FDI IN RETAIL: PART 3 - FDI in Retail Will Gradually Make Our Farmers Bankrupt

FDI IN RETAIL IS A BIG HOAX PROMOTED BY US MNCs AND INDIAN MEDIA

The Government is planning to bring in FDI In Retail, in On-Line Retail and In Defence. 

We all have a keen interest in knowing the effects of FDI in these sectors.
We start with the effects of FDI on the Indian retail sector. 
We are presenting you a series of articles, to help you come to an informed conclusion.

PART 3: FDI in Retail to Make Farmers Bankrupt

 (Summary: The supermarket chain stores keep squeezing the prices of the farmers and the small producers to a bare sustenance level. Some of them go bankrupt in this process. The supermarket chains also play with product freshness and quality to reduce costs. The profits of the supermarket chains, as a result, keep increasing along with their market share.)

PART 3: FDI in Retail will give better margins to Producers and Farmers - Is it the truth or wool in our eyes?

A very major promise held out by supporters of organized GDI in Retail is that it will result in the removal of the middle-men, in the delivery chain from the producer to the ultimate consumer. Due to this direct delivery system, there will be significant savings. These savings will be passed on to the producers, as better prices for their products. This will mean better profitability of farmers and lower prices to the consumer. Let us examine the truthfulness or otherwise of this crucial argument offered in favour of FDI in Retail, based on the international experience.

1. What has the media to say about the profits of the farmer and small producer?

Supermarkets indulge in regular price wars and “Loss-leader pricing” (Please refer Part 2), in order to increase their market share. As a result of these, the consumer may benefit in the shorter term through lower prices. But do the supermarkets absorb the losses due to the lower prices?

Let us take the example of the recent milk wars in Australia. The milk prices were reduced by the supermarkets to $ 1 per litre, a drop of over 50%. Who paid for this reduction? Not the supermarket! These lower prices were pushed down the throat of the producer, who had to either comply with accepting lower prices for his milk or let it rot in his milk-containers.

This is what the Herald Sun, a leading newspaper wrote in its business section,” Somebody has had to pay for those lower prices, and it has been the suppliers. Coles and Woolworth (the big two superstore chains, who control over 80% of the retail food market) have been ruthless with them. Forcing them to cut their prices…….. Milk is the standout example. Small suppliers, or those without major branded products, just have to cop whatever the big two demand……it's simply undeniable that overall, they've been ruthlessly squeezing their suppliers.”

And did the supermarkets lose money due to the price wars? Just the opposite. Herald Sun continues, “they have had to supply even bigger increases in volumes, because of their price cuts, their profits have increased at an even faster pace…. by 24 per cent for Woolworth, by 40 per cent for Coles.” So, the huge price reduction actually increased the profits of the Supermarkets. Herald Sun has this to say, ” Woolworth maintained a very aggressive program of new stores…..it added 74 new ones in three years, and increased it total food and liquor floor space by 13.5 per cent.” This 13.5% growth is in a market which is hardly growing by 1-2%! Is it not evident that the additional 12% sales came from driving the smaller players to the ground?

The supermarket chain stores are so powerful that even politicians do not want to take any action. Herald Sun continues,” It would be a courageous politician or regulator who tried to aggressively reduce the dominance or the price-cutting practices of the big two.” Are the Indian politicians any different?

So, if the supermarkets increased their profits and the consumer paid lower prices, who paid for the milk price reduction?

2. What is the version of the farmer and small producer, and what are the authorities doing?

Georgina Mitchell and Sally Willoughby, writing in Business Day section of Sydney Morning Herald, (the largest daily newspaper), say,” Brian Wilson, a fourth-generation cattle farmer with a property near Tamworth, says the Coles and Woolworth duopoly cut his income by about $80,000 last financial year… Mr Wilson said producers in the New England went through a competitive tender process to win the Coles and Woolworths milk contract, but many farmers were forced to sell their product at a loss”.

