Bistromathic

I've noticed a rather interesting lack of co-relation between cost and selling prices of stuff in our typical markets. Take the case of juice. One would assume that a firm selling packed normal juice will price it at some level, and the same firm takes normal juice, add some sugar to it and sells that too will price the 2nd one a bit higher due to added cost of sugar.
That is at a logical guy would think. However not so in practice dear. The leading juice brand prices the non-sugar version a lot higher.
Similarly if I buy normal plain white polished rice I assume it will have some price lower than the same rice, not polished and all. after all polishing u have to remove a part of each rice grain and few other things which cost time and money. So one fine day i decided that unpolished rice is healthier so I'll try that.
Now I'm a guy fond of good things in life and an used to buying top of line stuff. So I thought yippy, since I am now buying something that has lot less work being done on it, should be reducing my expenditure too. Healthy body and healthy bank balance.
At least that's what I thought. But this lousy rice costs more double than the exceedingly premium priced polished rice! Reminds me again of that "Bistromathematics. The most powerful computational force know to para-science." concept!
Indeed the guy was prescient. The price of goods in store depends not on costs but on perceived demographic. It seems in India, someone who want to eat healthy must be someone willing to live longer and hence must be stinking rich! So if you want just x- you have to pay more than to have x+y.
Soon I see the emergence of a new entrepreneur who buys polished rice, painstakingly colors each grain brown and sells it for only 50% markup. Color manufacturer happy, the entrepreneur happy, and I get to eat tastier rice!

Thoughts at the begining of the Year.

What a week. First we have the the party with less than 4% of popular votes holding up the nuclear deal, subverting critical reforms in pension, insurance sector in parliament, perpetuating violence on citizens of their own state (see Red cadres beat central forces ) for over 6 months now. Many peaceful protesters at Kolkata Film festivals were arrested, following which the 'intellectuals of the city then heart warmingly stormed the police headquarters and freed them all. The first act was legal, the 2nd (technically) not. The first act saw arrests, the 2nd will not.
On the other hand we have the UP government which gave up on key reforms on agricultural sectors after some protests that turned midly violent and which ironically forced spectators entering a cricket match between India and Pakistan in Kanpur to remove any black items of clothing including socks! Apparently this was to prevent any black cloth waving as a sign of protest during the match, protest against the UP government. So peaceful protest (assuming there were such plans - none that i heard of) is banned but if you are violent the government will be willing to harm 600 million poor farmers to save 10 million of you - just remember looting and arson are your friends in Indian politics.
Witness what happened in Gujrat and the number of orchestrators punished as yet ( no I am not talking of low level arsonists here but the planners)? Think how many of 1984 riots have been punished? How many of Mumbai train blast, Hyderabad bomb blast, Coimbatore blast perpetrators have been brought to book? What about the Kashmir victims? The victims in Northeast?
I recently read about the stories that won the Ramnath Goenka awards for journalism 2006. Some of the pieces coupled with my own observations recounted above and earlier posts are frighteningly leading me to conclusion that the nation of Gandhi actually listens to only violence which the political classes and executive reward while peaceful protesters are arrested, raped, killed.
I remember a friend who was in one of India's top civil services resigning and leaving for abroad. What he said than was that we Indians are a nation of the savage. I then thought that it was the reaction of a poetical mind to harsh realities. As I am realizing now, he just had seen much more of the system.
Its a sombre thought to start the Indian new year.

Updated 16 Nov 2007 : In the end all are equally bad. I agreed with Budhadeb's argument that population must move away from agriculture into industry. To that extent what happened in Nandigram (West Bengal) - probably a legitimate protest against land being acquired too cheap was turned by politicians into a movement against industrialization.
Instead of explaining to people why industrialization is necessary the ruling party decided to send its armed cadres to kill the opposition - not the argument, but the arguer itself! And the CM justifies the killing saying that its fair to retaliate against opposition! How is this different from the argument toted out for the Gujrat riots which we all condemn none so harsh as the left. How is it different from argument of terrorists - someone harmed me/my faith so i'll kill the next school gathering?
And how can a ruling party send its own people to "rescue" a locality and ask police to sit out for weeks while people are killed/maimed/raped? No doubt both sides of the divide were armed but how can the 'state' sit out? And if it does, how can one not then understand groups who say to hell with the state - lets get on our own and if it means killing few or many its OK. Is it not the same argument that the CM is making?

Pakistan Crises - An opportunity for peace?

"A crises is a terrible thing to waste". Pakistan as we all know is in deep crises. Reports indicate that the Pakistani army positions on Indian border is at its lowest level ever . Pakistan state is battling the hydra headed monster of fanaticism it so carefully cultivated as a matter of state and to an extent social policy, and from the looks of it, the fight is not very favorable to the state at the moment.
My estimate in around 2004 was that Pakistan in its current form may not survive till 2050. It seems I was too sanguine about its longevity. But can we in India really feel happy about it? Paradoxically for India, it may be our best interest to ensure that a state that keeps hatred for India as its raison de etre, survives as a state. Do we really want to govern NWFP on our own. Given our own problems with Minorities do we want to add to it? Do we want to be fighting this monsters on the Hindukush range on our own?
My guess would be not. So how can we help Pakistan survive. If we offer support directly, the social conditioning of the nation will ensure that the Jehadis get more popular support! My take would be - offer a deal to the Pakistani army. In return for lower deployment of troops on Pakistan's eastern border, India reduces its troops on India's western border. That will give a much needed rest to the Indian Army. At the same time, strengthen civil policing in the border states, especially J&K. As the example of Punjab shows a determined, well training civil police can tackle insurgency better. Army is a sledgehammer - indispensables to break down iron but not very fine to chisel. We will also lower our own operational costs due to troops reduction.
Concentrate on purging the ISI cells in India while the Pakistani state battles on its western border. My own experience is the Indian and Pakistanis are very friendly to each other in foreign streets. There is a genuine warmth in our social interactions. But when it comes to the same people in subcontinent, daggers are drawn. A large portion of blame must be taken to the cultural conditioning that ingrains hatred of India in average Pakistani. The school textbooks there perpetuate the same litany. Pakistan will do well to realize that hatred always comes back to haunt those who profess by it. As a part of lowering of tensions with India- which they must if Pakistani army is to survive the current crises, such institutional hatred needs to be gotten rid of.
India meanwhile can contribute by offering better trade terms to Pakistan. Both our countries are large agricultural producers. There is no reason why we cannot trade to mutual advantage. Once trade links are better average Pakistani will get to cultivate a more friendly image of India. Peace in the reason can transform our nations. But will we take the opportunity?