Monday, 29 April 2019

Government is a parasite

Government is a parasite.  Its sole capability is to perpetuate itself by feeding on and debilitating its hosts. Government’s host, human society, permits government to feed off it in exchange for social order i.e. government can reduce the harm one individual or a group can do to other innocent individuals. 
  • Government can do nothing without first taking something from someone else. The bigger government grows, the more it takes, and the more it takes the more it saps the vitality of its hosts.  
  • Politicians and lawyers pretend that they are important people doing important work. But often they're important because they are parasites. They feed off others, while creating no wealth of their own.
  • Every merchant must offer us something we want in order to get our money. But that's not true for politicians and their businessman cronies. They get to use government force to grab our money. The parasite economy thrives wherever "you use the law to get something you couldn't get voluntarily in the marketplace."
  • The more parasitic government saps the vitality of its hosts, the more the hosts resist. The more the hosts resist, the more government is compelled to visit force and violence upon the hosts to subdue them.
  • Government invariably ends up spending a large and ever increasing amount of the energy it sucks from its hosts, thus subduing them. It becomes a host-destructive, and self-destructive, spiral for the host population and the parasitic government. 
  • If Government got its spending under control, it would not need to pick our pockets. 
  • Government’s appetite is unlimited, and majoritarian democracies in particular lack the self-discipline to limit their feeding to the optimal level that would preserve the vitality of the hosts.  
  • Government also infects its hosts by transmitting all manner of ancillary social and economic diseases and disorders that further diminish the hosts’ vitality. 
  • Governments have developed survival strategies to overcome their self-destructive gluttony by evolving into what biologists call a hyperparasite - a parasite that hosts another parasite - and by transforming itself into a predator capable of preying upon humans outside the host population. Government-parasite-turned-predator is called “empire.” Government as hyperparasite is called the “welfare state.”
  • Government in its hyper-parasitic state sucks the sustenance from one group of human hosts within society to provide nourishment to another group of human hosts. Hyper-parasitic government feeds excessively off the more nutritious (productive) segment of society to nourish the less productive segment, from which it parasitizes less than it returns in nourishment.
  • This host-farm, redistribution strategy also has the added benefit of providing parasitic politicians sufficient votes to ward off any revolt of the hosts.
  • Eventually the productive hosts will cease to produce sufficient to nourish the rest of society adequately. At this point, hyper-parasitic government begins to starve its human hosts to death.
  • More and more people and groups are now a days whining and complaining as they demand that the government declare them to be clean and righteous. 
By using euphemisms and spin, the Government tries to hide the truth. If the Government cleaned up its own act, it might one day be able to give some money back, so its mates could spend their own hard earned money in the way they know is best for them. Sadly, none of the major parties seem to know what true mate-ship looks like, because real mates don’t force mates to hand over hard-earned money.

Government is not the solution to our problem; 
government is the problem - Ronald Reagan 

There is nothing fair about a tax that is effectively a fine for doing well. 

We have no government armed with power capable of contending 
with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. 
Our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people. 
It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other -  John Adams

Metaphorically, government is a parasite and we are its host. We support it and pump it up. When the parasite grows bigger than the host, the host will die. It's a logical conclusion. Every human dysfunction, every deviant behavior and even lawlessness feeds this parasite. Since the parasite is not allowed to judge, nor apply any moral discernment to its process and all the crooked things get guarded and shielded by politics. The host with awareness of conscience now lives in unease of the larger parasite that lives conscience-free.

