Jobs, Wages and Employment in India

Key features of jobs, wages and employment in India*:
1. Growth creates fewer jobs than it used to.
- A 10% increase in GDP now results in less than 1% increase in employment.
- Unemployment among the youth and higher educated has reached 16%.
2. Wages are rising but they are below the 7th Pay Commission's minimum.
- Wage rates have grown in most sectors at 3% per year or more.
- 82% of male and 92% of female workers earn less than ₹10,000 a month.
3. Replacement of workers by machines has slowed down.
- ₹ 1 crore of fixed capital in organised manufacturing supports 10 jobs.
- Contract workers are nearly 30% of all workers in organised manufacturing.
4. Productivity has increasingly diverged from wages.
- Labour productivity in organised manufacturing increased by 6 times over the past 30 years, but wages increased by only 1.5 times.
5. 'Surplus Labour' industries still dominate as 'new' service economy grows slowly.
- 'Surplus labour' based industries account for more than 50% of service sector employment.
6. Gender disparities are still high but are reducing in some cases.
- Women are 16% of all service sector workers but 60% of domestic workers.
- Women earn 65% of men's earnings.
7. Women's participation in the paid workforce is low but some states perform much better than others.
- While only 20 women are in paid employment for every 100 men in UP, this number is 50 in Tamil Nadu and 70 in the North East.
- Government programs are crucial.
8. Caste disparities are large but government policy is reducing them.
- Scheduled castes are 18.5% of all workers but 46% of leather workers.
- Caste earnings gap is larger than gender earnings gap.
9. Crafts remain big employers and are central to the rural non-farm economy.
- With over 500 officially listed arts and crafts, the sector represents immense cultural value, ecological positives and crores of jobs.

*Source: "State of Working in India 2018" (PDF) by Centre for Sustainable Employment, Azim Premji University.

Law Of Learning

LAW OF LEARNING

Learning happens when we transition from one state to another. And the amount of learning is proportional to the difference between the two states.

RSS, Brahmin Guilt and Action Vs Knowledge

The RSS was born out of nationalism. But there was another element in its DNA: Brahmin guilt. The RSS was founded by Brahmins who were not just nationalist but also happened to be guilty about the historical role of Brahmins in Indian society. In their view, Brahmins had been ivory-tower philosophers who had cut themselves off from the rest of Indian society and buried themselves in Vedas and Shastras – while India was being conquered and ruled by foreign invaders. And that is why India was under slavery for 1000 years. So the two sins of Brahmins were elitism and intellectualism. Thus the RSS has, since its birth, tried to make amends for these two sins by giving primacy to:
1. Action over knowledge
2. Quantity over quality.

How To Change A System

HOW TO CHANGE A SYSTEM

Is a system best changed from inside or from outside? The answer is that both internal and external stimuli help to change a system. But the nature of the two stimuli - and the role they play - are different. The external stimuli will be direct assaults demanding immediate and fundamental change - based on first principles. Whereas the internal stimuli will be indirect pushes towards gradual and incremental change - based on the rules of that system.

Greatest Strength/Interest: True Potential

1. Every person has a certain greatest strength/interest.
2. Our greatest strength/interest is our true potential.
3. When we exercise our true potential:
a) We are at our happiest
b) We are of maximum use to society.
4. So success is:
a) Discovering our true potential
b) Doing work that exercises our true potential.

Atal Bihari Vajpayee: A Tribute

ATAL BIHARI VAJPAYEE: A TRIBUTE

Yes, we knew you were old
Yes, we knew you were sick
Yes, we knew it was a matter of time
But still . . .
When the news finally came
It took some time to sink in
And when it did sink in
A heaviness descended on our chests
An emptiness filled our hearts
A darkness wrapped around our souls
For we have not lost a leader
But we have lost our father.

Suddenly after all these years
Of a long silence
And a longer forgottenness
Your voice rings in our ears
Your face shines in our eyes
Your smile lights up our hearts
We hear you again
We see you again
We feel you again
Just like it was yesterday
All these years of separation
Filled up in a mere instant.

Leader, poet, philosopher
You built a modern Brahmastra
And adorned Mother India's arms
You built modern necklaces
And connected India's corners
You built modern airwaves
And connected Indians all over
You freed our economy
And unleashed prosperity
By slaying the demon of socialism
You ruled us for 6 golden years
A rule that ended too soon
Cut short by our own stupidity
If only we had given you more time
If only we had given you more power
Today we would be in a different place
For you did not need us
But we needed you.

