I watch a great deal of the MSNBC news channel here in Vancouver. One of the highlights is the daily briefing of the press by the U.S. president’s Press Secretary. The current incumbent is a gentleman named Robert Gibbs.
Of course, I do not know Mr. Gibbs personally, but the more I see of him, the more respect I feel. This is not an easy job. The Press Secretary has to face a gaggle of knowledgeable, nit-picking journalists every single day. These journalists ask very pointed questions on a whole host of topics, usually involving interpretations of the President’s views on critical issues such as the Iraq War, the stock markets, the economy, healthcare, the budget, terrorism, proposed education reforms, etc. Watching Mr. Gibbs answer these questions is like watching a man navigate through a minefield. He has to ensure that he puts the right “spin” on Barack Obama’s comments. He also has to ensure that his own comments are not misinterpreted, and reflect exactly what the U.S. President wants to say, or would have wanted to say.
If the President says something that can be construed as being even remotely controversial, the Press Secretary has to defend his boss by ensuring that the statement is not misinterpreted. If the President says something that is plain inaccurate or wrong, he has to defend that as well. He also has to have a very good understanding of the issues being discussed, remain calm, and be able to think on his feet. At all times, he has to be able to keep his own opinions to himself, and only express what he thinks the President would have wanted to convey.
And he has to do all this on live television, in front of a bunch of journalists who more often than not, resemble a pack of hungry wolves, just waiting for a misstep or weakness on his part. Journalists in the U.S., like their counterparts elsewhere in the free world, always wait for the opportunity to take any statement, however innocuous it may seem, and make a screaming headline out of it. American television journalists appear to be as opportunistic as their Indian counterparts. They also seem to have the same breezy attitude towards the truth as our Indian television journalists. The focus is on getting viewer ratings, not getting to the truth.
The only difference I see between American journalists and their Indian counterparts is that the Americans actually allow the interviewee to complete a sentence without interrupting. Many Indian television journalists I see are more interested in getting their own point of view across, without even considering the opinion of the person they are purportedly interviewing. As a result, most interviews and debates on Indian television end up being shouting matches, and when you watch them, you are often left no wiser than before.
Coming back to the U.S. Press Secretary, this cannot be an easy job. Standing up in front of a bunch of intelligent, often hostile people who sometimes view you as potential prey, and that too on live television, must be extremely stressful. Yet Robert Gibbs always has time to listen to everyone’s questions. He is always patient and never seems to lose his sense of humour. He keeps the wolves in good humour too, by always being respectful to them, even though the reverse may not be true. And he has to do this live, every day. This is a tough job!
The daily press briefing does provide listeners with a lot of information. I could be wrong, but in India, our Prime Minister does not have a dedicated Press Secretary who faces the press every day. If we did, do you think it would work, in terms of clarifying what the Prime Minister did (and did not) say and mean?
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Monday, March 2, 2009
India: A Pensioners’ Paradise?
As a young man, I lived in the U.S for nearly six years, and in many ways, Canada, where I am living currently, is not very different. There is a lot to be said for living in a “developed” country (I always found that term a little strange, but that is the term that is most frequently used to describe economically advanced countries). However, there is one aspect of living in “developed” countries that I find sad. That is the condition of the elderly.
There are few sights sadder than watching a lone old man or woman here in winter, struggling to wheel a loaded shopping trolley across a huge parking lot in sub-zero temperatures. Old people here are often lonely, with nobody to look after them or even have a conversation with. Living in “developed” countries is great as long as one is working and fit. Once a person becomes old, children more often than not move away and do not keep in touch with their parents often (I realize that this is increasingly the trend in urban, middle-class India as well). Older middle-class people in the U.S, Canada and elsewhere are often forced to live all alone in difficult conditions. Unless one is rich, one has to do everything oneself, and there are no maids, chauffeurs and other domestic help available. Again, this is fine when one is fit and healthy, but when a person gets old, this can become a problem. The lack of a support system is a real issue for the elderly in Western countries.
This is why I think India (or parts of the country anyway) would be a great pensioners’ paradise for older folks from Western nations. If I was about to retire, what would be the factors I would take into account when deciding on a place to settle down? In my mind, the factors to consider while choosing a location to retire in would be:
1. A secure, stable place with a low crime rate and high levels of political stability
2. Plenty of sunshine and mild, warm temperatures. Cold weather has greater adverse affects on older people
3. A place where the cost of living is low, and my retirement savings will allow me to have a comfortable life
4. A pleasant, quiet, scenic location surrounded by nature
5. The availability of good, inexpensive medical care
6. The availability of domestic help such as maids, chauffeurs, etc.
7. Good public transport
8. Good infrastructure in terms of uninterrupted water, electricity and civic services
9. A place where the English language is widely spoken and understood.
Many parts of India score high on most of the factors listed above, except for Point # 8 (good infrastructure in terms of uninterrupted water, electricity and civic services). Erratic electricity supply is a major stumbling block to our country’s growth.
However, there are many parts of India that meet most of the criteria I have listed above. Goa, Kerala, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh come to mind. All of these places are very desirable places to live in.
Let me give you a personal anecdote. I used to know an old American guy who lived in the town of Almora, in the Indian Himalayan state of Uttarakhand. He was in his seventies when I met him, and divorced. He had worked in the U.S. financial services industry all his life, and had a Masters’ in Business Administration degree from Yale University. His daughter was married and lived in the U.S. They were not in touch often. Once I got to know him better, I asked him what made him come to a small Himalayan town to retire. He told me that the only other choice he had was to die in an old age home in New Jersey. He was alone, and felt that he still had a lot left to offer. He also had an interest in Buddhism. So he decided to chuck his life in the U.S., and move to Almora. He enjoyed life. He was an avid trekker. His dollar denominated retirement pension allowed him to have a very good standard of life in India. He died last year, and I am sure he never regretted his decision to move to India after retirement. He had ten years of an active, enjoyable life in Almora before he died in a hospital in Delhi.
In Europe, Spain is a very popular retirement destination for many people from the United Kingdom. It is cheaper to live in than Britain, and has much better weather. The Spanish government actively promotes Spain as a retirement destination, since British retirees bring in plenty of foreign exchange. Retirees, unlike immigrants, do not compete with locals for jobs, and you very rarely hear of seventy year old burglars or serial killers. These British retirees also create thousands of jobs in Spain, since they need locally based maids, drivers, doctors, nurses, financial advisors, real estate agents etc. Spain has many towns and “gated communities” that are full of British retirees.
