Subsidy for the hungry is not an economic misadventure.

For the last few years, every time I have participated in TV discussions on the Budget day, I have noticed how the stock markets play its mischievous card. Before the finance minister gets up to present the Budget in Parliament, the Sensex invariably slumps. This indicates the nervousness in the market. As the finance minister goes on reading his speech, the Sensex also steadily rises. This is nothing but a blackmail strategy that markets use across the globe.

So when a day after the UPA government passed the Food Security Bill, the stock markets fell by 590 points, I wasn't the least bit surprised. Nor should it be considered as an expression of an economic blow. It is simply the market's way to express its discomfort and contempt at the poor getting the subsidy benefit.

The Food Bill is expected to cost Rs1.25 lakh crore.

This has prompted the industry barons, economic commentators, and the business media to repeatedly ask the question: Where will the money come from? More so, at a time when the Indian economy is in crisis, and the rupee is in free fall, such a massive financial outlay for 810 million poor and hungry is being touted as a political misadventure. There is no need to feed the poor, the money should have instead been diverted to create infrastructure, and in the bargain create more jobs, goes the refrain.

This is not the first time that such a question has been raised. I remember when the UPA-I announced writing off Rs 62,000 crore (which later became Rs 72,000 crore) of outstanding loans to farmers, a similar hue and cry was raised. I too was faced with a volley of questions on TV channels the day the farm loan waiver was announced. When I asked where the resources for the Sixth Pay Commission, bringing in an additional burden of over Rs1.5 lakh crores every year, came from; there was no answer.

`Subsidies' is a bad word when it comes to the poor. The argument is that subsidies are a drain on the national exchequer, and add on to the fiscal deficit. So whether it is fuel subsidy, fertiliser subsidy or food subsidy, they have perpetually been on the chopping block. All these subsidies not only have provided safety net to India's teeming millions, but have also helped the country become self-sufficient in food and dairy production. It has provided a cushion to the aam aadmi against continuously rising inflation, and at the same time help minimise the impact of rising costs resulting from privatisation of health and education services.

But interestingly, while all eyes are on the subsidies being given to the poor, there is no mention of the massive subsidies being doled out to business and industry years after year. The only difference being that these subsidies are not called subsidies (because it is a bad word) but are classified as efficiency incentives. Since 2005-06, the government has been giving tax concessions, including income-tax concessions, to the industry which is clubbed under the category of `revenue foregone'. Till this year, the tax concessions to industry total to more than Rs 30 lakh crore. In this year's Budget, finance minister P. Chidambaram has allocated Rs 5.73 lakh crore as revenue foregone.

I didn't see the Sensex crashing to express its displeasure at this massive subsidy . Nor do I find any mainline economist ever mentioning that Rs 30 lakh-crore was a wasteful expenditure. After all, despite such a massive subsidy support, the industry output is in minus, the manufacturing sector is gasping for breath, and exports are not picking up. India is faced with jobless growth, and we see a spate of suicides in the urban areas across the country among those who lost their jobs. Does it not mean that the Rs 30 lakh-crore subsidy has gone into a black hole?

In past three years, roughly Rs15 lakh-crore has been given to industry as tax concessions. If this money had been recovered and invested in public infrastructure, not only the entire fiscal deficit would have been wiped out, but lakhs of jobs could have been created.

In addition, despite the downturn in economy, the Reserve Bank of India has admitted that India Inc. is sitting comfortably over a cash reserve of  Rs10 lakh-crore. There is no need for India to bend over backwards to attract foreign direct investments when its own corporates were sitting over a mountain of cash. Forking it out could have created investor's confidence and improved the business sentiments. The rupee would start to look up. The ensuing economic crisis should have been evident in the period 2004-2008 itself when India's economy grew at nine per cent. Behind all the jubilation, a startling study done on behalf of the Planning Commission should have served as an eye-opener.

Accordingly, in the period of high economic growth, 14 million jobs were lost in agriculture, and another 5.3 million in manufacturing. In other words, both agriculture and manufacturing sector became victims of high economic growth. Subsequently, it has now been shown that for the first time in history the number of landless agricultural workers has swelled to more than those who own land.

