Economy
Fault Lines in the development models of China and India–Part II

During the last four decades, Western technological innovation has focused too little on reducing the adverse environmental impact of growth and too much on saving labour—something that India and China have in abundance. So it makes sense for India as well as China to focus their scientific prowess on new technologies that use fewer material resources, but use more hands

To some of us, it is clear that the kind of development model that China and India chose in 1980 and 1991, respectively, is not a sustainable one. Such a development model based on the post-1970 distorted US model would not deliver what the people of both countries aspire to. It is amply clear that the development model based on promoting intensive consumption, as is prevalent in the United States and Europe since seventies, is not sustainable ecologically for the world and is culturally alien to India and China. The current Western model is dependent on a business-provoked, self-centred lifestyle, funded largely by offering careless financial credit to the common people, akin to the norms in the Western world. The current lifestyle is not healthy, both to the mind and the body. If we really want inclusive development and wish to carry our rural folk along, then we both have taken the wrong road. It is completely unimaginable that 2.5 billon people of India and China can ever hope to have a lifestyle similar to the Americans. Nature has not endowed the world with resources to match. Not only does the world not possess resources such as fossil fuels to support such dreams, but we do not even have enough water!

 

To understand the gravity of the situation, compare the per capita consumption of the fuel and water consumed by the Americans and Europeans. Indeed, both of us have a sizable population that lives like the Americans, and they too consume and pollute as much. Therefore, even if the leaders of both nations dream of bridging the widening gap between their haves and have-nots and focus on inclusive (India) or harmonious (China) development, they can never realise that dream. Both countries have a traditionally superior cultural model to lead a happy life that assures good health, happiness, social peace and comfortable living without excessive use of resources. Two centuries of technological progress and outstanding innovations in the use of science and technology will very well supplement our basic tenets and our traditional wisdom in conducting a harmonious life that can include many more. It is the combination of traditional lifestyle and modern knowledge that can help India and China to evolve a fresh alternative development model. In fact, today, one can feel that both the Dr Manmohan Singh-led India and the Hu Jintao-led China are indigenously seeking it.

 

The issue indeed, is more fundamental than the materialistic aspects of lifestyle which form an integral part of the Western model. The Western concept of being a developed society as has evolved in the last four decades, and their current model of economic development itself has several serious shortcomings, besides not being sustainable. It is also increasingly being realised that materialistic lifestyle resulting from such a model has many undesirable consequences, most important of them being the menacing fallout of global warming.

 

At the social level too, many are of the opinion that such a life is unnatural and emotionally unhealthy. Instead of narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor, pursuing the Western model is, in reality, widening it. Various studies show that a growing number of people in the developed world are emotionally unsettled, less happy and have psychological problems.

 

Interestingly, both, the Indians and the Chinese, on the other hand, have been practicing an alternate lifestyle model which can be broadly described as “simple living and high thinking”. This alternative way of life is nature friendly, healthy and emotionally fulfilling. This helped their huge population of poor to live tolerantly and peacefully. Some think this is a utopian and romantic belief since one sees helplessness in their peacefully tolerated abject life in the shanties. The economically weak in both these countries can bear their deprival of material comforts without the mental misery that the poor in the West are seen to go though. Psychiatry practice is definitely not a rewarding profession in India or China! Spiritual teachings by saints in India and Confucian thoughts and Buddhism in China have prevented them from getting hurt.

 

However, the Western lifestyle is exciting due to the higher levels of physical comfort, safer living and personal productivity. It is a fact that all these are the result of technological advances and man’s quest for new knowledge that happened in the Western world during the last two and half centuries. The Western world has the social order and the wisdom to encourage innovations. However, both the Chinese and the Indians gave the world foundational technologies till they got bogged down by the rule of the invaders from the second millennium onwards. Western society, for the last two centuries, used its innovative exploitation of technology and natural resources for comfortable living. Later, a progressively evolved industrial revolution was seamlessly followed by the communication and information revolutions to enable this remarkable transformation. It allowed common citizens to become productive participants and get rewarded in return.