So, what was the consequence of such unremunerative prices to the farmers? Mitchell and Willoughby write, “The chief executive of the NSW Farmers Association, Matt Brand, said 30 farming families in the state had left the dairy industry in the past year because of price cutting by supermarket chains.”

A dairy farmer of Australia, who has been made bankrupt, because of price squeeze by the Supermarket chain stores

And what was the regulator doing? …”The ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission) announced last week it would investigate the supermarkets over claims they bullied suppliers, misused market powers and potentially breached the law. Fifty producers anonymously stepped forward with evidence against the supermarket giants, who last year earned combined revenue of $70 billion.”

As you can see the producers were so scared of the big superstores that only a few of them gave evidence anonymously. These dairy farmers are giants in comparison to Indian milk producers, with hundreds of cattle and automatic milking stations. Till the time of writing this article, no action has been taken against the supermarket giants by ACCC.

Can you imagine what would happen in a similar situation in India? The farmers will have nowhere to go, but up. There will be mass suicides.

3. FDI in Retail supporters say that it will provide better storage and transportation and thus fresher food – how true or false?

What about the modern infrastructure facilities, tom-tommed by the FDI in Retail supporters?  What about quick transportation of produce from the farms to the consumers, to keep the natural freshness, and reduce wastage?

While in India we are used to getting our milk nearly fresh (less than 6 hours after milking), milk in Australia takes anywhere up to 6 days after milking, to reach the supermarket shelves. This is because of the system called batching, to minimize collection and transportation costs. To keep the milk from going bad in this period, it is chemically treated to kill all organisms. I have never been able to make curd at home with the supermarket milk. I am forced to buy curd, from the same supermarkets, at three times the milk price.

There is something more, which I have not been able to understand in years. The toned milk in Australia costs 15-20% more than full-cream milk! The superstores have given the story to the public that as they have to process full-cream milk in order to take out the butter, to make toned milk, the extra processing costs more. What about the sales and profits from the sales of butter? When I ask this question, people are puzzled, as no one has ever asked that question to the supermarkets.

So, how would you like to drink 6 days old milk, supplied at twice or thrice the present prices, and not being able to make your own curd, from these FDI superstores?

4. How supermarkets use meat scraps and animal glue to produce fresh meat

To meet the ever increasing pressure by supermarket chains to reduce prices, the commercial meat packing industry around the U.S. have found a new way to increase profits by using meat scraps to make filet mignons as well as hot dogs, sausages and stew meat. Powdered meat glue binds scraps of beef, lamb, chicken or fish that would normally be thrown out, into solid pieces of meat. According to its manufacturer, meat glue can be used to produce new kinds of mixed meats (for example combining mutton and fish seamlessly).

Meat glue permits restaurants and butchers to sell their meat scraps as premium meat. Once you cook the glued meat, even a professional butcher or chef can’t tell the difference.

Daily Mail, Australia, writes,” It's packaged in supermarkets and delis as 'formed', or 'reformed', meat. But in restaurants across the U.S., there are no laws requiring chefs to disclose the use of 'meat glue', a kitchen trick that has left consumers curdling at the thought of ordering a filet. The little-known secret - a powdery substance made from an animal blood clotting agent that connects small pieces of meat - allows stores to sell the final product as a prime cut, making fast food out of fine dining, experts say.”

The same is now being used in Australia and was shown on national television, in a sting operation. The video can be seen on the YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXXrB3rz-xU

Meat glue consumption can lead to illnesses such as Celiac Disease, Heart Disease, Stroke, Crohn’s, Ibd and Ibs.

Conclusion: Will the superstores help our farmers, improve their returns and supply fresher products?

Based on the example of the developed countries, we have to be prepared for regular farmer suicides, higher customer prices and non-fresh farm products, which are made to look fresh by artificial methods. Are these portends of good days for the customers and farmers?

PART 4: In this part we shall analyse if FDI in retail will bring in huge investments in infrastructure for storage and transportation, as being promised.

Sincerest Regards,

AAP - THE ROAD AHEAD

Please give your comments and share To Maximize awareness about the evil truth of FDI in Retail.