Agriculture has become a losing proposition. Every day, some 2,500 farmers are quitting agriculture and probably migrating to cities looking for menial jobs. This is no `inclusive growth'. Kaushik Basu, the former chief economic advisor to Prime Minister and now a chief economist with the World Bank, has himself admitted that the time of `inclusive growth' is over. He has tweeted, suggesting `intelligent growth' to be the new plank of economic growth.

The only way to bring prosperity into the rural areas, and thereby boost the country's economy, is by making agriculture sustainable and economically viable. Most importantly, the road to all-around economic development passes through the village of Hiware Bazaar in Maharashtra.Once a drought-prone village, where rural-urban migration was the only way to survive, this village now boasts of 60 millionaires.

This village has effectively demonstrated how an ecologically devastated landscape can become a bustling market place. It is, therefore, time to invest in agriculture, rural development and food security. That's where the future of India lies.

Source: Deccan Chronicle, Aug 29, 2013. bit.ly/1ciCseP

The corporate mega soap opera on Indian News TV Channels. It's pure entertainment, but with a hidden message.

The plot is getting thicker. I am waiting for the next twist in this mega soap opera. Yes, I am talking of the soap that is telecast every evening on prime time on most TV channels (some TV channels of course have been telecasting good discussions on other topics as well). The way corporate India has dressed up its PR agents, and lined them up as a rogue cast, every evening on the chat shows, I find it often very amusing, hilarious, and sometimes very irritating and disgusting. It has all the ingredients of a saas bahu serials, and of course a lots more.

For a number of days now, they found fault with the slow moving policies, which according to them lacked action. They talked of 'policy paralysis' and tried to play down the mega corruption that has hit the Congress-led UPA rule, and of course mentioned 'crony capitalism' as a matter of fact, and nothing more. Then came the news that 12 panchayats in Niyamgiri region had turned down the multi-billion dollar Vedanta empire to set foot, some of them were visibly angry. After all, how could a bunch of scantily-clad tribal stop the might of a business tycoon. So they ran down the Supreme Court which directed the public hearings, and blamed the judiciary for coming in the way of economic growth.

It didn't stop here. Many of them then questioned the delay caused due to the refusal by Ministry of Environment & Forests to grant them automatic clearance as a result of which some of the major investments were held up. They of course welcomed when Prime Minister set up a National Investment Board for fast-track clearance for industrial projects. And now I am told the Prime Minister has directed his officials to sort out all pending investments proposals and see to it that these are cleared before he departs in October to meet US President Obama on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly session.

Isn't that interesting? Prime Minister of a so-called democratic country preparing to present a report card to the world's most powerful CEO? No wonder, the Indian economy is in doldrums.

All hell broke lose the day the Lok Sabha passed the Rs 1.25 lakh crore food security bill. All the corporate actors on the TV shows were visibly angry. Unmindful of the fact that the nation was watching them, they went on to lash out at the wasteful expenditure at a time when the economy is in crisis. Some of them even went to the extent of saying that the poor didn't need to be given cheaper food. Another, who is quite a regular on TV nowadays, and I don't know why, defended the Rs 30-lakh crore tax exemptions given to the industry in the past 9 years. After all, with such a massive subsidy, good enough to wipe out hunger from India, the industry has failed to perform. industrial output is in minus, manufacturing has been destroyed, and joblessness is on the rise. So hasn't this massive subsidy gone into a black hole, I asked.

And then the Sensex dipped for a day. This is a usual practice with the stock markets whenever they want to blackmail the government into submission. It dipped 569 points, and the next evening went up by 500 points. Blackmail, isn't it? But this came in handy for the rogue artists to use the argument of market sentiments getting a blow with the food security bill. I have never seen such a blatant, and disgusting expression of contempt against the poor. This is shameful indeed.

Yesterday, one of the regulars went a step ahead. He even appealed to the middle class to come out and vote strongly against such measures that provide a safety net to the poor. I thought it was akin to inciting the audience to go for a class war. Now this is getting too much. Even Ekta Kapoor would have been careful. But then, the TV soap opera has no boundaries. The only prevention or precaution that it takes is that it doesn't criticise the Corporate world. They are the holy cows. They need all the subsidies if India's growth story has to go forward.

Remove environment hurdles. Provide them tax concessions, tax holidays. Give them land free of cost, or make it available to them at cheap rates. Forget about rehabilitating the displaced, the markets will take care of them. This is a small collateral damage in the path to growth, we are told. In short, while the State gives the poor with a Right to Food, the State needs to give the Corporates a right to poison the environment, and also a right to open loot. So far this is the message I get.

