Podcasts about fy16

India Policy Watch #1: What Do Successive Defence Budgets Reveal?Insights on burning policy issues in India— Pranay Kotasthane(An edited version of this article was published in Hindustan Times on 13th Feb)Another defence budget zoomed past us on Feb 1. Since then, analyses have focused on how the defence spending for the coming year departs from the last year. Some have waved a red flag as defence spending has fallen below 2 per cent of GDP for the first time in many years. On the other hand, the defence ministry's post-budget press release emphasised a 44 per cent increase in operational spending, which is expected to “close critical gaps in the combat capabilities and equip the Forces in terms of ammunition, sustenance of weapons & assets, military reserves etc.” The ministry also highlighted that the capital outlay for modernisation and infrastructure development has risen by a seemingly handsome 57 per cent over the last five years. How, then, do we make sense of these conflicting narratives?Comparing allocations with those in the previous year gives us a confusing picture. Every interest group can pull up a number from the budget to suit their pre-formed narrative. Taking a step back from these narratives, this article will show that this was another run-of-the-mill defence budget, just like the previous one was. Nothing in it indicates any significant change in the defence posture. Unlike Japan, which has announced a doubling of its military spending in the next five years, India's approach is about gradually improving the operational efficiency of the armed forces.Looking under the hoodThis article looks at the defence expenditure over the last six budgets to make sense of the numbers. To put numbers into context, let's use an earlier year (FY16). FY16 is a useful reference point as it predates two major developments: China's visibly aggressive posture on the border and the budgetary commitments arising from the One Rank One Pension (OROP) scheme. Three observations follow from such an analysis.One, not only has defence spending fallen as a proportion of GDP, but it has also fallen as a percentage of government expenditure. In other words, defence has slipped in priority relative to non-defence functions (Figure 1). Two, the China challenge hasn't led to any spectacular change in the composition of defence expenditure. Defence spending can be divided into four major components: salaries, pensions, capital outlay, and others. As Figure 2 shows, capital outlay was being squeezed by rising pension expenditure over the last few years. For two consecutive years (FY19 and FY20), more money was spent on pensions than on capital acquisition and modernisation. The balance has now been marginally restored since FY21, after the Galwan crisis flared up.Crucially, the rises in pension and capital expenditures have come at the cost of operational and maintenance expenditures, including ammunition stores (under the Others category). It is hence not surprising that the latest budget is trying to arrest this decline in combat capabilities.Three, this period has been relatively better for the Indian Navy in terms of capital expenditure. Since the procurement of new platforms happens over multiple years, a temporal view is useful in analysing how capital outlay is split between the three armed forces. Figure 3 suggests that the big change in the last four years is in the capital outlay for the Indian Navy, with the FY24 figure having doubled in absolute terms since FY20.The Big PictureBy connecting these dots over the last five years, the picture that emerges is this: the government seems confident that China can be handled without a substantial rise in defence expenditure. The latest budget serves as a bellwether indicator for this claim. It was the first budget of the post-pandemic period, at a time when the economic prospects for India had improved considerably. The government achieved better-than-expected buoyancy in income taxes and GST in the current financial year, while the cooling of global fertilizer prices has led to a decline in the projected subsidy bill. Consequently, the government, for the first time in many years, had some fiscal room to play with. It has used that space to increase the overall capital outlay to Rs 10 lakh crore, almost three times the outlay in 2019-20. Despite this increase in the overall capital outlay, the defence budget resembles the middle overs of a one-day cricket match.From a financial savings perspective, there have been just two important changes over this period in the defence domain. The first was the announcement of the Agnipath scheme. It might reduce the pension burden, but these savings will reflect only after a decade-and-a-half. Other proposals, such as theatre commands, haven't come to fruition yet. The proposal to create a non-lapsable fund for modernisation — a proposal the union government gave an in-principle agreement way back in Feb 2021, still hasn't found a mention in the latest budget.Probably, the defence budget is the wrong place to infer India's strategic posture against China. Perhaps, the government considers other tools of statecraft—diplomatic, economic, or non-conventional—more suitable for the purpose. This point needs deeper reflection. The discussions over the roles of these tools of statecraft currently operate under mistaken assumptions. Attempts at getting India into an anti-China alliance are spurned at the altar of “strategic autonomy”. The opponents seem to assume that India only needs to equip its armed forces with greater firepower. For too long, many parliamentary standing committees and defence organisations have gone hoarse trying to convince the government that defence expenditure should be raised to 3 per cent of GDP. If anything, the change is in the opposite direction.The defence budget trends are a reminder that the government does not prefer using the military instrument to outflank China. At best, it wants to equip the armed forces such that China's incursions can be matched or repulsed. Given that there's no significant increase in allocations for the Navy and the Air Force, it also means that the government is not considering an increased presence in the South China Sea. So, the military is being equipped to plug a vulnerability and not to gain an asymmetric political advantage over China. This line of thinking probably makes sense. There's no point in matching China's defence spending dollar-for-dollar. After all, the Indian armed forces are more adept at fighting at high altitudes. But this line of thinking should also make it apparent that India must develop capabilities in domains other than those involving force to inflict pain on China. The government should build a political consensus that closer relations with China's adversaries are not a matter of choice but an imperative. That we need to double down on economic growth and technological upgrading if we are to constrain China's hand in other domains. It also means that we shouldn't be indiscriminately banning China's investments in India; a better approach would be to make their companies in non-strategic domains more dependent on the Indian market. We will then have more tools in our kit to deploy if the situation on the border worsens. Each of these posture changes needs an updating of our priors and payoffs. For that to happen, it is necessary that the government comes clean about China's incursions. Pretending that all's well might give us false comfort, but they will also dissuade the strategic establishment from confronting the tough trade-offs in non-military domains. Without this pivot, we would merely rely on hope as a strategy. India Policy Watch #2: Through The Looking GlassInsights on burning policy issues in India— RSJWe talk about the arbitrary powers of the state on these pages often. Now, we cannot grudge the state's sovereignty because we have voluntarily handed it that power. One argument that follows from this is that such power is often prone to be used arbitrarily. And that's a problem for the citizens. The typical solution we have offered on these pages over time is to restrict the domain of the state to a narrow set where it can make the maximum impact or to design its incentives in a way that makes the state act with accountability. Now, these are good design principles. We could use them to create structures and institutions that are strong and independent that could hold their own against any arbitrary use of power. But are these enough? A natural question that should follow is how do we know things are working in practice like they were meant to? How do we get authentic information about how the state is conducting itself? How do we confirm that it is not subverting the institutional design that is in place to control its powers? These questions lead us to the other pillar of a well-functioning democracy - transparency. It is a topic we haven't discussed enough on these pages. Transparency is a moral good, and it is vital for a healthy democracy. Darkness stunts democracy. It needs light to thrive. In the early part of the 20th century, the US Supreme Court judge Louis Brandeis famously remarked, “sunlight is the best disinfectant” while making a case for a transparency imperative. Or, if we were to go further back, Bentham, often credited to have done the most original thinking on transparency, summed it up with - the more strictly we are watched, the better we behave - a principle he put at the heart of his advocacy for an open government. So, what has triggered my early morning ruminations on transparency? Well, there are two reasons. Here's one. The Indian Express reports:“The Supreme Court said it did not want to accept in a “sealed cover” the Centre's suggestions on who could be the members of a committee the court had proposed to assess the market regulatory framework and recommend measures, if any, to strengthen it in the wake of the Adani-Hindenburg affair. It refused to accept any suggestions on names from the petitioners as well.Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, who headed a three-judge bench hearing a clutch of petitions on the Hindenburg Research report and its aftermath, told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the court wanted to maintain “full transparency”. The court would appoint a committee of its own that will promote a sense of confidence in the process, he said.”CJI Chandrachud said, “We would rather not accept the sealed cover suggestions from you for this reason; in constituting a committee which we want to do, we want to maintain full transparency. The moment we accept a set of suggestions from you in a sealed cover, it means the other side is not seeing them. Even if we don't accept your suggestions, they will not know which of your suggestions we have accepted and which we have not. Then there may be an impression that well, this is a government-appointed committee which the Supreme Court has accepted even if we have not accepted your suggestions. So, we want to maintain the fullest transparency in the interest of protecting the investors.”Bravo. The Chief Justice was almost channelling Bentham there, who famously wrote, “secrecy, being an instrument of conspiracy, ought never to be the system of a regular government.” I mean, what even is a sealed cover in a matter that concerns millions of ordinary investors? Why should there be secrecy in the name of experts and their recommendations? A sealed cover is a strange invention. It gives the sheen of a fair and independent process to what is essentially a subversion of a democratic principle. It ranks up there among one of the great Indian coinages. The top spot, of course, is forever occupied by ‘mild lathicharge'. And now, onto the other reason for all this talk on transparency. This was the headline-grabbing news of this week in India - “Weeks after its documentary taken off, BBC gets I-T knock”. Here's the Indian Express reporting on this with many quotes from “unnamed government sources”:“The Income-Tax Department surveys at the premises of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) in Delhi and Mumbai on Tuesday (February 14) were conducted in view of the BBC's “deliberate non-compliance with the transfer pricing rules” and its “vast diversion of profits”, government sources said.The surveys