Saturday, 27 April 2019

General election 2019 blues

This is a waveless election (2019) wherein the preference or dismissal of a leader and issues seem to be pre-determined by the social background (caste and community) of voters. 
  • The BJP  won 31% of the vote with 282 seats nationally in 2014. This is the highest vote to seat conversion indicating heaviest fragmentation of the anti-BJP votes. Plain arithmetic suggests that if all major non-BJP forces come together, the Modi machine will halt.
  • Today BJP today rules 17 of 29 states (a year ago 21/29 states), either directly or with its allies. Despite BJP's countrywide presence, it is also true that the opposition has been winning most of the Lok Sabha by-elections which is a sign of defeat for the Modi-Shah combine in these elections.
  • Anti Modi factors are: Demonetisation, GST, cow vigilante  lynchings, agrarian crisis, unemployment, inflation, cattle trade ban, etc.
  • Pro Modi factors: Good governance, divided opposition, Balakot airstrike, surgical strikes, absence of major scams, etc. Factors such as welfare schemes like the PM Awas Yojana, Ujjwala Yojana (free LPG cylinder connection to BPL families), Rs 2,000 to the farmers, are secondary reasons for BJP.
  • BJP which won in UP (71/80 seats), Rajasthan (25/25), Gujarat (26/26), Bihar (31/40), MP (27/29), Chattisgarh (10/11), Maharashtra (22/48) and Karnataka (17/28), in 2014, may lose most of these seats in 2019. 
  • There is no perceptible Modi “wave” this time and the muscular nationalism plank that the BJP banks on fails to evoke the required response in the face of widespread agrarian crisis.
  • The public resentment against the BJP governments is glaringly evident even though some believe that Modi has no alternative. It is also clear the BJP is not adding any new constituency of voters. The trends point to a clear reduction of the BJP’s tally from its commanding position of 2014. 
  • Stung by the failure of the campaign based on muscular nationalism in the early phases of voting, the BJP desperately looks for new strategies and altered roadmaps, with emphasis on Hindutva. The candidature of the Malegaon blast accused, Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, in Bhopal against Digvijaya singh is a major step towards Hindutva consolidation.
  • Modi's election campaign is increasingly looking like his style of governance over the last five years, particularly the manner in which demonetization and GST were pursued. A new narrative every day, with new reasoning and strategies along with altered road maps to attain a proclaimed objective. This could also lead to results as chaotic as demonetization and GST produced.
  • Congress party has scored some vital points in terms of ideation of new policy initiatives and programmes, but has failed to follow this up with solid organisational initiatives and electoral strategies.
  • In Uttar Pradesh, multiple narratives are impacting the election in different ways. BJP's candidate's weaker profile as compared to BSP-SP-RLD alliance is widely acknowledged.
  • People are not interested in communal issues but have economic concerns. The BJP had impar­ted a larger-than-life cult image to Modi. Even now they are projecting him as a lone lion in the jungle versus the rest. This is not going to work now.
  • Had even a single person been killed in Pakistan by our our strikes, would they have returned Wing Commander Abhinandan in one single piece within days? Is Imran Khan not answerable to the people of Pakistan? So how did Amit Shah claim we killed 250 Pakistanis!” -- Raj Thackeray 
  • EVM's are neither easy to tamper with and at the same time not tamper proof. Its non-transparent mechanism gives scope for losing candidate to think that EVM has been tampered with. Unless public confidence is earned, EVM will remain a contentious issue. EC telling that EVMs are perfect without explaining how they are perfect is nonsense.
  • This election is not about who wins but to ensure that the BJP loses so that the nation survives. “We will take on each other later.”  -- Raj Thackeray 
  • Mukesh Ambani had recently extended his support to Congress candidate Milind Deora in South Mumbai constituency. Raj Thackeray called this shift in Ambani’s loyalty from BJP to Congress is a big message to the country. Ambani is Uddhav Thackeray’s close friend but decided to side with a Congress candidate is a clear indication that Modi is heading towards defeat.
As things stand today, a weak opposition is Modi’s biggest strength and he is likely to benefit from the TINA (there is no alternative) factor the most, with other positives contributing towards making him virtually unassailable. Reactions from the echelons of the Sangh Parivar after the first two rounds of polling point towards a sense of unease. Many leaders admit that there is a possibility that the BJP would only win half the seats it had in 2014. 

Jammu and Kashmir Governor Satya Pal Malik’s act of dissolving the Assembly when three non-BJP political parties in the State were on the verge of forming a coalition government is of a piece with the systematic undermining of democratic polity. Modi unleashing CBI, ED, Income Tax etc on all anti-BJP parties terrorizing opposing candidates and immobilizing their associates is gross misuse of institutions which are supposed work autonomously. In order to safeguard democracy it is important that Modi & BJP must be defeated in this 2019 elections and be watchful that future governments don't follow the same path. 