So this is what it feels like
To lose someone
Whom we thought was far away
But was so close to us
Indeed was a part of us
The wise tell your achievements
And contributions to the land
But somehow none of that
Really matters to us now
For we have not lost a leader
But we have lost our father
We are your orphaned children
We now have only your memories
To console us in this darkness.

We lost you in 2004 itself
2018 is just a technicality
How you must have laughed then
At our monumental stupidity
No doubt you would have said
"Forgive them, Father
For they know not what they do"
For the loss was not yours
But the loss was ours
We, your foolish children.

The most painful words are "What if"
What if we had been wise
What if we had given you more time
What if we had given you more power
What if . . .
But gone is gone
And the past shall not return
How do we fill this emptiness?
How do we lift this heaviness?
How do we dispel this darkness?
How do we bring back the light?
People miss the light
Only after it goes out
We will now miss your smile
Because we will never see it again.

A selfless child wishes peace
For his departed father
But we are selfish children
All we see is our loss, our sorrow
We, your selfish children
Why did you have to be so good?
Why did you have to be so kind?
Why did you have to be so gentle?
If only you had been like others
This would not hurt so much
We would have thrown a flower
And walked on ahead
Without looking back
But this time is different
Because you were different
A poet among rogues
A saint among sinners
A philosopher among knaves.

There will never be another like you
None with your heart
None with your voice
None with your words
None with your smile
And above all
None with your love
Farewell, our beloved father
Go to your Divine Father
Let your wisdom be with us
Let your strength be with us
And above all
Let your love be with us
We, your orphaned children.

India's Anti-Knowledge Society/Culture

The 21st century will be the knowledge century. Knowledge will play a central role in this century. A country's success or failure in this century will be decided by knowledge. So to succeed in this century, a country must give importance to knowledge. And all the countries of the world are doing this: China, America and many others. All, that is, with one exception: India.

In no other country is knowledge as disrespected as it is in India. Among professions, research/academics is the least respected profession. And education has neither value in the market nor respect in society. A doctorate has less value/respect than a post-graduate, who in turn has less value/respect than a graduate. An anti-knowledge culture pervades our society. People with knowledge are treated with hostility at worst and indifference at best. In the 21st century, this disrespect for knowledge is suicide. Yet we are doing it. Why?

The reason/cause is simple: Our guilt about the caste system. The caste system was a hierarchical and hereditary social system. And it put the knowledge-workers (Brahmanas) at the top of the hierarchy. When India was invaded, conquered and ruled by foreigners (Turks, Mughals, British) for 1000 years, this system became rigid and led to inequality. When we became free in 1947 and started to modernise, we rightly decided to abandon the degenerated caste system. That (again, rightly) meant giving equal respect to a) people of all castes and b) people who do all types of work. So far, so good. But in our over-eagerness to repair the inequality of the degenerated caste system, we (wrongly) took one more step: We stopped giving respect to knowledge itself. The result is the anti-knowledge culture that pervades our society today.

We must distinguish between a hereditary social group (ie, caste) and a social function (here, knowledge). It is one thing to refuse to give special privilege to a hereditary social group who historically performed the knowledge-function in society (ie, Brahmins) -- which is right. It is another thing to refuse to give respect to the social function of knowledge -- which has always been important and is most important in the 21st century. But this is exactly what we are doing. And its consequences are disastrous.

Some people say that our lack of respect for knowledge is due to our systems -- ie, we don't have the right systems in place. (Example: We need more money for research -- both from government and industry) True. But who will build those systems? The Chinese? The Americans? Nobody will do it for us. We have to build our systems ourselves. And we can build the right systems only if we have the right mindset/culture (because everything begins with mindset/culture). So first we must change our anti-knowledge mindset/culture to a pro-knowledge mindset/culture. That is, we must start giving knowledge the respect it deserves in the 21st century world.

PS: A parallel phenomenon (which has the same root-cause) is our attitude towards excellence/quality. We think excellence/quality is anti-equality and mediocrity is pro-equality.

The "Biggest Mistake Of Your Life"

At any point of time in your life, the "biggest mistake of your life" is the decision/choice you made that took you away from the path (that you now think) would have taken you to the point that you now want to be at.

Secret Of Happiness?

SECRET OF HAPPINESS?

Happiness comes from work - not from money. Yes, we need money to live. So the equations are:
1. Work you like + Enough money to live = Happiness
2. Work you don't like + Lot of money = Misery
So what will your life be? Equation 1 or 2? The choice is yours. In the 20th century, option #1 was not available. But in the 21st century, it is definitely available. You just have to search for it.

