Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5738
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby krisna » 30 Mar 2011 09:13

Krisna-ji,
Not sure if you dont relly undestand or simply refuse to...One last time...

I really wish the same for you. you simply refuse to see the facts and your own statements. :wink:
No, the article says that they becqueathed most of their personal wealth to charity...Which is patently and evidently wrong...


You boldly proclaim what the author did was wrong but refuse to give facts. You hide behind saying that
There is no way any third party individual can know the tax status/liability of any individual, not unless he works for Income Tax (or IRS in the US)...Its illegal in most civilised countries for such data to be in the public domain...Therefore, to impute motives on that basis is denigration, nothing else...

Are you not dishonest with yourself and everyone here.
1) How can you say then the author is wrong when you cannot back it up regarding Indians? and then with the americans?
2) how can you say the same regarding Buffet and Gates?

why do you negatively reflect on Indians and positively regarding americans when you cannot back it up. You say no one can access the tax status/liability in civilised countries. You are twisting yourself in knots. :lol:

I can collect the statements you made in the last few posts here. :D

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5738
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby krisna » 30 Mar 2011 09:18

somnath wrote:.And your favourite Rahul Bajaj or Kumar Birla would know about them as well as anyone else :wink:

I have not mentioned that they are my favorites.
These gentlemen are not my favorites in any sense other than quoting from the article. Please refrain from adding words/adjectives unnecessarily.
It detracts from the discussion.
I believe in learning from each other. We are all Indians and have a lot to learn from each other.

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 30 Mar 2011 09:26

Krisna-ji,

which part of the statement is incomprehensible to you?

1. The shareholding pattern of Bajaj Auto (which would be a very large part of Jamnalal Bajaj's personal wealth)? Or that of any other Bajaj company? Does it show that "most of his wealth" has been donated to charity?

2. Tax status of individuals - the fact that the same is not publicly available info anywhere, therefore not tenable as an unlterior motive?

3. Or the fact that regardless of the tax status of the foundations/trusts, rick folk do not need to do any charity to save on tax?

Arjun wrote:What exactly did you mean by that? I notice you don't apply the same standards for Indian industrialists versus white-skinned ones - the former can be denigrated at will but not the latter

Arjun-ji, there is no denigration of anyone...Just a factual notice that tax-efficient trusts are de regeur, in India, in US and many other countries...But there is no requirement to put a veneer of charity to get tax breaks on them...If you look at the shareholding of most of the older Indian companies, a lot of it is held through various trusts created precisely for that purpose...There is nothing illegal about it, so denigrating anyone - white, brown or black on that basis makes no sense..The likes of Gates etc are not setting up charitable trusts to get tax breaks, they can get such tax breaks through other non-charitable trusts equally well - so imputing motives on that basis is stupid..

Arjun wrote:Can you enlighten us on the methodology that Bain used for the study?

There is no mathematical model by Bain, just a collation of data, so not sure what you mean by "methodology"...Can they be wrong? Possible, though not very likely (data integrity is at the heart of a research business)...I would be happy to be enlightened if they are...

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4264
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Arjun » 30 Mar 2011 09:52

somnath wrote:Arjun-ji, there is no denigration of anyone...Just a factual notice that tax-efficient trusts are de regeur, in India, in US and many other countries...But there is no requirement to put a veneer of charity to get tax breaks on them...If you look at the shareholding of most of the older Indian companies, a lot of it is held through various trusts created precisely for that purpose...There is nothing illegal about it, so denigrating anyone - white, brown or black on that basis makes no sense..The likes of Gates etc are not setting up charitable trusts to get tax breaks, they can get such tax breaks through other non-charitable trusts equally well - so imputing motives on that basis is stupid..

You can make your point by simply saying that denigrating Gates and Buffet given what they have done is not on ! On the other hand I see you move towards counter-denigrating Birla and Bajaj !! I assume you think that is appropriate ? Its not just this example - your stress on trying to prove Indian industrialists as being robber-barons, your angry denunciations of one of India's top fund managers, Pradip Shah....

Arjun wrote:There is no mathematical model by Bain, just a collation of data, so not sure what you mean by "methodology"...Can they be wrong? Possible, though not very likely (data integrity is at the heart of a research business)...I would be happy to be enlightened if they are...

Your remarkable belief in Bain's quality is touching - I have personally evaluated them and used them for my efforts in the past. Surely you know that analysis is only as good as the quality of data that goes in!! Have you heard of GIGO - garbage in, garbage out ? Are you telling me the quality of field data in India is as high as it is for the US?

Can you lay out the data collection methodology that Bain adopted? Have they discussed this in their report?

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 30 Mar 2011 10:17

Arjun wrote:On the other hand I see you move towards counter-denigrating Birla and Bajaj !!

And where exactly is that? Is comprehension an issue?

And BTW, I wasnt criticising Pradip Shah the person, only the opinions that he expressed.

And of course, the point on crony capitalism in India int really a Robinson Crusoe point...There is enough in the public domain to get worried about it, people like Raghuram Rajan and Kaushik Basu have talked about it (among many others), and the 2G scam exemplifies it like nothing else...To argue otehrwise would be a stretch...

BTW, there isnt a definitive link between probity in business and philanthrophy - some of the biggest philanthrophists in the West have been robber barons :wink:

Arjun wrote:Your remarkable belief in Bain's quality is touching - I have personally evaluated them and used them for my efforts in the past

Well, Bain used to work very closely with us till a couple of years back...They are top notch in many respects - never had an occasion to quibble over their basic data collation capabilities....But whats the point? Do you have an alternative data source to disbelieve the numbers? Or a hypothesis? Or is it hand waiving? Its not enough, at least for professoinals (or even serious amateurs) to simply say that the data is not "good enough"...

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4264
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Arjun » 30 Mar 2011 10:39

somnath wrote:And where exactly is that? Is comprehension an issue?

Can you point to the exact quotes where Vaidya has denigrated Buffet and Gates? Please do so and I will respond by pointing out your denigrations. Comprehension abilities will be clearly in the open, won't it?

Well, Bain used to work very closely with us till a couple of years back...They are top notch in many respects - never had an occasion to quibble over their basic data collation capabilities....But whats the point? Do you have an alternative data source to disbelieve the numbers? Or a hypothesis? Or is it hand waiving? Its not enough, at least for professoinals (or even serious amateurs) to simply say that the data is not "good enough".

