Amit man, I love the content you put out; I probably am within the first 50 people who watch 'Everything is Everything' once it is uploaded, but what is the update on your books? I've been waiting for it for years now.
Amit, the section where you just start on price control immediately reminded me of a beautiful quote by Jake Gyllenhall in the brilliant movie Nightcrawler - ‘The true price of any item is what somebody is willing to pay for it.’
Ajay, you remind me so much of one of the smartest people I've had the good fortune of meeting. Prof. Sebastian Morris, whose economics class was dreaded, and whose philosophy course was always fully subscribed at IIMA.
Interesting podcast! I happened to watch the episode only now & the idea of staying away from luxury beliefs totally makes sense. Specifically on the question on poverty vs inequality, in my view, say from India’s point of view removing poverty is obviously is the priority no 1 for the next couple of decades and when try to think about how to go about eliminating the poverty, one of the areas that needs fix is inequality. Country like India cannot afford blatant inequality as that will trigger social unrest which doesn’t help anyone. So it is important as we look at growth as the path to eliminating poverty, we need to look at models that enables workers to get a part of company stocks like senior management.
Isn't Pro business crony capitalism also a function of extreme wealth concentration in society? When a handful of businesses/promoters control 20/30% of gdp, their access to power is immense. Poverty alleviation is the key but so is cultivating greater disconnect between wealth and access to power. The issue of wealth Inequality cannot be ignored without this issue being addressed.
This is why we keep stressting that pro-business and pro-markets are opposite terms. Cronyism is a huge problem, and at the core of it is the coercive power of the state. To imagine that the state is the solution, and not the problem itself, is also a luxury belief of sorts.
@@amitvarmaRuchir Sharmas recent book ‘What went wrong with Capitalism’ talks about this too. Pro business is not pro capitalism. The latter involves creative destruction at every level.
Very interesting conversation. The most difficult thing to do is saying "I don't know enough about this matter, so I do not have an opinion." As far inequality goes, it has always existed and always will. As you rightly said the priority is to uplift people to a certain standard of living. It is important have a clear path marked out, which is easily accessible for a poor person to uplift himself/herself out of poverty. That means availability of quality education, nutrition and healthcare at practically no cost. Unless these conditions are created and maintained, a poor person can only see the display of wealth without any hope of being ever part of it creating resentment. If theres is clear and accessible path out of poverty, the same Inequality can create aspiration.
Hey, Amit and Ajay! Just a bunch of thoughts.... I wanted to know your opinion on how much do you think individuals action from "free will", societal priveleges and true luck/chance contribute individually to wealth generation? I understand for every individual it might be different percentages of the above but is there a overall framework to understand generally what might be each's contribution. Dont you think in current scenario across the world, even in a relatively free market economy, disruption happens through people with elite backgrounds in terms of wealth and/or knowledge (not in a critical sense but as an observation)? How can these elite communities become more diverse in its members naturally and not through a coerced sense? I think any society at any point of time will never have equality and there will be elites but how can this be as diverse as possible with contridicting views working in their self interests to improve overall competition and at the same time represent the interests of their groups. Also wanted to know your take on diversity and inclusivity, can markets be coerced into preferring it? Though it is the right thing to do! How can we naturally incentivise diversity and inclusion? Also In Service Of The Republic is my no1 book recommendation to anyone I meet... :)
Amit and Ajay, thank you for this conversation. How would you view “Degrowth” and similar concepts for developed western societies who don’t have to deal with poverty? (unlike India, where you believe growth is essential)
I think that social stress goes up when growth is weak. It is in the nature of human society to get growth. There will always be saving and there will always be technical change. This will be greater than population decline. The natural state is growth.
Amit, I hear you repeatedly saying "India is a poor country" but in contrast I see you scoop on the elite communities of India, you talk about economics that establish the dynamics of Indian economics, you are in touch with the creamy layer people of India...what am I missing here. All that we enjoy today is a result of India being a resourceful country. What am I missing here?
@Ajay, on the point of collaborating with the strongman. What option do business leaders have once the strongman is in power? After all, masses voted strongman to power. They have to collaborate, though unwillingly, else risk themselves become the target of state coercion. And strongman has no personal benefit to fix rule of law!
