The Different Types of Interviews
Courtesy :- theoatmeal
Saturday, March 8
Friday, December 20
MEASURES TO REINVIGORATE INDIAN ECONOMY
Indian economy is looking to be at a perfect storm. A loose fiscal policy uncorked a spell of high inflation, triggering a tight monetary policy to fight it. The outcome was the economy began to lose momentum. Mismanagement added to woes by way of stalled industrial projects and policy flip-flops. The likelihood that the US will soon begin to roll back almost five years of monetary stimulus adds to the uncertainty.
The recent measures announced by the finance minister P Chidambaram looks quite inadequate to reinvigorate India's economy.
Import duty on gold has been increased thrice in 2013 by a cumulative six percentage points to 10%, in an attempt to rein in the current account deficit, but incremental rise will not solve a structural problem.
At the heart of India's current economic problems is the runaway fiscal deficit. It also happens to be under the direct control of the finance ministry. Chidambaram surprised everyone by announcing a fiscal deficit of just 4.9% of GDP in 2012-13, as this was lower than projected in the budget. This also helped the government regain credibility and was rewarded by an upgrade in the outlook of credit rating agency Fitch.
Still, the situation presents an opportunity to renew the jittery investors' faith in India. The overarching approach has to be to project stability. This will partially undo the damage of the last few years and also draw in the $70 billion Chidambaram forecast as the foreign money needed in 2013-14 to bridge the current account deficit.
The next step should be to follow through on the promised fiscal road map as this will be the single biggest stabilizing influence on the economy. Pulling back subsidies is critical. The food bill, however, sends a negative signal on the government's commitment and suggests an irrational approach to welfare measures. It should not be allowed to sidetrack reforms of fertilizer and fuel subsidies. Retail fuel subsidy today costs the exchequer Rs 379 crore a day and can be tackled through fast price adjustments.
Fiscal stabilization has to be complemented by catalyzing investments. Banks are hobbled by over Rs 2 trillion of bad loans. Here too the government can help by facilitating clearance of stalled projects that are stuck because of poor coordination among different arms of the government. Better systems are only the first steps for unclogging the investment pipeline. A turnaround requires a steadfast policy shift towards incentivizing growth.
Reduce the current account deficit- India adopted LPG policy in 1991 to avoid the precipitated balance of payment crisis since then the value of India's international trade has increased sharply. But a major fact remains same that its import always remains on higher side than its export. The major reason of this factor is its heavy reliance on global trader for import of commodities like oil, natural gas, machinery, electronic goods, gold and silver. India's oil import bill is seen as a major driver of its current account deficit due to global economic volatility in the oil market.
Time demands that India has to increase its global trade partner with whom it can have liberal policies like free trade agreement, currency exchange program, and technology development schemes. This is required to achieve the aim of faster, inclusive and sustainable growth.
Proper implementation of agriculture related schemes- Agriculture and its allied activities are an important of Indian economy but agriculture output of India lag far behind its real potential. With half of our population dependent on agriculture and its allied activities, there is a need of faster growth in farm sectors as even 1% point growth in agriculture is at least 2 or 3 times more effective in reducing poverty than the same growth pattern of non-agriculture sector.
There is a need of adopting modern agriculture practices, major land reform provision to increase land holding and targeted subsidy distribution schemes. There is a sharp requirement in revision of subsidy scheme (fertilizer subsidy, diesel subsidy) of govt. so that only real beneficiary will get the entitled profit and extra burden on exchequer can be reduced.
The authorities are required to provide strong impetus to schemes like BGREI (bringing green revolution to eastern India), RKVY (Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana) etc.
Boosting the secondary sector of the economy, that includes manufacturing, construction and electricity, gas and water supply. But in recent past it has almost shown negative growth pattern that is an alarming for a nation and the more dismal fact is that it has contributed only 15.8% in employment part. There is a requirement of effective plan for this sector like investment in renewable energy program on priority basis. Government has to revamp its number of schemes so that adequate spending in this sector can be done.
Improving the investment-grade credit ratings- either domestic or foreign investment depends ultimately on confidence. As investors want to have a feeling that their money will come back with reasonable returns. There is a need to have revision for high-profile tax policy which created a negative impact on the interest of foreign investors. Committees like CCEA, CCI have to create a positive environment in the market by resolving difficulty of obtaining land and environmental permits. This requires a good amount of cooperation and communication between different ministries of the cabinet.
