Vijay Amritraj

23.4K posts

Vijay Amritraj banner
Vijay Amritraj

Vijay Amritraj

@vjamritraj

India Katılım Nisan 2010
657 Takip Edilen1.4K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Vijay Amritraj
Vijay Amritraj@vjamritraj·
Pleased to announce the acquisition of Voila F9 Gourmet by Elior India. A ten year entrepreneurial journey comes to an end. Details in the post below. linkedin.com/posts/vjamritr…
English
4
3
14
11K
Vijay Amritraj
Vijay Amritraj@vjamritraj·
Watched for nostalgia, not a patch on the original. But can just keep looking at Meryl Streep and Anne Hathway all day long.
Vijay Amritraj tweet media
English
0
0
0
29
Vijay Amritraj
Vijay Amritraj@vjamritraj·
Absolutely. Most people haven’t a clue of the stranglehold the Communists had over West Bengal. Only Mamata with her unending courage and lone wolf qualities could bring the Red Fort down.
Abhijit Iyer-Mitra@Iyervval

Yes i do have a soft spot for Mamatadi. Im open about it. Again i dont agree with her politics but im perennially grateful to her for getting rid of the communists. The INC had given up. Only she could have done it & I have undiminished respect for that.

English
0
0
0
110
Vijay Amritraj
Vijay Amritraj@vjamritraj·
This is exactly how the other parties would have felt when Congress ruled from 1950 to the mid 90s. In our first past the post system even a 30% vote share can win elections. It’s better for a party to emerge clearly than to coalesce together with others, then quickly crumble.
Darab Farooqui@darab_farooqui

One of the more entertaining privileges of living in India is watching our unlettered rich and powerful perform socio-political analysis. These are men who built empires through connections, contracts, and the occasional government favour and have somehow confused that with wisdom. So when a prominent industrialist puts out a piece explaining why the BJP juggernaut will keep rolling, it's worth spending five minutes dismantling it. Because it falls apart in about that long. The framing is clean, I'll give him that. Clean in the way a card trick is clean. It looks elegant until you see where the cards went. His argument rests on a 50-50 split: BJP owns Hindu nationalist identity, which is roughly half the country, and everyone else is scrambling for the other half. Therefore BJP wins. Forever. Ameen. Summa-Ameen. Except the 50-50 is made up. BJP's actual ideological base, the RSS-mobilised, Hindutva-committed voter who is there regardless of candidate, regardless of price of onions, regardless of anything, is closer to 20-25%. The rest of their coalition is caste arithmetic, welfare delivery, regional anti-incumbency, and Modi's blind cult following. A significant chunk of their voters are OBC and Dalit voters with concrete material grievances who backed BJP for concrete material reasons. They are not ideological soldiers. They can be peeled away. They have been peeled away. So the first constant in his equation, the one he treats like holy scripture, is false. But even that isn't the biggest problem. The bigger problem is that he treats opposition fragmentation as a law of nature rather than a political failure. He looks at fifteen parties jostling for the same space and concludes: this is permanent, this is structural, BJP wins by design. Read that again slowly: BJP wins because the opposition hasn't solved a coordination problem. That's it. That's the whole secret. There is no juggernaut. There's a fragmented opposition handing over seats they should be winning. UP 2024 made this embarrassingly clear. When SP and Congress actually ran together, with some semblance of coordination and clarity, they won 43 seats in a state BJP had treated as a fortress. The juggernaut didn't wobble. It fell on its face in the one place where the opposition briefly got its act together. And here's what our industrialist friend also conveniently skips: BJP isn't dominant because it owns an ideological half of India. It's dominant because it has a machine. The RSS is the fuel, the cadre, the penetration, the ground structure that no opposition party can match. That's the real asymmetry. Not some metaphysical ownership of Hindu identity. Now, our industrialist friend could have asked the genuinely interesting question hiding inside his own argument: why hasn't the opposition solved this coordination problem in a decade? That would have been worth reading. The answer is partly structural, partly the ego of regional satraps who'd rather rule their fiefdoms than challenge nationally, and partly a failure of political imagination. Had he asked that question, he might have earned his seat at the table of serious political commentary. Instead, he built a tidy little argument with a predetermined destination, one that just happens to conclude that the party he has never found reason to criticise is invincible by the laws of mathematics. That's not analysis. That's propaganda written with CAPITAL letters. (No pun intended)