FDI IN RETAIL: PART 2 Unfair Competitive Practices resulting in joblessness

FDI IN RETAIL IS A BIG HOAX PROMOTED BY US MNCs AND INDIAN MEDIA

The Government is planning to bring in FDI In Retail, in On-Line Retail and In Defence. 

We all have a keen interest in knowing the effects of FDI in these sectors.
We start with the effects of FDI on the Indian retail sector. 
We are presenting you a series of articles, to help you come to an informed conclusion.

PART 2: Unfair Competitive Practices

(Summary: As we saw in Part 1, the supermarket chains, all over the world, create market dominance by cornering a market share of 50-88%, divided up among less than 5 players. In this Part 2 we see how with this mammoth market dominance, they squeeze the suppliers to the point of ruining them financially, source products from foreign suppliers in the name of benefit to customers, limit customer choice by offering only selected brands and packs, kill small players by unfair pricing policies and force customers to buy unwanted products. Proofs of these practices, both from consumer and professional organizations, are presented.)

The FDI in Retail claims to benefit the customer by lower prices and the farmer by better margins. How true are these claims?

A fair and healthy competition benefits the customer. Customers get the best product at the cheapest price. FDI in Retail supporters have been singing from media roof-tops that FDI in Retail will help in improving variety, quality and price for the Indian housewife, and give better terms to the farmer. To know the truth, let us analyse how these same corporate are operating in the countries of the developed world, how fair is the competition there and how much is the benefit to the housewife and the suppliers. The story in India will be a repetition of the same.

Price manipulation to kill competition from the smaller stores: 

Superstores are long term players, with deep pockets. They are prepared to lose money in the short-term to gain market dominance. They are well aware that the small-store owner has limited financial capability. So they use the strategy called “Loss-leader pricing” for selling a few products at cost or even below cost.

In a report produced in September 2012 by Consumers International, for the European Union states,” Supermarkets routinely practise selective deep discounting, often referred to as below-cost selling. This was identified by the UK Competition Commission in its 2008 study as a practice with the potential to have an adverse effect on consumers. Although the Commission expected consumers to benefit from lower prices, they recognised that the practice could “mislead consumers into thinking that the prices of all products sold  by a grocery retailer are lower than is really the case”. Supermarkets know very well that, in a one-stop shopping expedition, consumers are unlikely to buy deeply-discounted baked beans at one supermarket and deeply-discounted dog food at another.”

The small store cannot afford to match the prices of the superstore “Loss-Leaders” nor their promotion in mass-media. Over a period of time, the small store starts losing its regular customers and starts losing money. In the finale, either the small store closes down, or the superstore buys it off at a throw-away price, making the owners and their employees job-less. With competition gone, the superstores can now start charging higher prices and also start offering lower quality goods, thus increasing their profit margins. This is how in every developed country 3-5 supermarket chain stores have cornered up to 88% of the market share.

In a report commissioned in 2012, International management consultants Deloitte state,” ‘Down-Down’ is Coles pricing and marketing campaign. This has been a high profile campaign from its commencement in early 2010. Other supermarkets have their own pricing strategies to compete, including IGA’s with “Locked Down Low Prices” from July 2012 and Woolworths’s “everyday low prices”. The chart shows data from Coles, having 37% of the Australian grocery market share. By using “down-down” price strategy, over the last three years, Coles has managed to increase sales of selected products by 50-333%.” The total market growth is barely 5%. This implies that Coles has gobbled up the sales of the smaller retailers, driving them to ruin.

Picture shows a dairy farmer from Queensland, Australia, who was driven to bankruptcy by Coles’ “Down-down” milk pricing strategy.