The point is that your touching faith in Bain is just as naive a view as a peremptory dismissal of their abilities. The only valid conclusion that can be drawn is from an analysis of their data collection methodology and the reasoning behind the numbers. Until you get that, in a situation where there is reasonable scope for doubting the quality of the data available for any analysis by Mckinsey or any consulting firm for that matter - reliance on such numbers is bunkum !

Btw, most genuine research would have some explanation as to the backup or data collection methodology followed to arrive at the estimates.

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 30 Mar 2011 10:52

Arjun wrote:Can you point to the exact quotes where Vaidya has denigrated Buffet and Gates? Please do so and I will respond by pointing out your denigrations. Comprehension abilities will be clearly in the open, won't it?

I did that a couple of times already - more comprehension issues?

It is interesting that Bill Gates who has operations in Cayman islands and Reno of Nevada to minimise or evade taxes to be paid to the United States government is enthusiastic about “Giving by India Inc”. Warren Buffett is planning to give his dollar assets to the Gates foundation which will reduce estate taxes in the future. Interestingly both of them are some of the few US business barons supporting estate taxes. It is not clear who are their dinner guests in India. If it is Forbes billionaires from India we hope Shahid Balwa of the Spectrum fame is not going to be there!


Arjun wrote:The only valid conclusion that can be drawn is from an analysis of their data collection methodology and the reasoning behind the numbers. Until you get that, in a situation where there is reasonable scope for doubting the quality of the data available for any analysis by Mckinsey or any consulting firm for that matter - reliance on such numbers is bunkum

Ahh..So you think this data cannot be "relied upon"...But no alternate source, no alternate hypothesis..

Good...BTW, in case you didnt notice, the document is a speech by a Bain partner...Its not a consulting report..He is likely to have culled out the data from a commissioned research, and not likely to have just pulled it out of his hat...

Anyways, I dont think it helps if the discussion goes around in "I dont like this data, so I dont believe it", without any alternative source or reference or hypothesis...then its a matter of POV, and you are welcome to one..

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4278
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby abhischekcc » 30 Mar 2011 11:22

Hahaha, the taxable status of charities is given by USG online. One does not have to be an IRS agent or even a US citizen to know these details. One only has to be able to type, read, and write.

http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/charitables ... 55,00.html

This is searchable also :).

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 30 Mar 2011 11:30

abhischekcc wrote:Hahaha, the taxable status of charities is given by USG online. One does not have to be an IRS agent or even a US citizen to know these details. One only has to be able to type, read, and write.

http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/charitables ... 55,00.html

This is searchable also :).

And did you "search" for Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation? And found out what its exact tax status is? And concluded that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was setup by Bill Gates to save on his taxes?! What does this site (or list of tax-free trusts) say about Bill Gates' personal tax liabilities/status?

One only needs to be open enough to comprehend!
Last edited by somnath on 30 Mar 2011 11:35, edited 1 time in total.

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4264
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Arjun » 30 Mar 2011 11:32

It is interesting that Bill Gates who has operations in Cayman islands and Reno of Nevada to minimise or evade taxes to be paid to the United States government is enthusiastic about “Giving by India Inc”. Warren Buffett is planning to give his dollar assets to the Gates foundation which will reduce estate taxes in the future.

And in what way is this a higher level of denigration than this quote from you...?
I dont know whether Bill Gates has anything in Cayman, but Indian business worthies have not evaded taxes!!! :rotfl: the list of big tax evaders and "deliberate NPA creators" in India would be a roll call of honour of the business families...

Since you have given your certificates already to Tata & Premji, it does not take a genius to figure out that you are imputing Birla, Bajaj and others on this. You may be technically true in your statement, but then so is Vaidya.

Anyways, I dont think it helps if the discussion goes around in "I dont like this data, so I dont believe it", without any alternative source or reference or hypothesis...then its a matter of POV, and you are welcome to one..

Exactly right. And the Bain number you quoted is not data - it just a POV, until you can show the backup behind it.

Anyway - this discussion has gone on enough. I am not for denigrating Gates and Buffet's efforts - but nor am I for denigrating the efforts at home-grown ones. Overtime it helps if the philanthropy culture develops further globally - and that is the end of the matter.

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4278
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby abhischekcc » 30 Mar 2011 11:44

Yes, I did!

Apparently, there are two foundations with similar names:
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Trust is the largest tax exempt trust in the US with USD 33 billion assets under management.
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the second largest tax exempt trust in the US with USD 29 billion assets under management.

The data is a outdated, I think, so AUM figures may be different now. But anybody can get the drift.

And yes, the income by these foundations IS tax exempt.

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 30 Mar 2011 11:56

^^^You obvioulsly miss the point..Income of the trust being tax-exempt is the same as Bill Gates' personal tax status? And therefore the conclusion that the trust was set-up by Gates to save on his personal tax liability?

BTW, enough I think - lets put an end to this discussion on charity!

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4278
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby abhischekcc » 30 Mar 2011 12:11

Nobody is denying that these foundations do charitable work! :)

What everybody is pointing out is that we do not have to look upto Bill and Buffet as some sorts of ethical standard bearers, when they have many underhand techniques to their names. Bill's anto-competitive actions are too well known to be repeated. Buffet has been the recepient of several billion dollars of tax payer money in the recent bailouts (through his investment in Goldman Sachs).

We are not denigrating their charity work, but we do question their business ethics. Sometimes, all that a business needs to do is pay his taxes, and this is not apparent in their cases.

----------------
>>Income of the trust being tax-exempt is the same as Bill Gates' personal tax status
No, obviously.

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 30 Mar 2011 12:18

abhischekcc wrote:We are not denigrating their charity work, but we do question their business ethics. Sometimes, all that a business needs to do is pay his taxes, and this is not apparent in their cases

Abhishekcc-ji, the road to philanthrophic heaven is littered with robber barons :wink: West, East, North or South! One can off-hand name Rhodes, Rockefellers and many more...

Business ethics, including paying taxes, or ont paying them is a different issue altogether - and businessmen of all colours and in all countries have a lot to "teach" each other on that :wink: ....

shyam
BRFite
Posts: 1419
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby shyam » 30 Mar 2011 12:53

somnath wrote:Abhishekcc-ji, the road to philanthrophic heaven is littered with robber barons :wink:

What makes you believe that this philanthopy is real philanthropy and not a business strategy in the garb of philanthropy. For example, corporations that make cereal are interested in giving free food at disaster zones in different parts of the world. Noble cause indeed!!! The motivation for that is that by giving their type of food at the time of crisis, they create new market for them. If they pursue for long, they will be able to replace the native food by their corporate food.