 

 The problems started when inventions and discoveries became intellectual “private properties” and the tools came in the hands of money sharks in business. In the late 1950s, intellectual property of an individual became a corporate property with financial limits on its exploitation. Even till the early seventies, the Western developmental model looked ideal since per capita consumption was limited and earning differentials between the rich and the poor were justifiable. But, it is now realised that the money-centric modern business culture that essentially evolved from the early 1970s out of US business schools has been leading the world up the garden path. One can even say that the root cause of the current global economic crisis emanates from the greed of the multinational businesses that lured their democratic governments to go rather recklessly on a privatisation spree. It was essentially an escape route for politicians as they allowed public service to become bureaucratic, largely due to their poor governance and the consequent laxity in imposition of discipline in the delivery of public service by bureaucrats.

 

Today, big businesses use the magic of modern communication media to brainwash young men and women to practice mercenary, profit-centric style of management, focusing only on stock price and earnings. There has hardly been any organic growth of companies. The sizes grew primarily through mergers and acquisitions from all over the world. The media is being used shrewdly to teach people to live beyond their means and metamorphose into thoughtless consumers. Companies now build on the guilt factor and lure the young to buy non-essentials by making them out to be essentials. Business schools sponsor a win-at-all-costs trading approach with charismatic role modelling, teaching and coaching with an orientation to be reckless and with a motive to profit by every means. I wish that those in power in the United States used management thinker Tom Peter’s advice given in the early 1980s to close down all US business schools, preferably with its faculty locked inside!

 

In fact, I strongly believe that US multinationals in the early seventies took charge of the US economy. I have always felt that the United States that I was familiar with before 1970 has changed in terms of cherished social values. Due to the mismanagement of their economy on the advice of such business management experts, it is fast declining from its global supremacy. The current plight of the Europeans too can be easily traced to the American influence on their governments and institutions. The Western world has largely become the world of consumers and, consequently, produces little and does not create real wealth. Only those who trade in money and commodities earn well through market manipulation. People in the West also seem to increasingly realise the bitter truth that marketing is driving them into miseries. The boundless credit and lure of multimedia is hurting them like none other. Many independent studies have shown that excessive consumption of food and fun is harming them, both in body and in mind.

 

Till the early seventies, business culture in the United States too was different. Bright brains, those days, were in research labs and on shop floors using innovations to create some real wealth. There evolved a business culture that caused the United States to get rich as a society. Significantly, this was an inclusive growth. The real income of the average American had been soaring since the end of World War II. Wage ratios between the wealth-creating talents and shop floor workers were acceptable to all. The country’s trade balance was positive and consistently growing. Employment was ever-rising. The standard of living was improving democratically year after year. The number of college-going students doubled every five years, and unlike today, getting in was no longer the privilege of the rich and elite. During those decades, there were major breakthroughs in technology. James Watson and Francis Crick won the Nobel Prize for decoding the molecular structure of DNA. Tuberculosis had all but disappeared, and Jonas Salk’s vaccine was wiping out polio in the United States. Many may not know, but Dr Salk had refused to take a patent for his discovery and had said that he invented it to prevent human suffering. This reflects the culture that prevailed then. Then during the Nixon presidency came multi-national provoked economic theories and practices. Today, we cannot catch a glimpse of that industrious US. The companies grew organically, then. Today, the only corporate growth route is through mergers and acquisitions. {break}

 

Talking of happiness, both India and China have masses of contented poor who smile more frequently on an empty stomach than their well-fed Westernised rich compatriots living in their city towers. Here, one can see that in the matter of poverty reduction, the Chinese leadership did far better than its Indian counterpart, which is handicapped by the ‘system’ as claimed by it.

