Podcasts about Urjit Patel

Economists and markets have welcomed the reappointment of former IAS officer Shaktikanta Das as the Reserve Bank of India Governor. He is the first RBI chief to get an extension since the Bharatiya Janata Party-led government came to power in 2014. His predecessor Urjit Patel resigned before the end of his term amid differences with the government. And before him, incumbent Raghuram Rajan was not given an extension.   If he completes his full six years in office, Das will become the longest-serving RBI Governor in more than six decades.   What's more, in what is seen as a vote of confidence in him, the government broke away from the norm of extending the governor's term by two years and went ahead with the maximum three years permitted. And, his extension was announced nearly two months before his current term would end.   Das has been praised for maintaining a stable relationship with the government and his extension ensures the continuity of monetary policy.   Under Das, the central bank has cut the repo rate – from 6.25% in February to 4% in October 2021 – and embarked on a liquidity infusion plan. In its October monetary policy, the RBI stopped further liquidity infusion and announced variable rate reverse repo (VRRR) auctions to suck out excess liquidity. As the RBI starts to wind back its loose monetary policy, stability in its top leadership is seen as critical.   When Das took over in 2018, India's foreign exchange reserves were $455 billion. With aggressive accumulation, he took it to $641 billion. He oversaw the bailout of YES Bank and the merger of Lakshmi Vilas Bank with DBS.   He also played a key role in ensuring that the government's borrowing programme during the pandemic went smoothly without much disruption to markets.   According to CARE Ratings Chief Economist Madan Sabnavis: Extension to Das a very good idea Timing of announcement eliminates guesswork It dispels notion of disagreements between RBI and govt RBI played critical role during pandemic, ensured liquidity Govt borrowing programme didn't face hurdles Restructuring of loans, moratorium helped banks with asset quality Continuity of Governor good for markets Das reiterated calibrated approach to unwind liquidity Watch Video

In this episode, political scientist and economic historian Rohit Chandra (@rohitreads) gives an account of business-state relations in India over the last two decades. In this wide-ranging conversation, we discuss trends of market concentration since 2014, the state of public sector units, small businesses, and the state of banking among other things. Rohit, together with Rahul Verma (@rahul_tverma), has curated the Seminar Magazine Symposium for October 2020 on the topic A delicate balance: a symposium on untangling business-state relations in India.भारत में सरकार और बिज़नेस के रिश्ते कैसे बदले है पिछले दो दशकों में, यही है विषय इस पुलियाबाज़ी का | क्यों भारत में बिज़नेस केन्द्रीभूत हो रहे है? भारत के छोटे उद्योग छोटे ही क्यों रह जाते है? “सूट-बूट की सरकार” टिप्पणी को क्या इस सरकार ने दिल से लगा लिया? ऐसे ही कुछ सवालों पर चर्चा की हमने आईआईटी दिल्ली की स्कूल ऑफ़ पब्लिक पॉलिसी में असिस्टेंट प्रोफेसर रोहित चंद्र से, जो इस विषय के आर्थिक इतिहास पर काफ़ी वर्षों से अध्ययन कर रहे है |For more:Seminar Magazine Symposium for October 2020: A delicate balance: a symposium on untangling business-state relations in India, edited by Rohit Chandra and Rahul VermaDoing business in a deals World, by Sabyasachi Kar, Lant Pritchett, Spandan Roy, and Kunal SenBad Money by Vivek Kaul, Overdraft by Urjit Patel, Bloom in the Desert by D V Kapur, In Service of the Republic by Ajay Shah and Vijay KelkarThe Seen and the Unseen ep 186, Pratap Bhanu Mehta and Amit VarmaPuliyabaazi is on these platforms:Twitter: https://twitter.com/puliyabaaziFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/puliyabaaziInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/puliyabaazi/Subscribe & listen to the podcast on iTunes, Google Podcasts, Castbox, AudioBoom, YouTube, Spotify or any other podcast app.