The soap opera continues. Let us wait and watch for what happens next.

The onion story. It was all planned. Didn't I say that earlier?

A few days back, I had written about the urgent need to tame the wholesale/retail trade in onions. This was of course not liked by those who swear in the name of market reforms. They believe that markets have the inherent ability to correct itself, and that the onion price rise was because of poor storage, wastage and of course the weather going wrong.

The Times of India today (Aug 25, 2013) has a detailed report, entitled Traders make Rs 150-crore in 4 days with hoarded onions (click on the link: bit.ly/17d5ZmZ ). It's investigation shows that traders had mopped up onions from farmers in June/July and even earlier for a price not exceeding Rs 1,500/quintals (or Rs 15/Kg) and had stored it at different places. This created an artificial scarcity.

Between Aug 9 and Aug 19, and more sharply in just four days in between, the demand peaked and the traders made a huge killing. Wholesale prices shot up to Rs 4,300/quintal on Aug 12 and then to Rs 4,500/quintal on Aug 13. That is how the entire carnage was planned and executed.

Further, the report quotes the deputy registrar of the Nasik APMC  (Agriculture Produce Marketing Committee), which is the epicenter of onion production in the country. Accordingly, even now "farmers have around 2.5 lakh tonnes, of which 1.35 lakh tonnes are in the 66 villages under Lasalgaon APMC. This shows supply crunch was artificial." 

Reading all this, and looking at the accompanying illustrations, I am sure your blood would boil. You would definitely want the Govt to crackdown on the trade. But look at what the Chairman of the Commission for Costs and Prices (CACP) Dr Ashok Gulati is suggesting. In an article in the Indian Express a few days back: Know your onions (Aug 22, 2013, http://m.indianexpress.com/news/know-your-onions/1158278/), he doesn't propose any strict action against the erring trade. He thinks corruption by the private trade is justified since it is also happening elsewhere. So he is lobbying for setting up processing industry and an efficient value chain (which means more cold stores etc). He is not alone. Read any market ideologue, and you will find him/her quiet when it comes to a crackdown on corrupt practices. I don't understand why all pro-market reformists are supportive of corrupt and dirty marketing practices. There may be some honourable exceptions, but most fall in this category. Remember Kaushik Basu, he went to extent of suggesting legalising giving bribes as the answer.

This makes me wonder why do we nab petty thieves and criminals. If bigger fish can be allowed to get away in the name of market reforms, why not the smaller culprits? #

To know more: Watch this NDTV India discussion on the politics of onions.
http://khabar.ndtv.com/video/show/news-point/286927

Your money, My Growth.

For Cos, it's 
Mera Gaon, Mera Growth (My village, My growth) 
This headline from Economic Times yesterday (Aug 23, 2013) caught my attention. It made me once again don my thinking hat. The news report says: Even as city dwellers tighten their purse strings, 700 million rural Indians are ready and willing to spend. Knowing that rural market is still growing at 10-14 per cent, industry majors have either shifted or plan to launch a new marketing strategy luring the poor in the villages to spend more, and spend on non-essential goods.

This report comes at a time when the Indian Government is getting ready to provide subsidised food to 75 per cent of the rural population under the Food Security bill.

For a country which is caught in the matrix of growth, where growth is the new economic superstition that has been sold very effectively and widely, everyone believes that if growth happens, their lives would be better. After having sold this mantra, the trend is now to measure everything in terms of growth. If India Inc manages to extract whatever little remains in the pockets of rural poor, it becomes growth. If you empty your family silverware in the market, and become a pauper in turn, it adds to country's growth. Strange, isn't it?

I have seen Cafe Coffee Day and Barrista and the likes opening up new joints in the mofussil towns. Instead of offering me lassi, I am surprised when some farmers offer to take me to these joints for a cup of coffee. Not that they have enough money to splurge, but by inviting me to the new coffee joint where a cup pf coffee costs not less than Rs 150, they are trying to show they too have arrived. It is a symbol of prosperity (howsoever hollow it may be) that they want to demonstrate. Of course, while the farmers pocket gets empty, it adds to country's growth. Hindustan Lever, for instance, has launched an 'Operation Bharat' to tap the rural markets for fairness cream, toothpaste, Clinic Plus shampoo, Ponds cream etc etc. ITC's much publicised e-chaupals have now turned into a rural marketing chain for most FMCG products. The list is endless.