 

A careful study of China’s spectacular success since it began its transition to a market economy reveals that they managed it with adaptable strategies and policies: as each set of problems were solved, new problems arose, for which new policies and strategies were devised, and this has been going on year to year. To appreciate this policy, one has to read the annual reviews of the country’s progress by successive presidents since 1978. To that extent, single party rule has benefitted China, ever since their leadership got its new vision from Deng Xiaoping. China recognised that it simply could not transfer economic institutions that had worked in other countries without adapting it to the unique problems confronting China. Today, senior Chinese leaders talk about the need for a new economic model. They seem to be aware that their economic growth is mainly enabled by materialistic multinationals, which moved their manufacturing set-ups to China in order to use its cheap labour and very favourable tax regime. This Western model helped China to achieve over 10% annual GDP growth for three long decades. But this will not work long-term even if it has enabled China to lift hundreds of millions of Chinese out of poverty by wealth-creating activities like manufacturing and agriculture—the two vocations that use labour of every type in a large measure. Growth in manufacturing cannot be sustained too long without serious consequences. There is no doubt, however, that Chinese workers have been important beneficiaries, as it created over 200 million new blue collared jobs for their rural poor by their efficiently controlled migration to cities.

 

India, unfortunately, has failed to gainfully support both these areas. But this growth model has its limits. Global slowdown and lack of economic growth in the Western world is already hurting exports with consequential joblessness in China. China’s GNP export-led growth indeed looks impressive to everyone. One can see its real reflection on the faces of its people, not just on the streets of Shanghai, Dalian or Wuhan, but also in its villages. Some of the areas that we went to during our SME study were a hundred miles away from industrial areas in China, but the rural folk there had stable electricity, paved roads, televisions and even Internet connectivity.

 

So far, with an increasingly large share in the export market, half of China has benefitted greatly. But China has another half that is still very poor. Will there be a sustained demand with the ongoing poor state of economies of the developed world? Today, a lot of these rural communities live on the remittances from family members who have migrated to coastal cities. It is similar to the money orders sent by migrant Indians in Mumbai to their families in Bihar, UP, the Konkan area or any other state. We found that even the farmers were better off with new crops and better seeds. The local government sells high-grade seeds with a guaranteed rate of germination on credit. In spite of this, China still has a sharp rich-poor divide. The sad part is that this divide is growing even though income levels are higher. For the Chinese people who have seen total equality in poverty, this economic divide becomes far more painful. In India, a sharp rich and poor divide has existed since eternity, but the Chinese have seen the perils of equitable distribution of poverty that Mao brought about from the early 1950s to the end of the 1970s.

 

Leaders in China as well as India realise that the current divide must be narrowed if they have to have inclusive and ecologically sustainable growth. Luckily, healthy life for all seems to be China’s current agenda. I have seen playgrounds and well-maintained stadiums even in small places in China, where the young are seen in large numbers practicing sports and games. Everywhere, one can see carefully planned and well-maintained streets, green areas, parks as well as extensive public transportation systems. While some Indian leaders in Delhi have well-intended schemes, their corruption-infested delivery channels frustrate realisation of any of their noble objectives.

 

Realisation to move away from the Western model and seek another has now become more urgent after the global economic clash and its backlash on India and China. China felt it far more strongly than India due to its over dependence on export trade. They realised that even countries seemingly committed to competitive markets were getting protective and complaining of unfair competition. The export-led growth model was in danger and maintaining high growth was untenable. This strategic model worked well for China earlier in many ways. It supported technology transfer, helped to close the knowledge gap and rapidly improved the quality of manufactured goods. Export-led growth meant that China could produce without worrying about developing the domestic market. But the global economic catastrophe changed that quickly. China realised that it had to change. The country has a large portion of its reserves blocked due to its earlier strategy of “vendor finance” by depositing its earnings in the United States. It financed the huge US fiscal and trade deficits, allowing Americans to buy more goods than they could sell. In fact, to meet the challenge of restructuring its economy, removed away from exports and resource-intensive goods, China is stimulating domestic consumption. While the rest of the world struggles to raise savings, China, with a savings rate in excess of 40%, struggles to get its people to consume more.