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 30 Mar 2011 13:39

Shyam-ji,

You are almost talking like Vandana Shiva (in a different context)! :) But yes, it is a possibility, but dont think anyone's yet accused Gates, Rhodes, Rockefellers or any of the known worthies of such conspiracies...To be honest, it would make sense for corporate endowments to be specially "targeted", not for individual ones, though I think Goerge Soros' endowment (to promote democracy :twisted: ) could be described likewise..

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5738
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby krisna » 30 Mar 2011 14:08

No, the article says that they becqueathed most of their personal wealth to charity...Which is patently and evidently wrong...

which part of the statement is incomprehensible to you?
1. The shareholding pattern of Bajaj Auto (which would be a very large part of Jamnalal Bajaj's personal wealth)? Or that of any other Bajaj company? Does it show that "most of his wealth" has been donated to charity?
2. Tax status of individuals - the fact that the same is not publicly available info anywhere, therefore not tenable as an unlterior motive?
3. Or the fact that regardless of the tax status of the foundations/trusts, rick folk do not need to do any charity to save on tax?

You have refused to acknowledge that tatas, birlas and bajaj founders are philanthropists. You are obsfuscating the whole issue.
You go off on a tangent. I questioned your comments on the article for the founders of tata,Bajaj and Birla. It is very evident that founders of the above Indian companies gave most of their personal wealth to the greater good of India and its people.
You can search on google for it. I am too lazy for it- reason because you evidently dig info on non Indians but dont want to do it for Indians. there is a difference between individual wealth and company wealth.
These gentlemen during freedom movement had their wealth at the disposal of freedom movement-there were no websites no tax people or what not to keep track of what they did as they for Buffet or gates. There was no publicity also except deep appreciation from Indians. MKG called Jamanlal Bajaj as his son. He led a simple life, developed many intiatives for upliftment of Indians. same goes for GD Birla- he also kept his wealth for the Indians.
Only people like you do not have the ability to digest these aspects.
The author is absolutely right and factual in mentioning that
‘the Tata founders bequeathed most of their individual wealth to many trusts they created for the greater good of India and its people’. So is the case with G D Birla and Jamnalal Bajaj.


You are patently and evidently wrong as per your own quotes.
No amount of obsfuscation can cover it.

Indians have a system of giving wealth since immemorial- search google. philanthropy is evidently present here in India practised for centuries. Only problem is it is not on websites or propagandised like that in west.
You are behaving like a MUTU. even gates and Buffet acknowledge them but not you. :rotfl:

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 30 Mar 2011 16:45

Krisna-ji,

Ordinarily, I would have ignored your post - we have had enough of this topic already..But I detest people name-calling, and you have done that twice now...
krisna wrote:You are behaving like a MUTU


So I will just point out (yet again) how uninformed, and more importantly "intellectually unwilling" minds can be content in their adequacies...

One, obviously you have no clue, despite being pointed out many times, on what constitutes "wealth" for an entrepreneur...Bulk of any entrepreneur's wealth is the value of his equity in varioous companies - that is true for Buffet, for Gates, for GD Birla, for Bajaj, in fact most industrialists in the world..And as I have given data on many times before, bulk of Bajaj's wealth (his equity in Bajaj Auto, and other companies) have been becqueathed to his sons, who squabbled over it till early 21st century..Same holds true for the Birla as well...Ergo, it is WRONG to say that bulk of their wealth was becquathed to charity -it was willed to his sons/nephews etc....The "exceptions" are the Tatas, most of the equity in Tata Sons is held by the Tata philathrophic trusts, Premji (who becqueathed a billion dollars worth of his stock to his foundation) and a few others....the issue with overdpenedence on sources like Google and Wiki is you dont go beyond erroneous understandings of "corporate wealth", whatevre that means....

Two, once you understand that above, you can do well to use your google skills (and overcome your self-admitted "laziness") to understand the setting up of trust structures for tax planning around the world...And how they do not need to be coated with any veneer of charity to achiev their objectives...You should also find refernces to such trusts in India...

Last, in case you really think Indians do a "lot" in charity, find out some data/analysis/hypothesis that supports that contention...And fundamentally disagrees with the data (data, not opinion) that Bain has published...For this, Google might not be enough - but give it a shot...In fact, if you do Google, you will find most pulications across the board referencing the Bain estimate....In case you have a better handle, we can discuss this again...

Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9205
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Hari Seldon » 30 Mar 2011 17:47

^^^ I think sri somnath has a point there. No point defending the indefensible.

Wise thing to do is accept that India has ways to go before we can match TFTA levels of giving/charity but what to do, we live in SDRE turd world conditions, so we'll take a few generations to get there. And yup, we can do without the lecturing, than you.

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5738
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby krisna » 30 Mar 2011 19:59

Somnath,

I have a few things to say in response to your posts so far--
I have mainly restricted myself to Indian side of philanthropy only. I have not commented about Buffet or Gates. please see my posts.

1) viewtopic.php?p=1056703#p1056703 - dated 28 march 2011 2.32 pm- the article in question posted.
2) viewtopic.php?p=1056825#p1056825 -dated 28 march 2011 8.49 pm
3) viewtopic.php?p=1056844#p1056844 - dated 28 march 9.22 pm
4) viewtopic.php?p=1057321#p1057321 - dated 29 march 10.06 am
5) viewtopic.php?p=1057619#p1057619 - dated 29 march 9.58 pm
6) viewtopic.php?p=1057642#p1057642 -dated 29 march 10.43 pm
7) viewtopic.php?p=1057644#p1057644 -dated 29 march 10.48 pm
8 ) viewtopic.php?p=1057854#p1057854 -dated 30 march 3.38 pm
9) viewtopic.php?p=1056849#p1056849 -dated 28 march 9.31 pm in Indian Interests thread.
10) viewtopic.php?p=1056851#p1056851 -dated 28 march 9.33 pm in Indian Interests thread.
11) viewtopic.php?p=1057313#p1057313 -dated 29 march 9.58 pm in Indian Interets thread.
12) viewtopic.php?p=1057627#p1057627 -dated 29 march 2011 10.10 pm in Indian Interests thread.

I am sure you would like to clarify it. I take it that you might have missed reading it. If you feel I have not done so on my part I will clarify it.