All these years, economists tell us that the terms of the trade for rural areas had been negative. The rural Current Account Deficit (CAD) had always been in red. Which means more money was being taken out of the villages than what was being invested. But over the last few years, I am sure economists must be thinking of a new terminology to correctly depict the virtual day light robbery that is taking place in the rural areas. Poor are poorer, and the share prices of India Inc have been on an upswing. Isn't this a massive transfer of money from the rural to a few in the urban areas? How can it be called growth if it makes more people relatively more poor? Time to think.

I am waiting for the day when the Economic Times headline is rewritten as: Mera Gaon, Gaon ki Growth (My village, it's growth). Till then, growth is another name for exploitation.

Let's chop the onion cartel

Every time onion prices hit the roof, or for that matter, whenever food inflation inches upwards, it is amusing to see economists invariably pointing to supply-demand constraints and the urgent need, therefore, to modernise the supply chain. And that has always left me wondering why economists can never see beyond the fundamental prescription enshrined in the economic textbooks. It doesn’t always hold true.

The onion crisis is no different. At a time when the electronic media was screaming at the top of its voice, I heard many an economist, who had probably never been to a crop field, repeating ad nauseam what they had been taught in their classrooms.

Onion prices had hit a two-and-a-half year high in August at the back of fears of a drop in production in key areas because of drought last year, and in some areas, the heavy rains turning to be a spoilsport. The emphasis, therefore, was on the need to streamline the supply chain, with some newspapers even suggesting irradiating the vegetables to extend its shelf-life.

From a maximum of Rs 10 per kg in June, onion prices had shot up to Rs 70-80 per kg in a few weeks, finally stabilising at Rs 50-60 when the government announced a slew of measures, including imports and quantitative restrictions on exports. Although Union Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar had said that prices would remain high until October when the new crop comes in, strangely the wholesale prices began to soften to coincide with the announcement of import-export measures.

This is not the first time the onion trade has played truant. In December 2010, onion prices were on fire. Even prior to that, onion prices had flared up for three years in a row between the months of September to December. And I had always maintained that barring some seasonal variation, there was no reason for onion prices to soar by 400-500 percent. Even this year, the production shortfall has been anticipated at a mere 4 percent and the prices have gone up by as much as 600 percent on an average. How can this stupendous price hike be attributed to supply-demand constraints?

For several years now, I have been saying that the extreme volatility in onion prices (and also that of other vegetables/ fruits) is the handiwork of a cartel that operates in the wholesale trade. A handful of trading families have cornered the entire trading activities, thereby very conveniently manipulating the market. Large-scale hoarding of onions goes on unchecked.

The reason is obvious. No political party wants to ruffle the traders with any stringent action. Traders hold the strings to the political purse, and a crackdown against hoarding and speculation would mean chopping off the financial cord.

It is not that cartelisation operates only in agriculture. Take the case of airlines. You click three times on a flight route on the Internet, and the ticket price goes up. Private airlines have charged as high as Rs 25,000 for a one-way ticket between Mumbai and New Delhi, taking advantage of cancelled flights that day. Now look at the prices of eggs. If supply-demand is the mantra, then how come prices of eggs are almost uniform throughout the country? How come the demand for eggs remains the same in New Delhi and Bathinda, for instance? It is because a handful of people/companies decide the egg price for the day.

I can go on with such illustrations. Often the blame is rested on the Agriculture Produce Market Committee (APMC) Act, which regulates the agricultural markets. But there is no APMC Act for the airline industry. And look how conveniently they have unbundled the prices to even charge for a seat preference.

In agriculture, organised retail players such as Reliance Fresh, Easy Day, Big Bazaar, Spencer’s and others who buy the produce directly from farmers, too, have failed to pass on the price benefit to consumers. Replacing one set of middlemen with another, therefore, is not the answer.

Source: Tehelka Issue 35, Vol 10. Aug 31, 2013

http://www.tehelka.com/lets-chop-the-onion-cartel/

Onion prices: What brings tears to your eyes.