were looking into “manipulation of prices for unauthorized benefits, including tax advantages”, sources said.The BBC has been “persistently and deliberately violative of transfer pricing rules, it has “deliberately diverted a significant amount of the profits”, and has not followed the “arm's length arrangement” in the allocation of profit, the sources said.”A very garrulous source there with a lot of information. I don't want to ascribe motives to the tax raids yet. There's enough in the timing of these ‘surveys' to raise suspicions. The I-T department has been used to settle political and other scores for decades. It speaks poorly of our institutional strength and independence. But that's not the issue we are discussing today. The question is about transparency. Does anyone know why the surveys were carried out? The sources have cleverly given some reasons, but what stops the department from giving an official reason for them? Is it because it is likely that if they give the official reason, there will be further questions on the arbitrary nature of the actions? So, it is best to share nothing officially, selectively leak information to the media to paint the BBC in poor light and get away with harassment that then sends a message across to other foreign media outlets. Because even based on the merits of what the sources have said, it is difficult to justify a two-day survey. To quote the same news report:“Transfer pricing issues are very common for foreign companies but survey/search actions against them are not common. Assessment is usually opted for but is not the only route through which such cases can be approached. If tax officers want to do a survey/search, then transfer pricing issues can get covered.However, it is an approval-driven process with prior approvals required within the tax department before carrying out survey action. They would be having some information against the company and there might be a history of non-compliance too,” a Delhi-based tax expert said.  A notice preferably is issued to a company in an assessment exercise by the tax authorities flouting transfer pricing rules before undertaking any such action, experts said."It shouldn't surprise anyone that political actors don't like transparency. It adds to their burden of accountability and increases the political costs of any missteps, deliberate or otherwise. So, how should the citizens keep up the demand for transparency in a democratic setup? After all, for the citizens to be involved in the governance process, they must have access to the government's information, plans and intentions. Also, there is a line beyond which too much transparency could be counterproductive. Too much information, too early in the process, could mean stalling the plan as interest groups jump in and skew the decision-making process. I have outlined three frames that one could use to think about transparency in a democracy.First, it is in the long-term interest of political parties to seek transparency in a democratic setup. For those in the opposition, it is about making the incumbent party in power more accountable. For the incumbent, too, there's always the uncertainty about the future when they might not be in power. In such a scenario, it is better for them to have stronger laws on transparency for their own access to government information, which they can use to hold others accountable. A lack of certainty about future electoral prospects for any party is a feature of a good democracy. It is in this environment most transparency laws are made. In India, too, the RTI came about because of grassroots activism and a broad consensus among the political class led by the party in power then. However, it is important to note that the Overton window was right during that time when getting re-elected was an exception. It meant the political actors were keen to have access to information in future. In that sense, any period when transparency is suppressed in a democracy is a good surrogate for the power of the party in power. In India, the RTI laws allow for access to a significant amount of government information. The problem is that there is a gradual erosion of its ambit as the dominant political class comes to view it as an irritant. The only way to counter this is for the citizenry to continue using the RTI tool to its fullest extent. The more people know the tool's power, the harder it will be to blunt it. Second, it is important to devolve transparency to state and local governments. This is where the political uncertainty is still high in India, which means there's an incentive for political actors to support transparency moves to guarantee their own access to information in future. This is also the space where petty corruption is still rampant. One of the challenges of RTI in India is that most of the activism here is focused on big-ticket issues. The opportunity to bring sunlight as a disinfectant and its payoffs are the highest at the local level of governance. Separately, there are also specific areas in the private sector that could do with improved transparency. This is tricky territory, and let me be very specific about this. There's a significant amount of information that's collected, often without explicit consent, from the citizens by the private sector, which is then monetised in various ways. The mechanism by which their information is used and the extent to which the private sector, especially the social media platforms,  benefits from it are not transparent to the citizens who are the customers. If your attention is being monetised through multiple trackers and personalised ads, it is only fair you must know the rules of the game and agree to play it. This is still a white space of policymaking in India.   Lastly, the oft-cited risk of policy waters being muddied because of transparency, where various interest groups will lobby for their positions and slow down the decision-making process, is a bit misplaced. Those in favour of transparency do not argue for the innards of policymaking being put out for display. That process requires stakeholder mapping and seeking inputs in a way that's been documented by various policy thinkers. We have written about the eight-step process of policymaking on these pages on multiple occasions. The issue of transparency is important in two areas. First, the implementation and measurement of a policy proposal. How did a policy fare compared to its promise? Were the public resources and efforts prudently used? Was there a clear understanding of why something failed? Access to this information is important for the public and experts outside the government to hold the government accountable and improve future decisions. Second, the size of the state in India often means it is the biggest, often the sole, customer in multiple sectors and its decision on setting the rules of games in these sectors, awarding contracts and its performance in managing its budget should be available for public scrutiny. Again, this doesn't mean the government should vet its decisions at each stage with prevailing public opinion. Rather it must be able to explain its process and the rationale for decisions openly and transparently. The practice of sealed covers or I-T surveys and raids without a clear reason isn't new to India. What's new is the somewhat strange support for these actions by the mainstream media that are being fed by the ever-bizarre theories cooked by the partisans on social media. BBC isn't doing a documentary on Gujarat because China is now funding it. Nor is there a leftist cabal that's busy bringing Adani down one week and using BBC the next to show the government in a bad light. This playbook is reminiscent of the Indira era of the mid-70s, where in the name of national interest, we buried transparency and accountability. It took us decades to get out of that mire. Learning from history is free, but most of us fail the eventual test.PolicyWTF: Casually Banning Films Committee, RepriseThis section looks at egregious public policies. Policies that make you go: WTF, Did that really happen?— Pranay Kotasthane Last week, I came across an excellent report by Aroon Deep in The Hindu that explains how the Central Board for Film Certification (CBFC) is going way beyond its usual stance of “demanding” cuts of scenes showing sexual content, violence, or abusive language. Instead, the CBFC now also has a perspective on dietary preferences (demanding that mention of “beef” be struck off), foreign policy (demanding that references to ex-KGB officers, China, and Pakistan be removed), and even corruption (how can a filmmaker dare depict a police officer accepting a bribe?). Seriously, what an omniscient body.Despite its activism, the Censor Board hasn't impressed the extremists. One Hindu group leader has called for creating a ‘Dharma Censor Board' “to review Bollywood films and keep a check on any anti-religious content or distortion of facts about Sanatan Dharma.” In his words:“Our experts will see a film when it is released and if we find it suitable for people belonging to Sanatan Dharma, we will issue a certificate. At present, films passed by the censor board set up by the government have been found carrying scenes that hurt the sentiments of people. We have repeatedly asked for a religious person to be included in the censor board but this demand has not been accepted. This is why we had to constitute our own board.”While it sounds absolutely absurd at face value, there is a liberal way out to assimilate this conservative critique. We covered it in edition #122, and I want to re-emphasise those points.In 2016, my former colleagues Madhav, Adhip, Shikha, Siddarth, Devika and Guru wrote an interesting paper in which they recommended that film certification should be privatised.Deploying the Banishing Bureaucracy framework, they wrote:The CBFC be renamed the Indian Movie Authority (IMA) and that the primary purpose of the IMA would be to license and regulate private organisations called Independent Certifying Authorities (ICAs) which will then certify films.So, the Hindu group can very well have its own ICA, which will rate the movie on its Sanatana Dharma compliance score. But…The certificate granted by ICA will only restrict what age groups the film is appropriate for. This is the only form of pre-censorship that is necessary in today's age as all other restrictions on film exhibition should be applied retrospectively. The choice of ICAs available for producers to approach will render the question of subjectivity moot as the producer can switch to another ICA if unsatisfied with the certificate. The IMA will set the guidelines for the ICAs to follow and will be the first point of appeal.In other words, this solution reimagines the CBFC as a body that grants licenses to independent and private certification organisations called ICAs. These ICAs must adhere to certain threshold criteria set by the CBFC. Beyond these criteria, some ICAs may specialise themselves as being the sanskaari ones trigger-happy to award an “A” certification, while others may adopt a more liberal approach. In the authors' words:This will allow the marketplace of ideas to draw the lines of what kind of content is fit for what kind of audience with the government still being capable of stepping in to curb prurient sensibilities.This solution has the added benefit of levelling the playing field between OTT content and films. Currently, the CBFC has no capacity to certify the content being churned out on tens of streaming services. By delegating this function to private ICAs, the government can ensure adherence to certification norms.In essence, just as governments can often plug market failures, markets too can sometimes plug government failures. Reforming our ‘Censor Board' requires giving markets a chance.There's much more detail in the paper about grievance redressal, certification guidelines, and appeals procedure. Read it here.HomeWorkReading and listening recommendations on public policy matters* [Podcast] Over at Puliyabaazi, we discuss technology geopolitics with Anirudh Suri, author of The Great Tech Game.* [Paper] Laxman Kumar Behera's take on the defence budget.* [Paper] This paper has a fantastic framework for understanding policy failures and successes. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit publicpolicy.substack.com