There is no reason that parts of India cannot become a pensioners’ paradise. The places I mentioned above (Goa, Kerala, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh) have great, mild, weather, are very scenic, safe and it is reasonably easy to get domestic help. These states also have reasonably large local English speaking populations. Medical facilities in these states are decent, and cities such as Mumbai and Delhi are easily accessible and less than two hours away by air. Most importantly, a pension of fifteen hundred pounds a month goes much further in Goa than it does in Britain.
If the Indian government actively promoted “pensioners’ tourism”, it would help in bring in law-abiding, prosperous retirees by the thousands, as well as millions of dollars and pounds in foreign exchange, apart from creating thousands of jobs. There would be a role for the private sector in providing hospitality and elder-care services. Of course, the government would have to do its bit in creating better quality infrastructure, specifically roads, water and electricity.
These are my opinions. What do you think?
There are few sights sadder than watching a lone old man or woman here in winter, struggling to wheel a loaded shopping trolley across a huge parking lot in sub-zero temperatures. Old people here are often lonely, with nobody to look after them or even have a conversation with. Living in “developed” countries is great as long as one is working and fit. Once a person becomes old, children more often than not move away and do not keep in touch with their parents often (I realize that this is increasingly the trend in urban, middle-class India as well). Older middle-class people in the U.S, Canada and elsewhere are often forced to live all alone in difficult conditions. Unless one is rich, one has to do everything oneself, and there are no maids, chauffeurs and other domestic help available. Again, this is fine when one is fit and healthy, but when a person gets old, this can become a problem. The lack of a support system is a real issue for the elderly in Western countries.
This is why I think India (or parts of the country anyway) would be a great pensioners’ paradise for older folks from Western nations. If I was about to retire, what would be the factors I would take into account when deciding on a place to settle down? In my mind, the factors to consider while choosing a location to retire in would be:
1. A secure, stable place with a low crime rate and high levels of political stability
2. Plenty of sunshine and mild, warm temperatures. Cold weather has greater adverse affects on older people
3. A place where the cost of living is low, and my retirement savings will allow me to have a comfortable life
4. A pleasant, quiet, scenic location surrounded by nature
5. The availability of good, inexpensive medical care
6. The availability of domestic help such as maids, chauffeurs, etc.
7. Good public transport
8. Good infrastructure in terms of uninterrupted water, electricity and civic services
9. A place where the English language is widely spoken and understood.
Many parts of India score high on most of the factors listed above, except for Point # 8 (good infrastructure in terms of uninterrupted water, electricity and civic services). Erratic electricity supply is a major stumbling block to our country’s growth.
However, there are many parts of India that meet most of the criteria I have listed above. Goa, Kerala, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh come to mind. All of these places are very desirable places to live in.
Let me give you a personal anecdote. I used to know an old American guy who lived in the town of Almora, in the Indian Himalayan state of Uttarakhand. He was in his seventies when I met him, and divorced. He had worked in the U.S. financial services industry all his life, and had a Masters’ in Business Administration degree from Yale University. His daughter was married and lived in the U.S. They were not in touch often. Once I got to know him better, I asked him what made him come to a small Himalayan town to retire. He told me that the only other choice he had was to die in an old age home in New Jersey. He was alone, and felt that he still had a lot left to offer. He also had an interest in Buddhism. So he decided to chuck his life in the U.S., and move to Almora. He enjoyed life. He was an avid trekker. His dollar denominated retirement pension allowed him to have a very good standard of life in India. He died last year, and I am sure he never regretted his decision to move to India after retirement. He had ten years of an active, enjoyable life in Almora before he died in a hospital in Delhi.
In Europe, Spain is a very popular retirement destination for many people from the United Kingdom. It is cheaper to live in than Britain, and has much better weather. The Spanish government actively promotes Spain as a retirement destination, since British retirees bring in plenty of foreign exchange. Retirees, unlike immigrants, do not compete with locals for jobs, and you very rarely hear of seventy year old burglars or serial killers. These British retirees also create thousands of jobs in Spain, since they need locally based maids, drivers, doctors, nurses, financial advisors, real estate agents etc. Spain has many towns and “gated communities” that are full of British retirees.
There is no reason that parts of India cannot become a pensioners’ paradise. The places I mentioned above (Goa, Kerala, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh) have great, mild, weather, are very scenic, safe and it is reasonably easy to get domestic help. These states also have reasonably large local English speaking populations. Medical facilities in these states are decent, and cities such as Mumbai and Delhi are easily accessible and less than two hours away by air. Most importantly, a pension of fifteen hundred pounds a month goes much further in Goa than it does in Britain.
If the Indian government actively promoted “pensioners’ tourism”, it would help in bring in law-abiding, prosperous retirees by the thousands, as well as millions of dollars and pounds in foreign exchange, apart from creating thousands of jobs. There would be a role for the private sector in providing hospitality and elder-care services. Of course, the government would have to do its bit in creating better quality infrastructure, specifically roads, water and electricity.
These are my opinions. What do you think?
Friday, February 27, 2009
Hunger: India’s National Shame
Yesterday’s online edition of the Times of India carries a headline that said “India tops world hunger chart”. You can read the entire article by clicking on the link below:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India-tops-world-hunger-chart/articleshow/4197047.cms
Unfortunately, this is the India that most of the world used to know till recently. This is the India of “Slumdog Millionaire”, without the songs and happy ending. A corrupt, inefficient country that until recently repeatedly went to the rest of the world for aid, begging bowl in hand. There is another related article which shows how corrupt, incompetent and completely callous the government-run Food Corporation of India (FCI) is. The FCI is responsible for collecting, storing and distributing food-grains to the poorest of the poor. In this endeavour, it has failed miserably. Over one million tonnes of food-grains lying in FCI warehouses have been allowed to rot. One million tonnes! These food-grains would have fed over ten million hungry Indians for a year!! Statistics like these make my blood boil.
India is a crowded, overpopulated country to begin with. Resources are scarce and inefficiently distributed. To top it off, we have corruption, wastefulness and criminal negligence in government run organizations such as the Food Corporation of India. Why is nobody held responsible for allowing such huge amounts of food-grains to go to waste? Who is responsible? Does anyone in the government care?