This newsletter is really a weekly public policy thought-letter. While excellent newsletters on specific themes within public policy already exist, this thought-letter is about frameworks, mental models, and key ideas that will hopefully help you think about any public policy problem in imaginative ways. It seeks to answer just one question: how do I think about a particular public policy problem/solution?PS: If you enjoy listening instead of reading, we have this edition available as an audio narration courtesy the good folks at Ad-Auris. If you have any feedback, please send it to us.India Policy Watch: Rajan-Acharya on PSB ReformsInsights on burning policy issues in India— RSJRaghuram Rajan and Viral Acharya have a new paper titled, Indian Banks: A Time To Reform?, that looks at a comprehensive set of reforms that will enable public sector banks to drive the Indian economic growth engine instead of being a drag they currently are. Rajan and Acharya have held leadership roles at the RBI and know a thing or two about issues relating to the banking sector. Here’s a nice summary of the recommendations by the BloombergQuint.So, what to make of them? There are 4 points we’d like to raise:Is this the time? Rajan and Acharya argue maintaining status quo is untenable. The huge strain on government finances now shifts the Overton window for much-needed reforms of the public sector banking system. This is their hope. In my view, shifting the status quo at this time carries the risk of falling off the brink. There’s a fog of uncertainty about the duration of the pandemic, the state of our public finances and the nature and length of recovery. More than any immediate reform we need some stability, however precarious, at this moment.What about the empire? The paper reiterates the need for a systemic solution to the bad loan problem. The idea for a nationalised and a private “bad bank” is revived along with a strict time-bound process for bankruptcy procedure. The recent books by Urjit Patel (who succeeded Rajan) and Acharya have outlined in great detail how there’s no incentive for anyone in the political economy or in the banking sector to implement the IBC process. Everyone is happy kicking the can down the road. Any attempt at enforcing strict insolvency guidelines is met with resistance. Patel named the relevant chapter in his book ‘The Empire Strikes Back’. And this resistance to change was the state of affairs before the pandemic. So, to expect a serious reckoning by the government now is out of question. In fact, we seem to be going the other direction. The suspension of IBC is to be extended by another quarter and the restructuring proposal by Kamath committee leaves the discretion with the bank on triggering default procedure. We will have to learn to live with elevated levels of NPAs and banking system stress especially in public sector banks (PSBs).Who will implement them? There are proposals to improve the performance of PSBs through greater operational freedom, performance-linked bank financing plans and winding down the Department of Financial Services (hah!). While these are good intentions, operationalising them in a system that has bloated cost structure, unionisation and relatively lax performance management culture won’t be easy. There are suggestions that are akin to the Kamath committee on giving loans based on cash flow and liquidity position of the companies instead of their assets. More aggressive norms for provisioning for bad loans and making sure the promoters have skin in the game in long-term infrastructure projects are also suggested. There are other suggestions to manage banking system risks better that have been around for some time. But implementing them will mean standing up to the ‘empire’. Is stake sale the panacea? Finally, we have the issue of the ownership structure of banks. The paper proposes bringing the stake of the government below 50 per cent (state-linked banks) and gradual privatisation of select PSBs. While this step to create a distance between it and the everyday operations of the bank is necessary, this alone won’t address the governance issues of the PSBs. There’s an entire superstructure (the ‘empire’) that manages and lives off the PSBs that includes unions, bureaucrats, various oversight committees and temporal political interests. This influences everything from recruitment, performance management, promotions, disbursement guidelines to risk management practices. This won’t change overnight merely because the government stake is below 50 per cent.The paper brings together all the extant issues relating to banking reforms in India. In that sense it is a valuable compendium of ideas – most old, some new. The key question remains: what’s the political will to take up these reforms now? The authors are aware of this too:“While we have put together a variety of suggestions, many of these have been discussed in the past. Many concern public sector banks and their governance. Is there any reason to be more confident they will be implemented now?”And they bring up the issue of incentive. What’s in it either for the bureaucracy or the government (either this or any in future) to take up these urgent reforms? As they write in conclusion:“The government obtains enormous power from directing bank lending. Sometimes this power is exercised to advance public goals such as financial inclusion or infrastructure finance, sometimes it is used to offer patronage to, or exercise control over, industrialists. The government also has potential access to an enormous amount of sensitive information through its state ownership – for instance, the identity of purchasers of electoral bonds is known only to the State Bank of India. The government can oblige party members by appointing favorites to positions in public sector banks, including on their boards – and once there, some of these appointees use their influence to direct bank loans to favored parties. Parliamentarians of all parties are not immune to the lure of public sector banks – the banks are often asked to arrange the logistics for their fact-finding committee meetings in enjoyable locales across the country. And Finance Ministry bureaucrats are reluctant to let go of the power that allows a young joint secretary to order the chairpersons of national banks around.”Just reading that passage is kind of depressing. Besides the above, the ordinary citizen isn’t exercised by the deteriorating condition of public sector banking in India. It will never be an issue in any election. Rajan and Acharya believe the pandemic and the enormous resource constraints it will place on the government will make it difficult to recapitalise the banks. This in turn will curb credit flow and impede growth in the economy. “With government deficits and debt levels reaching enormous levels, there simply are not enough budgetary resources to recapitalize banks. An encumbered, under-capitalized public sector banking system will not lend well, which will be a huge tax on growth, as it has been for the last six years. More worrisome, without reform the banks will cumulate further losses. Status quo is simply not an option.”