From the humble Maruti-800 to Wagon-R, most of the hits delivered by Maruti Suzuki in India catered to the middle-income group. Since its inception in India in 1983, the company had its ear to the ground. It knew what a common man wants -- an affordable car with good mileage coupled with low maintenance. It explains why Maruti gets 43% of its sales from non-metro cities. The company has been equally focussed on urban markets too, which too has mixed segments and a greater appetite for high-end cars.   As part of its strategy, the company had in 2015 launched Nexa dealership. Its premium models like Ciaz, Baleno and SUVs such as the new Ertiga and the XL-6, all sold through Nexa. Since its inception, over 1.6 million cars have been sold cumulatively across 400+ Nexa outlets as of FY22. The premium focus is also reflected in the average selling price now. According to a company official, the average selling price of Maruti's models has gone up to Rs 7.12 lakh from Rs 6 lakh three years back. Start of bumpy road for Maruti For decades, Maruti commanded premium market share in the passenger vehicle segment. But then, the road turned bumpy. Stiff competition squeezed its sales and its market share started to fall. From a peak of over 51 per cent in FY19, Maruti Suzuki's market share in the personal vehicle segment fell to 43 per cent in FY22. The management acknowledged this loud wake up call. Maruti Chairman RC Bhargava in a recent post earnings call said that small cars, which used to be the bread and butter for the company, lost the butter. So what went wrong with the company?   The fate of Maruti was clearly tied to small budget cars. And the rise of SUV pushed the sedans to margins. According to a CRISIL report, the share of small cars in the passenger vehicle segment declined from 65 per cent in FY12 to 45 per cent in the first nine months of FY22. Meanwhile, the share of SUVs has shot up to 40 per cent in FY22 from just 18% in FY16. Speaking to Business Standard, Puneet Gupta, Director, S&P Global Mobility says, Maruti is still struggling in segment priced between Rs 10-20 lakh. The company is trying to rework its SUV strategy. With competition heating up, the company is trying to capture Rs 15-20 lakh market.  Did Maruti miss the boat? Maruti has been a painfully late entrant to the SUVs, a segment which other carmakers capitalised. Maruti's share in the UV segment has shrunk from 28 per cent in FY19 to 19 per cent in FY22, mainly due to its fewer products in this space. Currently, this category is dominated by Hyundai, and the likes of Kia, Tata and Mahindra have also gained significant share on their SUV models. On top of this, Maruti has seen a 25% decline in the market for hatchbacks in the last four years. This category was most affected by rising costs. But RC Bhargava is not a man known for quitting easily. The 88-year-old chairman of Maruti said the company will not “walk away”, but fight to get back to its market share. While retaining its core base of appealing to smaller cities and rural areas, the company has launched or lined up multiple premium models in the SUV segment for urban India. In the non-SUV space of hatchbacks and sedans, the company is planning to bring new features and technology. In the non-SUV segment, Maruti still has a significant market share of 65 per cent. In the entry level SUV segment, its share is 20 per cent. The company has only recently ventured into the mid-SUV segment with the launch of Grand Vitara. Hyundai Creta and Kia Seltos currently lead the mid-SUV segment. Maruti is still a marginal player in the mid-size plus premium segment with just a market share of 4 per cent as of FY22. However, the demand for its new SUV offerings is encouraging. Maruti Suzuki India has an order book of 130,000 units of the Brezza and 43 per cent of the it is for top-end variant. For Vitara, it has received pre-bookings of 57,000. Demand for top variants i