Hi Amit and Ajay, thanks for a great show. Have been a a regular listener.My largely uneducated opinion is that I agree with your luxury beliefs on the left side of the spectrum. But I think in general your opinions about socially unregulated sex, drugs and betting is also probably a luxury belief which mainly affects the poor and uneducated. And i think, Rob Henderson also agrees with me.
The point is all these things will happen even if they are illegal, through mafias. Second agents of the state will just take bribes to let you do what you want. The real solutions lie elsewhere.
Hi @amit great video! Can you link some papers of studies that prove that wealth and prosperity is not a zero-sum game, i believe in this but my friend doesn't so i want to show some resources.
As a libertarian socialist, I reject the notion that socialism is inherently tied to state coercion and ownership. In fact, libertarian socialism advocates for a decentralised, cooperative society where the means of production are democratically owned and controlled by the workers themselves, rather than being concentrated in the hands of the state. Instead, decision-making power would be more evenly distributed among workers and citizens. In fact, a true libertarian society would aim to eliminate coercive systems like the capitalist model of labour. The value of a product, the profit of a product, is a surplus value generated by the labor of the workers, and it is consumed unethically by the capitalist. The worker in this system doesn't consume their own labor, the capitalist class consumes the workers' labor. Therefore the worker cannot consume the full value of the product. The worker cannot therefore self-consume under capitalism which is what makes the capitalist system morally unjustifiable
Honestly a lot of the references given by Amit and Ajay are usually quite Western for me, I'm not aware of them most of the times. But must say I really enjoy this show, I randomly saw an episode on the Papers that changed the world, and realised that I landed on gold. Good show guys, keep going. Thoda Western ki jagah Indian references dedo pls.
Thank you for your interest. Once you have seen a few episodes, you would see that we're basically curious about the world and we live in India. Are the ideas and recommendations things that stir your mind? :-) That's what we're trying to do.
@@ajayshah5705 Yes Sir, its a fantastic show, so many ideas for stimulation. Just sometimes the relatability is less but thats ok. Btw, Sir I have read your book "In service of the republic", at first I didn't realize you were THAT Ajay Shah xD.
@@user-ng5xr2ju2z :) It's great that you have read the book. In this show you will see many connections into those ideas. (And, the end notes of the book have a lot of the modern understanding-India-literature). In EiE we are trying to be more accessible than the book. Please see www.mayin.org/ajayshah also.
@@ajayshah5705 Sure Sir. Small Request- I also want to learn about the professional economist side of you, if you could do some episodes where you go in detail about your work on the Indian Economy, policy issues, how you handled various govt/policy related assignments(maybe some fun stories about that)-proper hardcore economics basically. If you could do such episodes once in a while, would be terrific. Thank You
अमितजी, में तो हमेशा आपकी तारीफ करता रहता हूं कमेंट्स सेक्शन में। मैं हमेशा आप और अजय सर की वह-वह करता हूं। लेकिन इस विषय पर में निराश हो गया। जिसको आप luxury beliefs कहते हैं, उन्ही विचारों ने भारत को बचाया। अगर समाजवाद न होता, आज हमारी अवस्था पाकिस्तान की तरह होती। जब भारत और पाकिस्तान आज़ाद हुए तब हमारी अर्थ व्यवस्था पर जमींदारों की मज़बूत पकड़ थी। उन्होंने ही भारत के विकास को रोका। अंग्रेज से बढ़कर इन जमींदारों ने ही भारत को गरीब बनाया। आजादी के बाद, कई सारे प्रदेश सरकारों ने भूमि सुधार का कानून बनाया और उससे जमींदारों की दबदबा को खत्म किया। तभी हम एक मुक्त बाज़ार की स्थापना कर पाए। पाकिस्तान में यह सब कुछ नहीं किया। उन्होंने अमेरिका की गुलामी स्वीकार कर ली और पूंजीवाद को अपनाया। और हम आज उसका नतीजा देख सकते हैं। नमस्ते
I couldn’t understand why growth can't happen while keeping inequality muted. In many societies, including ours, a significant portion of growth stems from crony capitalism, or at least government complicity with the moneyed class. I am not advocating for perfect equality, but I am definitely arguing against extreme galloping inequality. You should also not discount the effect of relative poverty (inequality), as it cultivates mistrust in society. The 'Adanification' of society is both economically and morally bad. Extreme inequality not only diminishes the beauty of society but also fosters a master-slave configuration, perpetuating societal divisions. A healthy society is one where millionaires abound and not where few billionaires take advantage of the system & mock others. How can a nation idolize or even tolerate an Adani!