EVIDENCE FROM CUSTOMERS:

The truth of the above statements is well-known in the developed countries, but is well-hidden by the Indian media from the domestic customers. Many of you may be buying from the same small kirana store for decades. Possibly your mother also purchased at the same store, and the owner knows all of you. Here are some personal experiences of Australians, writing on a famous Australian blog, called “Whirlpool” (actual quotes of people, names removed for compliance with privacy laws): 

i. "It seems retailers in Australia are copping flak left, right and centre for all sorts of reasons. I'm sure lots of Whirlpool members have fond memories of retailers that have either been taken over or closed down over the years".
ii. "Brashes (an electronic small store) was good for most music and good for TV's …. until JB (an electronic superstore) started popping up everywhere…, then JB turned to crap when they realised they could sell more things for higher prices, and all they needed was a box and sales people, with very limited product knowledge".
iii. "Have fond memories of Waltons in Bankstown (Sydney) and of McEwans in Northland. I live near Northland now and when I go I try to remember where it used to be".
iv. "I miss Brashs, still have a shopping bag from them around the house somewhere".
v. "Now I miss just independently owned stores; walking through Melbourne CBD, it's all just big brand franchises. These corporations knocked out our small businesses".
vi. "I am 45. I was very young and remember the store and knew it used to be Foy's but it was also taken over by Woolworth's and became a Woolworth's variety".
vii. "Skinny's music store on Adelaide in Brisbane. Actually had ok prices for an independent. Along comes JB (an electronic superstore) and kills them". 

I can give you hundreds of such examples from real life people, showing how small businesses have been killed by superstores. The Indian media shows us manipulated market research reports, prepared by paid agents, to show that the FDI in Retail will bring a shopping haven to India. As you can see its nothing but a lie.

EVIDENCE FROM MEDIA AND AUTHORITIES:

Big name superstores, all over the world, like Wal-Mart, Tesco, Aldi etc. sell more than 75% of their products with “Made in China” label. This strategy has gradually killed the local manufacturers and vendors, who cannot match the Chinese prices. Their owners are workers have been rendered jobless.

Let us now see the facts found out by Australian authorities, in charge of ensuring fair competition, and published in the media.

Kate Carnel, Chief Executive of the Australian Food and Grocery Council, writing in Sydney Morning Herald, a leading Australian newspaper, says, “Aggressive price promotion and discounting by supermarkets is a normal part of competitive retailing to encourage customers into stores…… advertising new unsustainably low prices on staple products ………… will inevitably flow through to farmers and affect the viability and competitiveness of both farmers and the agri-food manufacturing sector, which employs more than 288,000 Australians, including half in rural and regional areas…… If these companies cease and reduce manufacturing in Australia, then infrastructure, employment and the social fabric of many rural towns will be significantly undermined… supermarket chains have moved many non-food manufacturing base offshore – we don’t want the same to happen to food products. Australians don’t want ….. cheap imports for our food supply.” 

Most customers in the developed countries are unhappy with the foreign outsourcing and quality of these products, but have little choice. The local governments are unable to do anything because of WTO rules, where trade restrictions and tariff protection is nearly impossible. It is like the genie of the bottle – once released you cannot put it back in to the bottle.

Conclusion: What will be the consequence of this unfair pricing? The smaller retailers, the farmers and the agro-based manufacturers will be forced to keep reducing prices, till they become nonviable and close down. What will happen then? Just more products with “Made in China” labels! Do you want this to happen in India in the next 15-20 years? As India is primarily an agrarian economy, the consequences of rural job losses will be catastrophic.

The Census 2011 report has said that 20% joblessness exists in the youth, both male and female. If FDI in Retail is allowed to come in to the country, the coming years will see this jobless figure jump to anywhere between 40-50%. Imagine while half of our country’s youth will be jobless, the foreign companies, owning the FDI in Retail, will be laughing all the way to the bank.

PART 3: In this part we shall analyse the truth of the claim that FDI in Retail will provide better margins to farmers and smaller manufacturers.

Sincerest Regards,
AAP - THE ROAD AHEAD

We look forward to your comments and suggestions.
Please Share on Other Pages To Maximize Participation.

FDI IN RETAIL: PART 1 IT IS A BIG HOAX PROMOTED BY US MNCs AND INDIAN MEDIA

The Government is planning to bring in FDI In Retail, in On-Line Retail and In Defence. 