“It is important that the government use the urgency of the moment to draw key players together to develop a reasonable reform path; it should be comprehensive and not just a one-off “tick-the-box” exercise dealing with a thin sliver of issues. It should then reach a consensus with concerned players such as unions and political parties, and then embark on the reforms.”We aren’t as sanguine as they are. The political capital that will need to be spent (or invested) in implementing the reforms they have suggested in this paper is enormous. While this government and the PM enjoy unprecedented goodwill and support, this is a bet that might just be too big even for it. The PM has shown an appetite for ‘bold’ steps. But they tend to be one-off events. A deeper and deliberate structural reform of this kind that will take years to implement will be a genuine bold measure. One can only hope he take that step. A Framework a Week: Nine Competing Visions of EqualityTools for thinking public policy— Pranay KotasthaneAssume the Indian government plans to distribute ₹50,000 crores to 50 crore Indians this year, how would it go about doing this equitably? The intuitively obvious solution is to divide the sum equally — ₹1000 to everyone. Simple, isn’t it? Think again. Isn’t it unfair to the nearly 80 crore people left out of this distribution in the first place? Even amongst the chosen 50 crore Indians, isn’t equal division unfair to some who need this money more than others? Isn’t it unfair to the socially disadvantaged groups who might not even have access to prove their identity?This is what Deborah Stone calls the paradox of distribution in her textbook Policy Paradox:“equality often means inequality, and equal treatment often means unequal treatment. The same distribution may look equal or unequal, depending on where you focus.”This is a key insight. Stone lays out a useful framework for thinking about what equality means. She lists nine ways in which one can use equity language to distribute, often in ways that you would consider to be unequal. Each of these ways equalises along one dimension and can be considered as being ‘unequal’ on another. These nine ways are split along three dimensions — who gets something, what gets distributed, and how is the distribution done. (Deborah Stone, Policy Paradox, Page 47)Way 1 deals with membership. It’s easy to say that things should be divided equally amongst all but who constitutes this all is a tricky question. Citizenship, for example, is a membership criterion that is exclusive by nature. Way 2 deals with merit. It argues that the more deserving should be rewarded for their accomplishment. Hence, any distribution problem should also be resolved by identifying achievement or aptitude.Way 3 is a claim that resources should be allocated based on ranked subgroups. For example, employees in all organisations are paid according to rank. Equally ranked get equal pay, unequally ranked get unequal payouts.Way 4 is a claim for group-based distribution. Caste-based reservation is an example of this kind of equality.Way 5 expands the boundaries of the item. If the government were to distribute the Rs 50000 crore only to those Indians who haven’t received their rations from the public distribution system in the last one month, the boundary of the item being distributed changes from only cash to a basket comprising of cash and food.Way 6 is a claim on distribution according to the value that the recipients ascribe to that item.Ways 7, 8, and 9 are about equalising the process. Way 7 talks about distribution based on fair competition between all players. Way 8 talks about distributing based on a lottery so that chances are equalised. Way 9 calls for a vote to decide who gets what.This categorisation into nine definitions of equality is useful for a policy analyst. There’s no right answer on which of these is the best method, of course. What can be said is that Way 1 (equal slices amongst all members) and Way 8 (lottery) are intuitively powerful and are used by policymakers when they can't find better reasons to justify their decisions.So the lesson for a policy analyst is that faced with a distributive problem, look at these definitions of equality and pick one that seems the fairest. It’s easy to say that inequality is a problem. It’s far more difficult to answer what being equal means.World Policy Watch: Tool To Change Social NormsInsights on burning policy issues in India—RSJShould courts be framing social policies? This question is the subtext of a number of articles that have appeared since the death of US Supreme Court (SC) associate justice, Ruth Bader Ginsberg (RBG) last week. The Trump administration is moving with speed to get a conservative judge confirmed by the Senate before the elections in November. The Republicans control the senate and nominating a judge of their ideological persuasion now will decisively swing the 9-member SC bench to a 6-3 ‘conservative’ majority. Why has nominating a judge to the highest court turned into such a contentious political issue? Not so long back judges would get nominated with overwhelming majority from the Senate. RBG won her confirmation with a 96-3 majority. Justice Antonin Scalia who was on the other end of the ideological divide won his nomination 98-0. The days of such bipartisanship are over. Why? All About IncentivesLike everything in life, it is about incentives. First, the lifelong tenure of a judge means they have the ability to influence decisions for a long period of time. As the ideological divide has gotten sharper, both Democrats and Republicans are keen on nominating more ‘extreme’ judges. Second, there’s an incentive to nominate relatively younger judges who will sit at the SC for a long time and influence decisions. This has meant nominating less experienced jurists who are ideologically ‘pure’. This riles up the other side. Lastly, an increase in the number of judgments that are decided by the slenderest of margins (5-4) works as a feedback loop to the parties. It feeds into their anxieties of what’s at stake and they have greater motivation to nominate more extreme candidates.At the heart of these debates is a deeper question about the larger role the SC has taken over the years in legislating social issues in the US. The two most famous examples, of course, are Roe vs Wade and Brown vs Board of Education. Courts have turned into lawmakers is how it appears. Seen from here in India, US is a litigious country. As far back as 1835, Tocqueville had noted ‘sooner or later, every major dispute in the US ends up in courtroom.’ So, it is no surprise when women, minorities and other under-represented sections started contesting the social norms handed down to them, the matters reached courts for resolution. The Conservative AnxietyThe conservative preference is for any social change to be gradual. Societal change is shaped through the many eddies of debates and protests that resist the flow of the mainstream. As they gain wider acceptance, they begin changing the course of flow of social norms. This could be painstakingly slow, but it makes change acceptable and sustainable. For the conservatives, the role of the judges is to apply laws, not to create them. Going beyond this brief becomes judicial activism. So, the original conservative view was all issues of public or social policy should be discussed and debated by the legislative and executive branches of the state that represents the society. Courts resolve disputes following the written down law while sending back any ambiguities to the legislative arm for approval. There is a lot of merit in this argument. It is difficult to imagine how a single complainant with a specific grievance in a combative judicial process be the basis for drafting a norm for the society. Isn’t there a risk of the courts overlooking the true costs and benefits to the society while judging a single case? Would the second order impact of their decision be visible to them? Should we allow the judges to bring in their personal values into issues of constitutional merits? And let’s not pretend judges are above this. ‘Judicial activism’ is unavoidable if we let courts decide on such issues. In fact, the current debate in the US about nominations is an implicit acceptance that judges insert their personal code into judgments. When you consider the adversarial nature of many historic social judgments (both in the US and India) and the costs such a process extracts in polarising the society further, it becomes clear litigation is a blunt instrument to carve out social change. Courts shouldn’t pre-empt social and political debates. The Liberal ActivismThe liberal position, as it has evolved over time, is marked with suspicion of the society reforming itself. The classical liberal approach to this problem was to accelerate the process of change in the society. This was to be achieved through a combined political, social and cultural assault on the bastions of conservatism in the society. This led to the portrait of a liberal as a perpetual activist in a constant state of mobilisation to upend existing norms. The liberal belief that society must change from within was no different from the conservative stance. The difference was on the need to induce change through proactive measures and on the speed of change. This need for speed eventually led the liberals to the courts. To the liberals, this wasn’t difficult to justify. The law isn’t ever ‘value neutral’. Like Sahir Ludhianvi once wrote (Chitralekha, 1964):“Yeh paap hai kya, yeh punya hai kya, reeton pe dharm ki moharein hai,Har yug mein badalte dharmon ko kaise aadarsh banaoge?” What’s right or wrong has always been a compilation of enforceable values. This is a forever changing or evolving construct. Since people use these values in their daily lives, the courts can define their boundaries of ‘reasonableness’. A couple of other reasons nudged the liberal position closer to supporting judicial activism. First, it became clear that there can be no regime where every issue of public policy can be resolved through the executive or legislative arms of the state. How representative is the legislature anyway? Or, how compromised? This centralised policymaking unit that changes every few years in a democratic process can’t be expected to draft policies that will be considered the final word and stand the test of time. Also, there are common laws that precede the state and changing them requires blunt force of law itself. Second, as the legislative environment turned more partisan and dysfunctional, the drafting of laws became more imprecise or vague to accommodate political bargains. This has meant a constant need for interpreting or divining the legislative intent of laws. This act of precise interpretation and proofreading has turned judges into lawmakers by default. Lastly, the liberals who are often blamed for nominating activist judges argue this is a matter of perspective. Only when the issue at hand goes against the conservative agenda, it is considered judicial activism. Not otherwise. The Perils Of (Any Kind Of) CentralisationBased on evidence it can be argued the conservatives have lost the argument. The courts are at front and centre of social policymaking today. The many historic judgments that cleave the US society are evidence of it. The legislative arms of the state representing the society aren’t drafting these laws. But here’s the irony. The conservatives have co-opted the liberal model. With a few strokes of good fortune, the single-minded agenda of turning the US SC bench into conservative majority has been fruitful. The peril of pushing social change into the cabins of a powerful, centralised and an autonomous institution is clear to the liberals now when the shoe is on the other foot. A blunt instrument doesn’t look blunt till it is in the hands of your adversary. The path of wresting back control to the society will be long and arduous.  Matsyanyaaya: COVID-19 Warrants Long Overdue Doctrinal Shifts in Military PlanningBig fish eating small fish = Foreign Policy in action— Pranay KotasthaneLt Gen Prakash Menon and I have a new paper out in the inaugural edition of the Indian Public Policy Review journal.We argue that the economic shock of COVID-19 makes the current method of defence budgeting redundant. When the GDP itself is set to reduce, defence expenditure demands as a percentage of GDP is less feasible. On the other hand, the situation on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Ladakh has demonstrated again that managing China, not just Pakistan, should be the focus of India’s military planning. To overcome these two challenges, a few incremental budget cuts, postponing of capital acquisition plans, and forgoing of salaries for a day would be insufficient. Instead, we argue that it’s imperative to address the mismatches between India’s political objectives and the kind of force structure put in place to meet those objectives. We identify four such mismatches.Derived from these mismatches, we propose six doctrinal shifts — a paradigm of employable power, a structure for integrated theatre commands, conversion of manpower to human capital investment, organisational changes to build firepower, and a shift in focus to the seas and new domains.Do read and let us know what you think. HomeWorkReading and listening recommendations on public policy matters[Article] Excerpts from Charles Tilly classic Misreading, then Rereading, Nineteenth-Century Social Change.[Article] The P.J. Nayak committee (2014) report on Banking reforms. It has a lot of points that remain relevant.[Paper] A must-read paper on equality and fairness by Christina Starmans, Mark Sheskin and Paul Bloom. Money quote: “humans naturally favour fair distributions, not equal ones, and that when fairness and equality clash, people prefer fair inequality over unfair equality”.[Article] Looking beyond reservations for equality. That’s all for this weekend. Read and share. Get on the email list at publicpolicy.substack.com