Unanswered questions from your side-
1) You have commentated on both sides( Indians and americans) - Indians with out back up. You dont accept google or wikipedia. But you dont give your sources about how you came to the conclusion that Indians in question do not do philanthropy.
2) I asked you if you accept Indians do philanthropy- you did not answer it.
3) I have asked you the sources to back up your claim that the said Indians did not give their wealth-something to back up your statements.
3) You did not read the fine print of Bains pdf you mentioned. I wanted you to highlight it. It is only 6 pages or so. Instead you only highlighted the big numbers hiding the rest. In this context I asked you. But you did not want to do it.
4)In all your posts you keep talking about author (and other brfites)denigrating Buffet and Gates. I have been talking more of Indian side of it. My only contention was the author did not denigrate them. It could be a difference in perception.I have mentioned that I do not know much about these aspects amd went by your posts about the americans.
But you did not do it, instead you pooh poohed the Indians which I thought was in distaste.
5)You pooh poohed the author in saying that Buffet and Gates do not have tax havens, but did not give sources to back it up. But instantly said that Indians have tax havens.
6)you did not give answers/sources to the very statements that you made to authenticate it.
7) I commented about you behaving like a MUTU ( with a simile to highlight the non seriousness of it) is because of the reasons mentioned above- you were pretty strong in saying Buffet and Gates were philanthorpists but not Indians. It is well known that Indians were philanthorpists also. Check the fine print in Bains PDF which you believe in. Only problem is that the Bains PDF does not talk about past in India except in indirect way.
8 ) I am commneting for the first time on americans here with backing of data- The bains pdf which you mentioned, but failed to say more on it. US foundations play a critical role thanks to the country's tax laws. Please read it and post the important points it. This is because you did not mention the full report -you posted only what you wanted to see and hide the rest from us despite me asking you. Also mention the unique Indian problems in it.

9) About google and wikipedia- Bains pdf has sources which are on google and the pdf is also on google. Then how can we not mention these as sources.

It is really mindboggling your way. :wink:



Last but not the least-
when some one says something on an open forum one should back it up or say the inability to do so. Both sides should learn from each other. One should not hammer his side of the story only and completely ignore the other side of the story.
There is no harm in saying if one cannot comment or accept it. It is a joy for everyone of us to learn from the other side and move on in life with greater understanding. we have to make internet friends- who knows we may meet in person someday. It will be nice to acknowledge and exchange pleasantries with each other. 8)

Hope both of us understand each other and move on. :D

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5738
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby krisna » 30 Mar 2011 20:03

Hari Seldon wrote:^^^ I think sri somnath has a point there. No point defending the indefensible.

Wise thing to do is accept that India has ways to go before we can match TFTA levels of giving/charity but what to do, we live in SDRE turd world conditions, so we'll take a few generations to get there. And yup, we can do without the lecturing, than you.


Please see the above post-

I agree that there is no point in defending the indefensible. But the facts have to brought out. We have to appreciate the good things going around us - does not matter whether Indians or americans. Lecturing is bad but sometimes it is inborn as we are argumentative sdres onlee. 8)

Abhijeet
BRFite
Posts: 805
Joined: 11 Nov 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Abhijeet » 31 Mar 2011 00:39

I think it's rational behavior for Indians to be less giving with their wealth in general, since they live in a country which has been poor for most of the last millennium. With increasing prosperity will (hopefully) come increasing generosity as well.

Somnath's point seems to be straightforward -- the Birla and Bajaj families have not given away most of their wealth, while Gates and Buffett have (or are in the process of doing so).

Krisna, if you disagree with this, why don't you simply post the source which says that those Indian families have, in fact, given away most of their wealth? Simply talking about how giving is ingrained in our glorious Indian culture is unthinking.

I'll say again -- and I don't think anyone will disagree -- that the behavior of our leading business lights is completely rational, and it's their money after all so why should anyone else have an opinion on what they do with it? But it's probably dishonest to claim that they are as generous with their wealth as Gates or Buffett.

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby vera_k » 31 Mar 2011 00:57

Gates and Buffet or anyone else are on a fools errand in India if they expect Indians to give away most of their wealth. That is just not how India works.

Indian culture places importance on hereditary transfer of power, wealth and knowledge. This is why a Sonia will try to get a Rahul to be Prime Minister, just as a Dhirubhai will transfer his wealth to his sons and a Ram Jethmalani will try to pass on his knowledge to his son.

If the philosophy behind Gates and Buffet's behavior is to be emulated, it will be worth getting laws in place to disrupt this hereditary pattern. Laws like death taxes, term limits for Prime Minister or other political office, preferences for students taking up other than hereditary professions.

Abhijeet
BRFite
Posts: 805
Joined: 11 Nov 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Abhijeet » 31 Mar 2011 01:42

I don't think either of them were here specifically for that -- Buffett was here recently to look at investments, and I'm not sure when Gates was here but it was probably related to his malaria or other health related work. I'm sure this was just a passing remark that has made into a mountain by our cultural defenders.

Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Virupaksha » 31 Mar 2011 02:24

Abhijeet wrote:Somnath's point seems to be straightforward -- the Birla and Bajaj families have not given away most of their wealth, while Gates and Buffett have (or are in the process of doing so).

You miss that in India, Tatas and Premji's have given.

In US, jobs, googles, bush, larry ellison, Queendom, .......... have also not given.

Why be party to such an insidious and malevolent campaign??


Let me put my view in this way:
i) Should we increase our charity? yes
ii) Would I listen to a foreigner saying this? NO - I will slap him first and point his own glass house. We dont need their patronising.

P.S: I wouldnt ever agree that US is a lot more tuned to charity or anything. Simply put, US has developed some systems and destroyed some other systems inside it. The complete picture is not rosy at all. Do I want India to replicate that? No. - They have destroyed their family supporting structure for the elderly, which produces many quircks.

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5738
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby krisna » 31 Mar 2011 03:22

Aiyyoo Abhijeet--

Somnath's point seems to be straightforward -- the Birla and Bajaj families have not given away most of their wealth, while Gates and Buffett have (or are in the process of doing so).



You seem to have lost the plot, my friend.
Somnath is talking about families of business tycoons which I have not commented at all. It is about founders in the article. It is as simple as that.

Krisna, if you disagree with this, why don't you simply post the source which says that those Indian families have, in fact, given away most of their wealth? Simply talking about how giving is ingrained in our glorious Indian culture is unthinking.


What is there for me to disagree :lol: - I have not commented on it. In fact I have asked questions to somnath regarding the article, he goes off tangent. He use different yardsticks for Indians and americans( that is my perception). He should clarify it. That is his responsibility because of his posts.
He does not even quote bains PDF which has some info regarding charities both in India and america. He hasnt even post them when I asked to. He just highlighted some he wants everyone to know. :twisted: :evil: I mainatian it his responsibility because of his own posts. He need not have to post them if he wishes to, just mention it I can post them. It is not a big matter.

