Increase in Prices After GST Reduction

Arun Jaitley announced the reduction of GST for restaurants from 18% to 5% starting Nov 15th. The above receipts are before and after Nov 15th. From the receipts, it looks like, Sangeetha Restaurant charged extra instead of reducing the tax. But, actually, Sangeetha Restaurant did correctly. The tax did not reduce. The tax got increased for all the restaurants.

GST has a concept of Input Tax Credit. For example, if you buy a product for Rs.100 and paid 18% GST, and if you are selling it for Rs.150, you can pay tax only for Rs.50. For Rs.100, for which tax already paid, you don't need to pay because of Input Tax Credit.

Starting Nov 15th, Union Government abolished Input Tax credit for restaurants. But, the tax got reduced to 5%. It means, if a restaurant is buying raw materials for Rs.100 and paid 18% GST, and if they are selling it for Rs.125 (Rs.100 Base Price + Rs.18 GST + Rs.7 Profit = Rs.125), then they have to pay 5% GST for Rs.125, and not just on the profit of Rs.7.

In the above receipt of Sangeetha Restaurant, they charged Rs.125 before Nov 15th, and charged Rs.130 after Nov 15th.

For example, before Nov 15th, if Sangeetha was paying Rs.100 (+ GST 18%) for raw materials, and other expenses, and if they were charging Rs.6 profit, then the total amount would be Rs.125. After Nov 15th, since there is no input tax credit, they have to pay 18% for the GST for Rs.100. Then along with that, for the entire amount, they have to pay additional 5% GST. In that case, the total amount is Rs.100 (for raw materials) + Rs.18 (GST on raw materials) + Rs.6 (Profit of Sangeetha) + Rs.6 GST (5% of Rs.100+18+6), which is Rs.130. If Sangeetha was paying less than 18% GST on the raw materials and other expenses, then the total amount could be less.

It looks like, Sangeetha was unable to explain Input Tax Credit, and they started giving discounts after they got bad name of increasing the prices after pseudo decrease in the prices.

What I hate is, Arun Jaitley increased the prices, but, they are propagating as if they decreased the prices.

Courtesy: Jeevanram Kasiviswanathan

Sonia Gandhi Renunciation of the Prime Minister Post

During our meeting with V.P.Singh, Natwar Singh told V.P. that Soniaji's children were concerned about her security and feared that like their grandmother and father she might also be killed. He told V.P. that the children were firm that she should not accept the post of prime minister. When we came out of the meeting I told Natwar Singh that he should not have disclosed how the family felt to outsiders and that this had cast a shadow on her act of renunciation. Even on the earlier occasion, Soniaji had wanted Dr Manmohan Singh to be the PM. The objection by her children thus appeared to be inconsequential. Soniaji was genuinely disinterested in the PM's post. However, the utterances by Natwar Singh had undermined her sacrifice.

From The Chinar Leaves: A Political Memoir by M.L.Fotedar.

Informing others when we think they don't have correct ticket

Whenever I travel by local train in Chennai in first class, if I feel any person is not having the first class ticket, then I inform him/her that, it is first class. If they know that it is first class ticket, they say so. If they know the difference between the first class and second class, and if they are having second class ticket, they would change the compartment at the next station. If they cannot understand anything, then I tell them that, they are having general ticket, and they should change to the next compartment at the next station.

Of course, the guessing is done by many factors including the dress/shoes/sandals/chappals that they wear, age, sex and many others.

For example, if a person is dressed in village grand mother style (and satisfying other qualities that I see in a person who does not have first class ticket), and gets into first class compartment, then I would definitely tell her that, it is first class compartment. If she starts asking about what is first class compartment and what is general compartment etc, then, I would assume that, she is having a general ticket, and advise her to move to general compartment at the next station.

In case if she turned out to be the wife of the founder of the second largest indian software company, she will write about me in her book, saying, a person in Chennai local train had discriminated her by her dress.

If TTE catches anyone in the first class without first class ticket, the fine would be upto 60 times to the general ticket. My intention is only to tell them that, if they don't have first class ticket, they would be liable for the fine. I felt bad many times, when I did not inform few people and later they were caught by TTE and had to pay huge fine. Just because, one person got offended, I am not going to stop informing the next person.

When that super rich woman was travelling by business class, the women infront of her might have feared that, if she is having economy ticket, then, she had to stand in the queue for few mins more because of the mistake. They might have advised her so that, she can stand few minutes less in the queue. But, that super rich woman got offended.

Another article about the same woman - http://blog.tnsatish.com/2014/07/no-money-to-start-business-famous.html

Vote of Conscience

In 1969, when there were elections to the President of India, after then President of India Dr.Zakir Hussain passed away, Congress Party chose Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy as its candidate. But, Indira Gandhi chose V.V.Giri as her candidate. Indira Gandhi asked everyone to vote by conscience and finally, V.V.Giri won with the smallest margin in the presidential elections.

In the book, "The Chinar Leaves: A Political Memoir" by M.L.Fotedar, Fotedar says, he suggested then Chief Minister of Kashmir to ask the MLAs to vote openly. The Chief Minister told the MLAs that, after voting they should show the vote to Fotedar. If anyone does not show their vote, they would assume that, they did not vote for V.V.Giri. Only five MLAs did not show their vote to Fotedar.