Friday, 26 April 2019

CJI in sexual harassment case

Open Letter to the Bar Council of India

To the Chairman of Bar Council of India

April 21, 2019

Respected Sir,

There is nothing more pivotal to the Indian democracy and to the Indian Constitution than the rule of law. And the very essence of rule of law is that the law of the land is above everyone, including the judges of the Supreme Court of India.

The manner in which the Supreme Court dealt with the allegations of sexual harassment made against the sitting Chief Justice of India (CJI Ranjan Gogoi) by a former woman employee of the Supreme Court deeply undermines the foundations of our Constitution and flies in the face of the rule of law.

According to the Supreme Court’s “In-House Procedure” that sets out procedure to deal with allegations of sexual harassment, an Inquiry Committee must have taken cognizance of the complaint and initiated inquiry proceedings after giving notice to the respondent (the CJI in this case).

However, that did not happen. Instead, the CJI, in exercise of his administrative powers, constituted a “special” Bench of his choosing (including himself) to respond to the allegations. What ensued on Saturday (April 20) morning in the Supreme Court is nothing short of a travesty of justice.

The CJI used his constitutional office to respond to and deny personal allegations of sexual harassment in the open court, made oral remarks vilifying the complainant, termed the allegations a high-level conspiracy against the judiciary, and discreetly attempted to silence the media. Both the Attorney General and the Solicitor General indulged in character-assassination of the complainant. And all this was done in the absence of the complainant, who was not given any prior notice of the hearing.

Shockingly, you, as the Chairman of the Bar Council of India, have endorsed what happened in the Supreme Court on Saturday morning. You have been quoted by PTI as saying: “These are all false and cooked-up allegations and we condemn these kinds of acts. These kinds of allegations and actions should not be encouraged. This is an attempt to malign the institution. Entire bar is standing in solidarity with the Chief Justice of India.”

As lawyers, we are deeply concerned about preserving and facilitating the cause of justice and protecting the very democratic and constitutional ideals that we profess and stand for. We feel compelled to write to you to say that you, as the Chairman of the Bar Council of India, do not represent the views of the bar in the instant matter, and most certainly, do not speak for the undersigned lawyers.

Without commenting on the merits (or otherwise) of the allegations made against the CJI, we believe (and we hope there are many other lawyers who concede) that a high-powered independent inquiry must be held to look into the allegations to maintain the credibility of the institution and repose public trust in the judiciary. Through this letter, we, as members of the legal profession, unequivocally condemn and distance ourselves from the unconstitutional stand taken by the Bar Council of India in the instant case for reasons outlined below.

  1. Two basic principles are central to the doctrine of natural justice. The first is “no man shall be a judge of his own case” and the second is “hear the other side”. The CJI has shown disregard to both these principles. Under no circumstance should the CJI have been a part of the Bench, nor should he have used his constitutional office to respond to personal allegations of sexual harassment
  2. The CJI should have promptly referred the complaint to the Supreme Court’s Internal Complaints Committee, headed by Justice Indu Malhotra. In not doing so, the CJI has exhibited disdain for an independent inquiry upon the allegations of sexual harassment made against him
  3. Judicial independence does not imply freedom from accountability. The allegations of sexual harassment, made in a sworn affidavit with specific details, cannot be conveniently dismissed as being “wild”, “scandalous”, or politically motivated.

In light of the above, we urge you to withdraw your comments as a mark of respect and honor to the fundamental principles and norms of our constitutional democracy. 

One of the primary functions of the Bar Council of India is to promote and support law and judicial reform, not impede it. The Bar Council of India must be mindful of its true purpose and existence.

(Note: We have learnt that The Women in Criminal Law Association (WCLA) have issued a statement demanding fair inquiry into the sexual harassment allegations against the CJI. We endorse and adopt the stand taken by the WCLA.)