We all have a keen interest in knowing the effects of FDI in these sectors.
We start with the effects of FDI on the Indian retail sector. 
We are presenting you a series of articles, to help you come to an informed conclusion.

PART 1: Market dominance

(Summary of PART 1: It has been said by the media and by the politicians repeatedly that FDI in Retail will only have a market share of 3-5%. It will thus have no impact whatsoever on the market dynamics of pricing or purchase control. The truth is just the opposite. In all developed countries, where supermarket chains operate, they control between 50-88% of the market share. They completely dominate all aspects of purchase and sales pricing. The small retailers, manufacturers and farmers have no say at all.)

The story told by Politicians In Support of FDI in Retail:
The Biggest bluff that the Indian politicians and the Indian media are telling the public is that FDI in retail sector will have multiple benefits for the Indian economy. It will bring in billions of dollars in investment, boost employment, reduce wastage of food grains and other edibles, set-up modern storage and transportation facilities, increase revenues and profits of the primary producers and reduce prices to the end-consumers. 

The Biggest bluff that the Indian politicians and the Indian media are telling the public is that FDI in retail sector will have multiple benefits for the Indian economy. It will bring in billions of dollars in investment, boost employment, reduce wastage of food grains and other edibles, set-up modern storage and transportation facilities, increase revenues and profits of the primary producers and reduce prices to the end-consumers.

Nothing can be farther from the truth.

The facts from developed economies, from where we are planning to copy the superstore-retail model, tell a completely different story. Based on my personal experience of such superstore chains of Australia, where I live, and from discussions on the subject with many close friends, who work in retail super stores, I find that the Indian public is being taken for a royal ride. 

The impact of superstore proliferation has also been analysed by many well-respected International management consultants. Their analysis and conclusions are available as private reports and as published articles in leading newspapers. Let us study what all they have to say and whether they also extol the virtues of the retail-superstore model. Does their analysis also match what is being told to us by the Indian media and .politicians?

Let us take up each of the arguments offered in support of the retail super-store model.

    1.    The superstores will only have a market share of 3-5% and thus hardly impact the total economic scenario:

The facts from various world markets, by well-respected sources, tell us a completely different story:

a)     Professors Graeme Samuel AC and Stephen King, co-directors of the Monash Business Policy Forum, who led a research project on Australia’s national Competition Policy, have this to say in an article published on 1/.Aug/.2013 “Australia’s ‘big three’ account for 95 per cent of grocery sales. Equivalent ‘big three’ shares in other countries range from around 65 per cent in Canada and Sweden, to 50 per cent in the UK and Austria, down to about 40 per cent in Germany”.

Coles and Woolworths, account for around 75 per cent of Australia’s sales of packaged groceries.

b)    
     A report produced with the financial assistance of the European Union, for Consumers International, documents the high degree of national grocery markets in a number of countries. In all cases not more than 5 supermarkets share 50 - 88 % of the National Food Market. This is a very high concentration of buying and selling power. A diagrammatic representation shows how in UK 4 supermarkets control 76% market share from 7000 suppliers and have a client base of 25 million households.

 c)  As per Stuart Alexander, a leading marketing and distribution consultant in consumer marketing, “It is estimated that there are over 10,000 small and independent retailers across Australia. The total market share of these is 2%”. It is very clear that over the years, the major players have squeezed out the small independent corner stores, similar to our Indian kirana stores, who are now left with a mere 2 market share. Majority of the existing 10,000 stores are in very small localities, where big superstores do not find it viable to operate.

d)   Euromonitor International, a leading tracker of supermarkets all over the world says, “Wal-Mart Stores Inc. remained the largest grocery retailer in the US with 25% value share of overall grocery retailers. Wal-Mart’s value sales grew by 2% in 2013”. Thus Wal-Mart, which also has operations in India, alone controlled 25% of the retail grocery market share, and this grew by over 2% in 2013, a year in which the US economy was in recession. This would imply that more and more small retail players are being systematically squeezed out.