Please read what I have been saying all along--

I have been saying all along that the author in the article says that founders of Tata/Birla/Bajaj have given away their personal wealth ony for charity. Not their companies. They gave it for the greater good of the Indians. This was during the freedom movement.
‘the Tata founders bequeathed most of their individual wealth to many trusts they created for the greater good of India and its people’. So is the case with G D Birla and Jamnalal Bajaj.
viewtopic.php?p=1056703#p1056703
This is nothing to do with the FAMILIES of BIRLA TATA and BAJAJ you people are talking. Please read the article and ask yourself if you have understod it. :(( :((

GATES and BUFFET are first generation in their companies, not yet passed onto their progeny. Tatas and Birlas and Bajaj have crossed that part. Hope I am clear. cheers :mrgreen:

This is all but differences in what one is seeing.

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 31 Mar 2011 07:24

Enough of "charity" :)

There is an interesting article in BS today about Indo-M'tius DTAT by Arvind Subramanium...

http://business-standard.com/india/news ... on/430351/

He makes some pertinent points, especially on the dichotomy of so much of our FDI (and FII, which he does cover) coming in from M'tius and Cyprus..

But I think there is a "streatgic" angle to the Indo-M'tius DTAT - it supports a large part of M'tian economy and gives us a handle over an important littoral state..

That apart, the issue is more about quality of regs in M'tius rather than the DTAT per se...Investors would look for the most tax-efficient route in any case, if not M'tius, then Cayman, if not Cayman, then something else...

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4264
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Arjun » 31 Mar 2011 08:09

Abhijeet wrote:I don't think either of them were here specifically for that -- Buffett was here recently to look at investments, and I'm not sure when Gates was here but it was probably related to his malaria or other health related work. I'm sure this was just a passing remark that has made into a mountain by our cultural defenders.

Promoting philanthropy was very much a stated aim of their visit....its been expected ever since they formed an initiative called 'Giving Pledge' to promote philanthropy among billionaires. The two went to China on a similar mission last year where they did not meet with much success, and the India trip has been widely expected for several months now.

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5738
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby krisna » 31 Mar 2011 08:51

http://www.bain.com/bainweb/PDFs/cms/Pu ... Speech.pdf

This is the excerpts from bain pdf which somnath quoted.
I am posting it as he has not done so by default (agree it is his choice) :wink:

Today, more than 400 million people—around 40 percent of India’s population—live below the poverty line. The World Bank defines poverty as living on less than $1.25 a day.

The recent global downturn has only made the challenge of reducing poverty in India even more monumental. It has pushed an additional 25 million to 40 million citizens below the poverty line.2

According to Bain analysis, philanthropic donations would amount to 0.6 percent of India’s GDP. In Brazil, the rate of giving is 0.3 percent and in China, just one-tenth of 1 percent, so we are faring well when compared with other emerging nations. But this is cold comfort given the enormous needs of the poor and disadvantaged in India


Annually, Americans make donations totaling slightly more than $300 billion—or about 2 percent of the US gross domestic product.

Admittedly, the US is a far more developed economy and the comparison between its figures and India’s has its limits.

what are the limits-Read further
The philanthropy chain is made up of three major stakeholders—donors, supporting networks and charitable organizations or grassroots nonprofits


In India 1) the supporting networks are not prevalent and not on a large scale relative to america.Yet individual and corporate donations make up only 10 percent of charitable giving in India (see Figure 2). The balance of the
philanthropy comes from foreign organizations and the government. In fact, nearly 65 percent is donated by India’s central and state governments with a focus on disaster relief.

By comparison, nearly threefourths of all philanthropy in the US is undertaken by individuals. This tradition
reflects America’s history and culture of individualism as well as a supportive tax structure


Between 2006 and 2007, the number of wealthy individuals in India surged by 23 percent—possibly the highest growth rate in the world

You and I know that it is not because Indians do not have heart—that is definitely not the case. We are a generous people: Just ask any guest who is welcomed into our homes, or consider how we go out of our way to support family and friends. (He does not define it but indirectly says that we are charitable. it is well known in the adage athithi devo bhavah in sanskrit which is centuries old. It did not come after 1947. :mrgreen: compare it to america when he quotes philantropy reflects american history.I am not denigrating the author please just pointing it out)

3 major factors limiting philanthropy in India- not it is not Indians but circumstances prevalent-
To understand the challenge before us, we need to look at the three major factors that constrain giving in India. A) We believe that the relatively recent accumulation of wealth by individuals inhibits philanthropy. The number of wealthy individuals in India started growing rapidly only after the economic reforms of the 1990s. Normally, it takes 50 to 100 years for philanthropic markets to mature. Today in India, many of those with hard-earned new wealth are not eager to part with even a small amount of their money.(reflects the new found wealth and the zealnousness to guard for the progeny for future which is not very clear.This occurs in all societies) .B) As a society, charitable donations do not necessarily win social recognition. Instead, many of the newly wealthy view increased material wealth as the key to improving their social standing. A Bain analysis of 30 high-net-worth individuals in India showed that they contribute, on average, just around one-fourth of 1 percent of their net worth to social and charitable causes. But remember, even the great philanthropists—John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie and J.P. Morgan—did not give away their riches until toward the end of their lives. (after they had enough for themselves, so also gates and buffet along with other circumstances which I will post later-again not to denigrate them but to show all are humans-does not matter american or Indians.)
C) Another factor impeding contributions is a belief by donors that support networks are not professionally managed, and as a result, their contributions won’t be put to good use—or are at risk of being misappropriated.( major problem in India) Finally, for some, the lines may be blurred between personal giving and corporate social responsibility initiatives. Much of corporate India is run by family-owned groups.(same in America) Among the top 40 business groups, nearly 70 percent are family-owned or -controlled enterprises. It is likely that some families and individuals view corporate responsibility initiatives as extensions of their own giving. And that may curb their interest in making personal donations.

Let’s look at 2) donation-support networks in India. Most of them are in their infancy and that limits their impact. We need to help these networks increase their activities and efficiency so that donors are confident their contributions will have a significant impact. Just look at United Way in America. It is able to have a dramatic impact on communities in need, with annual revenues of $4 billion in 2007.It has distributed funds to nearly 1,300 organizations with clearly defined missions.

