Government of India 's Smart Move

The verdict on Vodafone Group, regarding retrospective tax, is a indirect life saver for telecom industry in India. The stakes involved was Rs.22,000 crores.

Verdict in favor of India could have reduced Indian Telecom Industry into Duopoly with clear winning position for Reliance. 

It seems Indian Government did not accept that stance as it will give a very high upper hand for Reliance Industry over Indian economy.

In AGR case, Supreme Court of India, already gave its verdict that Vodafone and other parties can't escape the AGR dues. Efforts by Government of India to save the sector was rejected by the Supreme court.

It seems to protect or give reprieve to Vodafone Idea in the Indian Telecom sector, it was a must for Vodafone to win.

Confirming the ruling in favour of the company, Vodafone Plc in a statement to FE said, “Vodafone confirms that the investment treaty tribunal found in Vodafone’s favour. This was a unanimous decision, including India’s appointed arbitrator Rodrigo Oreamuno. The tribunal held that any attempt by India to enforce the tax demand would be a violation of India’s international law obligations.”.

The unanimous decision with Indian appointed arbitrator Rodrigo Oreamuno, is a indicator that Government of India wanted Vodafone to be a winner in this case.

This is a win win situation for all  ‐

1. Retrospective tax ghost is buried
2. Vodafone group and other foreign investors got a positive message
3. Indian Government indirectly protected telecom sector from reducing it to Duopoly
4. Reliance Industry will not complain that Indian Government protected Vodafone Idea

Must Read on Bullshit Jobs

 I was introduced to David Graeber vide an editorial in Indian Express newspaper on his passing away on 02 September 2020.

What took me by horns was the article On the Phenomenon of Bullshit Jobs: A Work Rant by David Graeber.

This article falls in the category of Must Reads. Some of the sections is reproduced below to stimulate the readers to read the article:

On what Technology has done or achieved

Instead, technology has been marshaled, if anything, to figure out ways to make us all work more. In order to achieve this, jobs have had to be created that are, effectively, pointless. Huge swathes of people, in Europe and North America in particular, spend their entire working lives performing tasks they secretly believe do not really need to be performed. The moral and spiritual damage that comes from this situation is profound. It is a scar across our collective soul. Yet virtually no one talks about it.

On what we human beings have selected

Given the choice between less hours and more toys and pleasures, we've collectively chosen the latter.

The Mystery

It's as if someone were out there making up pointless jobs just for the sake of keeping us all working. And here, precisely, lies the mystery. In capitalism, this is precisely what is not supposed to happen. 

On False belief

The answer clearly isn't economic: it's moral and political. The ruling class has figured out that a happy and productive population with free time on their hands is a mortal danger (think of what started to happen when this even began to be approximated in the '60s). And, on the other hand, the feeling that work is a moral value in itself, and that anyone not willing to submit themselves to some kind of intense work discipline for most of their waking hours deserves nothing, is extraordinarily convenient for them.

On what is hell

Once, when contemplating the apparently endless growth of administrative responsibilities in British academic departments, I came up with one possible vision of hell. Hell is a collection of individuals who are spending the bulk of their time working on a task they don't like and are not especially good at.

On frustration

This is a profound psychological violence here. How can one even begin to speak of dignity in labour when one secretly feels one's job should not exist? How can it not create a sense of deep rage and resentment. 

The Truth

It's not entirely clear how humanity would suffer were all private equity CEOs, lobbyists, PR researchers, actuaries, telemarketers, bailiffs or legal consultants to similarly vanish. (Many suspect it might markedly improve.) Yet apart from a handful of well-touted exceptions (doctors), the rule holds surprisingly well.