And for decades after that, followers of Indira Gandhi says, her candidate won the elections by "Vote of Conscience".

Reservations Should Be Used Once per Person

If abolishing reservations is going to take time, atleast as a first step, reservations should be changed to single use per person. The idea of reservations is, those who are deprived of privileges would get extra boost to be equal with others. If they have used reservation once, it means, they have been "made" equal with others. Then, why do they need reservation again?

Many people start using reservations at school (mostly unknowingly), and then at college for graduation, then post graduation. Later while applying for jobs, they may get a normal job (with reservation), then may apply for state service jobs, and finally may try for civil services. Giving these many chances is very unfair.

The person should be given only once chance to use the reservation and let them decide to use at college or at civil services or wherever they feel it is more appropriate.

Atheists Have More Blind Faith Than Theists

Is an atheist more scientific or a theist?

Is Atheism also a religion?

Anybody who has studied little advanced Science or Mathematics would know that, it is very difficult to prove that something does not exist or something cannot be achieved. Except in Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, it is practically not possible to prove that something does not exist in any non-trivial case. Even in Mathematics or its related fields, proving that something cannot be done is very difficult, and typically the proof is very complicated.

Whereas proving of existence of something is relatively easy. You just need to find where it is or show one sample of it. Whereas, proving non-existence of anything is practically not possible.

For example, if somebody has to prove that a particular virus is not present in somebody, practically it is not possible. The tests that we have typically finds virus only if it is in millions. If the body has only handful of viruses, and if the blood sample that one has taken does not have those, then tests cannot find it. To really prove that there is no virus in the body, one has to take out the complete blood and test it. By then, the person would be dead. On the other hand, by luck, if somebody gets the blood sample with virus, then they can prove the existence of virus.

To prove absence of a person in a relatively big apartment is also pretty difficult, if you don't have man power or technology. While you are searching, if that person also moves so as to avoid you, then you can never find him/her, unless you have some support. Even if you have lot of technology and many power, you need to prove that, that apartment does not have any place to hide. The most complex thing is, there are magicians who make people invisible for some time. You need to prove that, there was no magic involved there, which is practically not possible, if you have to convince someone who is not into lot of physics. Also, you need to prove that, there is no unknown technology which can hide that person, which is not possible. Physics rules are not applicable at very small or very big scale. If you want to depend on rules of Physics, you need to prove that, they are not using anything that is at the very small scale. We can safely forget scientifically proving the absence of a person in a city. Let's not talk about state or country.

In software development, most of the testers would have irritated by sporadic bugs which comes very rarely. When they file those bugs, the typical response from developers like me is, "Show me the bug infront of my eyes. Then only, I will take it". Obviously, no tester would be happy with that response. If a customer raises a critical bug, and if the tester says, "I have tested it thoroughly and there cannot exist a bug", then either he/she will lose the job or the customer.

But, for atheists, it is perfectly correct to say that, "God does not exist", irrespective of whether they can prove even trivial things or not.

Scientifically, it is possible that, somebody has seen God and is believing. But, Scientifically, it is not possible to prove the non-existence of God. Many people ask Theists, "How can you be a theist, when you believe in Science". I want to ask them back, "How can you be an atheist, when you believe in science."

An atheist is Millinillion (10^3003) times more unscientific than a theist.

If you don't believe in god, be Agnostic, and not an Atheist.

To the brink and back by Jairam Ramesh.

I used to get frustrated, Whenever I hear from Congress supporters saying, it was Rajiv Gandhi who wanted to bring economic reforms, and after his untimely death, P.V.Narasimha Rao brought those economic reforms.

Jairam Ramesh went a step ahead. He said in his book, "To the brink and back", before the 1991 elections, Rajiv Gandhi cleared three names for the finance minister, I.G.Patel, Manmohan Singh and S.Venkitaramanan. He wrote as if, P.V.Narasimha Rao did exactly what Rajiv Gandhi would have done (including the selection of the Finance Minister).

It is believed that, I.G.Patel was the first preference for P.V.Narasimha Rao. But, he declined and Manmohan Singh accepted it. S.Venkitaramanan was the then Reserve Bank Governor.

In olden days, whenever poets write any book, they start by glorifying their king. In the same way, Jairam Ramesh's book started with the glorification of Rajiv Gandhi.

During the discussion of the reforms in 1991, most of the ministers did not accept the reforms and rejected it. Later Jairam Ramesh added the preamble of praising Nehru-Gandhi family and described as if Nehru-Gandhi family wanted the reforms, and all the ministers accepted it.

I would have liked the book much more, had he skipped the "too exaggerating" praises of Rajiv Gandhi.

BJP forming the government without having majority

I saw one major change in the recent elections.

Since, 1996, whenever BJP (with its alliances) become the single largest party/alliance, but get less than the majority, all other parties were getting united and making BJP to sit in the opposition. With the same mindset, I thought, BJP will not form the government in Goa and Manipur. But, I am happy that, the situation is changing.

Of course, 1996 is a very interesting year, where the first largest party was in opposition, second largest party was outside the government supporting it, third largest party was inside the front but outside the government and parties with single MPs got minister posts.