Private foundations offer another support network for distributing funds to charitable organizations. In the US, foundations play a critical role, thanks to the country’s tax laws.(ex-think Gates foundation) With inheritance tax rates of nearly 46 percent for large estates of more than $2 million, wealthy individuals have a large incentive to create private foundations before death. There is no such inheritance tax in India or in many other nations, including China and Australia.The largest 100 foundations in the US have more than $200 billion in assets. These assets are used to help underwrite philanthropic activities. When the assets of all US foundations are added up, the total available to fund nonprofit work was nearly a staggering $700 billion in 2007. This massive asset base allows foundations to have not only a national impact, but to extend their impact throughout the world.(when you have enuf money and cannot spend in america as it is developed you obviously venture to help the under privileged communities which is to be welcomed but not to put on a pedestal for worship. Of course no sermonising please- IMHO) Given their size, these are professionally managed institutions and collaborate closely with grant recipients and charity operators.(they have to be professionally managed considering the huge sums involved- some of them exceed the GDP of poorer countries) In other words, they are not simply money-giving machines. They raise the bar, increasing the power of their donations to help those in need

The good news is that more and more wealthy individuals in India are establishing foundations. For example, the Bajaj trusts have amassed $150 million, and the Bharti Foundation, started by Sunil Mittal, has slightly more than $60 million. As the number of wealthy individuals continues to accelerate and more foundations are created, one can foresee a day where foundations in India play a growing role in addressing the needs of the impoverished, helping them lead healthier and more productive lives.

This constitutes 3) grassroots nonprofits and charity operations. There are some 2 million charity operators in India. The vast majority are run with the best of intentions, but without the transparency, processes and professional staff required to reassure donors and encourage large contributions.( a major drawback) In all of India in 2006, there were only about 500 that operated on a large enough scale (more than $100,000 in income) to be effective. If we’re going to reduce poverty in India, we’ll need more—many more—professionally run, large-scale charity organizations.

Governmental role in inhibiting Indians to do more charitable work- compare and contrast to america is telling
Like many aspects of Indian life, archaic laws and bureaucracy hinder both the growth and operations of nonprofits. There is an urgent need to reform our laws and taxation policies and create a more supportive climate for charitable organizations. Here is a short list of the hurdles and laws that make the work of charity operators more difficult:
1) Foreign funds or operators must obtain a Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act certificate. That can take up to a year.
2) Donors who provide material goods receive no tax benefits.
3) The current tax deduction structure does not encourage donations. Current tax laws allow deductions of either 50 percent of the amount given or 10 percent of taxable income, whichever is lower. However, there are exceptions where 100 percent deductions are available; for example, contributions to relief funds established by the central and state governments.
4) The cumbersome bureaucratic process required to obtain tax exemptions from the government hinders the smooth operations of NGOs.
Those involved in the world of philanthropy—nonprofits, such as Dasra, government agencies and donor support networks, such as the Red Cross—need to do more, and are, to create a system that gives donors like you greater confidence and more incentives. They understand that to boost giving, they must become more transparent, professional and effective. At the same time, the government must remove the obstacles that discourage philanthropy from
flourishing in India.
(amazing that even red cross in India, dasra and govt agencies are not transparent and professional- what can we comment on others :( )
Look at how Vineet Nayyar of Tech Mahindra is harnessing his wealth. His recent 30-crore rupees gift to the Essel Social Welfare Foundation is a high-profile example of philanthropic giving in India.
(nearly 30% of his wealth)

Hope this helps in understanding some important differences between the way charity works in both the countries.
No one disbelieves that Indians do not do charity but there are some other obstacles which inhibit charities on a large scale. With increasing wealth creation and more reforms from govt to streamline the tax laws, growing awareness we will be in for better times. :D

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5738
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby krisna » 31 Mar 2011 09:02

viewtopic.php?p=1056899#p1056899 - dated 28 march 2011 10.39 pm.

Arjun - your post is spot on similar to bains pdf posted by somnath originally.

Bill Gates and Buffet are certainly not to be denigrated given their huge achievements - but when they come in to India on a explicit mission of evangelizing US-style philanthropy, one can expect some push-back on the 'sermonizing' aspect.

This is american style-

Finally - in a country like India massive growth in the economy is likely to be the biggest game-changer for the masses. By being the drivers for the growth - Indian industrialists are actually playing a central role in the upliftment of the country in any case.


Agree. this will improve with time. In fact early pioneers were the ones quoted in the article- founders of tatas birlas and bajajs and many others also quoted. we can learn from them. Todays pioneers are buffets and gates no doubt.

Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Virupaksha » 31 Mar 2011 09:09

sorry, but I couldnt get any source for his 0.6% or 5 billion figure in that bain report nor any indication how Arpan- the author reached that figure.

From where did he get that figure?? Could anybody point to the page /para where he mentions the source

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4264
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Arjun » 31 Mar 2011 09:39

ravi_ku wrote:sorry, but I couldnt get any source for his 0.6% or 5 billion figure in that bain report nor any indication how Arpan- the author reached that figure.

From where did he get that figure?? Could anybody point to the page /para where he mentions the source

If you want more details, you will obviously need to pay their multi-million $ engagement fees. So what if the study area is philanthropy - did you expect them to be charitable and forego their fees for items as critical as the backup data to the figures that they have publicly thrown about with such abandon? 8)

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 31 Mar 2011 09:49

^^^I thought there was enough discussed on the topic already...But the same chestnuts are being beaten about again and again..

From the Bain report:

1. Philanthrophy-to-GDP ratio in India - 0.6%, US - 2.2%
2. Individual contributions to # 1 above - US - 75%, India - 10%..In other words, bulk of the philanthrophy in India comes out of the govt, multilateral institutions etc
3. The report goes on to articulate the systemic issues in India...

the simple point is this (I have said it many times now)...What Buffet/Gates have done is path-breaking in scale and ambition on philanthrophy...If they are on an evangelisation mission to India - more power to them...No need to denigrate them by attributing ulterior motives like tax breaks etc...On the other hand, charity is an intensely personal decision, there cant be any moral judgement passed one way or the other..But the macro numbers show that India has a long way to go before claiming "glory"...(BTW, the Bain numbers now are accepted by most people commenting on the issue - a Google, yes, old Goolge this time would yield many references)...In case someone has a quibble on the data, thats fine, its a POV..But to question that, it would be more credible if the quibble is backed up by alterate sources of data, or at least a hypothesis of that..

On individual cases, there are people in India who are in this heavily - Tatas, Premji we have spoken about..I am told GM Rao as well now, and of course many others, Birla and Bajaj included...But it is completely wrong to say that GD Birla and Jamnalal Bajaj donated their "entire personal wealth" to charity..If they did, Rahul Bajaj wont be owning ~40% of Bajaj Auto, or Kumar Birla wont be owning 20-25% of Hindalco...From the same Bain report, the total holdings of Bajaj trusts is estimated to be 150 million dollars...The value of Rahul Bajaj's stake in just one company, Bajaj Auto (inherited from Jamnalal Bajaj) is today about 4 billion dollars...