Programming Note: It’s just me this time. RSJ will be back next week. - PranayIndia Policy Watch #1: The Indefensibility of India’s Defence FinancingInsights on burning policy issues in India— Pranay KotasthaneGovernment budgets should be seen in the context of on-ground realities and future targets. The immediate context of the latest defence budget is the continuing stand-off between Indian and Chinese troops in eastern Ladakh. Since it began in May 2020, this stand-off has underlined the need to urgently equip India's defence forces to manage the strategic challenge posed by China. More firepower than Pakistan can no longer be the end goal of defence planning. Instead, India needs a decadal plan to effectively block and deter China's salami-slicing strategy.  The other important element underlying the defence budget is the COVID-19 pandemic. Last year's economic downturn further reduced the fiscal space and precluded a substantial rise in defence expenditure. Given that the government expects the economy to cross the pre-pandemic level in the upcoming financial year, it is worth comparing this year's defence budget with the pre-pandemic and pre-Ladakh stand-off year FY20. The traditional approach of comparing expenditures with the last year's budget is not as helpful because the previous year was an anomaly on many counts.First, the overall trend in defence spending is not encouraging. One way to measure the importance of a sector is to analyse the percentage of overall government expenditure it occupies. The Ministry of Defence's (MoD) relative importance has declined on this count. MoD expenditure now comprises 2.02 % of GDP (down from 2.22% in FY20) and 13.3% of central government expenditure (down from 16.7% in FY20). The more worrying part is that this decline is not recent. Since FY10, the MoD's expenditure has been steadily falling as a proportion of government expenditure. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence's 2017-18 exhortation that defence spending of 3% GDP is 'optimal and necessary for ensuring the operational preparedness of the Forces' hasn't had the desired effect.Next, the change in the composition of MoD expenditure reveals a lot about government priorities. There are some positive signs on this count. The spending on defence pensions has relatively declined. It now comprises 22% of the MoD expenditure, down from 26% in FY20. One reason for this decline is that previous years' pension payments included some arrears. While this is welcome news, the respite is temporary. The five-yearly revision of One Rank One Pension (OROP) is due, and when it gets approved, pension expenditure will swell once again. Effective lateral entry mechanisms and a customised national pension scheme for the armed forces are the only long-term solutions for controlling pension spending.Another vital component of the defence budget is the pay and allowances for the armed forces personnel and defence civilians. Expenditure on this component has increased relative to other items. While salaries made up 29.9% of MoD's allocation in FY20, they are budgeted to be at 31.1% of MoD expense in FY23.The relative decline in pension expenditure has allowed some fiscal space for more capital expenditure on arms, ammunition, and platforms. Capital outlay now makes up 29% of MoD expenditure compared to 24.5% in FY20. For the third straight year, the capital expenditure exceeds the expenditure on pensions, reversing a worrying trend that continued until FY20. However, this compositional improvement doesn’t translate much in absolute terms, despite the government congratulating itself for increasing the capital outlay. As defence analyst Ajai Shukla observes:“the MoD announced that military modernisation and border infrastructure development was at the centre stage of the national security and defence planning process. To support this, the MoD pointed to the steady rise in the defence capital outlay from Rs 86,740 crore in 2013-14 to 1.52 lakh crore in 2022-23 – an enhancement of 76 per cent over a period of nine years. While that sounds like a healthy growth rate, it actually amounts to less than 5 per cent, compounded annually – barely enough to cater for inflation and foreign exchange rate variation.”The Indian Navy's share of this capital expenditure has increased to 35%, up from the 27% range between FY16 and FY20. This increase is significant as the response to China's build-up in the mountains might well lie in building deterrence in the oceans. Budgetary allocations indicate that the government is trying to build up India's naval strength but at a slow pace. Ajai Shukla points out how the Navy plans to utilise this allocation:This increment will be needed to support the acquisition of new platforms, such as six air-independent propulsion (AIP) submarines being acquired under Project 75-I, a second indigenous aircraft carrier (IAC-2), 57 twin-engine deck-based fighters (TEDBFs) and four more P-8I Poseidon long-range maritime patrol aircraft to keep a watch over the Indian Ocean. The navy is also creating operational and strategic infrastructure that will be needed when the tri-service maritime command is operationalised in Karwar, near Goa.The other small bit of good news was a substantial increase in the capital expenditure budget got the Indian Coast Guard and the Border Roads Organisation. This will help accelerate the buildup of security infrastructure on India’s land and maritime borders in peacetime.While the capital outlay has increased in monetary terms, it might not immediately translate into better hardware. That's because the government has earmarked 68% of the procurement budget for domestic players through negative import lists. It will take a few years for Indian players to build local manufacturing expertise and meet quality standards. Moreover, an umbrella of protectionism often disincentivises companies from making world-beating products. Aatmanirbharta has its costs; at least in the short term, the armed forces will be bearing a significant chunk of this cost.A disappointing miss is the dedicated non-lapsable fund for modernisation, recommended by the Fifteenth Finance Commission and accepted in principle by the government in FY22. This fund has been a long-standing demand of the MoD to make multi-year payments of defence equipment easier. This fund was to be seeded by transfers from the government, monetisation of defence land, and disinvestment proceeds of defence public sector units. However, there is no indication in the budget about the progress of this critical reform.The Hour of ReckoningThese discussions on the defence budgets give us a rough idea about the priority that governments accord to defence. Beyond that purpose, these insights have limited value as they merely focus on the relative changes from past years. The most important question — how much should India really spend on defence given its economic situation and threat perceptions? — is never asked, and hence never answered. Year after year, the parliamentary standing committee on defence remarks that the MoD be allotted 3 per cent GDP. Although the basis of this 3 per cent anchor has never been explained, it has a debilitating effect on military reforms. Instead of confronting tough trade-offs, the military establishment finds it convenient to blame the government of the day for not raising the defence expenditure to 3 per cent GDP. The government for its part approves unsustainable personnel expenditures such as a One Rank One Pension (OROP) scheme without assessing its long term economic impact on defence preparedness. The net effect is that around the defence budget every year, a “passing the blame” game ensues. The armed forces personnel blame defence civilians for eating into the defence expenditure. The military establishment blames the bureaucracy for financial delays. The government responds to the parliament that “all is well”, not to worry.In reality, India’s defence planning needs a strong dose of economic reasoning. The defence ministry needs economists and defence planners who can create expenditure plans based on domestic economic conditions, resource constraints, and future threat scenarios. A part of military modernisation has to be about building its financial planning and forecasting capability. Without building this capacity, we would be shooting in the dark against an adversary that’s richer and better equipped. (A condensed version of this article was published in Hindustan Times, 3rd Feb edition)India Policy Watch #2: Contextualising the FY23 Union BudgetInsights on burning policy issues in India— Pranay KotasthaneBy now, you would have already read tens of fine-grained budget analyses. So, here’s something different. Earlier this week, I spoke with Narayan Ramachandran for the Bangalore International Centre’s Podcast. Instead of focusing on sectoral spending, we zoomed out to locate this budget in the context of India’s economic trajectory over the last decade. Here’s the conversation (also available on all podcast apps).HomeWorkReading and listening recommendations on public policy matters[Podcast] On All Things Policy, I spoke with Aarushi about why many policies end up being less effective than hoped? [Article] Pramit Bhattacharya has an excellent take on how to make sense of the big, confusing, and often misleading numbers in the budget. This article should be a mandatory reading before you go through any budget analysis. [Article] Resolving municipal distress in India, by Adam Feibelman and Bhargavi Zaveri-Shah on The Leap Blog explore a promising source of municipal finances. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit publicpolicy.substack.com

