"First, we will conduct a caste census...to know the exact population and status of backward castes, SCs, STs, minorities and other castes. After that, the financial and institutional survey will begin. Subsequently, we will take up the historic assignment to distribute the wealth of India, jobs and other welfare schemes to these sections based on their population," he said. Rahul claimed that backward castes, dalits, minorities and adivasis comprised nearly 90% of India's population, but had miniscule share in govt jobs, big companies and other sectors.
1. Logistically, one problem is that rich have assets either in immovable property or in banks abroad. How can one redistribute immovable property or confiscate money abroad?
2. Constitutionally, one can impose 80% tax of the richest 20% of India. It should also be fine to redistribute that wealth to the poor through cash transfers. However, if redistribution is only confined to backward castes and minorities, as his speech suggests, that may be constitutionally difficult. The creamy layer will have to be excluded and the poor among forward castes and non-muslim Minorities (Sikhs, Christians, Parsis and Jains) will have to be included as well.
3. Another issue is that of agricultural income. Will redistribution entail taking way wealth of rich farmers?
Bhai, yeh chunaavi jumle hain. Sometimes they come from Modi, at others from Rahul. Don’t take them to heart. Put your head down and keep making your living in whatever way you were before now.
The Karnataka elections taught them that overpromising is a sure and effective way of overcoming anti-incumbency. The desperation of winning matters a lot more than actually being able to deliver the stars and the moon - holds true across all political parties. There's so much money and power that comes with occupying the driving seat.
My two cents to those voting the first time. Please put in the effort to know the candidates for your constituency. Their governance track record should hold precedence over everything else. Then move to the manifestos. Filter out the ideology related mumbo jumbo and see which party has a governance plan that serves your interests first and then the interest of others. If the candidates visit your home/ neighbourhood to pitch for your vote and there's confusion on which candidate to pick on the basis of the aforementioned criteria, take the trouble of asking them questions and pick the candidate who presents a answer that's rooted in earnest and common sense. Don't get swayed by BS. As lawyers, your BS filter should be better than your peers. Remember, the politician is a "service provider". Unapologetically, pick one the same way you choose a SIM card/ cellular service provider. There has been serious horse trading across political lines. These rogues don't have an ideology themselves; ideology is just trope for them to mobilise support. The ideology pitch is therefore bull 💩.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/rahul-gandhi-vows-survey-for-wealth-redistribution/articleshow/109096058.cms#
Here's why I think there are challenges:
1. Logistically, one problem is that rich have assets either in immovable property or in banks abroad. How can one redistribute immovable property or confiscate money abroad?
2. Constitutionally, one can impose 80% tax of the richest 20% of India. It should also be fine to redistribute that wealth to the poor through cash transfers. However, if redistribution is only confined to backward castes and minorities, as his speech suggests, that may be constitutionally difficult. The creamy layer will have to be excluded and the poor among forward castes and non-muslim Minorities (Sikhs, Christians, Parsis and Jains) will have to be included as well.
3. Another issue is that of agricultural income. Will redistribution entail taking way wealth of rich farmers?
All in all, this is easier said than done.
My two cents to those voting the first time. Please put in the effort to know the candidates for your constituency. Their governance track record should hold precedence over everything else. Then move to the manifestos. Filter out the ideology related mumbo jumbo and see which party has a governance plan that serves your interests first and then the interest of others. If the candidates visit your home/ neighbourhood to pitch for your vote and there's confusion on which candidate to pick on the basis of the aforementioned criteria, take the trouble of asking them questions and pick the candidate who presents a answer that's rooted in earnest and common sense. Don't get swayed by BS. As lawyers, your BS filter should be better than your peers. Remember, the politician is a "service provider". Unapologetically, pick one the same way you choose a SIM card/ cellular service provider. There has been serious horse trading across political lines. These rogues don't have an ideology themselves; ideology is just trope for them to mobilise support. The ideology pitch is therefore bull 💩.