There is a race to the bottom in Indian media. It is rational. Its reasons are structural. The state and society must share the blame. Amit Varma and Vivek Kaul explain why in episode 8 of Econ Central. Also discussed: public sector banks, our love for simple narratives and Raat Akeli Hai. Also check out: 1. Raat Akeli Hai -- Honey Trehan. 2. 'Does he look depressed?' -- The Times Now tweet. 3. Television Price Controls -- Episode 27 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Ashok Malik). 4. Why Are Indian News Channels so Disappointing? -- Ashok Malik. 5. The top paid newsletters on Substack. 6. 1000 True Fans -- Kevin Kelly. 7. 1,000 True Fans? Try 100 -- Li Jin. 8. The State of the Media — Episode 46 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Prem Panicker). 9. The State of the Media 2 — Episode 89 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Sidharth Bhatia & Peter Griffin). 10. What Happened to Our Journalism? -- Episode 178 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Nidhi Razdan). 11. Persuasion -- Yascha Mounk's newsletter. 12. Fighting Fake News -- Episode 133 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Pratik Sinha). 13. Non-Performing Assets -- Episode 32 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Vivek Kaul). 14. IL&FS and the Indian Financial System -- Episode 91 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Vivek Kaul and Ashutosh Datar). 15. Overdraft -- Urjit Patel. 16. Quest for Restoring Financial Stability in India -- Viral Acharya. 17. The govt and RBI face a trilemma regarding PSBs -- Vivek Kaul. 18. RBI’s forecast on NPAs has often missed the mark -- Vivek Kaul. 19. Indian banks are in for a ₹20-trillion hole -- Vivek Kaul. 20. Privatisation of banks is a great idea, and will remain so -- Vivek Kaul. 21. Urjit Patel Ko Gussa Kyon Aata Hai? -- Vivek Kaul. 22. Whose Money is it Anyway? -- Amit Varma (on Milton Friedman's four ways of spending money). 23. Indian Board President's XI vs England XI, Vadodara, 2006. 24. The Evolution of Everything -- Episode 96 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Matt Ridley). 25. Who Broke Our Republic? -- Episode 163 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Kapil Komireddi). 26. The Economics of the Chilling Effect -- Episode 5 of Econ Central. 27. Facts Don’t Matter. Stories do -- Amit Varma (on Donald Trump & simple narratives). Do subscribe to The India Uncut Newsletter, Amit's new project. And pick up Bad Money, Vivek's bestselling book.