I have heard some experts say that the facilities in FCI warehouses are poor. Apparently, these warehouses do not have proper refrigeration facilities for food-grains and they are rat infested. Many reports by impartial agencies have highlighted the need for the government to invest in a “cold chain”, since efficient refrigeration and transportation infrastructure is essential for the effective distribution of food to the hungry. So far, nothing has been done by successive governments.
The tragedy here is not that India does not have enough food to feed its people. We do. It is the gross inefficiency and negligence of the public food distribution system, as represented by the Food Corporation of India and allied governmental agencies. This is not an insurmountable problem. It does not require additional money or resources to solve. All it requires is the better use of existing resources.
Why hasn’t the government done anything about upgrading the food supply chain in the country? Why does the government not focus on upgrading these FCI warehouses? Why do you hear about this appalling hunger epidemic so rarely on national TV channels? Is it because this is not supposed to be part of the brave, sexy new India, where actresses and cricketers are paid millions of dollars for endorsements? Why is our media, which is so active in highlighting many other trivial issues so silent on this one? An issue that affects 250 million people. Is it because there is no “lobby” that speaks up for them? Or do they care only about their TRP ratings? After all, “real” news is that which sells, not that which is true. To quote eminent journalist P. Sainath: “I learned that conventional journalism was above all about the service of power. You always give the last word to authority. I got a couple of prizes which I didn't pick up because I was ashamed”. I will tell you more about Sainath later in this blog.
Anybody who has spent significant amounts of time in rural Maharashtra and North India will know the extent of the hunger epidemic. South Indian states especially Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala are better administered, and consistently score higher than their North Indian counterparts on nearly every economic parameter. Last year, there was a news article that gave a graphic account of famine in Thane district, barely a hundred kilometres from my home in Mumbai. Such deprivation so close to India’s largest city should have caused a stir. Instead, it barely caused a ripple.
If you are interested to learn more about India’s hunger epidemic and the non-existent government response to it, I highly recommend P. Sainath’s book “Everybody Loves A Good Drought: Stories from India’s Poorest Districts”. Sainath is an award winning journalist and won the 2007 Magsaysay Award for journalism, literature and creative communication arts. The book is a little dated (it was published in 1996), but it will give you a good idea of the complete paralysis and lack of action of governmental agencies to this crisis. Not much has changed on this front since 1996.
Have we become so unfeeling as a nation? Have we become so much like those government bureaucrats and politicians we despise? I sincerely hope not.
Of course, all of us in our individual capacities can help in small ways. However, this will not solve the problem. At a macro level, you can start by holding your government responsible, at both the state and central levels.
My solution would be to dismantle the Food Corporation of India, and hand over the entire task of storing and distributing food-grains to the private sector. That way, someone would be held accountable for criminal negligence. If you hear of any political party proposing this course of action, vote for them. What are your views?
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India-tops-world-hunger-chart/articleshow/4197047.cms
Unfortunately, this is the India that most of the world used to know till recently. This is the India of “Slumdog Millionaire”, without the songs and happy ending. A corrupt, inefficient country that until recently repeatedly went to the rest of the world for aid, begging bowl in hand. There is another related article which shows how corrupt, incompetent and completely callous the government-run Food Corporation of India (FCI) is. The FCI is responsible for collecting, storing and distributing food-grains to the poorest of the poor. In this endeavour, it has failed miserably. Over one million tonnes of food-grains lying in FCI warehouses have been allowed to rot. One million tonnes! These food-grains would have fed over ten million hungry Indians for a year!! Statistics like these make my blood boil.
India is a crowded, overpopulated country to begin with. Resources are scarce and inefficiently distributed. To top it off, we have corruption, wastefulness and criminal negligence in government run organizations such as the Food Corporation of India. Why is nobody held responsible for allowing such huge amounts of food-grains to go to waste? Who is responsible? Does anyone in the government care?
I have heard some experts say that the facilities in FCI warehouses are poor. Apparently, these warehouses do not have proper refrigeration facilities for food-grains and they are rat infested. Many reports by impartial agencies have highlighted the need for the government to invest in a “cold chain”, since efficient refrigeration and transportation infrastructure is essential for the effective distribution of food to the hungry. So far, nothing has been done by successive governments.
The tragedy here is not that India does not have enough food to feed its people. We do. It is the gross inefficiency and negligence of the public food distribution system, as represented by the Food Corporation of India and allied governmental agencies. This is not an insurmountable problem. It does not require additional money or resources to solve. All it requires is the better use of existing resources.
Why hasn’t the government done anything about upgrading the food supply chain in the country? Why does the government not focus on upgrading these FCI warehouses? Why do you hear about this appalling hunger epidemic so rarely on national TV channels? Is it because this is not supposed to be part of the brave, sexy new India, where actresses and cricketers are paid millions of dollars for endorsements? Why is our media, which is so active in highlighting many other trivial issues so silent on this one? An issue that affects 250 million people. Is it because there is no “lobby” that speaks up for them? Or do they care only about their TRP ratings? After all, “real” news is that which sells, not that which is true. To quote eminent journalist P. Sainath: “I learned that conventional journalism was above all about the service of power. You always give the last word to authority. I got a couple of prizes which I didn't pick up because I was ashamed”. I will tell you more about Sainath later in this blog.
Anybody who has spent significant amounts of time in rural Maharashtra and North India will know the extent of the hunger epidemic. South Indian states especially Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala are better administered, and consistently score higher than their North Indian counterparts on nearly every economic parameter. Last year, there was a news article that gave a graphic account of famine in Thane district, barely a hundred kilometres from my home in Mumbai. Such deprivation so close to India’s largest city should have caused a stir. Instead, it barely caused a ripple.
If you are interested to learn more about India’s hunger epidemic and the non-existent government response to it, I highly recommend P. Sainath’s book “Everybody Loves A Good Drought: Stories from India’s Poorest Districts”. Sainath is an award winning journalist and won the 2007 Magsaysay Award for journalism, literature and creative communication arts. The book is a little dated (it was published in 1996), but it will give you a good idea of the complete paralysis and lack of action of governmental agencies to this crisis. Not much has changed on this front since 1996.
Have we become so unfeeling as a nation? Have we become so much like those government bureaucrats and politicians we despise? I sincerely hope not.
Of course, all of us in our individual capacities can help in small ways. However, this will not solve the problem. At a macro level, you can start by holding your government responsible, at both the state and central levels.
My solution would be to dismantle the Food Corporation of India, and hand over the entire task of storing and distributing food-grains to the private sector. That way, someone would be held accountable for criminal negligence. If you hear of any political party proposing this course of action, vote for them. What are your views?
