Creamy layer

[Haridasa Siva]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Forbes India has published the following facts about the Top richest Indians.

The concentration of wealth among the super rich is the heaviest in India. The top 10 account for 32% in the US. In India they account for 50% and in China, 38%.



WHAT HALF THEIR WEALTH CAN BUY

Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have been urging the world’s rich to part with half their wealth for charity. What if the Indian rich were to comply? ($150 Bln = Rs.675,000 Cr)

1. India can fund rural job guarantee scheme NREGA at 2010-11 budget levels for 17 years.
2. Endow Rs.33,750 on every child (20 crore of them) under the Sarva Siksha Abhiyan.
3. Fund the government’s borrowing for 2010-11 (Rs. 4.57 lakh crore) and have enough to spare for the next year.
4. Buy all the defence hardware needs (Rs. 135,000 crore) — 127 combat aircraft, 7 Scorpene subs, 12 stealth frigates and Howitzers and maintain the defence budget for more than three-and-a-half years.
5. Build 11 golden quadrilaterals.
6. Build Metro train service in 33 cities.
7. Build a Delhi-Mumbai high speed Maglev. Commuting time at 300 kmph will be just 5 hours.
8. Meet oil requirements for nearly two years.
9. Host 30 Commonwealth Games at ‘Kalmadi’ prices


People say, "Mracles do happen". Will this happen?

I remember the Tamil film song, "koduttadellaam koduttaar...."

 

[sravna]

In my opinion, a society should not reward its people in just monetary terms for their efforts and there should be a limit on how much wealth the richest can possess. Let me explain it with an example:

India has a population of 1 billion. Let the total wealth of all the people be 1 trillion rupees. Now the smartest indian is 1 in a billion. Thus given that capability he should hold assets that are 1 billion times the least capable people. Let us assume the least capable people are assigned a nominal wealth of 1 rupee, the most capable one or the maximum wealth of a person should be no more than 1 billion rupees or 100 crore rupees.

To motivate these people in putting efforts to earn beyond this the recognition should be in terms of government honors a la padma vibushan, bharat ratna etc. Thus one who amasses 200 crores should be conferred a title but the excess 100 crores is given back to the society and the person in turn enjoys honors and prestige in society.

 

[Haridasa Siva]

Sravnaji,

I appreciate your concern. But your suggestion appears to me like "out of frying pan into fire" for the following reasons.

1. Should not we encourage more money so that they work hard and provide employment to others?
2. If we cap the wealth of a person, he/she would not take any further step to grow his wealth as the same is not going to benefit him/her. The lazy would still remain lazy. This would stagnate the national economy. But at the same time, rich would still want to be richer and this would add to already huge black money.
3. There are already allegations that people are buying honours and awards. Your suggestion is legalising it as "Bharath Ratna for sale"
4. The purpose of these awards gets diluted.

 

[sravna]

Sravnaji,

I appreciate your concern. But your suggestion appears to me like "out of frying pan into fire" for the following reasons.

1. Should not we encourage more money so that they work hard and provide employment to others?
2. If we cap the wealth of a person, he/she would not take any further step to grow his wealth as the same is not going to benefit him/her. The lazy would still remain lazy. This would stagnate the national economy. But at the same time, rich would still want to be richer and this would add to already huge black money.
3. There are already allegations that people are buying honours and awards. Your suggestion is legalising it as "Bharath Ratna for sale"
4. The purpose of these awards gets diluted.

Dear Shri Siva,

Generating employment opportunities could be done by the government from that excess wealth. I am not sure if all have an unremitting appetite for wealth. There would be some who would be looking for other rewards and recognition.

I agree that money is the strongest motivating factor, but a few other factors which together can counter the factor of money and would prompt a person not to think in terms of money alone need to be thought of. Honors, Awards, priveleges etc, is one such factor, permanent marks of remembrance of that person in other ways may also help.

 

[B.Krishnamurthy]

If people share their excess wealth establishing various charities for the benefit of common man willingly and voluntarily(without any Governmental compulsions)such people come under the category of "enlightened selfish people".In our previous generation such people were in large numbers in our Society.This ensured Peace and Prosperity for the entire Society.Persons coming under"Only Selfish and unwilling to share their excess with others"were in minority.People who come under the category of "criminals,Goondas"were one in thousand.
With modern education,advancement of science, improvement in awareness there was a qualitative change in the Society.The new environment pushed most of the"enlightened selfish people" to the lower down group of"only selfish etc" and most of the "only selfish etc group" to "criminals,Goondas".
This could be the major reason for most of the 'ILLS' of the Society where we are living.
Will our next generation turn to better methods which may bring back
' peace and happiness' to the common man finding difficult to meet his basic requirements despite his honesty,sincerity and hard labour!