Increase the transparency of the system to reduce the level of corruption- corruption is one of the most pervasive problems in front of the nation which is assumed to be the major roadblock in the path of growth and development. Red-tapism, bureaucracy and license raj has made such its base that corruption is assumed to be the daily affairs. Excessive regulation, mandated programs and monopoly of govt. on distribution of certain goods and services are major causes of corruption.
The suggestive measures to improve this condition is that government has to implement the anti-corruption policies stringently like citizen's charter act, Right to information, public service bill, e-governance, e-procurement, e-choupal etc. These measures and some others can only reinvigorate Indian economy.
Courtesy :- R. Meghna / civilserviceindia dot com
Friday, November 29
Method of Writing Essay or WA
Method of Writing Essay or WA:-
After getting the topic or deciding the topic :-
1. Start brain storming
2. Write down all the ideas that you about the topic.
3. Do not classify or systematize your points at this stage.
4. Put them on paper randomly as they flow in.
5. Later, arrange the ideas in a logical and sequential manner.
6. Having arrived at the sequence, start writing, giving due care to the introduction, the body and finally the conclusion.
7. Ensure that you have enough time for revision.
8. Remember it is a General Essay or WA and you should not be highly technical.
==============================
Topic : - SC'S NEGATIVE VOTING VERDICT, GOOD OR BAD FOR DEMOCRACY:-
==============================
The Supreme Court made a momentous decision when it held that voters have the right to reject all the candidates contesting polls.
As per existing norms, if a voter goes to a polling booth and does not want to cast his vote for any candidate, he can sign a register saying he does not want to vote.
The Court directed the Election Commission to provide 'none of the above' (NOTA) option at the end of the list of candidates in the electronic voting machines (EVMs) and the ballot papers to allow voters to exercise the option of rejecting all those contesting polls.
It is a remarkable verdict upholding the democratic spirit of our nation. It comes as a respite for the fence sitters who vote for the better of the lot just to ensure that they do their duty to cast vote.
Now, if you feel that none of the candidates are worth for representing, then you need not quit voting, rather vote 'NOTA' thereby sending a strong message to the political parties to field better candidates worth your vote. It would reduce alienation of voters who usually don't come to vote as they are not satisfied with the candidates.
This move is a severe blow to the political parties who takes the easy road to success by fielding criminal candidates on account of their 'winnability' factor.
Now, they will be forced to bring forth candidates with clean background. With this the aam aadmi is empowered with a powerful weapon in the form of NOTA.
Non- acceptance and rejection is an aspect of our fundamental rights to freedom of speech and expression. We, the people are given the power to determine the fate of the nation and now our choices are not limited to the handful of candidates whom the parties field and from amongst whom we are bound to find the better one.
The court has opined that this would gradually bring out a systemic change in the whole election process in the country thereby cleansing Indian political spectrum in the long run.
The parties will take good care of the fact that more than half of the voters are not hard core followers of any particular political ideology and hence they would vote for none, beyond any political pressures and narrow political visions.
Also, this would mandate all the parties to follow a moral code of conduct not just at the time of elections but through out to win credibility and sustain their image. This would help developing better political culture in India.
So, there is not even a shred of doubt, prima facie, that the verdict holds good for the democracy. But, on second thoughts, what if NOTA gets maximum votes in many constituencies then it would literally bring the governance to a standstill.
One plausible suggestion is if NOTA get the highest vote, then the election should be cancelled and contesting candidates should be disqualified. And fresh election should be conducted and parties should be asked to field fresh candidates.
And if in second election, only a candidate who gets more than 50 per cent should be declared winner. Imagine the money, time and resources such a scenario would encompass. Though the verdict seems good in paper, the difficulties while implementing may turn it into a nightmare.
Is it just addressing the symptom, not the disease? Is the remedy worse than the disease? Abstaining from voting or negative voting just allows one to voice your discontent. But then what next? This is one important question to be pondered upon.
If the Election Commission can come up with a practical solution to the same, we could indeed cherish it as a celebration of our democratic ethos. But, till then we will have to keep our fingers crossed.
Courtesy :- Krishna S / civilserviceindia dot com
After getting the topic or deciding the topic :-
1. Start brain storming
2. Write down all the ideas that you about the topic.
3. Do not classify or systematize your points at this stage.
4. Put them on paper randomly as they flow in.
5. Later, arrange the ideas in a logical and sequential manner.
6. Having arrived at the sequence, start writing, giving due care to the introduction, the body and finally the conclusion.