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Economics: Swami Recession-ananda’s Unsolicited Economic Advice
Times are tough. The current morning temperature in Vancouver, Canada is – 3 degrees centigrade. Taking the wind chill factor into consideration, it feels like – 9 degrees centigrade. My new-found friend, a local black squirrel, who shows up at my apartment balcony every morning looking for a food bail-out (like many of us these days), did not stop by today. It is too cold for him this morning, I guess. It is also too cold for me to go running in the local park.
So I thought I would put on my economist hat and give my blog readers unsolicited economic advice. President Obama launched his US $ 800 billion stimulus package with great fanfare day before yesterday. Why am I focusing on the US economy and not India? Because whatever people may say about China (and to a lesser extent India), the US is still the heavy hitter of the world’s economic system. Over the last six years, as the US prospered, China enjoyed 11% annual GDP growth. India had 9% economic growth. The economic fate of the whole world depends on how quickly the US economy recovers. When America prospers, the world prospers. Make no mistake about it.
If Obama's stimulus package does indeed stimulate large-scale public works in the US, it will stimulate demand, put money in the pockets of consumers, and hopefully stimulate demand in other industries. This is classical Keynesian economic theory at work.
If this happens, the US (and consequently the rest of the world) will be pulled out of the recession. If it doesn’t, things are going to get a lot scarier than they are currently.
Large-scale government spending has worked before, most notably during the Great Depression of the 1930s, when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “New Deal” helped pull the world out of a recession. Of course, the Second World War also played a big role in reviving the world economy, but I am not advocating a Third World War.
So how do we get out of the current economic mess? Swami Recession-ananda(me) has some unsolicited advice to give. Everybody else is weighing in with their opinions, so why should I be left behind? So here goes:
1. American banks are just not lending, even to creditworthy customers. Short-term interest rates are close to zero. As far as monetary policy is concerned, there is nothing further that the US Federal Reserve can do. Fed Chief Ben Bernanke has used up all the bullets in his arsenal. So how does Obama ensure that the flow of credit, the lifeblood of commerce, is restarted? In my opinion, he has got to temporarily nationalize banks. For example, the US government has already spent US $ 45 billion on trying to nurse the ailing Citigroup back to health. This constitutes 8% of Citigroup’s equity share capital. It hasn’t worked. Citigroup now needs another US $ 175 billion just to survive the next quarter. If Obama gives it to them, this would mean the US government will own more than 40% of Citigroup. Why not just take over Citigroup (and Bank of America and AIG while you are at it) temporarily?
This would mean that Citigroup would be forced to start lending again, which would then inject credit into the US economic system. Conservative Americans do not like the word “nationalization”, because it smacks of socialism. But what is the alternative? There is none. Go ahead, Comrade Obama, nationalize ailing US banks, at least for the next one year! Swami Recession-ananda is not alone in saying this. Many economists, including Nobel-Prize winning Paul Krugman are also saying the same thing.
Fire the current managements of these companies. Put temporary caps on salaries of top executives, at least till their companies become profitable again. Ensure that the top managements who gave themselves millions of dollars in bonuses when their companies were bleeding and begging for handouts are put in prison for defrauding investors and shareholders. Put their summer homes in the Hamptons and the Bahamas up for sale.
2. Consider re-enacting the Glass Steagall Act. This Act came into force in the 1930s, and ensured that depository institutions such as banks could not invest in stock markets. The pros and cons of re-enacting the Glass Steagall Act need to be debated before it is re-enacted.
3. Do not give General Motors and Chrysler the US $ 40 billion they are asking for, unless there is a complete overhaul of the top management of these dinosaurs. Use the bailout to force them to re-negotiate their pension contracts with auto unions. In fact, don't make it a bailout. Make it a loan instead, repayable to the US government in ten years. Force them to start investing in clean, alternative technologies. Make these conditions explicit before giving them the money. Twist their arms until they comply. If they don’t, break their arms. This may sound harsh, but it is the only way that American auto makers will become competitive. I would not have advocated a bail-out for US auto manufacturers at all, but one in ten US jobs depends directly or indirectly on the US auto industry.
4. Raise taxes for the rich. This is also going to be deeply unpopular, especially among the conservatives. But it will help pay for Obama’s stimulus package and also for healthcare reform, which is the next time bomb ticking away in the US. Bush’s tax cuts were only for the super-rich. Families earning less than US $ 250,000 a year are not going to sympathize if taxes on the super-rich are raised anyway. If you are rich, you can afford to pay a little more in taxes. It is not a drastic tax increase, and it won’t kill you. Other states are finding innovative ways to raise taxes. The state of California has a proposed legislation that will legalize the personal consumption of marijuana. If this happens, the cash-strapped state will earn an additional US $ 2 billion every year in tax revenue. Marijuana is a cash crop, it is non-addictive, it is less damaging than alcohol, and it is used by millions anyway. Please do not get me wrong. I am not advocating marijuana use in this blog. All I am saying is that legalizing it will bring in billions of tax dollars. If alcohol, a far more damaging drug, is legal and brings in billions of valuable tax dollars, why not do the same with marijuana? By all means regulate the sale of marijuana, just like alcohol.
In summary, do I believe in principle, that the government is better than the private sector in running the economy? No. I do not. I am a capitalist, and come from a country which has been ruined by wasteful and corrupt socialist policies for decades. I am not partisan - I am neither "conservative" nor "liberal". I am just another middle-class average joe trying to ride out tough times. I am not wealthy, and becoming rich is something I aspire to. But what we have seen over the last decade or so in America is the pursuit of wealth at the expense of everything else - regulation, equity, fair play. That is not right.
In normal times, I would have opposed many of the economic plans Obama has in mind. But these are extraordinary times. The stimulus package will have its flaws. There will be some wasteful, “pork-barrel” spending. But as long as the majority of the money is used for long-term beneficial projects, the US economy (and the world economy) will benefit. Put Vice-President Joe Biden to work. Make him accountable for the success of the stimulus package. If he needs help from a Project Manager who has considerable prior experience in managing and tracking tough projects, I am available!
Obama’s opponents, the ones who are criticizing him at the moment, do not have an alternative plan. Just reducing taxes for the rich, holding hands and singing “We Are the World” does not constitute an alternative plan and isn’t going to cut it, unfortunately.