Your passion should be your job - it shouldn't be your hobby. If you say "I do X from Monday to Friday because it pays me a bomb. But on weekends/holidays I do Y because I love it." then you are living in hell. If you love Y, then why on earth are you doing it only on weekends/holidays? You should be doing it Monday to Friday! You will say "Y doesn't pay any money". That was true in the 20th century - not today. It may not be immediately obvious - but with imagination and experimentation, you can definitely figure out how to make money (enough to live) out of your passion. Or you can continue living in your hell. The choice is yours.

Wisdom: A Mathematical Model/Equation/Definition

A MATHEMATICAL MODEL/EQUATION/DEFINITION FOR WISDOM

W = L1×C1 + L2×C2 + . . . + Li×Ci + . . . + Ln×Cn

Where:
W = Wisdom
n = Number of problems solved
Li = Learning from problem i
Ci = Complexity of problem i

A problem is described by a set of equations - and each equation contains some parameters:
f1(x1,x2,...,xk,...,xp) = 0
f2(x1,x2,...,xk,...,xp) = 0
...
fj(x1,x2,...,xk,...,xp) = 0
...
fm(x1,x2,...,xk,...,xp) = 0

Where:
m = Number of equations that describe the problem
p = Number of parameters in the problem

1. Li = Learning from a problem
Li = e/m
Where:
e = Number of equations discovered (out of m)

2. Ci = Complexity of a problem
Ci = m × p × (c1 + c2 + . . . + cj + . . . + cm)
Where:
cj = Complexity of equation j

3. cj = Complexity of an equation
cj = V1 + V2 + . . . + Vk + . . . + Vp
Where:
Vk = Number of possible values of parameter k

Law Of System Complexity

LAW OF SYSTEM COMPLEXITY

A system must have a certain minimum level of complexity to perform its function. Above that level, its efficiency will be inversely proportional to its complexity.

Law Of Mathematical Models

LAW OF MATHEMATICAL MODELS

The probability of a mathematical model predicting the real world correctly is inversely proportional to its complexity.

First Law Of Decision Making

FIRST LAW OF DECISION MAKING

Every decision must be made at the last possible moment so as to:
1. Have maximum information for making the decision
2. Give your brain maximum time for processing that information.

Laws Of Information Flow And System Efficiency

Laws of information flow and system efficiency:

1. First Law:
A system's efficiency is proportional to the amount/volume/quantity of information that flows in it.

2. Second Law:
A system's efficiency is proportional to the rate/speed/velocity at which information flows in it.

'Major Economy': Definition?

Media keeps saying India is the fastest growing 'major' economy. So which are really the fastest growing economies (regardless of 'major' or 'minor')?
1. Libya - 55% (GDP: $30 billion, #95)
2. Ethiopia - 8.5% (GDP: $70 billion, #65)
3. Vietnam - 7.7% (GDP: $200 billion, #50)
4. Ivory Coast - 7.6% (GDP: $35 billion, #90)
5. India - 7.5% (GDP: $2.5 trillion, #6)

The top 4 are all small countries. So it is easy to say "India is the fastest growing major economy". But is there any precise definition of 'major economy'? Where do you draw the line between 'major' economies and the rest? Do you take the top X economies as 'major'? In that case, what is X? 10? 15? 20? How much? Or do you take a GDP value as a cutoff for 'major' economies? And in that case, what is the cutoff? $ 1 trillion? That will translate to X = 15. Or is it some other value? Or should we take some other parameter?

Hatred Of Hinduism (HoH)

When the British conquered India, they were intelligent enough to figure out a few things:
1. India is the world's oldest and greatest civilisation.
2. It has a way of life called Hinduism - which is its foundation.
3. The only way for them to rule India was to weaken it first.
4. And the best way to weaken India is to attack its foundation - ie, Hinduism.

So the British created a virus called hatred of Hinduism (HoH) and injected it into Indian society. They did this mainly through their education system. And they did it mainly to the Indian upper class.

The British drilled the following program into the brains of upper-class Indians (through their education system) for 200 years:
1a. Western civilisation is the richest and most powerful civilisation in the world.
1b. The foundation of Western civilisation is Christianity.
1c. So the root cause of the West's wealth and power is Christianity.
1d. So Christianity is progressive, enlightened and forward-looking.
2a. India has been a slave nation for 1000 years.
2b. The foundation of Indian civilisation is Hinduism.
2c. So the root cause of India's poverty and weakness is Hinduism.
2d. So Hinduism is backward, primitive and regressive.
3. Thus there is only one hope for India: to erase Hinduism and become a duplicate of the West.

And upper-class Indians absorbed this program completely . . .

