Minimum Wage

I was thinking if a government decides upon minimum wage then it has to set Minimum Retail Price for the products of those labourers. Then I came across the following Wikipedia article;
Resale price maintenance

However, that law doesn't seem to be from the minimum wage angle. I don't know whether such laws exist in India too (We have Maximum Retail Price). I suppose Minimum Retail Price would ensure, the imported goods cannot undercut local goods with pricing war.

I guess developed countries need Minimum Retail Price whereas developing countries Maximum Retail Price.

Road to True Capitalism - iii

The profit sharing policy enacted by the Indian government again appears to be socialist stagnation than capitalist mobility. Get over the guilty feeling - that's all they are interested in doing.

In between, there was another proposal to bring the tribals to mainstream. An Indian minister, Kantilal Bhuria, a tribal himself, has advocated for tribal regiment in Indian army. I believe if this were to become true the transition would be tribalism->feudalism-> capitalism-> welfarism.

I think this mode is more practical than triabalism->capitalism->welfarism model. However, what we have to make sure is with warrior life, we can legally kill tribals' present way of life and replace it with another tribal way of life, generally known as the Western life. I believe in this case, tribals may not have to be derided for adopting a foreign way of life since the fundamentals of both societies are the same.  Western Europeans have always been (with brief interlude) more egalitarian and a communal society.  For them the ideology of individualism was an artificial way to accept individual freedom. In contrast, sedentary Indian caste society is highly individualistic within its caste communal identities. The individualism comes from the occupational identity and communality comes from the hereditary caste identities. Thus it requires two levels of emancipation;
- Individualism at the caste identities (thus no-caste identity)
- Communality within the occupational identity (thus team work across different ideas)

However, the Indian tribal society is more akin to erstwhile western European society. Of course, we surely don't think a Dravidian tribal wearing his Bison horn is similar to present day Scandinavian wearing his imagined Viking Horn or a Scot wearing his skirt.  But the overall social dynamics are still the same.

This brings another issue to the foreground. In a democratic system is it possible to make policies that may show results after a generation (say 30 years)? A number of governments with different ideologies can come to the power during this period. Therefore, we need to have a democratic system where a party can implement its generational policy. However, we also require a little flexibility that it doesn't affect all Indians as the social realities are different for different regions. Thus;

- A state government should have a constitutional authority to make generational policies
- A generational policy should remain unchanged for 30 years
- The policies should mainly concern with socio-economic life of people (which includes religion)
- The conspicuous failure of the generational policy should only result in its modifications and not in its complete removal until the period is over

Road to True Capitalism - ii

The Indian government probably doesn't have clear idea on how to set the tribals in the path of welfarism. I'm not sure what other reasons could be given for the rejection of a mining project in regions belonging to the tribals. This point I'm making in the background of recent government decision to give 23% in the mining profits to the local tribals.

It should be noted here that I'm totally in dark how the government would identity the number of tribal families that would get the share. Also, what would be the minimum amount. I believe the minimum amount is paramount in any of these. I have already argued how a limited land distribution even in regions with enough water resources has not helped the farmers. The limited land would keep them in the static financial status for generations as even though it can satisfy their needs but cannot guarantee disposable income for their social mobility. The government exercise in this regard looks as if passing the guilt feeling to people.

This would be the case with the tribals too. Even though giving some share in the profit may look a lot civilized than giving complete monopoly to mining companies or allowing the tribals to worship their hill gods, it may not necessarily bring them out of their tribal economy to capitalist economy.

Road to True Capitalism - i

A society can make a transition from tribal to feudal society (most of the sedentary societies) or from tribal to capitalist society (Kerala and Tulu regions). A typical mode of transition is tribal-> feudal-> capitalist-> welfare. However, I have already explained how Kerala has moved from tribal-> capitalist-> feudal-> corrective capitalist (socialist) society. I was discussing this in the background of Naxalism.

The Naxalism even though it calls itself 'Maoist' isn't so. However, Indian mainstream Marxism was essentially Maoism. I was wondering how Indian tribals would make the transition. It appears the Indian government would like to move them from tribalism to capitalism.

Government is planning to give a share in mining profits to tribals. So, it looks as if the path is tribalism->capitalism-> welfarism* for them.

* It should be noted here that welfarism* ideals fall short of my true capitalism.
* the four alternate options that Blogger's word processor gave me for this word were 'welfare', 'wearisome', 'secularism' and 'vulgarism'.