I am not a blind Obama supporter. I do have objections to some of Obama’s ideas, such as his rhetoric opposing outsourcing and his proposal for more military aid to Pakistan, for example. But I do support his economic plan, because there is no alternative to it (at the moment anyway). He is also an intelligent man, who at least understands economics.
What are your thoughts, dear reader? Do post your comments on my blog. Thanks.
So I thought I would put on my economist hat and give my blog readers unsolicited economic advice. President Obama launched his US $ 800 billion stimulus package with great fanfare day before yesterday. Why am I focusing on the US economy and not India? Because whatever people may say about China (and to a lesser extent India), the US is still the heavy hitter of the world’s economic system. Over the last six years, as the US prospered, China enjoyed 11% annual GDP growth. India had 9% economic growth. The economic fate of the whole world depends on how quickly the US economy recovers. When America prospers, the world prospers. Make no mistake about it.
If Obama's stimulus package does indeed stimulate large-scale public works in the US, it will stimulate demand, put money in the pockets of consumers, and hopefully stimulate demand in other industries. This is classical Keynesian economic theory at work.
If this happens, the US (and consequently the rest of the world) will be pulled out of the recession. If it doesn’t, things are going to get a lot scarier than they are currently.
Large-scale government spending has worked before, most notably during the Great Depression of the 1930s, when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “New Deal” helped pull the world out of a recession. Of course, the Second World War also played a big role in reviving the world economy, but I am not advocating a Third World War.
So how do we get out of the current economic mess? Swami Recession-ananda(me) has some unsolicited advice to give. Everybody else is weighing in with their opinions, so why should I be left behind? So here goes:
1. American banks are just not lending, even to creditworthy customers. Short-term interest rates are close to zero. As far as monetary policy is concerned, there is nothing further that the US Federal Reserve can do. Fed Chief Ben Bernanke has used up all the bullets in his arsenal. So how does Obama ensure that the flow of credit, the lifeblood of commerce, is restarted? In my opinion, he has got to temporarily nationalize banks. For example, the US government has already spent US $ 45 billion on trying to nurse the ailing Citigroup back to health. This constitutes 8% of Citigroup’s equity share capital. It hasn’t worked. Citigroup now needs another US $ 175 billion just to survive the next quarter. If Obama gives it to them, this would mean the US government will own more than 40% of Citigroup. Why not just take over Citigroup (and Bank of America and AIG while you are at it) temporarily?
This would mean that Citigroup would be forced to start lending again, which would then inject credit into the US economic system. Conservative Americans do not like the word “nationalization”, because it smacks of socialism. But what is the alternative? There is none. Go ahead, Comrade Obama, nationalize ailing US banks, at least for the next one year! Swami Recession-ananda is not alone in saying this. Many economists, including Nobel-Prize winning Paul Krugman are also saying the same thing.
Fire the current managements of these companies. Put temporary caps on salaries of top executives, at least till their companies become profitable again. Ensure that the top managements who gave themselves millions of dollars in bonuses when their companies were bleeding and begging for handouts are put in prison for defrauding investors and shareholders. Put their summer homes in the Hamptons and the Bahamas up for sale.
2. Consider re-enacting the Glass Steagall Act. This Act came into force in the 1930s, and ensured that depository institutions such as banks could not invest in stock markets. The pros and cons of re-enacting the Glass Steagall Act need to be debated before it is re-enacted.
3. Do not give General Motors and Chrysler the US $ 40 billion they are asking for, unless there is a complete overhaul of the top management of these dinosaurs. Use the bailout to force them to re-negotiate their pension contracts with auto unions. In fact, don't make it a bailout. Make it a loan instead, repayable to the US government in ten years. Force them to start investing in clean, alternative technologies. Make these conditions explicit before giving them the money. Twist their arms until they comply. If they don’t, break their arms. This may sound harsh, but it is the only way that American auto makers will become competitive. I would not have advocated a bail-out for US auto manufacturers at all, but one in ten US jobs depends directly or indirectly on the US auto industry.
4. Raise taxes for the rich. This is also going to be deeply unpopular, especially among the conservatives. But it will help pay for Obama’s stimulus package and also for healthcare reform, which is the next time bomb ticking away in the US. Bush’s tax cuts were only for the super-rich. Families earning less than US $ 250,000 a year are not going to sympathize if taxes on the super-rich are raised anyway. If you are rich, you can afford to pay a little more in taxes. It is not a drastic tax increase, and it won’t kill you. Other states are finding innovative ways to raise taxes. The state of California has a proposed legislation that will legalize the personal consumption of marijuana. If this happens, the cash-strapped state will earn an additional US $ 2 billion every year in tax revenue. Marijuana is a cash crop, it is non-addictive, it is less damaging than alcohol, and it is used by millions anyway. Please do not get me wrong. I am not advocating marijuana use in this blog. All I am saying is that legalizing it will bring in billions of tax dollars. If alcohol, a far more damaging drug, is legal and brings in billions of valuable tax dollars, why not do the same with marijuana? By all means regulate the sale of marijuana, just like alcohol.
In summary, do I believe in principle, that the government is better than the private sector in running the economy? No. I do not. I am a capitalist, and come from a country which has been ruined by wasteful and corrupt socialist policies for decades. I am not partisan - I am neither "conservative" nor "liberal". I am just another middle-class average joe trying to ride out tough times. I am not wealthy, and becoming rich is something I aspire to. But what we have seen over the last decade or so in America is the pursuit of wealth at the expense of everything else - regulation, equity, fair play. That is not right.
In normal times, I would have opposed many of the economic plans Obama has in mind. But these are extraordinary times. The stimulus package will have its flaws. There will be some wasteful, “pork-barrel” spending. But as long as the majority of the money is used for long-term beneficial projects, the US economy (and the world economy) will benefit. Put Vice-President Joe Biden to work. Make him accountable for the success of the stimulus package. If he needs help from a Project Manager who has considerable prior experience in managing and tracking tough projects, I am available!
Obama’s opponents, the ones who are criticizing him at the moment, do not have an alternative plan. Just reducing taxes for the rich, holding hands and singing “We Are the World” does not constitute an alternative plan and isn’t going to cut it, unfortunately.
I am not a blind Obama supporter. I do have objections to some of Obama’s ideas, such as his rhetoric opposing outsourcing and his proposal for more military aid to Pakistan, for example. But I do support his economic plan, because there is no alternative to it (at the moment anyway). He is also an intelligent man, who at least understands economics.