The Indian real estate market is an unusual beast: there is as much politics in it as economics. Amit Varma and Vivek Kaul get together in episode 7 of Econ Central to dissect its innards. Also discussed: why Joe Biden is like Rahul Roy, and MCBC gaalis reflect a toxic mindset and should be abandoned by us.   Also check out: 1. The Mystery of Real Estate Prices -- Episode 30 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Vivek Kaul). 2. India's Unreal Estate -- Vivek Kaul for Newslaundry. 3. Why car sales are falling but not realty prices -- Vivek Kaul. 4. Narendra Modi Takes a Great Leap Backwards -- Amit Varma on DeMon. 5. Quid Pro Quo: Builders, Politicians, and Election Finance in India -- Devesh Kapur & Milan Vasihnav. 6. Crime in Indian Politics -- Episode 114 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Milan Vaishnav). 7. Overdraft: Saving the Indian Saver -- Urjit Patel. 8. The episodes of The Seen and the Unseen on Rent Control and FSI with Alex Tabarrok. 9. Twelve Dream Reforms -- Episode 138 of The Seen and the Unseen (Shruti Rajagopalan, Rajeswari Sengupta & Vivek Kaul). 10. The Market for 'Lemons' -- George Akerlof. 11. Rethinking Work, Home and Office -- Ajay Shah. 12. Rahul Roy and the Voting Mechanics of Bigg Boss -- Amit Varma. 13. Joe Biden’s Vice-Presidential Pick: Who’s in the Running? -- Alexander Burns in the New York Times.14. Aashiqui (1990) -- Rahul Roy's debut film. 15. Pyaar Ka Saaya -- Produced by B Subhash and starring Rahul Roy. 16. That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen -- Frédéric Bastiat. 17. The Law --  Frédéric Bastiat. 18. Conversation and Society -- Episode 182 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Russ Roberts). 19. Economics in One Lesson -- Henry Hazlitt. 20. Population Is Not a Problem, but Our Greatest Strength -- Amit Varma. 21. The Hype Around the Stock Market -- Episode 6 of Econ Central. 22. Max Roser's Tweet on the decline in smoking rates. Do check out Amit's course, The Art of Clear Writing, as well as Vivek's books, including Bad Money.