Onions being sold in a typical Indian market

Quoting a study by the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), the Hindustan Times has reported that the stupendous price hike in onions was because the trade had manipulated the prices. In a report titled: Farmer sells onions at Rs 8, you buy at Rs 70 (HT, Aug 22, 2013. bit.ly/18LnbB7 ) it states: "You are right to feel ripped off, but spare a thought for the farmer, too. A NABARD report on onion reduction and marketing seen by HT shows that the farmer makes a profit of just Rs 3.60 for every kg he sells. In other words, a farmer would need to sell nearly 20 kg of onion if he, hypothetically, wanted to buy a kg of his own produce in plusher arts of Delhi."

In other words, the middlemen, and that includes the wholesale agents as well as the retailers, have together romped home with a huge profit. According to the NABARD study, "in an ideal situation -- with no hoarding or unfair practices, and wastage at the 'normal' 25% of the 150 million tonne crop -- onions should be available at Rs 14 per kg."

This is not the first time that the trade has been exploitative. Even at the height of the onion crisis in December 2010, when prices had touched Rs 80/kg, I had said there was no shortfall in production, and the unprecedented price hike was on account of hoarding and manipulation of the prices. Of course at that time, the Govt had sided with the hoarders simply because it wanted to justify the need to push in FDI in retail. (See my blog post: Now it can be told. Onion prices were stage managed. Dec 2010, http://devinder-sharma.blogspot.in/2010/12/now-it-can-be-told-onion-crisis-was.html).

Time and again, rising food inflation has been the topic of media discussions. Some magazine/newspapers have trailed the entire supply chain to explain to readers how the prices are jacked up, and at what stage. The general agreement is that it is the middlemen who exploits both the producers and consumers. So if the middleman's role is minimised or done away with, both the farmer as well as the consumers stands to benefit. The solution that is being suggested therefore is to bring in organised retail which will buy directly from the farmers, and therefore make it available relatively cheaper to consumers.

During the present onion crisis, the organised retail chains -- Reliance Fresh, Spencer's, Easy Day, Big Bazaar and the likes -- were charging Rs 60/kg when the open market price was also Rs 60/kg. A day or two later, it brought down the price to Rs 59/kg and eventually settled at Rs 50-55/Kg when wholesale prices were softening after the Govt announced imports. I had made it a point to visit Reliance Fresh store in Mohali (where I stay) just to monitor the prices of onions. Two things I observed. First, there was hardly any price difference. Secondly, the price that is fixed for onions is for A-grade quality, but what sells for most part of the day is very inferior quality produce. In other words, what Reliance Fresh is doing is that it does provide A-grade quality, immediately when the stocks come in for the day at a little less price that is in the open market, but then pushes bulk of its inferior quality produce at the same price throughout the day.

India's economic crisis: Bottom of the pyramid has the answers

At a time when the Indian economy is in doldrums, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has time and again reassured investors that there will be no going back on economic reforms. As usual, he has blamed the external factors for the slump. The internationally respected weekly The Economist has gone a step ahead. To ensure that the Prime Minister does not retract from the promise of delivering more reforms, it has tried to create a fear psychosis among the policy makers so that they don't budge an inch from the faulty economic track the country has been made to follow for the 9-year period of the UPA Government.

Like the cover story in the Time magazine sometimes back that called Manmohan Singh an 'underachiever' (the underlying idea was to provoke him to open up to FDI in retail and other sectors), The Economist has in a frightening analysis titled "Made outside India" (Aug 10, 2013. econ.st/164nUNE ) tried bravely to build up the argument that if India does not accelerate the growth pace, what ever remains in India (in terms of industrial base) will also move out. It was not only amusing to read the biased argument (biased is a soft expression, it is actually a flawed analysis) but makes me wonder how can a reputed magazine support the frauds in trade and business in the name of economic growth. I am shocked that it sings praises for tax havens like Mauritius, and is also praising the decision by Finance Minister P Chidambaram to defer the General Anti-Avoidance Rules (GAAR) which could have brought curbs on the flow of black money and corruption. (Read my earlier blog: Celebrating the induction of black money: http://devinder-sharma.blogspot.in/2013/01/gaar-deferred-investors-stock-markets.html).