Yours sincerely,

Ashish Goel, Lawyer
Enrolment No: D/1333/2012

Gautam Bhatia, Lawyer
Enrolment No. D/2290/2012

The essence of democracy is that the rule of the law is above all. CJI facing sexual harassment charges constituting bench headed by himself and filled with other two friends to deal with the allegations is unjust & untenable. (Already judiciary appointments by extra-constitutional collegium functioning in most non-transparent manner is an irritant in this largest democracy). The procedure applicable for common man in similar situations must be applied to CJI or anybody and everybody in this country, no matter how much taller he is. There can't be different sets laws for different sections of society. All vip privileges must be withdrawn and all citizens must be at par everywhere without qualifiers or positions or situations. CJI instead of subjecting himself to investigation and coming out clean invoking political statements like "Judiciary under threat" etc is unacceptable non-sense.

Saturday, 20 April 2019

Prayer by an aging person

Prayer of an Anonymous Abbess:
Lord, thou knowest better than myself that I am growing older and will soon be old. Keep me from becoming too talkative, and especially from the unfortunate habit of thinking that I must say something on every subject and at every opportunity.

Release me from the idea that I must straighten out other peoples' affairs. With my immense treasure of experience and wisdom, it seems a pity not to let everybody partake of it. But thou knowest, Lord, that in the end I will need a few friends.

Keep me from the recital of endless details; give me wings to get to the point.

Grant me the patience to listen to the complaints of others; help me to endure them with charity. But seal my lips on my own aches and pains -- they increase with the increasing years and my inclination to recount them is also increasing.

I will not ask thee for improved memory, only for a little more humility and less self-assurance when my own memory doesn't agree with that of others. Teach me the glorious lesson that occasionally I may be wrong.

Keep me reasonably gentle. I do not have the ambition to become a saint -- it is so hard to live with some of them -- but a harsh old person is one of the devil's masterpieces.

Make me sympathetic without being sentimental, helpful but not bossy. Let me discover merits where I had not expected them, and talents in people whom I had not thought to possess any. And, Lord, give me the grace to tell them so.

- Margot Benary-Isbert

Abraham Lincoln’s letter to his son's teacher

“My son starts school today. It is all going to be strange and new to him for a while and I wish you would treat him gently. It is an adventure that might take him across continents. All adventures that probably include wars, tragedy and sorrow. To live this life will require faith, love and courage.

So dear Teacher, will you please take him by his hand and teach him things he will have to know, teaching him – but gently, if you can. Teach him that for every enemy, there is a friend. He will have to know that all men are not just, that all men are not true. But teach him also that for every scoundrel there is a hero, that for every crooked politician, there is a dedicated leader.

Teach him if you can that 10 cents earned is of far more value than a dollar found. In school, teacher, it is far more honorable to fail than to cheat. Teach him to learn how to gracefully lose, and enjoy winning when he does win.

Teach him to be gentle with people, tough with tough people. Steer him away from envy if you can and teach him the secret of quiet laughter. Teach him if you can – how to laugh when he is sad, teach him there is no shame in tears. Teach him there can be glory in failure and despair in success. Teach him to scoff at cynics.

Teach him if you can the wonders of books, but also give time to ponder the extreme mystery of birds in the sky, bees in the sun and flowers on a green hill. Teach him to have faith in his own ideas, even if every one tell him they are wrong.

Try to give my son the strength not to follow the crowd when everyone else is doing it. Teach him to listen to every one, but teach him also to filter all that he hears on a screen of truth and take only the good that comes through.

Teach him to sell his talents and brains to the highest bidder but never to put a price tag on his heart and soul. Let him have the courage to be impatient, let him have the patient to be brave. Teach him to have sublime faith in himself, because then he will always have sublime faith in mankind, in God.

This is the order, teacher but see what best you can do. He is such a nice little boy and he is my son.”

The authenticity of this letter remains unconfirmed.