 

[sangom]

I have a basic doubt, may be very silly; how is the "wealth" of the super-rich (like the Ambanis, Tata,etc.) calculated? Any idea?

 

[Iyyarooraan]

I think every able person (i.e. fairly well-to-do) pick up a few people from BPL and help them cross the BPL and compel them to watch all Indian mega serials for most of the days (all mega serials are riches-centred) and leave them. Within a year most of them might be at least millionaires. Then pick up next group. It should start from bottom. When the BPL group become rich enough the super-rich can buy all the oil wells. Thus it will be wealth and only wealth.

 

[KRS]

The value an industrialist/entrepreneur provides to the society is not in terms of distributing their wealth to the society but it is singularly by creating jobs and wealth. Government can never create wealth. They can only distribute wealth.

In the modern society, where the markets are global, there will be future rich like Gates, Buffet etc., who start from modest beginnings, but by providing value to the society by creating new industries and/or changing an existing industry, will create wealth for the society. I do not begrudge them their wealth - any civilized society has to have respect for the difference between private property/wealth and the public welfare.

How the rich distribute their wealth is their own affair. One can create endowments and charity to benefit the mankind as Gates is doing and be admired for it, or one can set a record money on a daughter's wedding amidst the poverty of a nation as was done by an Ambani.

All in all I generally find that the giving to the society spirit is lacking among us, Hindus. Even in India, great secular giving is from the majority of non hindu folks. This is my perception.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Nara]

Government can never create wealth. They can only distribute wealth.

Folks, my dear brother Shri KRS has given his views from a capitalist's POV. I wish to give the common person's POV, a view that Shri KRS may like to say is the leftist view.

He is right when he says governments cannot create wealth. But, what he does not say is, the private sector needs the protection of the government, the legal system, the infrastructure, the welfare of the common people who buy what they sell, etc., and last but not least - the hard work of labor, to create that wealth. So, a pertinent question is whether the private sector pays all the costs. The answer in most cases is, they don't.

When the Wall Street tycoons brought the world economic system to its knees, it is the free-market devotee Bush who bailed them out, and they promptly gave themselves hefty bonuses, amounting to billions of dollars. The corporate capitalists are very good at externalizing cost and internalizing profit. They have been racking it in for several decades, both in Republican and Democratic administrations. In the last 28 years the income of the top 1% of rich rose by 281% while the rise for the bottom 80% was a mere 25%, that is more than 10 times the rate -- for more information visit this link.

I agree with Shri KRS, "How the rich distribute their wealth is their own affair", but it is the government's affair to make sure the wealth generated due to a myriad of factors, is equitably distributed as opposed to the already rich getting even filthily richer.

Cheers!

 

[KRS]

Dear Professor Nara Ji,

I thought we were talking about very very rich industrialists/entrepreneurs.

A society has every right to tax and provide common good (I do not agree with progressive taxation though - it punishes success among other reasons). With all due respect I was not talking about any 'fat' Wall Street 'rich'. I was not talking about the so called 'rich' who work for others.

Any government policy should be such that it encourages capital formation and wealth creation, and entrepreneurship.

Since labeling is not permitted, I am not going near it !

Regards,
KRS

 

[Raghy]

Sri.KRS Sir,

Greetings. With due respect to your opinions, Ambani's spending mega bucks for his daughter's wedding may not be exactly 'spreading the wealth'. In my opinion, 'spreading the wealth' would involve, provide education to the youngsters, create manufacturing industries and jobs, payment of wages to reflect the job performed etc.

.....All in all I generally find that the giving to the society spirit is lacking among us, Hindus. Even in India, great secular giving is from the majority of non hindu folks. This is my perception.

That is a good perception. Giving spirit amoung Hindus is limited; if that, for some reason, such spirits are connected to religious activities and/or caste based. But, sometimes I used to think, 'anything is better than nothing'.

Cheers!

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Raghy Ji,

Of course! I forgot to put a after my sentence - it was said tongue in cheek

Regards,
KRS

Sri.KRS Sir,

Greetings. With due respect to your opinions, Ambani's spending mega bucks for his daughter's wedding may not be exactly 'spreading the wealth'. In my opinion, 'spreading the wealth' would involve, provide education to the youngsters, create manufacturing industries and jobs, payment of wages to reflect the job performed etc.



That is a good perception. Giving spirit amoung Hindus is limited; if that, for some reason, such spirits are connected to religious activities and/or caste based. But, sometimes I used to think, 'anything is better than nothing'.

Cheers!