7. Ensure that you have enough time for revision.
8. Remember it is a General Essay or WA and you should not be highly technical.
==============================
Topic : - SC'S NEGATIVE VOTING VERDICT, GOOD OR BAD FOR DEMOCRACY:-
==============================
The Supreme Court made a momentous decision when it held that voters have the right to reject all the candidates contesting polls.
As per existing norms, if a voter goes to a polling booth and does not want to cast his vote for any candidate, he can sign a register saying he does not want to vote.
The Court directed the Election Commission to provide 'none of the above' (NOTA) option at the end of the list of candidates in the electronic voting machines (EVMs) and the ballot papers to allow voters to exercise the option of rejecting all those contesting polls.
It is a remarkable verdict upholding the democratic spirit of our nation. It comes as a respite for the fence sitters who vote for the better of the lot just to ensure that they do their duty to cast vote.
Now, if you feel that none of the candidates are worth for representing, then you need not quit voting, rather vote 'NOTA' thereby sending a strong message to the political parties to field better candidates worth your vote. It would reduce alienation of voters who usually don't come to vote as they are not satisfied with the candidates.
This move is a severe blow to the political parties who takes the easy road to success by fielding criminal candidates on account of their 'winnability' factor.
Now, they will be forced to bring forth candidates with clean background. With this the aam aadmi is empowered with a powerful weapon in the form of NOTA.
Non- acceptance and rejection is an aspect of our fundamental rights to freedom of speech and expression. We, the people are given the power to determine the fate of the nation and now our choices are not limited to the handful of candidates whom the parties field and from amongst whom we are bound to find the better one.
The court has opined that this would gradually bring out a systemic change in the whole election process in the country thereby cleansing Indian political spectrum in the long run.
The parties will take good care of the fact that more than half of the voters are not hard core followers of any particular political ideology and hence they would vote for none, beyond any political pressures and narrow political visions.
Also, this would mandate all the parties to follow a moral code of conduct not just at the time of elections but through out to win credibility and sustain their image. This would help developing better political culture in India.
So, there is not even a shred of doubt, prima facie, that the verdict holds good for the democracy. But, on second thoughts, what if NOTA gets maximum votes in many constituencies then it would literally bring the governance to a standstill.
One plausible suggestion is if NOTA get the highest vote, then the election should be cancelled and contesting candidates should be disqualified. And fresh election should be conducted and parties should be asked to field fresh candidates.
And if in second election, only a candidate who gets more than 50 per cent should be declared winner. Imagine the money, time and resources such a scenario would encompass. Though the verdict seems good in paper, the difficulties while implementing may turn it into a nightmare.
Is it just addressing the symptom, not the disease? Is the remedy worse than the disease? Abstaining from voting or negative voting just allows one to voice your discontent. But then what next? This is one important question to be pondered upon.
If the Election Commission can come up with a practical solution to the same, we could indeed cherish it as a celebration of our democratic ethos. But, till then we will have to keep our fingers crossed.
Courtesy :- Krishna S / civilserviceindia dot com
Thursday, October 24
R.I.P : Manna Dey - An unmatched musical genius.
R.I.P : Manna Dey - An unmatched musical genius.
यारी हैं इमान मेरा, यार मेरी जिंदगी
Prabodh Chandra Dey aka Manna Dey, who was one of the greatest playback singers in Hindi and Bengali films, had his last breath in Bangalore. Honored with titles Padma Shri, Padma Bhushan and Dada Saheb Phalke award, the singer had recorded more than 3500 songs. Also, he lent his voice for Hrivansh Rai Bachchan's longest composition 'Madhushala'. The singer had worked with legendary singers Mohammed Rafi, Kishore Kumar and Mukesh.
via: ToI
Monday, July 29
Thursday, July 25
Solution of Baap of Challenger
There are how many integers "n" in between 1 and 10^7, including both, such that last 7 digits of n and n^3 are
the same? (If n or n^3 has fewer than 7 digits,
then add 0s in the left and then compare the last 7 digits.)
a. 10 b. 15 c. 20 d.