English
0
0
0
79
Vijay Amritraj
Vijay Amritraj@vjamritraj·
Indian government doesn’t reduce prices when crude prices fall, they make super profits like they did throughout the war buying cheap and discounted Russian crude. So when crude prices go up they just rake in lesser profits by reducing taxes. It’s not sitting on any balance sheet
farrukh saleem@SaleemFarrukh

1. Pakistan buys at $115 a barrel 2. India buys at $115 a barrel 3. Bangladesh buys at $115 a barrel 4. In India, the oil shock sits on corporate balance sheets 5. In Bangladesh, the oil shock sits on the state 6. In Pakistan, the oil shock sits in the kitchen On February 1, petrol in New Delhi was Indian Rs94.72 per litre. It remains Indian Rs94.72 per litre (approximately Rs280 in Pakistani rupees). On February 1, petrol in Bangladesh was approximately BDT 130 per litre. It remains largely unchanged. On the same day, petrol in Pakistan was Pakistani Rs257 per litre. It now stands at Rs399.86 — a 56 percent increase. Meanwhile, Brent crude oil rose from $68–70 per barrel to $105–$115 — an increase of 54 to 64 percent. Hard truth: Prices unchanged in India and Bangladesh. Pakistan up 56 percent. How does India do it? The government cuts taxes, and state-owned oil companies — Indian Oil Corporation (IOCL), Bharat Petroleum (BPCL) and Hindustan Petroleum (HPCL) — absorb the losses. Prices are managed. The consumer is protected while the cost is shifted to company balance sheets. How does Bangladesh do it? Prices are administered. The government-owned Bangladesh Petroleum Corporation (BPC) absorbs the shock, adjusting prices infrequently. The consumer is protected, while the cost is shifted to the public balance sheet. Pakistan does it differently. Prices are passed through immediately, petroleum levy is raised, and domestic refineries — Pakistan Refinery Limited (PRL), National Refinery Limited (NRL), Attock Refinery Limited (ARL) and Cnergyico — are paid import parity prices. The consumer absorbs the shock, the government collects the tax, and refineries make billions. The same pattern holds for diesel. On February 1, diesel in New Delhi was around Indian Rs88 per litre and remains unchanged. In Bangladesh, diesel was approximately BDT 109 per litre and is still at similar levels. In Pakistan, however, diesel has risen from about Rs267 per litre to around Rs399.58 — an increase of 50 percent. Red alert: Three countries. One oil shock – different choices. The oil price is global. The pain is a policy choice. thenews.pk/print/1413105-…

English
0
0
1
93
Vijay Amritraj
Vijay Amritraj@vjamritraj·
What was telling was that 99% of the respondents weren’t from Bengal, mostly Hindi speaking North Indians and the main issues they were espousing were - infiltration, Muslim domination, Hindus in danger, poll violence, and that whole nation belongs to them etc.
English
0
0
0
27
Vijay Amritraj
Vijay Amritraj@vjamritraj·
@cricketingview Over a dozen batters got more than 10,000 runs and 50 plus averages. This was a rarity in the Sunil Gavaskar era. Fortunately DRS saved us from this nonsense.
English
0
0
0
247
Vijay Amritraj retweetledi
Diva Jain
Diva Jain@DivaJain2·
In Calcutta Nandan 1 is full even for the screening of an obscure Soviet film. Barely a couple of hundred have shown up for a legendary film like "Le Samourai" at Regal with capacity of ~1000. Bombay for all its wealth will always be a Vada Paav class city :)
Film Heritage Foundation@FHF_Official

A line of cinephiles formed to watch Jean-Pierre Melville's landmark French film 'Le Samouraï' (1967) today at Regal Cinema, Mumbai!!