Wednesday, 17 April 2019


Wealth is a lot of things. It is much more than just money.
  • Merriam-Webster defines 'wealth' as abundance of valuable material possessions or resources.
  • The United Nations definition of inclusive wealth is a monetary measure which includes the sum of natural, human, and physical assets. Natural capital includes land, forests, energy resources, and minerals. Human capital is the population's education and skills. Physical capital includes such things as machinery, buildings, and infrastructure.
  • Wealth means different things to different people. Wealth has a meaning that varies from person to person as well as family to family.
  • Wealth is what you accumulate — not what you make. If you were to stop working tomorrow, how long could you support your current lifestyle? That is what makes you wealthy.
  • A community, region or country that possesses an abundance of such possessions or resources to the benefit of the common good is known as wealthy.
  • The wealth of households in the world amounts to USD 280 trillion (2017).
  • The net worth of a person, household, or nation – is the value of all assets owned net of all liabilities owed at a point in time.
  • Wealth is created through using labor and/or capital to make things, or provide/perform services, that other people find valuable. In the modern information economy, computer programmers often create wealth too, so it isn't necessary to create a tangible product in order to create wealth.
  • Wealth means being able to be financially free to do the things you love, to live the way you want to live. But it also means being healthy, and to know that your family and the ones you care about are healthy and spiritually whole, and that they’re contributing.
  • Wealth provides access to more. While money doesn’t make you happy, it does give you freedom to not worry about those financial stresses
  • Having excess income allows you to be more involved with family and community.
  • If you’re a healthy person, you are already wealthy. If you have your health, if you have your life, you can accomplish pretty much anything if you get the right mind-set.
  • Material aspect of wealth is very important, because everything else is much easier to plan around if you are financially stable.
  • For the poor it is always survival mode. The transition from scarce resources to financial security will be a challenge. It’s always about choices.
  • Spending and taking care of money is a skill — not everybody has that skill.
  • On the business side, wealth creates opportunities. On the personal side, wealth is about having more security and giving more to those you love.
  • Wealth means you have the luxury of being able to provide for your family and determine how much work you want to do.

Rich is having abundant financial assets: money, real estate, investments, material possessions, etc. Wealth has four categories of assets:
  1. Core Assets: your family, values, faith, health and the individual well-being of each family member;
  2. Experience Assets: good and bad experiences, education, reputation, networks, knowledge and the wisdom of each family member;
  3. Contribution Assets: contributions made to the well-being of others;
  4. Financial Assets: money, real estate, investments, material possessions.

Sunday, 14 April 2019

Poverty is not an original state

Most wealthy people believe that poor people today have it 'easy' because they can get government benefits without doing anything in return. This is an infuriatingly obtuse view of those who have not known or have long forgotten what poverty truly means. 'Easy' is a word not easily spoken among the poor. Things are hard, the times are hard, the work is hard, the way is hard. 'Easy' is for the willfully callous and the haughtily blind.

Poverty is not an original state, nor are the poor the victims of their own faults and weaknesses. Poverty is self-sustaining. Poverty creates a picture of aimlessness, uncertainty and hopelessness. Once a person is caught in its trap, it is hard to escape the cycle of poverty. It destroys self-confidence and the capacity to organize collective action and response. 

Poverty is a multidimensional phenomenon. Advising poor people to working harder is an useless advice because people are rarely compensated for hard work. They are compensated for skills and smart working. A poor person can't think or plan his old age years. Poverty restricts forward thinking and planning. The daily struggles of the poor constantly humiliate them. There is no possibility of poor people enjoying rights. In poverty there can be no control over one’s life chances or even everyday life.

Development fail to address poverty or to narrow the gap between rich and poor, but widens and deepens this division and ultimately creates poverty, as natural resources and human beings alike are increasingly harnessed to the pursuit of consumption and profit. The rich are great beneficiaries of poverty. It is very cheap to be rich in India. In a poor nation, the social elite can pass through life without facing any competition. The less democratic a nation, the safer it is for the rich.

The attitude we have is running away from the needy and not drawing near to them. Corruption directly brings underdevelopment and spawns poverty. In India poor people vote, and the elected become rich. It’s a government of the rich, for the poor to sustain the poverty. This sounds cynical, but hard facts vindicate the statement.