As we explained in the episode, poverty and inequality will inevitably go in opposite directions when growth happens in a country like India. So you have to choose which you want to tackle. In India, our moral imperative is to reduce poverty.
@@amitvarma Some countries have achieved economic growth with relatively low levels of inequality. Examples include the Nordic countries, where strong social policies and labor market regulations help ensure that growth benefits a broad segment of society. Investments in human capital - education, skills training, and healthcare - can promote more inclusive growth. When a broader base of the population has access to these resources, it can participate more fully in the economy, reducing inequality. In summary, while economic growth comes with a risk of increasing inequality, it is not an inevitable outcome. It may be possible to achieve economic growth that benefits a wider range of the population through right policy intervention or at least by avoiding crony capitalism. I am not batting for perfect equality but only for a tolerable inequality.
I wonder whether an ism of any sort is highly dependant on who's running it. For eg where is pure capitalism in play? Secondly, having robust minimalist state intervention and liberty on all else, is liberalism, then what level of people maturity needed?
Amit, Would you consider bringing Prabhat Patnaik on your show one day please. I see all your points in the perspective you outline but a contrarian thought does exist. Did you listen to the recent talk of Prabhat Patnaik where he says that present Indian politics was in essence fascism but neoliberals were refusing to call this so because it was their own creation on purpose. The capitalists wanted to enervate the economic have-nots class which was rising against it with force. The capitalists/corporates created Hindutva hoodlums and Hindutva politics so that energy of economic have-nots is dissipated in fighting with Hindutva and the capitalists continue without being challenged.
The great depression of 1929 led to the downfall of capitalism and rise of socialism, and this attracted Indian old timers towards the latter as it showed remarkable progress in soviet countries. However, India took to "democratic" socialism not socialism per se. People mistake it for Marx's Socialism, na not the case though :) u guys are 🤗
Mr shah can zoning laws like residential area and agricultural, industrial land be thought of like luxury beliefs? Height restrictions. Is urban planning not a top down utopian belief.
The recipe is. Where is the market failure? Using the coercive power of the state in certain ways may be useful when faced with market failure. Otherwise, freedom (absence of state) is the best. There is a role for (correctly done) town planning.
Can inequality be seen as a source of coercion through the concentration of influence? It is then not about wealth per se, an individual or family can have enough to live comfortably, but about the larger structures of choice that get controlled by a small group of people or interests. I can understand Amit's frustrations with dinner party elitism, or ngo pontificating, and that to start with atleast poverty and inequity go in opposite directions as the poor become better off and the rich get richer in a growth driven paradigm, but it is also elitism to accept the worsening of inequality as collateral damage for improving poverty or growth. How is coercion not made worse by increasing inequity, in the real world?
Hey but i was thinking wealth distribution via inheritance is not that bad of a idea. Suppose if 1 farmer has 10,000 goats instead of 1 , in that case distribution might make sense. In an ideal world , billionaires should not exist since they should be paying enormous amounts of taxes but these people always find a way of legal loophole in the system to avoid taxes.That's why i believe that inheritance tax should exist but only at 0.001% richest population (for example people having more than 100 crore in wealth)and tax rate could be upto max of 30%. In this way we aren't completely stripping away everything from a child while maintaining equality.
While this is indeed a great episode and it may sound heretical, I wonder if "consent" or "freedom" are also such a set of luxury beliefs? One could argue with some merit that an average person in China has way less of both consent and freedom than someone in India, but they enjoy perhaps a better day to day quality of life.
Amit, I know you didn't know this, but your parents also kept a 2nd name of yours secret from you. Today I will reveal that to you. It was "EYE-OPENER"!
The past few years that propagated these ideas of luxury beliefs was caused by a generalized conviction that someone else is doing the thinking and that individuals don’t need to think deeper about not just themselves but of those around them. Which allows them to build up hollow religion-powered moralistic benchmarks through which they judge everyone else. If anything, what we need is degrowth of faux pride. OMG you guys stop making me want to rant.