In short, there is action, but at a macro level, "individual philathrophy intensity of GDP" is many tens of times lower for India compared to the US...It might change, might not...We dont know...Regardless, Gates/Buffet are great inspirations...
Last edited by somnath on 31 Mar 2011 09:51, edited 1 time in total.

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4264
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Arjun » 31 Mar 2011 09:51

Some voices from other high-growth developing nations, on the value of US-style philanthropy. There was a similar debate in China as well when Gates and Buffet went on their mission to China...Not necessarily endorsing what Carlos Slim says here and obviously he could be pushing his own interests - but it is a matter to be debated whether billionaire money might not be better spent in a high-growth developing economy in the form of investments that can generate higher growth and employment : Carlos Slim on Philanthropy

Carlos Slim Derides Billionaire Giveaways as Gates and Buffett Prepare China Pitch

September 29, 2010, 6:00 am

The Mexican telecommunications magnate Carlos Slim, the world’s richest man, said Wednesday that his money would be better spent on projects that create jobs than on charity, according to Bloomberg.

Speaking at a conference in Sydney as Bill Gates and Warren Buffett prepare to host a dinner in Beijing to promote philanthropy among China’s wealthy, Mr. Slim said employment is the best weapon to fight poverty.

“Trillions of dollars have been given to charity in the last 50 years, and they don’t solve anything,” he said, adding, in apparent reference to the Gates-Buffett “Giving Pledge,” “To give 50 percent, 40 percent, that does nothing.”

Wednesday’s dinner has sparked an unprecedented public debate in China about the value of philanthropy and whether the Gates-Buffett giving approach is appropriate for the country, The Wall Street Journal and Reuters write.

In India, another country with a growing tycoon class, the technology mogul Shiv Nadar has pledged 10 percent of his wealth to philanthropy, Indian newspaper The Economic Times says.

Mr. Nadar said he was influenced by the example of Bill and Melinda Gates but that he intends to build a less “project driven” philanthropic institution that, unlike the Gates’ foundation, will not spend itself down within a specific time after his death.

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 31 Mar 2011 09:57

People often confuse philanthrophy with "small time charity" - give some clothes to the destitute, or some money...The larger enterprises work at much bigger scales, including organisations like CRY in India...They work on specific projects that complement govt efforts in the realm of education, healthcare and the like...the Tata trusts, for example, run successful elite schools like TIFR and TISS, whih are not just into education but also into cutting edge basic research...

Organisations like the Bill Gates Foundation work at even larger scales, funding R&D projects on eradication of malaria for example...Or clean tech...In many ways, these philanthrophies are looking to be VCs/angel investors to frontier area projects without having the necessity of a "payback"...

So if Warren Buffet earns (say) 1 billion dollars every year from his equity in Berkshire, he can either buy more stock of the company with that, or invest in other businesses, or buy real estate in Manhatton or islands off Monaco, or give it away to Bill Gates Foundation...the perspective of people like Buffet is that his company, Berkshire will anyway take advantage of any emerging investment opportunity that he sees..therefore, his personal money need not be restricted to be used in his "vision", but can be used for a larger cause...Its a perspective, and there are no right or wrong answers...

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5738
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby krisna » 31 Mar 2011 10:13

viewtopic.php?p=1056937#p1056937 - dated 29 march 9.52 pm somnath
Most philanthrophic/charity donations in India too are tax-friendly...At an infinitesimaly small level, I have received tax breaks for all my donations to CRY, and I know for a fact that Azim Premji's foundation is a tax-exempt entity..the "religious" aspect touches India as well - the well-known cases, Birla especially, deploy a large part of their corpuses towards the various Birla Mandirs across the country..


As per bains pdf the Indian tax laws are not charity friendly. So I am not sure whether to believe this or not. Excerpts from the Bains report posted.
2) Donors who provide material goods receive no tax benefits.
3) The current tax deduction structure does not encourage donations. Current tax laws allow deductions of either 50 percent of the amount given or 10 percent of taxable income, whichever is lower. However, there are exceptions where 100 percent deductions are available; for example, contributions to relief funds established by the central and state governments.


What Buffet is doing, and he is doing it across the world, including in the US, is very important..He is asking successful industrialists to give up bulk of their wealth (the paper worth) for a larger cause...This has hardly been practised in India - barring the Tatas and Azim Premji, no industrialist has parked away a sigificant part of their wealth for charity...that is one..


Indians have had philanthropists - saying that it has not been practised is not true.
Two, it is also about the structure..The Bill Gates foundation is sponsoring work in areas that are right at the cutting edge - for example, on research to eradicate malaria...There are lessons that can be drawn there as well...


Yes it is laudable so also Indians have done- see the list-http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?p=1057338#p1057338 dated 29 march 10.24 am and viewtopic.php?p=1057349#p1057349 dated 29 march 10.33 am by ravi_ku


By Arjun, dated 29 march 10.46 am
True, but my point is also that when one says only 0.6% of GDP goes towards charity, I am pretty sure this does not count the massive amounts deposited into hundis of temples across India (as also that of other religions) every year.

viewtopic.php?p=1056982#p1056982 dated 29 march 12.39 am ravi_ku
The management of all major hindu religious trusts are taken over by the govt. Are the TTD funds from individuals/institutions? Who controls the money? The govt. Who does it come from? The general public but in records it will go as going from govt.


according to bains pdf- 65% of donations come from govt. how much of it comes indirectly from common Indians?? :((
The needs of a growing country and a developed country are different.
Many of the trust in US are set up for tax benefits. and because there is an estate tax.
You are comparing apples to oranges. Just because some western guy tries to patronise, we dont need to fall for it.

spot on as per bains pdf

viewtopic.php?p=1056986#p1056986 dated 29 march 12.43 am ravi_ku

M
any of the trusts are for that exquisite purpose. Some do gooders will give the money to charity but make sure the control must remain with them and their children.


even in america there are lot of family controlled firms/business like India.

viewtopic.php?p=1056996#p1056996 dated 29 march 12.55 am. ravi_ku
Important distinction between Indians and non Indians. sadly we fall for the american one. similarly with founders of tatas birlas and bajajs who did their work silently with no media blitz. it is more in tune with Indian culture as mentioned in the article.

viewtopic.php?p=1057002#p1057002 dated 29 march 1.03 am somnath
the difference between (say) a Jamnalal Sons trust and a Bill Gates Foundation would be on objective, legacy and access to cash flows.
..
Indian charitable organistaions have problems as mentioned in bains pdf report. Legacy- gates does not have one as yet. no point on commenting at present.

viewtopic.php?p=1057013#p1057013 dated 29 march 1.11 am somnath
What chance do I have? Warren Buffet is doin that job

we already have tatas and azim premji doing for India as per your own admission in posts.yeah cash is less obviously compared to buffet. :mrgreen:
About the so-called ambani uni - is that philanthrophy or another business stream? What are the fees charged? What is the endowment created?