 

Both Indians and Chinese, especially those who are not economically strong, intuitively do not trust the government and focus on saving for their “rainy day”. The Chinese government is therefore, now focussing on providing better social services (public health care, education, nationwide retirement programmes, etc.) with a hope to move people away from their urge to save.

 

The Chinese government is also giving cheaper access to finance for small and medium-sized businesses. Both countries therefore, will have to look for new sources of dynamism in their growing entrepreneurial ranks, which requires a commitment to creating an independent innovation system.

 

China has, for long, invested heavily in higher education and technology, and now it is striving to create world-class institutions. India too needs to somehow speed up. While both countries should stimulate an environment of dynamic innovation, they should resist pressure by Western governments to adopt the kind of unbalanced intellectual property laws that are being demanded of them. Instead, they should pursue a balanced intellectual property regime because knowledge itself is the most important input in the production of knowledge; a badly designed intellectual property regime can stifle innovation as has been the case in several areas in the post-1970s America. IP rights protection needs a financial cap, after which that protection must go, rather than become the current protection over a long period of time.

 

During the last four decades, Western technological innovation has focused too little on reducing the adverse environmental impact of growth and too much on saving labour—something that India and China have in abundance. So it makes sense for India as well as China to focus their scientific prowess on new technologies that use fewer material resources, but use more hands.

 

However, it is essential to support innovation and scientific research in ways that ensure that advances in knowledge are widely used. This itself may require innovative approaches quite different from intellectual property regimes based on privatisation and monopolisation of knowledge, which result in high prices and restricted benefits.

 

(PS Deodhar is founder and former chairman of the Aplab Group of companies. He is also the former chairman of the Electronics Commission of the Government of India and was an advisor to late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi on electronics. He also was the chairman of the Broadcast Council in 1992-93 that set in motion the privatisation of the electronic media with metro channels. He can be contacted at [email protected].)

User

Dr Verghese Kurien: More than the Milkman of India

The lessons we can learn from this great man are simply invaluable

How often do we come...

Premium Content
Monthly Digital Access

Subscribe

Already A Subscriber?
Login
Yearly Digital+Print Access

Subscribe

Moneylife Magazine Subscriber or MSSN member?
Login

Yearly Subscriber Login

Enter the mail id that you want to use & click on Go. We will send you a link to your email for verficiation
Is Gadkari, IRB & Purti dealings just the tip of a “money-laundering” iceberg?

Did the dealings between the BJP’s Nitin Gadkari, under cloud for corruption charges and discredited business group IRB, really show a nexus between corporates and netas to hide various ‘quid pro quo’ deals?


Nitin Gadkari, president of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), who is under a cloud for serious breach of ethics and propriety over the way he has grown his business while ostensibly being in public life, has come under the scanner as the Registrar of Companies (RoC) is likely to inquire about the alleged funding of the companies associated with him. However, Ajit Sawant, the former general secretary of the Mumbai Pradesh Congress Committee, who was instrumental in unearthing the shell companies of the BJP president, said that Gadkari, Purti group and Ideal Road Builders (IRB) group are just the tip of an iceberg and feels there could be hundreds of such companies being used for money laundering.

 

“In Purti Power & Sugar (Purti), over 80% shares are held by about several dummy companies. Some of these companies not only share the same email ID, but also have same directors and even same addresses. Of course, some in the media have found that several addresses provided by these companies do not exist, while four are from slum areas where nobody even heard the name of these companies,” Sawant said.