What does this mean for us in India:  Once we allow FDI in retail in India, over a few years the independent retailers will be squeezed out from all major markets. They will only be able to operate in small and uneconomic geographical areas, where super-stores will not like to go. The cumulative market share of the major superstore chains will not be 3-5%, but more like 40-50%.

PART 2: In this part we shall analyse what will be the consequences of such market dominance by the super-stores.

What is wrong with the AAP volunteer system which is leading to dissonance?

GROWTH OF AAP VOLUNTEERS: In a very short time frame a huge volunteer force was created by AAP. These volunteers were dedicated and worked selflessly to make AAP a powerful organization. They soon became a thorn in the flesh of the established opposition parties. Established parties like Congress and BJP started to take notice of AAP because of the quiet but highly effective work done by AAP volunteers. 

Why Effectiveness of AAP Volunteers Has Declined with Time: To-day AAP volunteers are feeling lost. They appear directionless and frustrated. Internal power struggles have started among AAP volunteers. Those who are not able to make their voices heard are feeling that their cause is not getting due attention. They feel that the volunteer organization has been taken over by those with an ear to someone from the top leadership. These people are acting in their personal interest and against the interest of the AAP national volunteers. The volunteers are expressing their dissatisfaction in small groups but are afraid to speak openly. This is not a good sign for a party which has a long way to go. Volunteers are the life blood of a political party. If the blood gets polluted or infected, it will not be long before the whole system gets diseased.

WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE PROBLEM: A healthy system needs to have a continuous 2 Way communication. Think of your own body. Each part is all the time sending information to the brain about its status. If the brain will not listen to a small part of a small finger which is burning, the whole finger will get burnt. The brain needs not only to listen to the small finger but also provide action so that the finger is saved. Unhappily this 2 way communication is seriously lacking in AAP, because of the present organizational structure. Because of this lack of free and frank communication, many fingers in AAP have got burnt. A emergency measure like "MISSION VISTAAR" will not result in the right treatment, as it is only a band-aid reaction. Its bound to fail, because it does not recognize the cause of the problem. 

WHAT IS THE REAL PROBLEM: The problems are of organization, of communication and of timely conflict resolution. But the basic problem is organizational. If we have the right organizational model, the communication and conflict resolution will automatically follow from it. The biggest question we have to analyse and answer is what is the correct organizational model for AAP voluntary group.

Let us analyze the available alternatives.
What Are the Alternative Organizational Models: (1) The most commonly used organizational model is based on a hierarchical structure. The Government, Military, Companies etc work on this model. It is bureaucratic and works well when problems are of a standard and repetitive nature. You have a few well tried solutions, and you keep solving problems based on your well-tried solutions. As majority of problems one faces when in government, military and companies are of this nature, the hierarchical organization works well, but as we all know, it works very inefficiently.

(2) The second organizational model is the autocratic model. This works well when there is a single objective of the organization and all members are committed to that single objective. This system demands that individual members give up their own personal rights and accept the rights of the organization as supreme. Such an organization model has its use in emergency situations, as in times of war or national calamities. This system seriously lacks a feedback mechanism, leading to serious dysfunctional actions. Unhappily, once such a system comes into being, its very difficult to change it, as individual groups have lost all power of opposition.

(3) The third organizational structure is by committee control, where a small group replaces the single dictator/autocrat. This core group system allows a wider information flow and generation of alternative strategic solutions. This system works well in small homogeneous communities and most tribal colonies have successfully used this model for centuries. Unhappily, with large heterogeneous groups, with widely differing circumstances and problems, this system cannot work.

(4) The fourth organizational structure is ORGANIC. As the name implies the structure grows and gets organized around the problem. As the problems change, the structure keeps getting modified to take care of the changing conditions. In very large groups, there are many problems of different groups. So there can be multiple "organs" which get created around individual problems. The relationship of the members within any "organ" is one of expertise, and not of hierarchy. There are no power-centers but solution-centers. The members can also move from one "organ" to another depending upon changing problems. As the focus of each individual "organ" is to solve the problem it has been built around, with the expertise of its members, there is no need of any external authority, and this obviates the need of power struggles. 

There are bound to be conflict situations within an organ, as effectiveness of alternative solutions is not known. This is solved by the age-old and well tried PANCHAYAT system. The panchayat is selected for a particular problem and has a short life-span. All members are committed to accepting the panchayat solution. There is no praise or blame for success or failure on any one individual or any sub-group. The success or failure is of the whole "organ". All successes and failures are analysed and documented, to ensure that there is learning for the future. This builds the knowledge-base of the "organ" reducing future conflicts. 

LET US LOOK AT THE SCENARIO TO CHOOSE THE RIGHT ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE: As we see from the four organizational structures analysed above that each has its advantages and disadvantages. The Congress and BJP are organized around the hierarchical structure. Shiv Sena, BSP, AIADMK, TMC etc, are organized more on the dictatorial model. Even in the hierarchical organizations, wherever there are powerful groups, the dictatorial forces come in to play, either by an individual or by a small group. They start working in their own interest and not in the organizational interest. This is the reason why all these organizations have moved away from the problems of the people and have started working around the personal objectives of the dictatorial forces. This is why public has become frustrated with all of them, and hopes that someone will solve their problems. So they just try one group after another - so the anti-incumbency vote. Unhappily, with the present organizational structures of the parties solution of problems is impossible. 

If AAP was to also follow the same hierarchical organizational structure, AAP will also become bound in similar knots as the other parties, and become a failure. So AAP volunteers have to have a different organizational structure. 

AAP VOLUNTEERS MUST ADOPT ORGANIC STRUCTURE:
Since AAP wants to solve the problems of the public, it has to have a structure that can help it to achieve this. The only organizational structure that can do this is the ORGANIC model. In this model the structure is flexible and builds itself around the problem. As no one is superior to any one else in an organic structure, there are no power conflicts, and everyone is focused on solving problems and not on getting into position of power or influence. 

In an organic structure, the group works to find solutions and hence, it works for the benefit of the people. As it solves more and more problems it gets more efficient for this and gets greater support from those it benefits. As its very existence is dependent upon solution of problems, the "organ" keeps actively looking for problems. It does not spend time trying to curry favor with senior members, as that does not help it in any way.

The PARACHUTE REPRESENTATIVE FOR ASSEMBLY/LOK SABHA: This is the worst face of a hierarchical organizational structure and creates utter frustration among the dedicated workers. They have little opportunity for growth, as everything is decided and told to them from top down. They lose their individuality and creativity. They become mere postmen between the public, who they are supposed to help, and the leaders, who keep getting more and more busy, and do not have time to help them solve the problems. Gradually the public does not get timely solutions, leading to its frustration, and the volunteers losing confidence in the organization.

SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVE FOR CORPORATION/ASSEMBLY/LOK SABHA: The representative should be selected from the "organ" based on the decision of the"organ". The "organ" wishes to be successful in solving the problems, as such, it will like to send someone who can be a good representative. As the real action is at the "organ" level, not everyone is inclined to become a representative and move away from the scene of action. Also, no one should become a representative more than once and for one post only. 

I would like all volunteers to debate the above post among themselves and see if their present issues will get resolved with this system. Do not, for the present think of representative selection, but in solving the real problems of the public. If you succeed in that the rest will follow automatically.

Best regards
Pravin Gupta
AAP-THE ROAD AHEAD

The Year Ahead Analysis Times Are Going To Be Very Bad
Situation of the economy is going to be very bad this year. Rains are poor and prices of all agricultural products are going to rise by 30-50%. Onion prices are already bringing tears to the eyes of the common man.

Talks of huge hoarding have already started. The middle men are looking forward to making a killing. The difference between wholesale and retail prices is 100%, showing that there is a nexus of middle men making very huge margins. Ruling party supporters are medium business and shop owners. It will, hence, not take serious legal steps against them. People who supported the present government in recent elections have to make money.