What are your thoughts, dear reader? Do post your comments on my blog. Thanks.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
India: The Rise and Rise of Poverty Tourism
There is an old brand of tourism resurfacing in India – “poverty tourism”. This brand of tourism was fashionable in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. It vanished for a little while in the 1990s and the early years of this century. Poverty tourism involves highlighting and promoting the wretched condition of approximately a quarter of India’s population, for the benefit of tourists from other, wealthier nations.
In the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, this elite group of tourists generally consisted of members of the Peace Corps, left-wing economists, hippies, eccentrics, do-gooders of all stripes and spiritual seekers who kept harping on India’s material poverty and supposed “spiritual” wealth. This Indian trend of promoting poverty tourism diminished in the last twenty years, as the story of India’s economic boom took centre-stage. It has now returned with a vengeance, possibly as a result of the global recession. Miserable people always feel better when they know that there are others who are worse off than them.
I will use two examples to explain the revival of poverty tourism. The first example involves our eternal political child Rahul Gandhi (better known as Rahul “Baba” despite his middle age) taking the British Foreign Secretary David Milliband to the rural, backward town of Amethi in Northern India. The idea, Rahul “Baba” said, was to show Mr. Milliband the “real India”.
The second example is the international success of the movie “Slumdog Millionaire”.
But first, let me illustrate the phenomenon of Rahul “Baba” as global ambassador for India’s poverty tourism. David Milliband, British Foreign Secretary was in India on an official diplomatic visit, ostensibly to show his support to India in the wake of the terror attacks in Mumbai. Rahul Gandhi, rich and privileged scion of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, saw it fit to take Milliband to a poor, backward village in his constituency of Amethi in Northern India. Mr. Milliband stayed the night in a village of “Dalits” (a supposedly backward caste tribe), without running water, plumbing or electricity, and slept in a poor Dalit’s hut for the night. Rahul Baba wanted of course, to show Milliband the “real” India.
The Indian media gave this “event” a great deal of publicity, gushing over what conversations Milliband and Rahul Baba had with the poor uneducated locals, and how admirably these two gentlemen coped with the hardships they faced for the night. Very little was said about the villagers who have been living in Amethi all their lives.
The one and only important question the media did not address was – Why is Amethi, the constituency of the ruling dynasty, still so poor and backward after so many years? What has the Gandhi family done to improve the wretched lot of the people living in this village? Surely, the constituency of the Prime-Minister-In-Waiting should have had running water, electricity, literacy, jobs and schools by now? If not, why not? But our media conveniently chose to ignore this all-important question.
The next day, as Milliband and Rahul Gandhi departed for Delhi in a private plane, the charitable organizations that had donated clean, warm blankets and bed-sheets for these gentlemen quietly came by and took these items back. The villagers had served their purpose, which was the promotion of poverty tourism. They were now forgotten, and welcome to go back to their primitive, poverty-stricken lives. The cause of poverty tourism had been promoted and publicized, and that was all that mattered.
The second example I would like to highlight is the phenomenal success of the movie “Slumdog Millionaire”. I have not watched the movie yet. I am told it is an excellent movie, which it probably is. Daniel Boyle, the movie’s director, probably made the movie because it was a good story worth telling. However, it has been received very differently by many members of the Indian media. Instead of treating “Slumdog Millionaire” as a good movie, they are somehow reading much more into it than there actually is. They are treating the movie as somehow representative of the country India is, which this film definitely isn’t.
One prominent South Bombay socialite waxed eloquent about the movie, about how it portrayed the struggle of the poor in India’s slums. While this may be true, I got the distinct feeling that she was somehow suddenly proud of these slums which she has probably never ever visited or talked about before. Somehow, these slums, that she would wrinkle her nose at in disgust on any other occasion, had become a symbol of India’s “pride”, “spirit” and “resilience”. Why? Only because a Hollywood director made a famous movie about them.
She would much prefer India to be a poor country which draws the world’s attention with its misery and poverty, than a quiet, staid prosperous nation with no poverty. Look at Sweden, she must be thinking to herself – it is rich and boring, nobody talks or makes movies about it.
I am sure Daniel Boyle (the “Slumdog Millionaire” director) did not mean to portray all the residents of Edinburgh as crazed heroin addicts living in squalor, when he made the movie “Trainspotting”. That is because Edinburgh, like Mumbai, is a diverse place, with own share of rich and poor, sublime and tragic. Just like all residents of Edinburgh are not crazed heroin addicts, all the residents of Mumbai (Bombay) do not live in slums.
The fact of the matter is Boyle was only making a movie. The image of India being a miserable, poor country is promoted by many Indians more frequently than anyone else. Why? Because our poverty becomes the source of international attention, a form of celebrity. And of course, it is better to be famous for being poor, than not being famous at all. Right?
To those overseas tourists who are planning to visit India, I would like to say this. India does have pockets of abysmal poverty. This is a shameful fact of Indian life, it cannot be ignored and it is not something most Indians are proud of. But India also has a prosperous middle class, good schools and education, good jobs and yes, many of us actually live in homes with running water, electricity and indoor plumbing. All of us do not defecate on the street.
We are ashamed of the poverty that afflicts many of our countrymen and women. It distresses us as much as it distresses our foreign tourists. We would like our politicians to provide proper homes, education and jobs to the poor, instead of promoting poverty tourism.
In the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, this elite group of tourists generally consisted of members of the Peace Corps, left-wing economists, hippies, eccentrics, do-gooders of all stripes and spiritual seekers who kept harping on India’s material poverty and supposed “spiritual” wealth. This Indian trend of promoting poverty tourism diminished in the last twenty years, as the story of India’s economic boom took centre-stage. It has now returned with a vengeance, possibly as a result of the global recession. Miserable people always feel better when they know that there are others who are worse off than them.
I will use two examples to explain the revival of poverty tourism. The first example involves our eternal political child Rahul Gandhi (better known as Rahul “Baba” despite his middle age) taking the British Foreign Secretary David Milliband to the rural, backward town of Amethi in Northern India. The idea, Rahul “Baba” said, was to show Mr. Milliband the “real India”.
The second example is the international success of the movie “Slumdog Millionaire”.