It is true that gambling is illegal in India, except a few places. If Sri Lanka is planning to develop a casino industry to attract weekend travelers (like Nepal has done), does it mean that India should also allow gambling to be developed as an industry? This is like saying that India should allow sex tourism to develop on the lines of Bangkok under the proposed India-Thailand Free Trade Agreement that is being renegotiated. I think there can be nothing more stupid as well as dangerous than this argument.

What is amusing of course is the example of Bollywood films that are being shot abroad. The Economist says: "In 1985 Yash Chopra, an Indian film-maker, led a trend of shooting Bollywood "dream sequences" -- in which the hero and heroine sing amidst meadows and snowy crags -- in Switzerland. The Alps were easier, safer than the more familiar location of Kashmir." This is true. But what is wrong in this? Doesn't the Hollywood industry do the same? It has for late done many a films in India or with Indian participation. Does it mean that the Hollywood industry is moving offshore? In any case what the magazine does not perhaps know is that even that trend of filming abroad has come down lately. Film goers love the films that are shot in countryside locales in India. The latest release Chennai Express shot within the country's lesser known locales has been a record earner.

In essence, The Economist is indirectly trying to tell India to strengthen its service industry, cut down on red tape, and allow dirty and corrupt practices to prevail. This is exactly what India has been trying to focus on since 2004-05, and look at where the economy has plummeted to? I will not try to go into the finer details, but I would surely like to draw the attention of The Economist to an excellent analysis by S Gurumurthy that has been published in the New Indian Express. Titled: Reckless imports put Rupee on a ventilator, Aug 19, 2013. http://www.http://www.readwhere.com/read/c/1505436 ). The article brings out how a flood of imports because of the deliberate destruction of the domestic manufacturing sector has put the Indian Rupee in a crisis. "The 9-year UPA period saw manufactured goods import of $ 50 billion against just $2.3 billion during the NDA regime." 

It was primarily because of destruction of the domestic manufacturing sector that some of the Indian industry has moved out. It is not because of red tape and bureaucratic hurdles but because the Reserve Bank of India changed the rules that allowed companies to take out money to invest abroad. I see no merit in this. If foreign companies bringing Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in India can do business and still make profits (despite the hurdles), how come the Indians companies are not? Again, it is The Economist all these years that has been drumming up the need to open up the economy to foreign investors. More the FDI more has been the imports of manufactured goods. More the signing of unreasonable FTAs, more has been the deluge of unwanted imports that further destroyed the domestic manufacturing sector.

It didn't only end up with massive imports but also destroyed jobs. A Planning Commission sponsored study says that between 2004-05, when Indian economy grew anything between 8.5 to 9.3 per cent, manufacturing sector witnessed a massive job loss. More than 5.3 million people lost jobs in manufacturing. Wrong advise by economists (and also The Economist) had forced the government to bypass manufacturing and follow services in its quest for growth. Remove all the hurdles, and let the markets operate freely is what we have been repeatedly told. But when markets crash, the same set of corporate media advises the government to step in and provide bailout packages.

Markets are always manipulated. There is no such thing as free markets. Whether it is the World Trade organisation (WTO) or the Wall Street, manipulation is the core ability of free trade as well as open markets. So don't get unnecessarily alarmed when the stocks tumble. Just wait and watch. Heavens are not going to fall if the Wall Street crashes completely. This is gambling. Let the gambling rules prevail for those who have willingly put their surplus money in.

I am not sure whether The Economist will ever take my advice. But it will good if they step down from their high pedestal and look at the ground realities more carefully. All that it has been suggesting so far is aimed at creating more wealth. Whether it is through the unhindered capital flows, hedge funds, stock markets, farm land grab,  foreign direct investments etc etc the basic premise is to create more high-net worth individuals. The poor will get the advantage of trickle down. Knowing the economic, environmental and social crisis the world has been pushed into, it is high time to move away from this terribly flawed economic approach. Take the simple case of Hiware bazar village in Maharashtra. Without indulging in all the spoils that neoliberal economists have been tirelessly suggesting and manipulating, this village alone has created 60 millionaires. Imagine if each of the 6.5 lakh villages in India can produce 10 (and not 60 millionaires to begin with), wouldn't the face of India change for ever? And what if the same principle of self-reliance is applied everywhere else in the world?

The solution to the economic ills can be provided by the bottom of the pyramid. Read this: One village, 60 Millionaires. The miracle of Hiware Bazar. bit.ly/15NdWMU