The global economy on a wildly unequal trajectory is absurd and unsustainable. For getting everyone above poverty line (> $5 per day) would take 100 years, require $1m GDP per person and per capita income about $100,000. As a result, ending poverty under the current model is slow, inefficient and runs into planetary problems. Already the present global economy is in ecological overshoot. A radical shift in distribution to favor the poorest is the only way to reconcile the twin challenges of halting catastrophic climatic change and ending poverty.

The wealth of the super rich in the world can eradicate global poverty TEN times!

In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. 
In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of - Confucius

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, 
it cannot save the few who are rich - J F Kennedy

Saturday, 13 April 2019

This is how politics works!

I told my son, "You will marry the girl I choose." 
He said, "No." 
I told him, "She is Bill Gate's daughter." 
He said, "Yes." 

I called Bill Gates and said, "I want your daughter to marry my son." 
Bill Gates said, "No". 
I told Bill Gates, "My son is the CEO of World Bank." 
Bill Gates said, "Okay". 

I called the president of World Bank and asked him to make my son the CEO. 
He said, "No". 
I told him, "My son is Bill Gate's son-in-law." 
He said, "Okay." 

And this is how politics works!

Thursday, 4 April 2019

Nation first, party next, self last - LK Advani

BJP Leader Lal Krishna Advani (age 91 years) in a blog today (April 4, 2019) expressed his views on a host of issues. The blog is seen more as a conversation with the party cadres, especially at a time when not agreeing with the government is being widely dubbed as anti-national in many quarters. He has been upset since he was overlooked and BJP president Amit Shah decided to contest from Gandhinagar. 

Here is the full text of LK Advani's blog
On April 6th, the BJP will celebrate its Foundation Day. This is an important occasion for all of us in the BJP to look back, look ahead and look within. As one of the Founders of the BJP, I deem it to be my duty to share my reflections with the people of India, and more specifically with the millions of workers of my Party, both of whom have indebted me with their affection and respect. 

Before I share my thoughts, I take this opportunity to convey my most sincere gratitude to the people of  Gandhinagar, who have elected me to the Lok Sabha six times since 1991. Their love and support has always overwhelmed me.

Serving the Motherland has been my passion and my mission ever since I joined the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) at the age of 14. My political life has been inseparably associated with my Party for nearly seven decades – first with the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, and later with the Bharatiya Janata Party and I have been a founding member of both. It has been my rare privilege to work closely with stalwarts like Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya, Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee and many other great, inspiring and self-less leaders.

The guiding principle of my life has been ‘Nation First, Party Next, Self Last.’And in all situations, I have tried to adhere to this principleand will continue to do so.

The essence of Indian democracy is respect for diversity and freedom of expression. Right from its inception, the BJP has never regarded those who disagree with us politically as our “enemies”, but only as our adversaries. Similarly, in our conception of Indian nationalism, we have never regarded those who disagree with us politically as “anti-national”. The party has been committed to freedom
of choice of every citizen at personal as well as political level.

Defense of democracy and democratic traditions, both within the Party and in the larger national setting,has been the proud hallmark of the BJP. Therefore BJP has always been in the forefront of demanding protection of independence, integrity, fairness and robustness of all our democratic institutions, including the media. Electoral reforms, with special focus on transparency in political and electoral funding, which is so essential for a corruption-free polity, has been another priority for our Party.

In short, the triad of Satya (truth), Rashtra Nishtha (dedication to the Nation) and Loktantra (democracy, both within and outside the Party) guided the struggle-filled evolution of my Party.The sum total of all these values constitutes Sanskritik Rashtravad (Cultural Nationalism) and Su-Raj (good governance), to which my Party has always remained wedded. The heroic struggle against the Emergengy rule was precisely to uphold the above values.

It is my sincere desire that all of us should collectively strive to strengthen the democratic edifice of India. True, elections are a festival of democracy. But they are also an occasion for honest  introspection by all the stakeholders in Indian democracy – political parties, mass media, authorities conducting the election process and, above all, the electorate.