But first, let me illustrate the phenomenon of Rahul “Baba” as global ambassador for India’s poverty tourism. David Milliband, British Foreign Secretary was in India on an official diplomatic visit, ostensibly to show his support to India in the wake of the terror attacks in Mumbai. Rahul Gandhi, rich and privileged scion of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, saw it fit to take Milliband to a poor, backward village in his constituency of Amethi in Northern India. Mr. Milliband stayed the night in a village of “Dalits” (a supposedly backward caste tribe), without running water, plumbing or electricity, and slept in a poor Dalit’s hut for the night. Rahul Baba wanted of course, to show Milliband the “real” India.
The Indian media gave this “event” a great deal of publicity, gushing over what conversations Milliband and Rahul Baba had with the poor uneducated locals, and how admirably these two gentlemen coped with the hardships they faced for the night. Very little was said about the villagers who have been living in Amethi all their lives.
The one and only important question the media did not address was – Why is Amethi, the constituency of the ruling dynasty, still so poor and backward after so many years? What has the Gandhi family done to improve the wretched lot of the people living in this village? Surely, the constituency of the Prime-Minister-In-Waiting should have had running water, electricity, literacy, jobs and schools by now? If not, why not? But our media conveniently chose to ignore this all-important question.
The next day, as Milliband and Rahul Gandhi departed for Delhi in a private plane, the charitable organizations that had donated clean, warm blankets and bed-sheets for these gentlemen quietly came by and took these items back. The villagers had served their purpose, which was the promotion of poverty tourism. They were now forgotten, and welcome to go back to their primitive, poverty-stricken lives. The cause of poverty tourism had been promoted and publicized, and that was all that mattered.
The second example I would like to highlight is the phenomenal success of the movie “Slumdog Millionaire”. I have not watched the movie yet. I am told it is an excellent movie, which it probably is. Daniel Boyle, the movie’s director, probably made the movie because it was a good story worth telling. However, it has been received very differently by many members of the Indian media. Instead of treating “Slumdog Millionaire” as a good movie, they are somehow reading much more into it than there actually is. They are treating the movie as somehow representative of the country India is, which this film definitely isn’t.
One prominent South Bombay socialite waxed eloquent about the movie, about how it portrayed the struggle of the poor in India’s slums. While this may be true, I got the distinct feeling that she was somehow suddenly proud of these slums which she has probably never ever visited or talked about before. Somehow, these slums, that she would wrinkle her nose at in disgust on any other occasion, had become a symbol of India’s “pride”, “spirit” and “resilience”. Why? Only because a Hollywood director made a famous movie about them.
She would much prefer India to be a poor country which draws the world’s attention with its misery and poverty, than a quiet, staid prosperous nation with no poverty. Look at Sweden, she must be thinking to herself – it is rich and boring, nobody talks or makes movies about it.
I am sure Daniel Boyle (the “Slumdog Millionaire” director) did not mean to portray all the residents of Edinburgh as crazed heroin addicts living in squalor, when he made the movie “Trainspotting”. That is because Edinburgh, like Mumbai, is a diverse place, with own share of rich and poor, sublime and tragic. Just like all residents of Edinburgh are not crazed heroin addicts, all the residents of Mumbai (Bombay) do not live in slums.
The fact of the matter is Boyle was only making a movie. The image of India being a miserable, poor country is promoted by many Indians more frequently than anyone else. Why? Because our poverty becomes the source of international attention, a form of celebrity. And of course, it is better to be famous for being poor, than not being famous at all. Right?
To those overseas tourists who are planning to visit India, I would like to say this. India does have pockets of abysmal poverty. This is a shameful fact of Indian life, it cannot be ignored and it is not something most Indians are proud of. But India also has a prosperous middle class, good schools and education, good jobs and yes, many of us actually live in homes with running water, electricity and indoor plumbing. All of us do not defecate on the street.
We are ashamed of the poverty that afflicts many of our countrymen and women. It distresses us as much as it distresses our foreign tourists. We would like our politicians to provide proper homes, education and jobs to the poor, instead of promoting poverty tourism.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Observations: In Between Trains
There are two sounds I love above almost everything else. The first is the sound of birds chirping. The second is the whistle of trains as they rush past, far away. Fortunately, my new home allows me to hear both these sounds every day. Every evening, after sunset, I sit out in my balcony, and listen to the mournful, lonesome wails of long distance trains as they rush through the night.
“Wooooooooaaaaaannnnnnnhhhhhh”, the long distance trains shriek, as they speed through the night. They sound like huge, metallic dinosaurs lost in the winter night fog, desperately trying to find their way back to the rest of the herd. The train lines are quite far away from where I live, about two miles, but the sound carries at night, when all is quiet. It is a sound that never fails to thrill me.
I have reasons for loving trains. When I was a small boy, air travel was nowhere near as ubiquitous or inexpensive as it is today. Every time my parents wanted to go on a vacation, we piled onto a train. We usually vacationed in winter, and travelled to places far away. This meant preparing for the train trip days in advance. My dad, with his usual precision and eye for detail, would make long lists of what needed to be taken along for the trip. For my mother and him, travelling anywhere meant days of advance preparation. It felt more like an expedition than a vacation. But that was all part of the experience. My parents are still amazed at how I pack for a trip (my packing takes no more than thirty minutes). For them, travelling involved a lot of preparation – material and mental.
Winter is the best time for travelling by train in India. The weather is great, and the early morning fog adds an element of romance and mystery to any train trip, especially if you are travelling in North India. Take a look out of your train compartment on a winter morning anywhere in North India, and you will feel like you have stepped into the pages of a Raj-era E.M. Forster novel.
I still have so many vivid memories of travelling by train in winter. Some of them are permanently etched in my mind. Watching the towering Howrah Bridge materialize out of thin air as the train pulled into Howrah Station on a Calcutta winter morning is one such memory. I guarantee you that the first sight of Howrah Bridge from the train will leave you speechless. It looks like a flawless structure, a shiny beast straight out of a science fiction movie.
Another such memory is that of the great Sanchi Stupa outside the little town of Vidisha in Central India. When travelling from Mumbai (Bombay) to Delhi on the Central Railway, you will suddenly see the “chhatra” or roof of the main Sanchi Stupa rising from behind the tree-line by the side of the tracks. The roof of the Stupa appears to float in mid-air, thanks to the heavy early morning fog. The Stupa is a marvellous complex of buildings dating back to the third century B.C. Its construction was started in the reign of Ashoka the Great – India’s greatest king. The Stupa is part of the living history of India, and in my opinion, should qualify as one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. The contrast of the Stupa seemingly floating in mid-air, with the emerald-green fields of Central India as a backdrop, is stunning, and is something that will stay with you for a long time.