It's no secret that New Zealand punches well above its weight with innovative, interesting companies that come across the pond and list on the ASX. In this episode, Alec and Bryce chat to Grant Straker - the co-founder and CEO of Straker Translations, an ASX-listed language translation service. Since co-founding Straker with his wife Merryn in 1999, the company has grown to $30m in revenue and a $130m market cap. Prior to Straker Translations, Grant was a paratrooper in the British Army. Straker has gone from strength to strength, with revenue growing from $10m in FY16 to $31m in FY21 (5 year CAGR, 25.6%) and guided for $50m in FY22, while the global market for language services was $43b in 2017, expected to be $67b in 2022 (5 year CAGR, 9.3%). Together they talk about how Straker will capture larger and larger market share in this growing market, their partnership with IBM, and what the future holds for Straker.Pre order the book on Booktopia or Amazon now. If you want to let Alec or Bryce know what you think of an episode, contact them here. Some of our favourite resources and offers to help you during your journey:$50-$200 OFF some amazing investing courses by our friend-of-the-show, OwenTrack your investment portfolio with Sharesight.Get a free stock when you sign-up to Stake, using the code EQUITYMATESGet exclusive access to our favourite data and insights platform, TIKRTake the emotion out of investing in Bitcoin, Ethereum, Gold and Silver with micro-investing app, Bamboo. Use EQUITY MATES for $10 when you sign-upGet $15 of Bitcoin, using one of our favourite crypto-currency exchanges, SwyftxGet 5 free trades if you plan to use the broker SelfWealthMake sure you don't miss anything Equity Mates related by signing up to our email list. And visit this page if you love everything Equity Mates and want to support our work.Any views expressed by the podcast host or any guest are their own and do not represent the views of Equity Mates Media or any other employer or associated organisation.Always remember, all information contained in this podcast is for education and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional financial, legal or tax advice. The hosts of Equity... See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