Ambani is still young. He has a long way to go. Buffet is in 70s. he mentioned about charity after he had enough. Buffet might not have done charity when he is of ambani age. so wait for Ambani till he has had his work. This is unfair comparison.Also India now is creating more wealth, will take more time to mature.

viewtopic.php?p=1057070#p1057070 dated 29 march 2.27 am arjun.
But does not make sense to force the pace on any such standards in India - India will create its own examples eventually over the next 50 - 75 years.

spot on per bains pdf posted by somnath.India will do likely better than america.

viewtopic.php?p=1057176#p1057176 dated march 29 5.48 am amit
I agree with Arjun on this point. You can't compare US standards with those of India.
Think of it this way. After how many generations of affluence, the type of which the world has probably never seen (in terms of breadth of affluence) before, has this philanthropy habit come in? Contrast that with Mukesh Bhai. It's useful to remember that Mukesh (and his brother) were born in a one-room chawl in Mumbai when Ambani senior was just starting out.

Indians are only now coming out of abject poverty that the country was plunged into for about 1000 years. And Mukesh Ambani's generation is probably the first after a millennium which has seen a horizontal growth of prosperity across different sections of society. You'll need some more generations to go through that experience before you can expect the type of philanthropy shown by a Gates or Buffet, IMO.

spot on as per bains pdf- problems related to charity in India.


viewtopic.php?p=1057198#p1057198 dated 29 march 7.06 am somnath
Philanthrophy cannot be "forced", it is a question of inner calling...But the template setup by the likes of Gates and Buffet (and even before, by the Rockefellers and Oppenheimers) is great..And if they are on an evangelisation mission to India on this, more power to them! There isnt a need to denigrate that effort (or indeed the individuals) or invent "glories" in India on that topic...

The realisation comes at different ages- for buffet it comes at around 70 years of age. for others it is at early age - some Indians had it early. all are laudable only. no need to put down Indian achievements also. Indians do not have the scale of money as buffet or gates. Philanthropy is inner calling and should be without strings. If they are on evangelisation mission it is not philanthropy. it becomes a sort of business type.



viewtopic.php?p=1057363#p1057363 dated 29 march 10.57 am shyam
Shankara Netralaya performs an eye surgery for $30. If we give money to professional charities, it would cost $300 in India and may be $10000 in Massa.

Interesting I did not know this.

Just a collection of statements made by various brfites and related it to bains pdf as somnath beieves it.
It is just an attempt from my side. :wink:

Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Virupaksha » 31 Mar 2011 10:18

somnath wrote:^^^I thought there was enough discussed on the topic already...But the same chestnuts are being beaten about again and again..

From the Bain report:

1. Philanthrophy-to-GDP ratio in India - 0.6%, US - 2.2%
2. Individual contributions to # 1 above - US - 75%, India - 10%..In other words, bulk of the philanthrophy in India comes out of the govt, multilateral institutions etc
3. The report goes on to articulate the systemic issues in India....

Those figures are out of someone's musharaff and unless he provides with the actual sources and how they actually calculated it, quoting them is meaning less.

I am right now creating ravi_ku's report.

It is scientifically proven that philantrophy to GDP ratio in India- 25% , in US-0.0000001%

Note: All calculations and actual sources will be paid on payment of 10000000000000000000000$ into an account whose number will be given when sufficient bank worth is proved to ravi_ku's satisfaction. No guarantees or warranties implicitly or explicitly provided.

P.S: I have been asking what is the actual source behind that individual data, how they are calculated, what are included and what not of that Bain report. All I see are people quoting it, but no one can verify that data. Why are people still quoting from a source which is clearly unverifiable and may have questionable and variable interpretations and also the bain report is clearly agenda driven, thus cannot even say it is from a neutral source.

Anyways last post from me on this malicious agenda drive.
Last edited by Virupaksha on 31 Mar 2011 10:26, edited 1 time in total.

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 31 Mar 2011 10:26

^^^Ravi_ku-ji,

All power to you..

It is interesting that a name-anonymous blog is supposed to have more creds than Bain as a data source! Lage raho!

BTW, what is the standing assumption on why the Bain data HAS to be "erroneous, motivated" etc?

Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby Virupaksha » 31 Mar 2011 10:32

somnath wrote:^^^Ravi_ku-ji,

All power to you..

It is interesting that a name-anonymous blog is supposed to have more creds than Bain as a data source! Lage raho!

for me even Bain doesnt have more cred than the neighbor next to me.

I am sorry I am not one of those who get googly eyed when they hear brands like harvard, nike, walmart, paan dabba.

I have seen enough of those living with those brands with no matter.
Each data source/brand has its agenda, so yup bain's words for me has the same worth as Johnny lever's words unless they prove that they have no agenda behind it.

So yup I will never give much cred to anything simply because it is some bain report.
The recent expose of british scholars behind Libya and global warming fiasco with all their "reputed" publications should have brought things into perspective for common people. Guess it will take more truths to come out before these "reputed" glass buildings are brought down.

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

Re: Indian Economy: News and Discussion (Jan 1 2010)

Postby somnath » 31 Mar 2011 10:38

ravi_ku wrote:Each data source/brand has its agenda,

nothing to do with the topic at hand, but I agree with you - every data source has an agenda...Why Bain? CSO has an agenda when it releases India's macro data...RBI has big agenda when they release monetary numbers...NSSO has an agenda on what sort of pverty estimates it releases...Point therefore is, you should be able to discern through the numbers to arrive at an optimum level, using models/experience whatever...Or have alternate data sources to validate or critique (for exmaple the NCAER income survey for poverty levels)..Without that, its just hand waiving...

BTW, chaps who can do both the above usually come from some of these "elite brands" - their ability and creds are co-terminus with the ability and creds of these orgs :wink: So its a self-fulfilling virtuous cycle!
Last edited by somnath on 31 Mar 2011 10:40, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Strategic & Security Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests