Authors: Krishna Raghav Chaturvedi & Vikas
Economics is a strange subject. There are many ways to define economics. The father of Economics Adam Smith characterized Economics as “An inquiry into the nature and cause of wealth of nations”. However, there is no concrete definition as no single definition is globally accepted.
So it’s prudent to have an idea about what Economics is rather than looking for a definition. The stretch of economics is vast. It may talk about some rare yet valuable source like diamond and also vastly abundant resources like air. By virtue of its scarcity, a diamond is priced high and as air is abundant so it has no price. But while we can live without diamonds, can we live without air? No doubt, this is why air is priceless and people are yet to put a price on air. Adam Smith’s studies showed that “the things which have greater value in exchange has almost negligible value in use and vice versa”. Another example water, it has great value for us. We can’t live without it, but hardly can we buy anything by bartering it. But as the human tendency is to care for scarce more so Economics and by extension, economists talk about scarcity more often than not. This is where sometimes, even a learned Economist falters in his quest to understand “real economics” and finds the need to go back to his books. At other times, even a less literate chai-walla comes up with the most ingenious of the solutions to the most typical of challenges. This may be because we tend to see “Economics” as a subject, like Physics, Chemistry or Biology with some rigid laws and theorems. However, even the laws of Physics seem to change in certain cases. Economics, on the other hand, can and should never be seen in isolation. There is caste economics, political economics, regional economics, behavioral economics, national economics, sub-divisional economics and much more. This is where many economists fail and this is where some from the real grass roots really shine.
There has been a lot of buzz about the recent slowdown in the Indian GDP growth. While the GDP growth slowdown can certainly be linked to the twin shocks of Demonetization and the implementation of the Goods & Services tax (GST), critics of the present dispensation are presenting it as an Armageddon. Yes, Economy is Economics at play in a certain region, the certain region here in question being India. Demonetization was a behavioral change and the GST, a structural change. Such radical and far reaching changes are going to have an impact on the economy and yes, they have had their pound of the flesh. But to decry the entire process and denounce the present ruling dispensation as inept requires a special kind of narrow mindedness and selective criticism, a behavioral trait that is common with the critics of the ruling political party of India, the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) and its leader, Shri Narendra Modi.
True, as the critics claim, the economic growth has slowed. True, jobs are been created at an abysmal rate. True, present government measure’s aimed at boosting manufacturing (Make in India) and promoting job creation (Start-up India, MUDRA etc.) have failed, some quite spectacularly. True, these signs do not bode well for the Indian economy, nor in the short term and certainly never will in the long run. Yes, the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA) is at fault here. But not for making a mess of the economy, for which their predecessor, the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) deserves full credit but for failing to bring out a white paper on the state of the economy when they took the reins of the Indian Government in 2014. For failing to show the public the true grim picture of which the UPA government left us in and the hell hole we had dug for ourselves with continuous tax evasion, black marketing and numerous scams which had dominated the public discourse (2G, Coalgate etc.) before 2014. And this is why, their defense of this lag in growth is being questioned and this is why, the present ruling dispensation and the prime minister, Shri Narendra Modi and his finance Minister, Shri Arun Jaitley must provide answers.
While this article can be far from a white paper on the state of the Indian economy in 2014 at time of the transition from the UPA to the NDA, it will no doubt portray the truth of the times and endeavor to expose the fallacies of both for the time period 2010-2017.
While GDP growth has often and more often, wrongly, cited as the criteria for growth of a country, such a calculation is far from perfect and there is a pertinent need to align growth with human parameters like living Indexes, Education, Distribution of Wealth rather than only the gross domestic value of all products and services in a country. Recently, a quarterly GDP “Growth rate” of 5.7% is cited as a slowdown (true, it a slowdown but only temporary) or a “crash landing” recession (though I doubt the critics claiming this even know the meaning of a recession). Such irrational and biased thinking is uncalled for and while, there is truth that the GDP growth has slowed, it is nowhere near the Armageddon being projected by the critics, prominent among which is the former Prime Minister of India and a very noted economist, Dr. Manmohan Singh-ji. He claimed and quoted that the GDP will suffer a contraction by atleast 2% points in wake of the Demonetization exercise. The Demonetization, an exercise in which the current Indian Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi-ji effectively made approx. 85% of the Indian currency redundant in a bid to attack black money hoarders, formalize the economy, cripple naxalism & terrorism, promote a cash-less economy, a digital economy and send out a strong message to the common people of India that the present ruling dispensation is serious in its bid to curb corruption.
While complete picture of the after-effects of the exercise is yet to be revealed, one thing is clear. Dr Manmohan Singh-ji was wrong. NO, the economy did not decline. No, it is neither prudent nor good economics to declare Demonetization a failure. But yes, as per the IT returns data, more taxpayers are now part of the formal economy. Certain news (unverified) emerged that poor people hired as mules to convert ill-gotten cash of some corrupt folk defrauded them of their wealth. Some mules completely decamped with the money of the corrupt. In my hometown, the state capital of India’s most populous sub-division, for the entire 50 day duration of cash exchange, not a single laborer was found in want of work. All had been hired to exchange cash from multiple banks in lieu of a daily wage. Shri Arun Shourie-ji, a noted economist and a past supporter of PM Modi has called the demonetization as the world’s biggest money-laundering scheme, I have no qualms in saying that it is indeed the world’s biggest public redistribution of wealth. While there is no reliable parameter to gauge corruption, one thing is for certain, the wrong doers will now have to think twice before thinking about stashing away their ill-gotten cash.
Inflation is an important parameter in a country’s economic growth. While the word may ring some negative connotations in our mind when heard of, it is not all bad. Like everything, too much of inflation is bad. It retards growth as buyers defer or cancel purchases as the products are too expensive, strangling the manufacturing and slowing the economy. Too little of inflation or negative inflation (Deflation) is also bad, as purchasers for various goods and services are hit by complacency, postponing purchases in hopes of more fall in prices, further constraining the demand and causing more fall in prices. Lower-than-expected inflation furthers the actual burden of debts. The lenders may benefit. However as they are more likely to save than borrowers, demand is overall reduced. It also increases rigidity in the human resources market. Workers are resistant to wage cuts in their wages, but inflation lets firms cut real wages by freezing pay in nominal terms. Deflation, by contrast, makes this problem worse (The Economist, Jan 2015). Hence, there is a need to hit the sweet spot, the right value of inflation that will ensure not only growth but also, cost less of the citizens of the state.
It is evident here from the presented data that the inflation under the UPA government was high (at least twice and possible more in the double digits). This is a cause of concern. Here this is why it is cause of concern. Suppose you earn a hundred rupee per month (GDP). Your expenses are also a hundred rupees. Now, if in the next your wage registers a growth of 8% (GDP Growth) i.e. it becomes a 108 rupees, is it a cause of jubilation? Certainly yes but then you realize that your expenses have risen by 10% (inflation). Simply said, nominal growth reduced to the base year is the real growth. This is where the current critics, especially, the former Finance Minister, Shri P. Chidambaram are wrong. In his time under UPA, the growth rate of April-June quarter of 2014 (the transition from UPA to NDA), the existent gap between real and nominal GDP was as high (by some calculations, as high as 6.5% (Jagannathan, Jun 2015, Firstpost)). Simply put, half the growth under UPA was pure inflation. This gap started to narrow every quarter after the NDA took charge, falling to 5.2 percent in Q2, 1.5 percent in Q3 and finally to a minuscule 0.2 percent in Q4 of 2015. This Narrowing of the gap between the real and the nominal growth rates tells us exactly two stories – a positive one about the NDA’s and Modi’s big success in killing inflation even when the monsoons were weak and a comparatively less positive one on the industry’s inability to raise prices – which is good for consumers, but bad for profitability, investment and market wealth creation.
Share markets are a virtual representation of growth of the top companies of the country. Seen here is a growth of the Indian Bombay Stock Exchange for the period of 2012-2017. It must be noted that fluctuations in the stock market can have a profound economic impact on the country’s economy and everyday lives of people. A collapse in the share prices has the potential to cause widespread economic disruption. Most famous of this all is the stock market crash of 1929 which triggered the great depression of the 1930s. In everyday terms, the stock market directly impacts the people’s wealth creation, pension funds, investor confidence and further critical investment. The Indian stock market has bloomed and touched new heights under the present ruling dispensation. The critics have been quick to point out that such a growth is meaningless until it is evident on the ground. Yes, exports have reduced. But unlike what the critics portray, exports have not been hit as hard by the twin shocks and while data for 2017 is yet to come, it is a general feeling that growth will observed as already, the numbers are too low to fall any further. There are reports that Indian exports have risen for the 12th straight month, touching just over USD 21 billion in the month of September (partially propelled by the phenomenal growth of Petroleum products and Chemical products export). Pessimists, however, in their bid to defame the ruling government would also like to point that our imports are increasing too. True, our imports have reached a near high of approx. USD 33 Billion (again a major chunk of the import is crude oil and gold). But on the bright side, our foreign exchange reserves have reached an all-time of USD 400 billion.
Such a huge cash pile is enough to cover for all imports for over 10 months and possibly more. Also, while it is true that the current account deficit has widened in the past four months, it is nowhere near as severe as the royal mess we were in the past. Even in the recent months, the CAD anomaly is mainly due to a sharp uptick in Gold imports (thank you Indian Aunties, who allegedly own more gold than most sovereign nations).
Pessimists are also pointing towards a lack of private spending and need for investment from alternative sources. Private investment in the country is hampered by the twin balance sheet problem (courtesy the past regime) and ever worsening NPA crisis, which restricts a financial institution’s lending ability (again, Thank you UPA). Yes, merchandise exports have fallen a bit and lending has taken a minor hit but this is reaction of the system adjusting to the changes, nothing more.
As stated earlier, GST was a structural change, revamping and overhauling the entire Indian indirect tax system. Modi deserves full points for his efforts to get a country as politically and culturally diverse as India on a single table and pass a radical bill like GST. While he was a chief minister in Gujarat, he found the UPA proposed form of GST indigestible for his state, a major manufacturing powerhouse. As the Prime Minister, he has ensured that even after the implementation of GST, the states losing revenue will be compensated for a short-period to accrue additional sources of revenue. His critics call him a hypocrite but all he has shown is a true maturity. He took a radical idea, ironed out the rough edges. He made it practical for implementation and went out of his way to get his rivals onboard for the passing of the GST bill. The implementation, like all things rest, is full of glitches but the official mechanism is tackling the problem both reactively and proactively. The situation will only improve in the coming future. It’s hilarious how the critics of Modi and an army of online trolls venerate any and every source that speaks against the ruling dispensation but even calls a venerable organization like the World Bank “biased” because of its favorable outlook of the GST. Furthermore, the sales of two wheelers, certain cars has already been recorded higher than before and collections under GST are improving and meeting their targets. Yes, GST is working.
The Demonetization was a necessary exercise. One can argue that the Indian economy was weak, or dead or hale & hearty but the timing was so perfect. With anyone even catching wind of his intentions and holding fast even when all seemed lost, in one stroke and by mere words, Modi had put the fear of law back into the corrupt. People were encouraged to come forward, report their ill-gotten cash, pay a stiff penalty and let bygones be bygones. Some did take this easy way out. This was a carrot. Now, it times for the stick. Shell corporations are identified. Action has already been taken against the directors of multiple shell companies established only to launder money. Any disproportionality of income and deposits if established, leads to a notice from the income tax department notice and further inquiry. It is painful. The Indian Income tax department like all its counterparts across the globe is despised and for good reason, it is a broadsword, not a scalpel. But we need a broadsword, now that corruption and tax evasion has become an everyday part in an Indian lives.
To conclude, while the Indian economy is slowed by the twin shocks, it is resilient and in capable hands. The pessimists may have their trends but things were bad, even worse before (in the UPA as evident by the data presented here) and now that things are finally starting to smoothen, we are bound to regain our top spot as the world’s fastest growing nation. The Indian economy is a jig-saw, complex pieces dominated by regions, cultures and festivals. It is a folly to see one in isolation or use the data of a 1-2 quarters and portend grim warnings. Diwali, the Indian festival of light is fast approaching. Let this occasion be the mark of a new India, an era of economic growth and prosperity for all. The UPA government, it too had its moments of glory and yes they were aplenty, had made a grand mess of the economy and its effects persist till this date. The lack of investment in roads and railways is costing us today in terms of time, lives and growth. Their numerous scams had bankrupted the country and virtually emptied our coffers. Modi is lucky. He only has to outperform a three legged donkey. It is up to him whether he will turn the Indian Economy into a prancing pony or a galloping steed. By the looks of it, we already are a prancing pony. But can he make us the galloping steed. Unfortunately, only time will answer this, with any certainty.
The author is neither an economist nor claims to be one.
Vikas is pursuing his PhD from the Department of Management Studies, Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Petroleum Technology, Jais
The views expressed by the authors above are personal. The authors declare that all sources used in the above article are freely accessible on the internet. The images are snapshots of existing accessible data, sources of which have been acknowledged beneath every image. The authors declare no competing financial interest.
Modi’s India a flawed partner for post-Brexit Britain
With just two weeks to go until Britain is scheduled to exit the European Union, Boris Johnson and his ministers are understandably focused on the last-minute dash to formulate a workable Brexit deal with the EU. Once this moment has passed, however, either Johnson or whoever replaces him as PM will come under intense pressure to deliver the trade deals Brexit side supporters have so talked up since 2016.
One such envisaged deal is with India. Seven decades after securing independence from Britain’s colonial empire, New Delhi has the world’s seventh-largest economy and one of its fastest growth rates. The prospect of deeper trade ties with Asia’s third-largest economy has been a major feature of the pitch for a “Global Britain” that extends the UK’s reach beyond the continent, and Johnson himself made a big thing of expanding economic ties with India while campaigning to become PM.
Unfortunately, any plans to kickstart trade agreements with India will run into problems, and not just over immigration and visa issues. India is on the verge of a serious economic downturn, hit by job losses and decreasing levels of foreign investment. With growth slowing down, Indian PM Narendra Modi has fallen back on his aggressive brand of Hindu nationalism to galvanise public support, a gambit that has most recently resulted in his government’s controversial move to strip automony from Kashmir.
Bad time for a UK-India trade deal
Whereas only a few years ago India was held up as one of the world’s fastest growing economies and an enticing prospect for global trade and investment, Moody’s new projection of a 5.8% growth rate represents a danger to Narendra Modi’s promise of a $5 trillion economy. Recently released figures show India’s GDP growth falling for the fifth successive quarter, to a six-year low of 5.2%.
India’s economic woes are reflected in patterns of foreign investment. Around $45 billion has been invested in India from abroad over the last 6 years. The downturn in the country’s economic fortunes has seen a record $4.5 billion of shares sold by foreign investors since June this year. These economic problems are linked to Modi’s failure to carry through on economic reforms promised when he came to power in 2014, when a number of structural problems were seen as inhibiting external trade relationships.
India currently has over 1,000 business regulations and more than 3,000 filing requirements, as well as differing standards for social, environmental and human rights. These have been sticking points in the moribund trade deal negotiations between India and the EU, and Brexit advocates have not explained how they plan to overcome these hurdles.
Hostility to foreign companies
Structural issues are only part of the problem. Another key concern is the Indian government’s adversarial attitude towards foreign investors. Despite Modi’s promises to make India an attractive place to do business, his government has continued protectionist policies that throttle the country’s ability to attract outside capital.
One issue is retrospective taxation. Under Modi’s predecessor, Manmohan Singh, several British and international firms were hit with sizeable, legally dubious tax bills by the Indian government. Modi came to power on a promise of ending retrospective tax bills being imposed on overseas companies, and yet British firms such as Vodafone and Cairn Energy still find themselves pursued through the courts for back-dated tax bills, despite the protections they should enjoy under the bilateral investment treaty between India and the UK.
Vodafone’s case involved its 2007 acquisition of a stake in cellular carrier Hutchinson Essar. While the deal did not take place in India, New Delhi determined Vodafone still owed $5 billion in taxes on the overseas transaction. After the Indian Supreme Court dismissed the claim in 2012, India’s previous government introduced a new law to tax transactions of this nature that retroactively applied to cases going back to 1962. Modi attacked this “tax terrorism” at the time, but his government has continued its dogged pursuit of Vodafone in the courts.
Cairn Energy has faced an equally arduous struggle with the Indian Ministry of Finance, which in 2014 blocked the British firm from selling its 10% stake in Cairn India and subsequently demanded $1.6 billion in taxes. Indian officials used the 2012 law to justify their actions, violating the bilateral investment treaty and breaking one of Modi’s own campaign promises in the process.
Immigration laws a further sticking point
This recent history should already give British businesses pause, but the most obvious obstacle in any trade negotiations between UK and India will be the issue of immigration. The Centre For European Reform has argued post-Brexit trade will be closely linked to opening up UK borders to workers from partner countries, but a UK Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee report in June highlighted how Britain’s immigration restrictions on Indian workers, students and tourists has already impacted bilateral trade relations. The report noted how the UK has slipped from being India’s 2nd largest trade partner in 1999 to 17th in 2019, adding that skilled workers, students and tourists are deterred from coming to the UK by the complicated, expensive and unwelcoming British migration system.
It is unlikely the Modi government will agree to any UK-India trade deal that doesn’t guarantee a relaxing of immigration rules that will allow a free flow of people as well as goods and capital between the two countries. The question is whether the British government, which has veered ever more closely towards a Brexit-fuelled populism at odds with relaxed border controls, will be flexible enough to sign up to this.
Given these issues, are Britain’s hopes for a post-Brexit dividend in Indian trade dead on arrival? Unless Modi’s government starts living up to international standards and honouring his country’s investment agreements with British companies, “Global Britain” may not get much further with India than it has with the US.
A more effective labour market approach to fighting poverty
is still the most reliable way of escaping poverty. However, access to both
jobs and decent working conditions remains a challenge. Sixty-six per cent of
employed people in developing economies and 22 per cent in emerging economies
are in either extreme or moderate working poverty, and the problem becomes even
more striking when the dependents of these “working poor” are considered.
Thus, it is not just unemployment or inactivity that traps people in poverty, they are also held back by a lack of decent work opportunities, including underemployment or informal employment.
Appropriate labour market policies can play an important role in the fight to eradicate poverty, by increasing access to job opportunities and improving the quality of working conditions. In particular, labour market policies that combine income support for jobless people with active labour market policies (ALMPs).
The new ILO report What works: Promoting pathways to decent work shows that combining income support with active labour market support allows countries to tackle multiple barriers to decent work. These barriers can be structural, (e.g. lack of education and skills, presence of inequalities) or temporary (e.g. climate-related shocks, economic crises). This policy combination is particularly relevant today, at a time when the world of work is being reshaped by global forces such as international trade, technological progress, demographic shifts and environmental transformations.
that combine income support with ALMPs can help people to adjust to the changes
these forces create in the labour market. Income support ensures that people do
not fall into poverty during joblessness and that they are not forced to accept
any work, irrespective of its quality. At the same time, ALMPs endow people
with the skills they need to find quality employment, improving their
employability over the medium- to long-term.
New evidence gathered for this report shows that this combination of income support and active support is indeed effective in improving labour market conditions: impact evaluations of selected policies indicate how people who have benefited from this type of integrated approach have higher employment chances and better working conditions.
One example of how this combined approach can produce results is the innovative unemployment benefit scheme unrolled in Mauritius, the “Workfare Programme”. This provides workers with access to income support and three different types of activation measures; training (discontinued in 2016), job placement and start-up support. The programme was also open to those unemployed people who were previously working in an informal job. By extending coverage to the most vulnerable workers, the scheme has helped reduce inequalities and unlock the informality trap.
Another success came through a public works scheme implemented in Uruguay as part of a larger conditional cash transfer programme, the National Social Emergency Plan (PANES). The programme was implemented during a deep economic recession and carefully targeted the poorest and most vulnerable.
Beneficiaries of PANES were given the opportunity to take part in public works. In exchange for full-time work for up to five months, they received a higher level of income support as well as additional job placement help. This approach reached a large share of the population at risk of extreme poverty and who lacked social protection. The report indicates that providing both measures together was critical to the project’s success.
The effects of these policies on poverty eradication cannot be overestimated. By tackling unemployment, underemployment and informality, policies combining income support with ALMPs can directly affect some of the roots of poverty, while enhancing the working conditions and labour market opportunities for millions of women and men in emerging and developing countries.
CPEC vs IMF in Pakistan
International Monetary Fund (IMF) was created just after World War II (WWII) in 1945. The IMF is an organization of 189 countries, working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world.
Pakistan has been knocking doors of IMF since 1958, and it has been 21 agreements with IMF. Generally, the IMF provides loans at very low-interest rates and provides programs of better governance and monitoring too. But for the last 6 decades, Pakistan has suffered a lot, in terms of good governance. Especially last 2 decades, corruption, nepotism, poor planning, bribery, weakening of institution, de-moralization of society, etc were witnessed. We may not blame the IMF for all such evils but must complain that the IMF failed to deliver, what was expected. Of course, it is our country, we are responsible for all evils, and wrongdoings happened to us. We have to act smartly and should have made the right decision and at right times.
IMF also dictates its terms and condition or programs like: devaluation of local currencies, which causes inflation and hike in prices, cut or draw-back of subsidies on basic utilities like fuel, gas, electricity, food, agriculture etc, which causes cost of life rather higher for local people, cut on development expenditures like education, health, infrastructure, and social development etc, which pushes the country even more backward. IMF focusses only on reducing expenditures and collection of taxes to make a country to meet the deadlines of payments. IMF does not care about the development of a country, but emphasizes tax collections and payment of installments on time, to rescue a country from being a default.
While CPEC is an initiative where projects are launched in Power Generation, Infrastructure development under the early harvest program. Pakistan was an energy trust country and facing a severe shortage of Electricity. But after completion of several power projects under CPEC, the shortfall of electricity has been reduced to a great extent. One can witness no load shedding today, while, just a few years back the load shedding was visible throughout the country for several hours a day. Several motorways and highways have been completed. Gwadar port has been operational partially. Infrastructure developments are basic of economic activities.
Projects under CPEC has generated jobs up to 80,000. CPEC was the catalyst to improve GDP by around two percent during 2015-2018. CPEC has lifted the standard and quality of life of the common man in Pakistan. CPEC was instrumental to move the economic activities and circulation of wealth in society. Under CPEC, early harvest projects, 22 projects have been completed at the cost of approximately 19 billion US dollars.
It is understood that early harvest projects were heavy investment and rather slow on returns. But, these projects have provided a strong foundation for the second phase, where Agriculture, Industrialization and Social Sector will be focused. Return on Agriculture and Industrial produce is quick and also generates more jobs. The second phase will contribute toward the social development of Pakistan as well as generate wealth for the nation. Pakistan’s agriculture sector has huge potential as cultivatable land is huge, workforce is strong and climate is favorable. Regarding Industrialization, Pakistan is blessed with an abundance of mines and minerals. The raw material is cheap and the labor cost is competitive. Pakistan has 70% of its population under the age of 40 years, which means an abundance of the work force. Pakistan’s domestic market is 220 million and the traditional export market is the whole of the middle-east and the Muslim world.
The major difference between the CPEC and IMF is that CPEC generates wealth, while IMF focuses on tax collection and reducing the developments and growth. China is the latest model of developments in the modern days, China is willing to replicate its experience with Pakistan for its rapid development.
Mandarin Oriental Announces Luxury Hotel in Nanjing
Mandarin Oriental Hotel Group has announced that it will manage a luxury hotel in Nanjing, the capital of Jiangsu Province...
Will CPEC be a Factual Game Changer?
Pakistan’s economy is shrinking, and shrink economy always needs reforms, reforms either political, social or economic can be an upright...
What they say about first impressions
In my family, the men are in a league of their own. They are authoritative, speak their mind, they’re elders...
Four Regional Development Banks Launch Joint Report on Livable Cities
Rapid urbanization has provided most cities in the world with opportunities to provide more sustainable, vibrant, and prosperous centers for...
Indonesia’s new electric car may disrupt its relations with Japan
Authors: Muhammad Zulfikar Rakhmat, Dimas Permadi, and Ramadha Valentine President Joko Widodo has recently signed a presidential regulation on electric...
OECD and European Commission join forces to further support structural reforms in European countries
The OECD and the European Commission’s Structural Reform Support Service (SRSS) sealed a new agreement today in Paris that will...
Turkey and the time bomb in Syria
The Turkish attack on northern Syria has provided conditions for ISIS militants held in camps in the region to escape...
Americas3 days ago
When Democracy Becomes the Problem: Why So Many Millions Still Support Donald Trump
Intelligence3 days ago
Strategy of Cyber Defense Structure in Political Theories
Newsdesk3 days ago
World Economic Forum 50th Annual Meeting in Davos: Defining Stakeholder Capitalism
Science & Technology2 days ago
US Blacklist of Chinese Surveillance Companies Creates Supply Chain Confusion
Europe2 days ago
The return of a “political wunderkind”: Results of parliamentary elections in Austria
Economy1 day ago
Modi’s India a flawed partner for post-Brexit Britain
Defense2 days ago
Revitalising the Quad
Economy2 days ago
A more effective labour market approach to fighting poverty