#10 Wakefit: Founded by Chaitanya Ramalingegowda and Ankit Garg in 2015, Wakefit started selling mattresses online and were already making a profit within six months of operations. Today, this D2C mattress startup is selling 1,500 mattresses to their 500,000 customers every day – raking in a revenue of $26.5 million and making a profit of $1.3 million in FY20. #9 Lenskart: Founded by Peyush Bansal in 2010, Lenskart offers an omnichannel platform for selling eyewear and lenses through their online platform and offline stores. The company has been investing heavily in setting up new physical stores – taking the number of offline stores to over 750. This is why the startup took a decade to reach profitability. In FY20, Lenskart made a revenue of $130 million with a profit of $2.4 million. #8 Cashfree: Cashfree is a digital payments gateway platform that offers more than 100 payment methods to over 50,000 businesses around the world with a team of just 130 employees. Their ability to stay lean has not only enabled them to scale but also remain profitable from the get-go. Their profit increased 14X from just $190,000 in FY18 to $2.6 million in FY20. #7 BrowserStack: India's most valuable SaaS startup BrowserStack enables developers to test their apps remotely using their cross-browser testing platform that has more than 2,000 devices and is being used by over 50,000 businesses across the world. The company has been profitable since day one. In FY20, BrowserStack raked in a profit of $3.8 million. #6 Aye Finance: SME lending startup Aye Finance has been profitable for the last three consecutive years and has disbursed loans worth more than $538 million to more than 200,000 small businesses. Aye Finance's profits have increased to $5.3 million in FY20. #5 Lendingkart: Founded in 2014, Lendingkart has disbursed loans worth $741 million to more than 100,000 small businesses. This fintech startup first achieved profitability in FY19 and their profits stand at $5.6 million in FY20. #4 OfBusiness: B2B e-commerce and lending startup OfBusiness uses purchase financing – providing businesses with a loan that they can use to purchase raw materials from their e-commerce platform. Once their profits from the interest started coming in, OfBusiness started making money and they are now on their way to becoming a unicorn. Their profits jumped 73X from just $150,000 in FY18 to a healthy $80 million in FY20. #3 CarTrade: Founded in 2009, CarTrade is the only profitable online used car marketplace. This decade-old startup has already filed for an IPO and is expected to hit the stock markets soon. The company significantly decreased its losses from $20 million in FY16 to just $2 million in FY17. They first turned profitable in FY18 and they did this through internal restructuring, key acquisitions and cost-cutting measures. Today (FY20), they are making a healthy profit of $11.5 million. #2 Boat Lifestyle: Indian consumer technology startup Boat started in 2016 by selling charging cables and were able to hit profitability within the first year. Next, they launched more products like earphones, headphones and smartwatches with quality and affordability in mind to target value-minded Indian consumers. This strategy only accelerated their growth. Boat's profit's increased by 30X from just $225,000 to $6.6 million in FY20. #1 Zerodha: India's largest stockbroking platform Zerodha has managed to change the entire stock trading industry single-handedly and they did it without even raising any external funding or marketing their product. Today, Zerodha charges just Rs 20 (or 0.03% as commission – whichever is lower) from their customer for every intraday trade. Thanks to that, Zerodha earned a solid $135 million in profits in FY21.

On this episode of the RAISE podcast, Brent gets the scoop from Jessica Jones Wilson, Associate Vice President for College Advancement at Dickinson College. Jessica got hooked on fundraising when she secured her first $1K gift as a student telefund caller at Albright College. Since then she's had experience in just about every facet of development work, and it shows. Jessica and her team of prospect researchers at Dickinson have launched some amazing initiatives, including their Presidential Fellows program through which students connect with alums in their hometowns every summer (and gather invaluable data through those conversations); and the Revolutionary Challenge that empowered the Dickinson alumni community to suggest, vote on, build out, and promote the priorities of their new capital campaign. It's clear that Jessica fits in well at the helm of her team of creative, inspired, data-loving go-getters who continue to shoot the moon.About JessicaJessica joined Dickinson College in 2015 and currently serves as the Associate Vice President for College Advancement. Jessica manages Advancement Services, Prospect Research, Donor Relations, Alumni & Parent Relations and the Annual Giving offices. She served as the Advancement representative on the College's Strategic Planning Committee in FY16 and the 2017 Presidential Transition Committee where she led the national tour to introduce the new president. In FY17, she led her team through a successful database conversion from Banner to Raiser's Edge. In 2019, Jessica's team established the Presidential Fellows program- approximately 25 current students were hired to go home over the summer and interview alumni. This discovery initiative resulted in over 800 interviews. In 2020 despite Covid challenges, students interviewed over 1300 Dickinsonians. Jessica served on the college's FY21 Financial Working Group. She currently serves on the Fall 2020 Reopening Implementation Committee - specifically on the subcommittees for Health & Quarantine and Travel & Campus Safety.Jessica led the technology and event needs for the Revolutionary Challenge - a chance for Dickinsonians to come together, leverage the college's emerging and existing strengths and address grand challenges with big ideas and bold deeds. In October 2020, Dickinson held an event that will brought the four finalist teams together to present to the Dickinson community. Originally planned for May 2020, the team pivoted and held the successful event virtually.Prior to Dickinson, she worked for Gettysburg College as Interim Campaign Director and Director of Prospect Research. Jessica's career in advancement began as an phonathon caller at her alma mater, Albright College, Reading PA. She also worked for Hollins University, Roanoke, VA in several different positions over a seven-year period, including Annual Fund Director. Jessica's background in annual giving gives her a unique perspective on prospect research, solicitations, and portfolio management.Jessica is passionate about philanthropy, higher education and the liberal arts. She is a member of the Blackbaud Higher Education Executive Advisory Board and volunteers for Junior Achievement for the local schools. She is past Secretary of the Mechanicsburg Midget Football Association, the former President of APRA-PA, and co-chaired the 2015 Mid-Atlantic Researchers Conference. She lives in Mechanicsburg, PA with her husband, their 14-year old son, and their pets - Vinegar the cat and Sprite the dog.

Looks like we’ll be getting cheaper organic food what with Amazon buying Whole Foods. What exactly is the strategy at play here, though? Other than the obvious thing of doing online groceries, how is Amazon advantaged here such that others (like Wal-mart), can’t simply do this themselves. We go over these questions and how they related to M&A in general. Plus recommendations and some podcast meta talk. Mid-roll This episode is sponsored by Casper, who’s looking for some good senior SREs (https://boards.greenhouse.io/casper/jobs/649758?gh_jid=649758). If you’re into building out and managing infrastructure that keeps code running and makes sure you can sleep soundly at night, check out the job listing, apply (https://boards.greenhouse.io/casper/jobs/649758?gh_jid=649758), and be sure to mention that you heard about it on Software Defined Talk. According to Glassdoor reviews (https://www.glassdoor.com/Overview/Working-at-Casper-EI_IE990859.11,17.htm), it’s a damn fine place to work. You can also just email jobs@casper.com and browse all their openings at casper.com/jobs (https://casper.com/jobs/). LOOK, MA! I PUT IN DATES! DevOpsDays Minneapolis, July 25 to 26th: get 20% off registration with the code SDT (https://devopsdays-minneapolis-2017.eventbrite.com?discount=SDT) (Thanks, Bridget!). SpringDays (https://www.springdays.io/ehome/index.php?eventid=228094&) - Atlanta (July 18th to 19th) (https://www.springdays.io/ehome/spring-days/atlanta) Matt will be at: DevSecOps at RSA Conf APJ (http://www.alldaydevops.com/blog/all-you-need-to-know-about-devops-connect-devsecops-at-rsac-singapore) Sydney Chef Meetup August 1st (https://www.meetup.com/Chef-Sydney/events/240660647/) Auckland AWS User Community August 3rd (https://www.meetup.com/AWS_NZ/events/237833579/) Brisbane Azure User Group October 11 (https://www.meetup.com/Brisbane-Azure-User-Group/events/240477415/) Podcast meta-talk Podcasts.app to be able to track what you listen to (https://cote.io/2017/06/28/apple-makes-major-podcast-updates/). Just paying for podcasts. $220m+ estimated TAM (https://cote.io/2017/06/28/podcast-market-estimated-at-over-220m/). We have a Casper ad! Amazon Buys Whole Foods This was not covered in the Mary Meeker slide-fest. Coté’s notebook on the topic (https://cote.io/2017/06/28/amazon-buying-whole-foods-notebook/). Stratechery on WF Acquisition (https://stratechery.com/2017/amazons-new-customer/) Exponent Podcast (http://exponent.fm/) What exactly are the barriers to entry here for other grocery stores. The business: online, and just the grocery store on it’s own...plus the 460+ physical stores for other goods? Barriers to entry, Amazon buyers (Whole Foods looks good now?), culture clash?, HEB love, private label BONUS LINKS! Not covered in episode. Gartner Magic Quadrant for IAAS is Here! Larry D. (http://www.zdnet.com/article/gartner-puts-aws-microsoft-azure-top-of-its-magic-quadrant-for-iaas/) Once again, what a change from way back when: CRN (http://www.crn.com/slide-shows/cloud/300087321/heres-who-made-gartners-2017-magic-quadrant-for-cloud-iaas.htm) The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/19/gartner_confirms_what_we_all_know_aws_and_microsoft_are_the_cloud_leaders_by_a_fair_way/) Johnny Leadgen can get a copy (https://pages.awscloud.com/mq-download-report.html). On Oracle: “Gartner warns potential customers to be cautious of high-pressure sales tactics.” How Microsoft Is Shifting Focus to Open Source Link (https://thenewstack.io/microsoft-shifting-emphasis-open-source/) “Chef is used to manage thousands of nodes internally across Azure, Office 365 and Bing.” Amazon Eyeing Slack? Link (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-15/messaging-startup-slack-said-to-draw-interest-from-amazon-com) “Buying Slack would help Seattle-based Amazon bolster its enterprise services as it seeks to compete with rivals like Microsoft Corp. and Alphabet Inc.’s Google.” Walmart Buys Bonobo I’ve got a Bonobo suit I really like (https://www.geekwire.com/2017/walmart-buy-bonobos-310m-continues-e-commerce-battle-amazon/). They had ModCloth and some others. Their M&A strategy has really shifted of late. Walmart Sez Get Off the AWS Finally a reason for multi-cloud (https://thenewstack.io/wal-mart-kicks-partners-off-amazons-cloud-implications-organizations/) BigCo’s gonna bully that supply-chain. What’s Wrong with Jenkins? Jenkins is the Nagios of CI/CD (https://thenewstack.io/many-problems-jenkins-continuous-delivery/) “No toolchain is perfect, but you can achieve software delivery perfection (or something close to it, at least) when you implement the right culture.” Tools don’t substitute culture. Oracle’s Swinging For the Fences (and missing) Link (https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/13/specsavers_says_no_to_oracle_cloud/) “He was also unwilling for Specsavers to become a guinea pig for Oracle's cloud.” Ubuntu Mobile Post Mortem Not much strategy… (http://www.lieberbiber.de/2017/06/20/my-ubuntu-for-mobile-devices-post-mortem/) Serverless and the Death of DevOps Link (http://redmonk.com/jgovernor/2017/06/02/serverless-and-the-the-death-of-devops-can-you-not/) Spoiler: “DevOps is the ultimate reactive, or event-driven, tech use case. It’s not going anywhere” State of DevOps 2017 Report Johnny Leadgen to the rescue (https://puppet.com/resources/whitepaper/state-of-devops-report)! Commercial Open Source Software Companies Link (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/1/d/17nKMpi_Dh5slCqzLSFBoWMxNvWiwt2R-t4e_l7LPLhU/htmlview#gid=0) A bit of sourcing on the numbers would be valuable Glad Chef’s not on the list, wouldn’t want to comment on the numbers Cloud Foundry Summit A whole mess of videos! 121 of them. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLhuMOCWn4P9hTlDEWJZV8JbVsW01avHF1&v=em-W0rVbCLc) Heptio Out of Stealth Mode with K8s Management Tool TheNewStack covere (https://thenewstack.io/heptio-comes-stealth-mode-ksonnet/) Official page (http://ksonnet.heptio.com/) File under “It didn’t already do that. I see.” Not sure this qualifies as “coming out of stealth”, everyone knows they work on open source K8s. I’m not seeing a monetization strategy yet beyond support & training. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but they raised $8.5 for their A-round BMC Software Exploring Merging with CA STOP THE PRESSES! TERRIBLE MEETS TERRIBLE (https://mobile-reuters-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN19C036)? So far, no confirmation, but (https://www.streetinsider.com/Analyst+Comments/CA+Technologies+%28CA%29%3A+Anti+Trust+Should+Not+Prevent+CABMC+Merger+-+Bernstein/13052376.html): “While the two companies were once dominant in the systems management industry, the analyst notes that CA and BMC have 7.5% and 8% share respectively as of FY16 which combined would put them on a near even footing with IBM, the largest vendor, at 15%.” “There are also many other vendors in the market including MSFT (7%) and NOW (5%) so anti trust concerns should not be an issue.” High Level Kubernetes Overview Link (https://jvns.ca/blog/2017/06/04/learning-about-kubernetes/) “Basically Kubernetes is a distributed system that runs programs (well, containers) on computers. You tell it what to run, and it schedules it onto your machines.” More on Service Meshes From James Governor, RedMonk (https://redmonk.com/jgovernor/2017/05/31/so-what-even-is-a-service-mesh-hot-take-on-istio-and-linkerd/) Recommendations Brandon: The Scholar and the Drop Out podcast (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-scholar-and-the-drop-out/id1143931540?mt=2); Coté’s add-on: Karl Lagerfella’s day (http://www.harpersbazaar.com/fashion/trends/a865/24-hours-with-karl-lagerfeld-0412/), no exercise and long night-shirts. Matt: Commando: Johnny Ramone’s Autobiography (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007IV89TS/) Coté: Gulf Shores, Alabama; Hillbilly Elegy (http://amzn.to/2tpO6Gm) and “The Dead Pig Collector.” (http://amzn.to/2tpoU2L)