True Capitalist Society- i

There are only two economic models. Capitalism and Feudalism. Socialism is a correction to Capitalism. 

 In human history only Feudal economy has been practiced in its purity. Capitalism has always been bugged with feudal elements -which I'm going to discuss later. Socialism came up in regions where feudal power was in decline but the economy has not moved to true Capitalist self. Ironically, Socialism enforced state feudalism while rooting out family feudalism.

A true capitalism differs from feudalism in three aspects:
1. Inheritance of wealth
   Inheritance is everything in a feudal economy; it doesn't exist in a capitalist economy

2. Open competition

   Monopolization is the feudal mindset; whereas open competition is for true capitalism

3. Exploitation of earth resources and people

   Both are part of feudal economy; True capitalism only exploits earth resources

Generally, capitalism has shown feudal tendencies of (1).

The salient features of a true capitalist society are;
- Wealth (in the form of land, articles, businesses) can not be inherited. If a person dies his wealth goes to the state
- Every individual is free to make money by the exploitation of the resources. But his wealth will be distributed in the form of taxes and after his death - elaborated next;
      * In businesses, his share in the company goes to public and can be bought by anyone who is not part of his/her family
      * Land goes to the state which it can auction it and it can be brought by anyone who is not part of his/her family
      * Material possessions(house, jewellery) goes to the state which it can auction it and can be brought by anyone who is not part of his/her family
- Every male pays taxes. This part is explained in the subsequent part

But to create a true capitalist society the state needs to support children to grow into productive persons who can generate wealth.

However, since Homo Sapiens are sexual beings they are not really individuals and need at least one partner. Considering the case of heterosexuals only, the state needs to ensure that male and female are independent of each other. It is required to remove the cultural expectation of male-female bonding and create an environment for materialist bonding. In a true capitalist society, a productive -explained later- female is financially fully secure and a productive male is completely unsure of his future.  To achieve this it's required to:

- Provide education completely free. Thus create productive male and female.
- Social security to each and every female in the form of a house and unemployment benefit to live a life of middle-middle class standard
- Females are not to be taxed but males to be taxed 40-50% of their income. Male doesn't have any other materialist responsibility apart from his own self
- State has to take care of people in their old age contingent on their working years and tax payment history
- Voluntary childlessness should be taxed in the case of both males and females. Males may need to give additional 10% and females start paying tax rate of 50%

Agriculture in South India - notes

There is a huge population of Kannada speaking labourers in Hyderabad. They live in primitive conditions. In some cases their family life is a complete mess. Many of them own few acres of land in North Karnataka. But because of insufficient irrigation system and irregular Monsoon they had to abandon their land and migrate as coolie workers.

However, in my opinion, even with proper rains and irrigation system the prosperity of these farmers can not be guaranteed. Because of their limited land they would employ only limited resources. They most likely remain as stagnant farmers.

As I see it, in places like Karnataka we face two problems.
- Water
- Limited land of individual farmers

I have made the following observations:
1) In a water scarce land, a farmer with large landholdings still can survive and even prosper by using high technology.
2) But even in a water abundant land there is no guarantee for a farmer with limited land to reach sustainable prosperity. Few reasons for this:
(i) Not much use of high technology
(ii) Not much room for experimentation
(iii) Content, happy and petty life when the earning is below certain threshold.
All these contribute lower yield and lower profit.

But there is an additional point to (2)
2.a) A farmer with limited landholding in water abundant region can always sell his land and buy a greater stretch of land in water scarce region and become prosperous.

Bonafide Feudalism:
The best way to overcome the situation in Karnataka is to create a class of bonafide feudals. These bonfide feudals must be local to the region. More precisely, only officially Karnatakans are eligible to become bonfide feudals in Karnataka. Bonafide colonialism is not acceptable (even if the person is resident of India). The concept is simple and is generally employed by landless but money rich neo farmers. They lease the land from the farmers.

The salient features of this system:
- the land will never be owned by the bonafide feudals. They have to lease it every year.
- there is no upper limit for the acquisition of leased land.
- the farmers have to work for the feudals. The surplus farmers should work in any ventures that they run.
- all farmers' families must get monthly salary. A minimum monthly salary is a must under any conditions.
- the farmers' income is taxable but not bonafide feudals'.
- failure to pay minimum monthly salary will result in end of feudalism and the land will be available to a new feudal

Reference:
Bonafide Colonialism in Ukraine