Narendra Modi's Masterplan for Indian Economy

While I don't actually know what NaMo is thinking, given his actions to date I think his plan for the economy is on the following lines: 

1. Market India as an investor friendly country to get in FDI
2. Promote "Digital India" to encourage a part of economy that does not need big infrastructure spend, and use it to promote e-governance
3. Get manufacturing in India at least for domestic consumption (including defence) to create jobs and positive buzz. Defence export are less likely to be sensitive to transport costs (the penalty of poor infrastructure) and can boost Digital India
4. Start building the infrastructure required to ultimately enable India to export manufactured goods 

For the first three to be sustainable, reining in bureaucracy to be more business friendly  and judicial reforms to reduce end-to-end judgement times would be needed. We are already seeing steps to make the bureaucracy toe the line. Whether it will work or not is to be seen.

There is no concrete step on judicial reforms, which is a concern. However, as long as NaMo is in power, a compliant bureaucracy in itself will make a world of difference. If Modi goes out of power, most of the gains are likely to be lost without judicial reforms.

These changes are hard, but step 4 will be the hardest. Indian export in manufacturing at global scale is simply not possible without a highly developed infrastructure, including state of the art container ports, express ways for large container trucks, and a functioning fast freight container rail routes. Privatisation of freight rail, strategic layout of roads, and integrated deep water ports are needed to match the logistics advantage for manufacturing in China. To give you a perspective, right now 7 of the world's busiest container ports are in China, who has strategically invested in its infrastructure to brilliantly support exports. Without doing the same Make in India (for export and not just internal consumption) will never be viable, and digital India+defence exports can take you only so far. 

Even if Modi delivers factually, he needs to up his game regarding communication and rein in a lying, agenda based main stream media. It is time that media houses were held accountable for what they publish as factual news. You can't run a lie to tarnish somebody's reputation as main news for 20 hours and then publish the apology as side news for 2 minutes.

Overall, these steps, if executed reasonably, can provide India a significant boost and actually turn it into a world power. However, it is a difficult battle against entrenched socialist practices/culture of non-performance, corruption, and protectionism. Add in a biased, lying, agenda based main stream media and desperate fight for survival by the existing corrupt order, and this gets even more interesting. Of course some of out neighbours would like to see us derail as well. NaMo alone can do only so much. I just hope it is enough...

Finding Merit

This year I read two books by Ayn Rand- "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged". Very beautifully (and bitterly) written. A considerable amount of depth is evident in every word written in these two books. Nevertheless, like most extreme view points, these books fail to capture the complexity of human society. At the same time, they do raise some key questions that we can ignore only at our own peril.

Let me start with what I agree. I agree with the importance of work, the value of ability against need and justice against charity. I concur with the view that collectivism can promote mediocrity and that many do try to ride on the back of few who produce and create. However, I do not agree with a simplistic view of the world that demands enlightenment from everybody. It completely ignores the fact that the world essentially runs on principles of power and opportunism. You cannot wish it away or solve it magically.Moreover, every argument has two sides. Overall, things are much more complex and the solutions are ever more so elusive.

Many people believe that Ayn Rand stands for capitalism. I don't think so. A careful read will convince you that she damns any system that asks people to discard reason, merit, independence, or happiness. She denounces every system that does not value ability or forces one man to live for another. I think that this can easily include most of the known systems of government except Meritocracy (rule by merit). Hence, I feel Ayn Rand stands for Meritocracy and not an exploitative Capitalism. Once we can see this, it is easy to see that all the problems inherent to a state built on tenets of Meritocracy apply to Ayn Rand's philosophy. Interested reader should read about Singapore to understand the advantages and disadvantages of such a system with a practical example.

I feel that most of the systems of government can succeed, provided certain conditions are met. However, only a few have managed to actually succeed in actually enriching the life of its citizens, maintain peace and provide meaningful progress. Too theoretical or puritan frameworks tend to degenerate more easily. Hence, Communism without fail degenerates into dictatorship while Aristocracy often degenerates to Plutocracy and so on. Meritocracy falls just in between the extremely theoretical and the viable. Provided the country can establish an objective scale of merit that takes into account education, practical experience and practical results achieved into consideration; it is possible to make a meritocracy work. Otherwise there is a genuine danger of it degenerating into a Plutocracy (rule by money) or Oligarchy (rule by elite). Till somebody goes on to establish such a framework (and a country), capitalistic democracies remain our best bet for the better or the worse.

Finally, I think that the same principle can help one make a model corporation. In fact I feel that if a country is run like a well-run corporation, the result would be a true meritocracy.