 

According to the former Congress leader, Gadkari’s driver Manohar Panse, accountant Kaurav Pandurang Zade, Sagar Kotawaliwale and Nishant Agnihotri (both employees of Purti) are directors of several shell companies. As per the information procured from the RoC, about 19 of these investor companies of Purti, show same email ID—[email protected]

 

 

While pointing out that the investigation of shell companies on such a large scale is not the job of a common citizen, Sawant said, “It (the detailed investigations) should be carried out by a government agency. I am planning to file a complaint against these malpractices with the RoC.” Two other agencies that should be involved in the investigation are Economic Offences Wing of the state government and Serious Frauds Investigation Office, set up by the central government. But will these two agencies actually act or will there be a deal to save Mr Gadkari?

 

During 1995-99, Gadkari was a public works minister in the Shiv Sena-BJP government, in Maharashtra. Incidentally, during this period, IRB, whose owners are said to be close to Sharad Pawar, witnessed a phenomenal growth and was awarded hefty contracts for road building. When Gadkari demitted office, IRB founder Dattatrey Mhaiskar invested in Gadkari’s Purti group. He bought around Rs2 crore worth of shares or 8% of the group.

 

Similarly, in 2010, Purti group, which had got a hefty loan of Rs164 crore, was provided funding by Global Safety Vision Pvt Ltd, another company related to the IRB founder. IRB Infrastructure Developers (IRB Infra) issued a denial, stating that Global Safety Vision was never a subsidiary of the company.

 

“Neither IRB Infra nor any of its downstream subsidiaries have ever committed or made any investments in Global Safety Vision Pvt Ltd. We are not privy to business decisions or information on investment made by Global Safety Vision and therefore unable to comment on any investment made or money lent by it to any other entity,” the release said.

 

However, this is only a half truth. Global Safety Vision is not subsidiary of IRB Infra, because it is one of the promoter entities of the company. IRB Infra said, “In the prospectus dated 8 February 2008, it is disclosed on its page 163 that Global Safety Vision is a Promoter Group Entity.”

 

Interestingly, Global Safety Vision gave a loan of Rs164 crore to Purti group at 14% interest, after mortgaging several assets (land) of Purti. India Against Corruption (IAC) has made several allegations against the land allotment to Gadkari’s Purti group.

According to media reports, Sudhir Dive, the managing director of Purti and a close associate of Gadkari, said that the loan was to be paid back in 73 instalments and most of it had been repaid.

 

Surprisingly, Global Safety Vision might require financing. In its last regulatory filing, the company had paid up capital of just Rs1 lakh. How could a company with a tiny capital base, lend Rs164 crore when the land is not even owned by the loanee?

 

Earlier, in a regulatory filing, IRB Infra had said that Ideal Power or Ideal Energy Projects were never part of the IRB group and it neither committed nor made any investment in Ideal Energy. However, Sawant alleged that Ideal Energy Projects is promoted by the Mhaiskar family and has a power unit, with 540 megawatt capacity, at a close distance from Purti's sugar mill.

 

Over the years, IRB group built the ‘Ideal’ brand and seems unlikely that anyone but the family will use the brand. If IRB says that Ideal Power or Ideal Energy were never part of the group, then a pertinent question arises: Why has it not taken any action against them for using its ‘brand’ name?

 

In a separate incident, corporate affairs minister M Veerappa Moily said that the Registrars of Companies will “definitely inquire into it”, after the information on alleged funding of companies with which Gadkari is associated had been made public.

 

When asked by reporters whether the business dealings of Robert Vadra, the son-in-law of Congress chief Sonia Gandhi, will also be scrutinised, Moily said that the two issues were separate and that there was no link between them.

 

The BJP has endorsed Gadkari’s stand that the party was open to any investigation by any competent authority and accused Union ministers of taking a partisan position on issues relating to corruption.

User

COMMENTS

GOVIND GOPAL SHANBHAG

5 years ago

Yogesh Jee - On corruption issue, BJP did not allow Parliament to run last two entire sessions, they did not allow very very importat bills to pass through and made mockery of duties of elected reps to run the parliament smoothly. What have they to say now as their top most leader is involved in this tamasha.