None of These
Sol [b]
If last 7 digits of n and n^3 are the same it means n^3 - n
is divisible 10^7
i.e (n-1)*n*(n+1) is divisible by 10^7 [n^3 - n=(n-1)*n*(n+1)]
It shows (n-1)*n*(n+1) is divisible by both 2^7 & 5^y
Case I: (n-1)*n*(n+1) is divisible by 2^7
Sub-case a : If n is even than both (n-1) & (n+1)are odd so n should be
divisible by 2^7
=> n is multiple of 2^7.......................(i)
=>n = 2^7, 2*2^7,.........,5^7*2^7
Sub-case b : If n is odd than (n-1)*(n+1) should be
divisible by 2^7
Since the gap between n-1 and n+1 is 2 so one of them is divisible by 4 and
other is by only 2
Sub-case b1 : Let n-1 is divisible by 2 but 4 , then n+1 is
divisible by 2^6 => (n+1) is multiple of 2^6
=> n = 2^6 -1 , 2*2^6 -1, 5^7*2^6 -1 .....5^7*2*2^6 - 1
Sub-case b2: Let n+1 is divisible by 2 but 4 , then n-1 is
divisible by 2^6 => (n-1) is multiple of 2^6
=> n = 1, 2^6 +1 , 2*2^6 +1, 5^7*2^6 +1 .....
Sub-case b3 : Let n-1 is divisible by 2^7 => (n-1)
is multiple of 2^7
Sub-case b4 : Let n+1 is divisible by 2^7 => (n+1)
is multiple of 2^7
So we
can say we are getting 5 different remainders for "n" when divided by
2^7 which are 0, 1, 2^6-1, 2^6+1 & 2^7 -1
Case II: (n-1)*n*(n+1) is divisible by 5^7
Sub-case (i) : n-1 divisible by 5^7 => n = k*5^7 +1
Sub-case (ii) : n divisible by 5^7 => n = k*5^7
Sub-case (iii) : n+1 divisible by 5^7 => n = k*5^7 -1
So we
can say we are getting 3 different remainders for "n" when divided by
5^7 which are 0, 1, -1
There are three possible values of remainders by 5^7 and five possible values by
2^7 . Then by the CRT (Chinese Remainder Theorem) there are 15 possible values
of remainder by 10^7.
Hence there are 15 required solutions of n in between 1 to 10^7.
Saturday, July 20
Mumbai's bar dancers will only get partial relief from the Supreme Court's recent ruling
#LAV
Mumbai's bar dancers will only get partial relief from the Supreme Court's recent ruling.
The Supreme Court’s 16 July ruling upholding the 2006 judgment of the Bombay High Court that upturned the Maharashtra government’s ban on dance bars is, at best, a pyrrhic “victory” for the women who danced in these bars. In 2005, when the ban was instituted, an estimated 75,000 women lost their main source of livelihood. Hence, it is presumed that following the Supreme Court’s ruling these women will once again have recourse to a livelihood option. However, a closer reading of the judgment coupled with the competitive “moral” politics of Maharashtra suggests that the “victory” is only partial.
The Bombay High Court struck down the Maharashtra government’s amendment to the Bombay Police Act, 1951 banning all forms of dancing in bars that were lower than three star status, to be against the constitutional provisions in Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). By amending Section 33 (A) of the law, the Maharashtra government had created two categories for the same activities. Women could not perform in licensed bars outside hotels that were three star or higher, or in private clubs. The justification for the ban was that these performances resulted in depravity, lowering public morality and exploited the women. Yet, no such value judgment was made on the same or similar performances in the higher class establishments. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the Supreme Court has confirmed what the Bombay High Court concluded, namely, that such a law is discriminatory and goes against the Constitution.
Now that the ban has been struck down, will dance bars reopen and the women find work again? In the year following the ban, which was incidentally supported by virtually all political parties in Maharashtra, and the Bombay High Court judgment, hundreds of bars were forced to close. Apart from the women dancers, the entire industry consisting of support staff, waiters, managers, and others who provided services to these bars was put out of work. And as the Maharashtra government managed to get a stay from the Supreme Court on the Bombay High Court ruling, the ban prevailed.
Despite the Court ruling, it is unlikely that things will return to pre-ban days. Although many dance bars metamorphosed as “live music” bars, they will now have to apply for fresh licences if they want to introduce dance performances. It is unlikely that these will be granted in a hurry. The Maharashtra government has already indicated that it might go back to Court. It has to maintain the appearance of being concerned about “public morality”, the apparent reason it went in for the ban, because it cannot afford to yield this high moral ground to its competitors, especially the Shiv Sena but also its ally the Nationalist Congress Party.
The Supreme Court has asked the Maharashtra government to implement the rules formulated by its own committee prior to the ban. These rules include restrictions on what the women can wear while dancing, a fenced-off area where they dance, not more than eight women dancing at one time, not permitting the “showering” of money on dancers and registering the names and addresses of the dancers. In their anxiety to restart, bar owners are already promising to implement all this and more.