English
75
52
463
64.6K
Vijay Amritraj
Vijay Amritraj@vjamritraj·
This is funny 😂
Mushtaq Bilal, PhD@MushtaqBilalPhD

Recently, a Pakistani friend of mine (we'll call him Danial) got a postdoc at the Lund University in Sweden. We met at his office for coffee. I congratulated him and we caught up. "I need you to do me a favor, Mushtaq," he said. "Of course." "Please don't tell anyone in my family or friends that I work at the Lund University," he said. "Why? What happened?" "Man, just don't mention where I work especially if a mutual friend asks," he said. I was taken aback initially. But then I put two and two together and realized why he didn't want me to tell anyone about his workplace. In Pakistan, the word "lund" means penis. Being the reliable friend that I am, the very next day I rang up Danial's dad and eight of our mutual friends. I told them that Danial was doing well in Sweden and dropped the name of his university ever so nonchalantly. Things went exactly as planned. His dad called him and asked how he was settling in at the Schlong Institute of Dick Studies. Another friend asked Danial how his project would contribute to the research at the Weiner Academy of Sausage Sciences. Every few days, someone from Pakistan calls him to ask how his research at the Phallus Institute of Dong Dynamics is going, or if he was looking for a permanent job at the Johnson Institute for Shaft Studies. He has started looking for a new job. Since Lund was causing Danial all sorts of problems I decided to help him. The poor thing took all this Lund stuff really badly. Apparently, some of our friends tried setting him up with a beautiful British-Paksitani woman, Yasmine, who was visiting Copenhagen. Now Danial has limited social skills when it comes to women and Yasmine was way out of his league. Yet he was able to charm her somehow and took her out for a date in a trendy restaurant in Copenhagen. Things came to a head when she asked him where he was currently based. "Lund," he said. "I wasn't sure initially, but now I quite like Lund." She thought he was a closeted gay looking for a lavendar marriage and was trying to deceive her. She got up, threw her wine in his face, and stormed out of the restaurant but not before yelling "You sick little perverted motherfucker" in the poshest British accent. Anyway, I decided to help him get out of Lund. I asked my colleagues here in Danish academia if they were hiring any researchers. Søren, one of my colleagues, said that he was. A marine ecologist, he had recently won a big grant to conduct research in the North Sea. I showed Søren Danial's Google Scholar profile. He was clearly impressed. "He's exaclty the kind of researcher we need," Søren said. So, I rang up Danial and told him that Søren here in Copenhagen is interested in hiring him. "Yes," He said without even letting me finish. "I'll take the job. Just get me out of Lund, man, it's hard, Lund's hard." I told Søren that Danial was willing to accept the job. As we parted, I asked him what his research project was about. "Effekten af ​​bundtrawl i Nordsøen," Søren replied in Danish. In English, this means "The effect of bottom trawling in Nordic sea." The only problem with this is that the Danish word for bottom is "bund." In Pakistan, bund means buttocks. Danial will join Søren's project in a few weeks. This time around I'm not going to tell his father or our friends anything about his job. Just kidding. I've already told them and they've started working on names like Keister Institute of Booty Sciences. It's going to be great I also took the opportunity to update Yasmine about Danial's upcoming project on bundtrawling. "I knew it," she said. "I already knew it."

