but don't tamper with the veneer of GDP-increases and sophisticated reports, please, or the poverty and the misery and the failed policies and persistent social problems will show. We have schemes for rural employment, we do. We have schemes for the girl child, plans and policies for all our social and economic problems. We come out with the regulation 200-page report on each of these every fiscal, and we highlight what we have achieved and brush the rest under "still in progress". There is no doubt that detailed plans are in place; they may or may not be sincerely intended (but we'll give them the benefit of the doubt); but between pious intentions and ambitious plans at one end and implementation at the other, something goes horribly, horribly wrong. Meanwhile, we're busy with the details of the facade that we present to the world. Make no mistake, we are a developing economy.

Except that the order of things is messed up. There's no dearth of money to spend (there shouldn't be, definitely not in these, of all times) on the part of the Government. It isn't only about allocating funds to one Plan or Policy and waking up to the fact that there was a Plan, 52 weeks later. It is about better administrative machinery, about greater transparency, about incentives to keep things above board (of course, the very fact that it needs incentives says it all). I do not know if it is the optimistic economics grad within me that says so, or plain lack of worldly wisdom...but then it does make sense to assume that, in an economy like ours, at least, development should be allowed to work its way up, rather than trickle down. The trickle down effect cannot exist here, in the state that we've allowed our affairs to work themselves into. Maybe it is time we realised that escalation of commitment doesn't do such a great job of covering up for errors - both those of commission and of omission.

One catches oneself wondering what it is, exactly, that the State has been doing, anyway. It was a private business house that took upon itself the onus of turning a luxury into a comfort for the common man, and barren land into an industrial hub in the process. Not for a moment is one saying that the decision was not guided by the profit motive - but if industrial and social development come with the profit, is there really anything to complain about? Again, it is the common man that takes upon himself the onus of guarding himself, his city and his country. One didn't see the State doing much in the face of terror - unless one takes into account the fit of social insensitivity and the sheer lack of humanity that overcame our politicians around that time, that is. As they callously, willingly, made gaffe after gaffe, leaving a bleeding city to its own devices, one stared in disbelief and dismay, which swiftly gave way to anger. Who deserves the misery and the tragedy? Who actually does? Or maybe we do, for having allowed them into power in the first place. Maybe this is the price we must pay for that mistake. Once again, the common man has gone back to rebuilding his life. How much, and how many times, can you rebuild using debris and shrapnel, really? Once, maybe, or twice. And then?

So much has changed between the last general elections and the upcoming. It's a series of half-measures and false starts. There have been good times, positive changes...sadly, they serve, more often than not, as security blankets. We'll remain couched in them and hope that the bad times will go away. That's the misfortune. They don't.