The British left in 1947. But the virus they created continued to thrive - under the names of 'liberalism' and 'secularism' . . .

* * *
Four types of people hate Hinduism:
1. Liberals/secularists
2. Communists
3. Islamic fundamentalists
4. Christian fundamentalists

But there is one small distinction among them. #2, #3 and #4 each have their ideology - and hatred of Hinduism is a part of that ideology. But for #1, hatred of Hinduism is itself their ideology.

PS: Was the British propaganda against Hinduism correct? Yes, it is true that India was a slave nation for 1000 years. But India is a 5000-year-old civilisation - and for the first 4000 years of her history, she was the richest and most powerful civilisation in the world. India's empires (Maurya, Gupta, Chalukya, Rashtrakuta, Chola, Vijayanagara) were the richest and most powerful empires in the world. And the root cause of this wealth and power was Hinduism. But nothing lasts forever. So after 4000 years of wealth and power, Hinduism developed some weaknesses. As a result, India was conquered by foreign invaders and became a slave nation.

Law & Order Vs Subsidies

How do we achieve a state of zero rapes? Keeping people safe is the job of the law & order system. And what is the state of our law & order system? Forget high-level things like technology; the most basic thing is manpower. India's police force has only 130 cops per lakh people. The international standard is 200 cops per lakh people. This means our police force is under-manned by 35% - around 10 lakh cops. How can such a weak system do anything at all? The obvious solution is to recruit these 10 lakh cops. But we don't have any money to pay their salaries. Why? Because we are spending 1.5% of our GDP (₹ 2.5 lakh crores) on wasteful subsidies.

We are happily spending lakhs of crores on wasteful subsidies. So obviously we don't have any money for basics like law & order. Want zero rapes? Begin with zero subsidies. Because the path to zero rapes begins with zero subsidies.

Legislature, Executive, Judiciary

The universe has 3 phases: beginning, existence and end. Accordingly, the Supreme Being has 3 functions: creation, preservation and destruction. In Hinduism, these 3 functions are assigned to the 3 Gods: Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva.

A society needs rules to run properly. And rules also have 3 phases/functions: making them, enforcing them and interpreting them. So society created a system called 'government' to make, enforce and interpret rules. But if all these 3 powers are with one body, it will lead to concentration of power. And concentration of power leads to corruption. Because power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

So the government is divided into 3 bodies - with each body doing one of the 3 functions. Legislature makes the rules, executive enforces the rules and judiciary interprets the rules. This is called separation of powers. It is a fundamental feature of a democracy. So a healthy democracy requires:
1. The 3 bodies must be independent.
2. The 3 bodies must respect one another.
This is the Dharma of democracy. It enables a democracy to give freedom, equality and justice to its people. Without it, a democracy cannot even exist - let alone function properly.

By trying to impeach the Chief Justice of India on completely baseless legal grounds and for purely partisan political reasons, the Congress Party has declared war on the judiciary - one of the 3 pillars of our democracy. And in doing so, it has directly violated the sacred Dharma of our democracy. Dharmo rakshati rakshitah, Dharmo vinaashati vinaashitah.

Dharma Vs Adharma

DHARMA VS ADHARMA

Hatred is Adharma, Love is Dharma
Falsehood is Adharma, Truth is Dharma
Slavery is Adharma, Freedom is Dharma
Chaos is Adharma, Order is Dharma

Stupidity is Adharma, Intelligence is Dharma
Ignorance is Adharma, Knowledge is Dharma
Cowardice is Adharma, Courage is Dharma
Weakness is Adharma, Strength is Dharma

May He remove our Adharma
May He fill us with Dharma
May He take us from Adharma to Dharma

May we fight against Adharma
May we fight for Dharma
May we defeat Adharma with Dharma

Ambedkar, Hinduism, Buddhism

Liberals have falsely projected Ambedkar as anti-Hindu. The truth is he was a staunch nationalist.

Myth #1: Ambedkar converted from Hinduism to Buddhism.
Truth: Hinduism is not a religion - it is a way of life. So the question of converting out of Hinduism does not arise. Ambedkar rejected the orthodox Hindu/Indian religions (Shaivism, Vaishnavism, Shaktism) and embraced a heterodox Hindu/Indian religion (Buddhism).

Myth #2: Ambedkar hated Hinduism.
Truth: Ambedkar did not hate Hinduism. He only hated casteism and untouchability. And these were corruptions which had crept into Hinduism under Turkish/Mughal/British rule. If Ambedkar hated Hinduism, he would have converted to a non-Hindu/Indian religion (Christianity).