Urjit Patel uses an interesting analogy the 'Checkhov's Gun' to answer questions like what is the banking sector and what are the core problems in it?  

In Episode 2 of InvestStream, Pankaj and Harjit discuss the resignation of Urjit Patel, the RBI Governor, the outlook for the Indian Rupee, Google’s acquisition of Where’s My Train, Siftery’s exit, and funding rounds raised by NinjaCart and Roposo. We then turn our attention to Bitcoin and blockchain. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/pjain/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/pjain/support

In this episode of NL Hafta 202, the regular Hafta gang of Manisha Pande, Abhinandan Sekhri, and Anand Vardhan is joined by Saurabh Dwivedi, founder-editor of Lallantop.Saurabh, who travelled for a month in Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan in the run-up to the elections, has some great insights to share. The team discusses the reasons for Congress’ victory in the Hindi heartland and whether it will have any bearing on the 2019 general election.Saurabh explains how PM Modi failed as a communicator in Chhattisgarh and why his speeches didn’t click with the masses.Anand tells us why political analysis as we see in news media is overrated. Abhinandan says the Assembly results were not Rahul Gandhi’s Pappu-pass-ho-gaya moment, but more a failure of the BJP government.The Hafta gang also discusses the resignation of RBI chief Urjit Patel and his successor Shaktikanta Das. Abhinandan says: "...the way everyone is dismissing him on his degree, I disagree with that...I will not diss him on that."Finally, the team discusses the Ambani wedding and what it means to be as rich as Mukesh Ambani.Listen up! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The past weeks saw an uncharacteristically public spat between the Government and the RBI over who calls the shots over banking and money supply. The RBI doesn't want to pump in money into the economy. The government desperately needs it to. Join your simblifiers as they wade through deep waters to fish out the truth Disclaimer: This episode was recorded before RBI governor Urjit Patel's sudden resignation NEW TO SIMBLIFIED? It's an Indian podcast - probably the best to come from Malad West - that takes things that happen around us, and deconstructs them in a language you can understand, often surmounting several puns and PG Wodehouse references along the way. We aim to make you appear smarter during parties, job interviews, and dates. Your hosts (and Twitter / Instagram handles) are Chuck (@chuck_gopal / @chuckofalltrades), Srikeit (@srikeit, @srikeit) and Naren (@shenoyn, @shenoynv). We are part of the IVM Podcast network, who, till this day, wonder why they signed us on. For more awesome IVM podcasts,find us at:  Website: Indusvox.com Facebook: facebook.com/ivmpodcasts Twitter: twitter.com/ivmpodcasts Instagram: instagram.com/ivmpodcasts

The week gone by saw Sensex plunge from 700 points to rise by over 600 points. With a volatile and eventful week, it was a challenge keeping up with the news every day. In this week’s podcast, we talk about all that brought wild swings in the market. Urjit Patel's departure, the impact of his resignation on the markets, and all you need to know about the new appointee Shaktikanta Das, will be the topics of discussion. That apart, we will also be talking on lots of other topics including Vijay Mallya’s extradition, India’s current account deficit, India’s retail inflation among others. What’s more? Research Analyst, Girish Shetty shares his insights on such events. He talks about the dinosaurs in stock markets. Now what are these dinosaurs? Tune in to find out…