With food prices rising and gas and electricity prices also north-bound, the whole economy will have a 15-20% inflation. TIMES WILL BE VERY BAD. Achche din nahin aayenge.

There will be a huge anger in the common man, in a very short time from now. Corruption has not been talked about by BJP. So the officers know that they will not be answerable. BJP is only doing show business by talking about punctuality. The real problem is corruption.

The worst thing is the main stream media will keep quiet, as the ruling party will threaten it that by writing about these realities, you are creating a fear psychosis in the society. Because of this absence of prior information, the people will realise the consequences very late when no action will benefit. The horse will have escaped the stable.

AAP must start mohalla sabhas to make the common man aware of this game plan.
The people should demand that they must have immediate elections so that their welfare can be assured.

The Huge Joblessness among the Indian Youth and The Bleak Future with FDI In Retail

The news from Census 2011 is shocking. Please read how 20% of the young people of India are jobless. On top of it this government wants to bring in FDI In Retail, FDI in On-Line Retail and FDI In Defence. What does it want to do? Make the whole country JOBLESS?
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Over-20-of-young-Indians-are-jobless/articleshow/37598409.cms

NEW DELHI: More than 20 per cent of Indians in the 15-24 age group were jobless and seeking work, according to startling data released on Tuesday by Census 2011. In absolute terms, this army of unemployed youth is staggeringly huge — around 4.7 crore of which 2.6 crore were men and 2.1 crore women.

These definitive figures for 2011 reveal the deep and pervasive unemployment that has gripped India since the past decade even as economic growth was zooming along at over 8 per cent per annum for most of this period. The figures include the entirely unemployed and marginal workers who get work only for up to six months in a year.

Overall, the unemployment rate among the working age population in the 15-59 age group was a worrisome 14.5 per cent, including marginal workers seeking work. In the 25-29 age group, the unemployment rate was nearly 18 per cent. Even among those in the 30-34 age group, nearly 6 per cent were unemployed, numbering over 1.2 crore.


Youth from Haryana at Chandigarh railway station while back to their native place after attempting railway recruitment exam in city on June 15, 2014. (TOI photo by Rohit Kundra)

Among dalits, unemployment rate in the working age population of 15-59 years was a shocking 18 per cent, much higher than the general population. Among adivasis, the unemployment rate was even higher at over 19 per cent. These are the two most marginalized sections of Indian society and clearly they are struggling with widespread unemployment.

Inexplicably, census authorities have not released data for 15-19 years and other such five-year age groups for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, like it has been done for the general population. In the 15-34 age group, 21 per cent dalits and 22 per cent adivasis were reported to be unemployed. This includes the 'youth' age group of 15-24 years but in later years, more persons should be finding employment.

One myth busted by this age-wise data on workers and non-workers is that young women do not want to work either because of family responsibilities or social disapproval. While the bulk of non-workers are indeed women, among younger women 20 to 29 years of age, the share of those seeking work is the same as for men in the same age group — slightly over 20 per cent. This is the new generation that is relatively better educated and wants to build a better life, but the opportunities are not there.


Crowd of jobseekers at an employment office in Lucknow. (TOI file photo by Manoj Chhabra)

This finding is in consonance with the fact that women are getting married at a later age, and having children at an even later age than before.

In urban areas, nearly 18 per cent of the 15-24 age group is seeking work while in rural areas the share rises to over 21 per cent. In both rural and urban areas, the share of young women seeking work is high at 17 per cent and 20 per cent respectively. So, young women wanting to work is no longer just an urban phenomenon.

The new census data also shows how the lack of social security for senior citizens and low economic status is forcing them to continue working despite their advanced age. Nearly 3.3 crore persons of 60 years age or more are employed as main workers, that is, full-time regular employment. Besides these, another one crore senior citizens work as marginal workers. The bulk of elderly workers are male.

Some 18.5 lakh persons of age over 80 years are still working as regular workers and another 6.5 lakh octogenarians eke out a living as ill-paid marginal workers.