REPLY

M G WARRIER

In Reply to GOVIND GOPAL SHANBHAG 5 years ago

Though disruption of parliament is never justified,'this tamasha'does not in any way reduce the gravity of 'that tamasha' namely the corruption issues raised earlier.

Shadi Katyal

5 years ago

One wonders why it took so long for public to know that how so many shell companies remained under the cover.
Are there no honest people in India or is it in our genes to be greedy and corrupt.
What has BJP to say about the party to have head of a party so crooked and keep pointing fingers to others.Would the party explain

A BANERJEE

5 years ago

Naturally, as the entire political structure of the Indian 'republic' rests on a corrupt base of political cut throats funded by the corporates. This suits the bureaucracy immemsely, in keeping with its own traditions!

REPLY

Yogesh Sapkale

In Reply to A BANERJEE 5 years ago

Thanks for your comment.

Surinder

5 years ago

Ham sab chor hain. Do not worry.
Mango man will soon teach a lesson to every chor by the power of ballot.
S.K. Jerath
Chandigarh

REPLY

Dayananda Kamath k

In Reply to Surinder 5 years ago

in democracy you geta govt you desrve. we have got this govt because we deserve it. when we vote for colour tv,laptop,mobile, cycle and inductionstove and freebees. what we can desrve? we will get such govts only. it is open curruption and election commission files a case for giving mony in appreciation of some act in rally is not bothered about these freebees in manifestos. even a complaint filed by me when dmk announced colour tv in tamilnadu was not taken up. they gave them colour tv at public funds.and earned millions by way of cable charges to their tv company. and may have collected moola from tv companies also during purchase.

NSriramamurty

In Reply to Dayananda Kamath k 5 years ago

As Judges are Serious about Corruption now, PIL in High Court may result in Ordering that Election Manifestovs of Political Parties Should not Allow any Free Gifts Except-Food,Shelter,Education,Amenities,etc.Even Gold Coins,SArees,Golden Bangles,in addition to Money and Liqour being given for Decades , avoiding Police Notice. It is High Time To bring Restictions on Manifestov Inclusion of Valued Articles Gifts to Voters,to make Elections Fair&free.It helps in Curbing Corruption,by bringing up Non-Corrupt Politicians.

Rajeev Kapur

5 years ago

All politicians are corrupt. Some are more corrupt than others. A few are reincarnation of the Blind Kaurav King Dhritrashtra. Is India a Banana Republic?

REPLY

M G WARRIER

In Reply to Rajeev Kapur 5 years ago

Let us identify the less corrupt and support them till those who are not corrupt come to the fore to lead. One way is: In any election(luckily for us politicians are dependent on election and many of them claim that election expenditure is the cause for corruption!)from today, let local people identify the 'least corrupt' among the candidates and support, irrespective of party affiliations. May be social groups like IAC may guide local people.Don't give up hope, Mr Rajeev!

A BANERJEE

In Reply to M G WARRIER 5 years ago

Is there any way to separate the less corrupt from the "corrupt"per se? Or, would it be justified at all? The corrupt are all the same, as is the entire "political class"as a whole-be it an anti-corruption activist (contemplating to join the election fray) or anyone aspiring to get elected even to a housing cooperative or a residents'association or any group of people having some powers over financial and executive powers. So are the bureaucrats, especially those in the top most posts who are "selected" for motives other than national gain. This is true of all political groups called the Congress or the BJP or the CPI-M or the erstwhile Janata Govt. or the NDA or whatever, and any of the regional parties created on purely community interest basis. So, we the people have no choice.