NL Hafta has gone behind the paywall, but we love our listeners. So, here's a little sneak peek into the complete episode. In this episode of NL Hafta 202, the regular Hafta gang of Manisha Pande, Abhinandan Sekhri, and Anand Vardhan is joined by Saurabh Dwivedi, founder-editor of Lallantop.Saurabh, who travelled for a month in Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan in the run-up to the elections, has some great insights to share. The team discusses the reasons for Congress’ victory in the Hindi heartland and whether it will have any bearing on the 2019 general election.Saurabh explains how PM Modi failed as a communicator in Chhattisgarh and why his speeches didn’t click with the masses.Anand tells us why political analysis as we see in news media is overrated. Abhinandan says the Assembly results were not Rahul Gandhi’s Pappu-pass-ho-gaya moment, but more a failure of the BJP government.The Hafta gang also discusses the resignation of RBI chief Urjit Patel and his successor Shaktikanta Das. Abhinandan says: "...the way everyone is dismissing him on his degree, I disagree with that...I will not diss him on that."Finally, the team discusses the Ambani wedding. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The Indian market is set for a negative start ahead of the Reserve Bank of India board meeting later in the day. On Thursday, ministers, led by FM Arun Jaitley, attacked Urjit Patel on RBI functioning and termed the central bank's policies as "unreasonable". On the global front, Asian shares were defensive on Friday as investors kept a wary eye on economic tensions between US and China. At 07:26 AM, SGX Nifty, an early indicator of the Nifty 50's trend in India, was down 0.39 percent at 10,784, indicating a negative opening for the Indian market.

With Shaktikanta Das's appointment as the RBI governor, what all transpired with his appointment and why is it that Urjit Patel resigned? Mr. Akhilesh Bhargava, Business Editor of HW Business and Finance shares his insights on the matter.

The Indian market is set for a positive start after making a smart recovery in the previous session amid the assembly election counting. Investors took note of the assembly poll outcome. The Congress won in the key states— Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh, though final numbers were not out yet. TRS won in Telangana and Mizo National Front (MNF) returned to power in Mizoram. In another important development, the government on Tuesday appointed Shaktikanta Das as the new RBI governor for the next three years, after Urjit Patel abruptly resigned from his post on Monday. At 07:40 AM, SGX Nifty, an early indicator of the Nifty 50's trend in India, was up 0.06 percent at 10,606.50, indicating a recovery in the Indian market.

Radhika Rao, Economist at DBS Bank reacts to the news that The Reserve Bank of India Governor, Urjit Patel, has resigned and what this means for markets and the rupee.

The Indian market is set for a negative start after Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) governor Urjit Patel tendered his resignation with immediate effect on Monday. "Markets certainly will be concerned unless there is further clarification that comes through tonight," R Sivakumar, head of fixed income at Axis Mutual Fund, told Reuters. Indian investors are also cautious ahead of the outcome of the assembly elections in the five major states — Rajasthan, Chattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Mizoram and Telangana — which is due Tuesday. At 07:15 AM, SGX Nifty, an early indicator of the Nifty 50's trend in India, was down 1.51 percent at 10,359.00, indicating a negative opening for the Indian market.

India’s prime minister Narendra Modi has become embroiled in a public row with the country’s central bank and its governor Urjit Patel, which critics say puts the independence of the Reserve Bank of India at risk. Victor Mallet, the FT's Asia news editor, tells Katie Martin the story.Contributors: Adam Samson, head of FastFT, Katie Martin, capital markets editor and Victor Mallet, Asia news editor. Producer: Fiona Symon See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Reserve Bank Of India governor Urjit Patel may consider resigning from his post if Section 7 of RBI Act is invoked to transfer reserves.The government and the RBI came to loggerheads after the deputy governor Viral Acharya hinted that the government is trying to hinder the independent working of the institution.The spat became more public when Finance Minister Arun Jaitley blamed the institution for “lending spree” during UPA era. We spoke to Vishwas Utagi, Banking expert over this ongoing rift between the RBI vs the Government.

This week Mint Editor R. Sukumar discusses his top stories from Mint: Flipkart-Amazon tussle, RBI's new governor Urjit Patel, UPI interface and IITs blacklisting of 31 companies. #Flipkart #Amazon #UrjitPatel #RBI #RaghuramRajan #IIT #UPI