How Patel would have tackled Geelani :-)

Definitely not a Gandhian way of solving problems but empirically has been found to be an effective one. Co incidentally this man resembles Geelani in features as well as wickedness!

Freedom of Expression

Hilarious to hear that proponents of freedom of expression find it as their fundamental right to burn the tricolour in Delhi.
2 months back they were the ones who were shouting at Pastor Terry Jones for burning the holy Quran. Honestly speaking, I wouldn't mind too much if someone burns the tricolor (though my sentiments would be definitely hurt) but are these liberals going to give their support to the ones who want to burn Quran. I want answers!

Sachin

Conspicuous is the indifference with which Sachin talks about facing fast bowlers like Marshall and Ambrose.
Simplicity is definitely the first step towards greatness and after watching his 21 years stint in world cricket, probably the last too!

Kashmir-Continued

1) One thing I am not able to understand that how could the so called champions of liberalism don't find it objectionable to share dais with people like Geelani. The Kashmir which he wants to create wouldn't even have basic fundamental rights, forget about things like freedom of expression. I may be blamed for creating paranoia but wouldn't you agree that if Sharia is implemented (as wished by the hard-liners and as what would certainly happen if Kashmir is 'freed') then how miserable the condition of minorities and women would become. Do these liberals would go to save those girls who would be stoned to death on allegations of committing adultery or those boys who would be framed for theft and whose hands would be chopped off in the name of some archaic Arabic laws.

2) The problem is that these supposed intellectuals would rarely utter a word for the freedom of Tibet or for that matter in favour of Aaung San Suu Kyi. (after all China and Myanmar are ruled by leftists) but would have harshest of things for countries like US and India. (the most liberal of governments). And if this is not hypocrisy, then I don't know what is!

3) Even if we agree with Arundhati Roy that its only people who should decide how and with whom they want to live, then shouldn't Kashmir be partitioned and one part given to Kashmiri Pandits. Its immensely sad that our media is completely silent on the issue of Kashmiri Pandits and their rights. Because from any logic I don't understand that we should sympathise with those who are violent and just ignore those who are pleading for mercy and justice.

It is imperative for us that we start looking at the Kashmir issue more logically, rationally and judiciously rather than creating one more Taliban in our North. Hopefully its still not very late.

Taxes

Tax cuts introduced by the Bush regime are due to expire (it was probably the only good thing done by him!)

This is a brilliant article by Greg Mankiw (economist at Harvard) on the disincentives of taxes. Do remember to read his reply to Barry Ritholtz in his blog. He is at his wittiest best!

He himself was the Chairman of President Bush's Council of Economic Advisors from 2003-2005.

And if you want to know the furore caused by his article in NYT amongst the 'liberal intellectuals' (isn't it an oxymoron ;-) ), just click this.

PS: I myself was not convinced on this until it happened to me last year. After spending all my evenings, most of my nights and some of my mornings in the office, when my boss gave me an 11% increment citing that the present policy does not allow to differentiate too much amongst people, I stopped making efforts to get differentiated. As a result I had (like rest of the team) a great time in the next three months. Just to realize one fine Monday morning that our team is being closed.

It was a team at the end of the day, just imagine what would happen to the country called United States of America. Probably under democrats, US is heading the Europe way. Are the voters listening?

PPS: For last 2 years, I have seen the direct effect of taxes. On my bonus day I used to get an i10 but taxes would convert it into an Alto! :)

A lesson for Republicans and the BJP

http://robertaugustine.com/bg.pdf

I think this reading should be made compulsory to all Right Wing Parties (especially the BJP)

I don't know Vajpayeeji ever read it but the ideas expressed resemble a lot to his tenure as of course it does to Reagan. Both my personal favourites!

As a matter of co-incidence, both Reagan's and Vajpayee's tenure changed the fortunes of the two nations. It is when the right wing parties start drifting too much from centre and start giving precedence to tradition over logic, they become unhealthy for democracy. Sadly post Reagan, the Republicans under Bush and now Palin have forgotten the basic principles of rationality, logic and debate. Needless to say, post Vajpayee BJP is finding itself in a similar (if not more 'extreme') state. Both these parties just need to see these two towering figures, and the rest would be history.

PS: I don't agree completely with the author and I would be slightly more conservative on social issues but all the assumptions of his political and philosophical theory look completely at the 'right' place.

A must read for for all of us, no matter which side of the centre we stand.

Just to quote few paragraphs

"I have been much concerned that so many people today with Conservative instincts feel compelled to apologize for them. Or if not to apologize directly, to qualify their commitment in a way that amounts to breast-beating. “Republican candidates,” Vice President Nixon has said, “should be economic conservatives, but conservatives with a heart.” President Eisenhower announced during his first term, “I am a conservative when it comes to economic problems but liberal when it comes to human problems.” Still other Republican leaders have insisted on calling themselves “progressive” Conservatives.1 These formulations are tantamount to an admission that Conservatism is a narrow, mechanistic economic theory that may work very well as a bookkeeper’s guide, but cannot be relied upon as a comprehensive political philosophy.

The same judgement, though in the form of an attack rather than an admission, is advanced by the radical camp. “We liberals,” they say, “are interested in people. Our concern is with human beings, while you Conservatives are preoccupied with the preservation of economic privilege and status.” Take them a step further and the Liberals will turn the accusations into a class argument: it is the little people that concern us, not the “malefactors of great wealth.”

Such statements, from friend and foe alike, do great injustice to the Conservative point of view. Conservatism is not an economic theory, though it has economic implications. The shoe is precisely on the other foot: it is Socialism that subordinates all other considerations to man’s material well-being. It is Conservatism that puts material things in their proper place—that has a structured view of the human being and of human society, in which economics plays only a subsidiary role."

"Surely the first obligation of a political thinker is to understand the nature of man. The Conservative does not claim special powers of perception on this point, but he does claim a familiarity with the accumulated wisdom and experience of history, and he is not too proud to learn from the great minds of the past.

The first thing he has learned about man is that each member of the species is a unique creature. Man’s most sacred possession is his individual soul—which has an immortal side, but also a mortal one. The mortal side establishes his absolute differentness from every other human being. Only a philosophy that takes into account the essential differences between men, and, accordingly, makes provision for developing the different potentialities of each man can claim to be in accord with Nature. We have heard much in our time about “the common man.” It is a concept that pays little attention to the history of a nation that grew great through the initiative and ambition of uncommon men. The Conservative knows that to regard man as part of an undifferentiated mass is to consign him to ultimate slavery."

Irrationality and Capital Markets

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704657304575539592465679482.html?mod=WSJINDIA_hpp_LEFTTopWhatNews

"On Wall Street, bad may be the new good when it comes to economic data.

Investors translated a grim September jobs report as a welcome sign that central banks might rush to inject additional stimulus into the economy. It's a twist of logic as Wall Street now views negative economic snapshots as a positive for the stock market.

The Labor Department report was the catalyst for the stock market as the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed above 11000 on Friday for the first time since early May. There are building expectations that the Federal Reserve, Bank of England and perhaps the Bank of Japan might embark on a second round of quantitative easing—dubbed by investors as "QE2"—to keep the recovery going.

George Stahl explains why a weak jobs report actually helped stocks advance today, pushing the Dow back above the 11,000 level for the first time since May.

That means Wall Street has been viewing every negative economic report as another reason to snap up stocks."

Only at spencer's :)

And then people wonder at 15% Food Price Inflation!

Is it merely a coincidence that extremely high Food Price Inflation and these retail outlets started almost at same time in India. And does Correlation imply Causality here?

Any ways you know my answer!