None of these so-called “rules”, however, will alter the daily reality that bar dancers have had to live with all these years. For instance, there is no guarantee that these women will work under better conditions. In the past, many did not get paid and depended entirely on the money “showered” on them by the clientele. If these tips are now to be collected by the bar’s management, it is anybody’s guess how much will finally get to the women. Even at the best of times, the bar dancers had no security and could be turned away on any given day. That insecurity will continue. And finally, only a small number of those who lost their jobs in 2005 are likely to be re-employed as they are now older and do not fit the profile of the bar dancer.
The Court’s intervention apart, what remains untouched is the “popular” conception of what is moral and immoral. The ban on dance bars exposed how lawmakers fell over each other in declaring the immorality of women dancing in bars even as they swore concern about the exploitation of women. At no point did any of them notice the hypocrisy of pushing ahead with policies that make women more vulnerable to exploitation while denying them agency and the right of choice.
Mumbai's bar dancers will only get partial relief from the Supreme Court's recent ruling.
The Supreme Court’s 16 July ruling upholding the 2006 judgment of the Bombay High Court that upturned the Maharashtra government’s ban on dance bars is, at best, a pyrrhic “victory” for the women who danced in these bars. In 2005, when the ban was instituted, an estimated 75,000 women lost their main source of livelihood. Hence, it is presumed that following the Supreme Court’s ruling these women will once again have recourse to a livelihood option. However, a closer reading of the judgment coupled with the competitive “moral” politics of Maharashtra suggests that the “victory” is only partial.
The Bombay High Court struck down the Maharashtra government’s amendment to the Bombay Police Act, 1951 banning all forms of dancing in bars that were lower than three star status, to be against the constitutional provisions in Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). By amending Section 33 (A) of the law, the Maharashtra government had created two categories for the same activities. Women could not perform in licensed bars outside hotels that were three star or higher, or in private clubs. The justification for the ban was that these performances resulted in depravity, lowering public morality and exploited the women. Yet, no such value judgment was made on the same or similar performances in the higher class establishments. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the Supreme Court has confirmed what the Bombay High Court concluded, namely, that such a law is discriminatory and goes against the Constitution.
Now that the ban has been struck down, will dance bars reopen and the women find work again? In the year following the ban, which was incidentally supported by virtually all political parties in Maharashtra, and the Bombay High Court judgment, hundreds of bars were forced to close. Apart from the women dancers, the entire industry consisting of support staff, waiters, managers, and others who provided services to these bars was put out of work. And as the Maharashtra government managed to get a stay from the Supreme Court on the Bombay High Court ruling, the ban prevailed.
Despite the Court ruling, it is unlikely that things will return to pre-ban days. Although many dance bars metamorphosed as “live music” bars, they will now have to apply for fresh licences if they want to introduce dance performances. It is unlikely that these will be granted in a hurry. The Maharashtra government has already indicated that it might go back to Court. It has to maintain the appearance of being concerned about “public morality”, the apparent reason it went in for the ban, because it cannot afford to yield this high moral ground to its competitors, especially the Shiv Sena but also its ally the Nationalist Congress Party.
The Supreme Court has asked the Maharashtra government to implement the rules formulated by its own committee prior to the ban. These rules include restrictions on what the women can wear while dancing, a fenced-off area where they dance, not more than eight women dancing at one time, not permitting the “showering” of money on dancers and registering the names and addresses of the dancers. In their anxiety to restart, bar owners are already promising to implement all this and more.
None of these so-called “rules”, however, will alter the daily reality that bar dancers have had to live with all these years. For instance, there is no guarantee that these women will work under better conditions. In the past, many did not get paid and depended entirely on the money “showered” on them by the clientele. If these tips are now to be collected by the bar’s management, it is anybody’s guess how much will finally get to the women. Even at the best of times, the bar dancers had no security and could be turned away on any given day. That insecurity will continue. And finally, only a small number of those who lost their jobs in 2005 are likely to be re-employed as they are now older and do not fit the profile of the bar dancer.
The Court’s intervention apart, what remains untouched is the “popular” conception of what is moral and immoral. The ban on dance bars exposed how lawmakers fell over each other in declaring the immorality of women dancing in bars even as they swore concern about the exploitation of women. At no point did any of them notice the hypocrisy of pushing ahead with policies that make women more vulnerable to exploitation while denying them agency and the right of choice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)