English
0
0
0
253
Vijay Amritraj retweetledi
Aunindyo Chakravarty
Aunindyo Chakravarty@Aunindyo2023·
The Truth about Bengal's De-industrialisation In 1947, Bengal was the most industrialised province in India, with one-fourth of all registered factories, and 24-27 percent of industrial output. But these figures hide some important truths: a) Bengal's key industries largely produced raw materials and inputs: jute, coal, iron & steel, and tea. b) They were overwhelmingly owned by non-Bengalis, and c) The condition of the working class was abysmal. The largest of the capitalist groups were British expatriates who operated through managing agencies - Andrew Yule, Bird & Co., Williamson Magor, McLeod & Co., Begg Dunlop, etc. As late as 1955, more than two-thirds of India's diversified business groups were British owned conglomerates with headquarters in Calcutta. The second big group was Marwari trading capital - Birlas, Goenkas, Bangurs, Khaitans, Kanorias, Jalans, Bajorias, etc. British control was finally dismantled after the Hazari Reports of 1964 and 1966, and the Monopolies Inquiry Commission of 1965. This accelerated the transfer of corporate control from the British to the Marwaris - something that had already started in the early 1950s. The buyouts were financed by private banks, share market manipulations, and even funds diverted from worker PFs. The focus was on arbitrage earnings, rather than expanding production. What broke Bengal's back, however, was the Freight Equalisation Act of 1956. Before 1956, it made sense to set up factories close to the source of coal, and iron ore. And that gave Bengal its unique advantage, since it was the hub of the mineral wealth of the eastern states. But the Freight Equalisation Act brought in by the Nehru government removed that advantage, by subsidising the flow of raw materials to other states. This meant that factories could be set up elsewhere and didn't need to be concentrated in Bengal. Within a few years, Maharashtra was receiving many more industrial licences than Bengal, and by 1964, well before the Left came to power, Bombay's factories were employing 13.5 lakh workers, compared to Bengal's 8.8 lakh. What about workers? Bengal's jute, steel and mining companies were notorious for exploiting workers. This became a cause of struggle under the national movement as long as their employers were British. But even after the transfer of ownership, the conditions of Bengal's working class continued to be terrible. Even in the early-70s, their wages were about a third less than what workers earned in Maharashtra, and surveys showed they suffered from chronic work-related ailments. That was the ground on which Bengal's militant labour movement arose and then intensified from the mid-1960s. The Left and socialist parties rode on the anger and frustration of industrial workers, miners, and of course, share-croppers. The 1967 United Front govt, brought SUCI's labour leader, Subodh Banerjee, to the labour minister's chair. He would come to be known as 'gherao minister.' Gheraos increased dramatically, and industrial stoppages rose from 179 in 1965 to 894 in 1969. The Left's political obligation was towards workers - not their employers. This accelerated the flight of capital that had already started two decades earlier. Equally important was the collapse of the global demand for jute, which was once the mainstay of Bengal's industry. Along with that the nationalisation of coal by Indira Gandhi also removed another important magnet for private capital in the region. The end of the licence-quota raj after the mid-1980s, caused a massive migration of capital from pro-worker states to pro-employer states. The Left Front's initial strategy was to implement land reforms, and generate capital formation in agriculture. While there is no doubt that Operation Barga was the most successful example of land reforms in India, the LF completely failed in its programme to create rural industries. This was despite the CPIM's trade union, CITU, becoming largely an industrial peace broker, shedding its old militant stance. By 1991, the number of stoppages had dropped to 192 (from 894 in 1969) out of which only 32 were because of workers' strikes. Most of the industrial stoppages were because of employers locking their factories and leaving. By 2003, mandays lost in West Bengal due to lockouts by owners was 16x that of what was lost due to workers' strikes. Of course, this was because other states were much more capitalist-friendly than West Bengal, and were much more open to implement anti-worker 'labour-reforms.' The biggest example of that was the suppression of the long textile workers' strike in Mumbai. The Left Front, under Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee tried its best to compete with other states to present a business-friendly image. It succeeded as well, in attracting capital into real estate, establishing SEZs across the state, and even getting the Tatas to invest in Singur. The rest, of course, is history. The question remains - why did the Bengalis not develop their own capitalist class? That is an entirely different story.
English
72
187
605
56.9K
Vijay Amritraj
Vijay Amritraj@vjamritraj·
Never understood this fascination with West Bengal, notice this especially amongst North Indians. Can understand people interested in their home state elections and Lok Sabha polls. Why a state that doesn’t belong to them? How does it affect their fortunes?
Tushar Gupta@Tushar15

Anyone who remotely follows politics is super invested in the West Bengal election results. The mood is like what it was before the results of 2014, 2019, and 2024 Lok Sabha results, and everyone wants the same party to win. A pandemic of anxiousness. A wretched weekend ahead.

English
106
4
33
65.3K
Anjali Rao
Anjali Rao@AnjaliR48517486·
@vjamritraj Why would we be so insular ? I grew up in Bengal , Iam not a Bengali . Married an Army Officer , lived in many states . Still am interested in all . My husband is from Maharashtra, which is our home . I have a stake in the whole of India .
English
1
0
0
84
!!!
!!!@big_pict·
@vjamritraj @Puyangan5 The world has been fighting it for 1400 years. Only midgets like you think we shouldn't proactively fight the problem.
English
1
0
2
29