Top Aussie broker, Ross Le Quesne, returns to The Adviser to discuss Aussie Parramatta's success, his acquisition of a new branch, why he's big on educating clients about the industry and why he favours attitude over skill when extending his team. Find out how this broker: - Went from being a PE teacher to writing $280 million in the last financial year - Aims to get 4.3 applications per business day - Got 200 years of experience in his office - Plans to grow his business 'organically' - Handles his recruitment process - Manages his referral network and relationships http://www.theadviser.com.au

Pastor Wiley Drake is in the news and it's amazing. There's also some political polling data from LifeWay Research as well as a big CP bump for FY16,

LinkedIn : Too many to-do’s to do Very interesting document outlining why LinkedIn are a bad investment from an Equity Research firm. Here are their main 5 reasons; (1) Lack of key functionality in its flagship Voyager app. (2) Relevance of proposed job openings or “Sponsored Updates” hasn’t improved. (3) A slow ramp to get the right content on lynda.com to make it more attractive to Enterprises. (4) High penetration of Hiring Solutions – translating into slowing growth in FY16. (5) The technical immaturity of Sales Navigator. Other highlights; • New company pages will provide salary data and allow for anonymous employee reviews (similar to Glassdoor). This could provide LinkedIn with a "Tricky balance” to find as many of these organisations are their biggest clients! • The SMB Recruiter product will be slow growth and likely to have a high cost of sales. • 20% of LinkedIn members are students. • Advertising solutions will be opening up their API to third-party operators. • New members are less engaged. • Less than 2% of members upgrade to a premium account. LinkedIn Changes • New Company Page insights. • More information on job postings. Other interesting stuff I saw this week • Is LinkedIn disconnecting us? • Contrary to rumours LinkedIn has not removed the connections download feature. • Some people are reporting a 403 error which may be due to LinkedIn being hyper sensitive about suspicious activity following the recent sale of passwords. It may be good advice to reduce activity in the short term until things die down. • The return of the Galek! The interview with our beloved infamous swimwear entrepreneur! • Exaggerated LinkedIn profile question.  

Presentations, FY 2016 Revised Budget Plan, FY16-22 Transit Developmental Plan, Transform 66, Public Health Week, Fair Housing Month, Public Safety Telecommunicators Week.

Presentations, FY 2016 Revised Budget Plan, FY16-22 Transit Developmental Plan, Transform 66, Public Health Week, Fair Housing Month, Public Safety Telecommunicators Week.

Harry Bryant and I discuss Davco's vision for the coming future and the business plan for the fiscal year 2016.

#20 - Low-carb beats low-fat in a meta-analysis of 17 clinical trials. Obese and overweight adults on low-carb diets lost more weight and had lower atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk.   #19 - What Kojima And Andrew House Were REALLY Saying In Their Announcement   #18 - Donald Trump loses Scottish windfarm appeal   #17 - Now THAT'S a selfie   #16 - Rand Paul rips Chris Christie: 'If you're in favor of World War III, you have your candidate'   #15 - TIL that when Cristiano Ronaldo was asked to donate his cleats for a charity auction benefitting 10-year old Erik Ortiz Cruz, who had a brain disorder that can cause 30 seizures a day, he instead paid the whole $83K for his surgery.   #14(1) - Congress creates a bill that will give NASA a great budget for 2016. Also hides the entirety of CISA in the bill.   #13(5) - Octopus makes a rolling armoured home out of a coconut.   #12 - They covered real brick with fake brick.   #11 - My friend's cat had surgery and now he has no pants   #10 - New Earth like planet spotted just 14 light years away: Wolf 1061c   #9 - Amazing Rendering   #8 - Sikh store-owner called terrorist and shot in the face in Michigan #7 - Digging peanuts   #6 - TIL in 1941 the world's largest seed bank (created by botanist Nikolai Vavilov) was housed in Leningrad. As the Germans surrounded the city forcing mass starvation, Vavilov's scientists refused to eat from the collection, slowly dying of hunger as they maintained 16 rooms of edible plants.   #5 - Octopus carrying around a coconut for portable protection xpost /r/interestingasfuck   #4 - "'When I stand across from King Hussein of Jordan, I say to him you have a friend sir who will stand with you to fight this fight,' Christie said during Tuesday's Republican primary debate. Only problem is that Hussein has been dead since 1999."   #3 - So this happened..   #2 - NASA gets $19.285B in the FY16 budget, nearly $750M above request, includes $1.2438B for Commercial Crew, the exact amount requested.   #1 - Lawmakers Have Snuck CISA Into a Bill That Is Guaranteed to Become a Law     Show contact E-mail: feedback.ireadit@gmail.com Twitter: @ireaditcast Phone: (508)-738-2278 Michael Schwan: @schwahnmichael

Now that the FY16 O5 promotion board results have been released and I’ve had a chance to review a number of officer records, here are my O5 promotion board takeaways. If you’d like to review the statistics, click here: https://mccareer.org/2015/07/18/fy16-cdr-promotion-board-statistics/ Promotion Board Takeaways If these things happen to you, you are very likely never going […]

We're joined by John Kepner, our own local coffee roasting expert and owner of neighborhood favorite Zeke's Coffee. Then we're joined by Ward 5 Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie. Councilmember McDuffie discusses the FY16 budget for DC, and how it impacts Ward 5.