Unfortunately, steam powered trains are a thing of the past. These engines were once the backbone of the Indian Railways and were very much in service until about twenty years ago, especially on the smaller and lesser known train routes. Watching several steam powered engines huff and puff their way into the railway sheds in Lucknow is another enduring memory of my childhood. When you travelled in a train pulled by a steam powered engine, you knew that travelling could be a pretty tiring and strenuous affair. You could sense the little engine giving it all it had, as the soot from the coal fired engine settled on your clothes. It took a long while for the engine to finally get up to high speed, by which time it was groaning and gasping for breath. When the train finally pulled into a station, you heard the little engine exhale, and take a break from its labours. It was truly fascinating stuff, in my opinion.
Steam engines are no longer in service on the Indian Railways. They have become extinct and gone the way of the dodo. There may be a steam engine heaven somewhere, where these sturdy engines built more than a century ago frolic and play. If so, I would like to go there when I die. The one steam engine that is still in service is the one going up to Himalayan mountain town of Darjeeling, in Northern West Bengal. This little engine, more than a hundred years old, is lovingly preserved and taken care of, and is still in daily use. Travelling on that train is one of the things I intend doing before I die. The sight of the world’s third highest peak, Kanchenjunga, wreathed in clouds as it first appears from the train, is something I would not want to miss.
Of course, Indian train stations tend to be unhygienic, crowded, chaotic places. Watching a crowd of travellers at an Indian railway station, writer Paul Theroux remarked that they looked like “a crowd of lazy refugees fleeing an ambiguous catastrophe”. That pretty much sums it up.
Apart from the real pleasures, sights and sounds of train travel, there is also another factor that is responsible for my love of trains. As a child, train travel for me meant vacations, a change from the mundane and routine. It meant pleasurable anticipation, and a chance to leave one’s boring and sometimes difficult life behind for the irresistible charm of new places and adventures. Like Jimi Hendrix once sang:
“I hear my train a’comin’
Comin’ to take me
From this lonesome town”
I know what Jimi meant. Trains were a way to reinvent oneself; a way to new adventures and a new life; a way to leave behind those parts of yourself that you did not like; a new start.
Air travel doesn’t have the same appeal. Even today, when I feel uncertain or apprehensive about the future, I convince myself that I am in between trains. Sooner or later, my train is going to pull into the station and take me away from this lonesome town.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Music: Why it means so much
I was playing the first self-titled album by the band Traffic last night. For those who have not heard it, this album from 1968 is a classic. Alternately sombre and light-hearted, loud and melodic, it is a tour de force by Steve Winwood and the rest of the band. Winwood’s vocals never sounded so urgent. Dave Mason’s understated guitar work is brilliant, Jim Capaldi’s angular drumming is spot-on, and the lyrics are profound, yet self-effacing. It is rock, it is blues, it is folk, it is jazz. Like a lot of great music, it is hard to categorize.
Listening to the album had an entirely unexpected effect on my wife. Ten minutes into the album, I saw her sitting in a corner looking very thoughtful. I asked her whether she was bored by the music, since rock music for her is still an acquired taste (I do not blame her, considering the amount of taste she has had to acquire for it – I play so much of it). She said she wasn’t bored. In fact, she liked the album. She had another question on her mind entirely. What, she said, would the next generation of kids listen to, now that most modern music is so inconsequential and pointless?
I paused, with my glass of rum and coke half-way to my lips. I was floored. I did not expect the music to have that effect on her. I wasn’t prepared for the question, which was a very good one. “Well”, I said, “I am sure there still are some good new bands out there. Maybe we just aren’t aware of them, old fogeys that we are” (or I am anyway). Besides, in terms of my tastes in music and other references to popular culture, I am a throwback to the 1960s. I am hardly representative of my own generation; forget about kids who are much younger than me.
But the question was still a very valid one, and I started thinking of why exactly music has played such a huge influence in my life. I consider myself an expert on rock music – not just the music or lyrics, but what the music represents. For example, I can tell you what the Who classic “Won’t Get Fooled Again” means. Written and released in 1971, it is about the souring of the social revolution of the 1960s. Drugs, idealism and a naïve belief in loving everybody else on the planet isn’t going to work, the singer cautions; don’t get fooled again!
And then I realized that for me, music has always stood for a lot more than just a tune or a lyric. In many cases, it has captured my feelings in ways that I could not. Great rock and classical music reminds me of what my dreams in life once were. It reminds me of how I used to be before (like everyone else) I was forced to compromise and dilute some of my beliefs to get ahead in this world. It reminds me of everything out there that is still pure and free. It reminds me not to take anything at face value; to question everything. Rejecting easy answers to complex questions is the easy part. Sometimes (and a great art form like music tells you this), there just are no answers to the difficult questions life throws at us. Sometimes when life gets hard, there is no redeeming pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. You just have to grin and bear it.
Of course, this was not always the case. In my youth, I thought the best way to deal with the blues was to listen to Led Zeppelin’s “No Quarter” at very high volume, preferably with my choice of intoxicants and stimulants close at hand. It felt great for a little while, but at the end of the song, my problems still didn’t go away. Much later, I realized that the music in itself gave you a high. You really didn’t need anything else to go with it.
The music itself can capture what you feel, your hopes, dreams and apprehensions; in many cases, music captures it better than you can yourself. Music is also that last free, pure, unadulterated place in my soul – that last piece of paradise within me. It is mine! I am very selfish as far as guarding that space is concerned. Dig it, baby.
Of course, music has also been responsible for me meeting and getting to know many of my closest and truest friends. An initial conversation would go something like this: Me - “What do you like to listen to, man?” Friend – “Well, I like Creedence Clearwater Revival and the Clash”. Me – “Really? Well, we should get together sometime and listen to “Guns of Brixton”. Friend – “Yeah, that sounds like a plan”. And that is how many of my most valued friendships have started. Recently, when a close friend of mine saw the Who in concert in Los Angeles and brought back a t-shirt of the band for me, I was ecstatic. Yes, band t-shirts still make me happy, ok?
Coming back to the question my wife raised; Will the next generation of kids have their own representative bands, making music that reflects their hopes and fears? I do not know. What I do know is for me, so many years later, the music I first heard twenty-five years ago as a boy still matters. And I have a feeling that I will still feel this way even if I live to be eighty.
I realise this has been a “heavy” blog. I promise that the next one will be a much lighter one!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