M G WARRIER

In Reply to A BANERJEE 5 years ago

Mr Banerjee
Self-marketing is not appreciated by Moneylife, I suppose! Still, to cut short my reply, I suggest reading my article "Eradicating corruption: Power to the people" posted recently on Moneylife.in I would like to call your attention to the idea of 'corruption index' discussed in that article. You 'people' and we 'people'add up to more than 1.1 billion and the corrupt people are among the remaining 10 crore somewhere, whom we have to identify and expose. Any initiative in this direction should be encouraged. There are vested interests trying to silence such voices.

Yogesh Sapkale

In Reply to M G WARRIER 5 years ago

Thanks for your comment, Mr Warrier. That is the only hope. As they say: “When choosing between two evils, I always like to try the one I've never tried before.”

Pradeep R Hattangadi

5 years ago

Yes agree that the Gadkari affair is the tip of the iceberg. But why is this being confined to only one person or party. What does Mr Ajit Sawant have to say about the VAdra affair? How is it that the party feels it does not come under the ambit of investigation. In fact, all corporates which have been setting up or promoting a horde of companies and having to high a growth needs to be looked into.

REPLY

Yogesh Sapkale

In Reply to Pradeep R Hattangadi 5 years ago

Thanks for your comment. Ajit Sawant is doing the investigation, research on Gadkari, IRB and Purti, on his own without support from any political party (he is no more in Congress either). You would agree that for an individual there are limitations and these things require collaborative efforts from all people, including you and me.

NSriramamurty

5 years ago

Both Allegations on Robert Wada and Bjp President Are Ordered to be Invested ,as Both are alleged to be Illegal Acts by IAC.Cogress's Crude Thiking Comes out by saying that Robert Varda is a Private Individual,and hence not investing his Alleged Frauds.
All Govt.Depts. Chiefs are also Joining Corruption Team,by not investigating allegations against Ruling Party's People but only Others.As Khemka has investigated on allegations published in media and Remedial Action taken,All IAS/IRS/IPS officers should investigate all allegations on his Depatment's works and Remedial Action taken.other-wise they are not justified for their Jobs.If done so,Corruption will come down substantially.

REPLY

Yogesh Sapkale

In Reply to NSriramamurty 5 years ago

Thanks for your comment.

Anil Agashe

5 years ago

The RoC is a useless and sleeping body. it should have a data base all persons who are Directors of any company. All filings are just that and probably hardly read. Defunct companies must be forced to close down. There should be restriction on subsidiaries and on investment companies.

REPLY

Yogesh Sapkale

In Reply to Anil Agashe 5 years ago

Thanks for your comment, Sir. I wonder, what kind of KYC is being followed at the RoC, while for opening a simple bank account the common people are harassed to produce n number of documents for KYC.

Krishnan B S

In Reply to Anil Agashe 5 years ago

ROC and FDA are more loyal to Companies than to the Govt because they survive because of companies !

Yogesh Sapkale

In Reply to Krishnan B S 5 years ago

Thanks for your comment.

Krishnan B S

5 years ago

If one company is thoroughly investigated we can get the main ones.
Investigate Reliance Industries from 2002 - 2012 !
And Truthfully and sincerely investigate only one person, that is Hassan Ali Khan, you will get all major ones !
What ever said, the Main issue of "Sonia Gandhi's trips abroad in private jets since 2004, the countries visited and the purpose of those" has been successfully diverted by all the people concerned. "Jay ho:" to all of them !

rajesh

5 years ago

Great Party President. Poor Bangaroo Laxman, lost president post for one lac.Bangaroos now learn to steal only in crores, then no problem and even party will protect them

Sunil

5 years ago

Wow , the party with a difference. A president who leads the way and sets the example . I am sure that Sushma Swaraj and others will not find anything wrong with this .

REPLY

Yogesh Sapkale

In Reply to Sunil 5 years ago

Thanks for your comment. If you remember, Sushma Swaraj was known to be very close to Gali Reddy brothers of Bellary. Some media even called her as 'Godmother' of the Reddy brothers, who allegedly destroyed greenery at Bellary with their illegal iron ore mining empire.

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)