Sei sulla pagina 1di 3

Demonetization:

Against:

 We have to wait for the full evolution of the data, the costs have been upfront, there’s a lot pain
have been suffered by the formal sector, job losses
 Populace has suffered and growth has been subsidized.
 The growth has come down from 8 to 6.5 while the world economy is rising.

For:

 Better tax compliance, with the help of data.


 Helps reducing the inspector Raj.
 Digital transaction has gone up that helped in the compliance.

Nationalist zeal

Against:

 It is inward looking and generally the policies are against growth rather than towards it.
 Divisive, not patriotic and weaken rather than strengthen the country.
 Strong communities has started protesting for reservation that they need it, although thjat’s not
required (ultimately it’s about job losses).

For:

 Majority community feeling aggrieved that it has been discriminated.


 Should not neglect the demands but listen and carefully analyze the core problems and that
mostly is economic.

Solution: We should look at long term broader based economic growth.

Democracy

 Illiberal democracy or elected democrats are threat as they are lopsided towards one
community and the potential for mistakes increases.
 Democracy has a culture of throwing the rascals out.
 It is the system that need to be tackled as the whole system gets along the illiberal democracy

Aadhar Card:

Against:

 Supreme court asked that how much should the state know.?
 The data should not be misused and taken for the betterment of any organization or any
individual.

For:

 A state which doesn’t have info, an incompetent state is also problematic.


 We don’t know where people have their money, we can’t go for tax compliance.
 Poor salary tax payer is at loss

Solution: We need professional organizations manning this data that how much should be in the ambit
of the government.

Openness: India vs China:

 We have to look at the difference at where they have started and where we have started,
majorly two difference.
 First, they started with a much better educated population, although the per capita gdp was
similar but the educational penetration was much better there than here.
 Second, we have democracy they didn’t.
 These initial starting points do make a difference.
 They were much better at building infrastructure, because of the authoritarian government and
picking investment led growth.
 They had a splendid shift from export led growth to focusing on consumer demand led growth
 We were behind them due to some necessary constraints such as land acquisition imposed by
democracy.
 We can work on these, these are not insurmountable issues, but it’s not openness that damped
us.
 In the long run democratic way is more sustainable and more humane, we should carry on with
these while working on issues like land acquisition.

Bad loans, stressin banking sector:

Against:

 Supreme court asked that how much should the state know.?
 The data should not be misused and taken for the betterment of any organization or any
individual.

For:

 A state which doesn’t have info, an incompetent state is also problematic.


 We don’t know where people have their money, we can’t go for tax compliance.
 Poor salary tax payer is at loss

Solution: We need professional organizations manning this data that how much should be in the ambit

Net Neutrality:

 The idea, principle or requirement that ISPs (internet service providers) should or must provide
access and treat all internet data as the same regardless of its type, destination or source.
 User access all types of data, be it static written content, videos, games or websites, it should be
worked on the same speed and there should be no discrepancy in this regard from providers
side.
 This is a debate between Business viability and Public access. if we are supporting Net Neutrality
then, we are for public good, public access, but will it hurt business?

For:

 Preferential bandwidth will be provided to particular websites and those will be charged by the
ISPs, eg Netflix will be charged by Airtel for providing extra bandwidth but Netflix will charge
more to the customers and eventually customers will have to foot the bill and will be at loss. So,
preferential treatement is risky

 ISPs can restrict content and websites on their wish. Eg, if they restrict a govt website on the
day of form filling and they ask for extra fee then we have to give it because then it will be
completely legal to do that, but consumer will be at great loss.

 Censorship, isp can restrict particular content and this freedom of expression will be hindered.

 Small and New companies will be at disadvantage, innovation will be impacted and the culture
of entrepreneurship will be at risk. As the smaller companies will not be able to give the isps the
money they need for preferential access and thus their content will be restricted or slowed
down.

 ISPs Monopoly.

Against:

 Large population in developing nations which are without connectivity.


 Rural broadband infrastructure is very poor and non-existent in many places and thus
requires a huge amount of investment.
 Out of 130 crore people in india, 42 crore have access to mobile data, rest have the mobile
phones but not have the internet access ability , so isp are providing them free access, then
what is the harm in that?
 No real neutrality in other sectors as well, like all the cars can access the highways, but
different cars have different taxes and thus it is also differential.
 Electric tariffs are different depending on the amount of units we use.

Potrebbero piacerti anche