Advani's rath yatra of 1990 leading to demolition of Babri Masjid and killing of thousands of Muslims in the aftermath communal rites and later protecting Modi (Gujarat CM) when PM Vajpayee ordered Modi to step down as CM for Gujarat riots 2002 in which ~2,000 Muslims were killed - indicates Advani's priority as Party first, Self next and Nation last and is contradictory to his utterances in the above blog. Advani paid a bitter price for promoting and protecting Modi who subsequently dumped Advani on wayside in his ascending to PM position and showing utter disrespect and hurling insults to him on public platforms.

Wednesday, 3 April 2019

Jet Airways bailout. Who pays the price?

The government last week seems to have nudged public sector banks (PSBs) to bail out the bankrupt Jet Airways. Was this a good idea? No, but there was no alternative either. Banks will provide fresh funds of Rs.1,500 crore to restore some normalcy in the airline’s operations. This is supposed to be against ‘security of assets, but this is mainly the value of the 50.5% equity that the lenders have extracted. If no buyer materializes in two months, then the share price, which shot up after the bailout, will fizzle out equally fast and lenders will be left with worthless paper and the prospect of liquidation. 
  • The founder Naresh Goyal and his wife Anita Goyal will step down from the board of directors. Mr Goyal sends out an emotional farewell letter in which he says, “No sacrifice is too big for me to safeguard the interest of Jet Airways…”
  • Mr Goyal still holds 25.5% of the equity. The stake of Etihad Airways halves to 12%. 
  • Jet Air says that the money will be used to clear dues owed to vendors, creditors, lessors, pay salaries to employees and get more aircraft off the ground again. A committee of experts, along with management consultants and an audit firm, will handle the revival of the airline and, probably, find a buyer. 
  • Jet Air had two former civil aviation secretaries on its board but couldn’t come up with a plan to stay afloat.
  • Jet Air has 22,000 employees.
  • Jet Air owes Rs.8,000 crore to banks. The biggest mystery is: Why isn’t anyone holding him responsible for repaying the massive Rs.8,000 crore that the airline owes banks?
  • Naresh Goyal’s business dealings are far more controversial than those of Vijay Mallya. But he was sensible enough to maintain a low profile and adopt a humble demeanor.
  • Jet  was allowed to fly abroad; got the choicest destinations; was allowed to buy Sahara Airlines to retain market leadership (for a short while) and also wangle a great deal for Etihad Airways, to persuade it to come in as a strategic partner.
  • This is hugely ironical when you consider that Vijay Mallya, whose Kingfisher Airlines owes Rs.9,000 crore (with interest) to lenders is having all his assets liquidated and faces untold humiliation. Is the difference in treatment explained by the fact that Mallya chose to run away to the UK when it seemed likely that he would be arrested?
  • Why didn’t the lenders demand a board position earlier? 
Rajnish Kumar, SBI chairman has led the restructuring effort and even put his reputation on the line. He told a journalist, “If my transaction is successful, after May 31, I will write a book on it.” If he succeeds, he certainly deserves every accolade; but what if his gamble fails and the airline ends up in a bigger mess, like Air India? Will he be held accountable or will he be allowed to shrug it off and put the airline into liquidation? Remember, SBI has made a virtue of ripping off small account-holders who do not have the resources to maintain a minimum monthly balance and collecting thousands of crores from them.

Common sense tells us that recapitalisation must be done by owners themselves not lenders. Banks are not supposed to invest any amount of money without 'due diligence' and without 'adequate securities'. It is not bank's job to bailout a privately held company facing financial crisis mainly due to mismanagement of funds by management. In all probability this Jet Air will go into liquidation sooner or later. Then who will be held responsible for doling out this Rs.1,500 crores of depositors money? Also why lenders with exposure of Rs.8,000 crores have no member on Jet Air board is unclear. Unless investigated it is likely to be a scam supported by powerful people. It is likely that Naresh Goyal who killed Jet Air by siphoning off money has been allowed to exit by lending banks & central government without facing inquiry or trial is a big favour. Why same courtesy was not extended to Vijay Mallya & Kingfisher Airlines few years ago in an identical situation?