Monday, September 30, 2013

It takes much more than just talk .... Power & Politics /The SundayStandard/ September 29, 2013

It takes much more than just talk to become country's maximum leader

A volcanic eruption incinerates all that is dead or alive that stands in its way. When Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi’s inner voice emerged finally on Friday, it not only shook the UPA government’s foundations but polarised the Congress party itself. His 150-second intervention at the press briefing on the controversial ordinance devastated the national discourse on crime in politics. The subtext of his vehemence was a Churchillian riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma—did he undermine the office of the Prime Minister or convert an adversity into an opportunity?
The Gandhis have now realised that CEO Singh and his executives have outlived their utility and can’t ensure profits anymore.
It was a war of words and not ideologies of two eminent individuals. While PM Manmohan Singh manages the compulsions and contradictions of his coalition government to remain in power, the Congress vice-president appears to be fighting for survival of his party, the ownership of which the Gandhis acquired through democratic means. Rahul’s accidental outburst marks the arrival of the Rahul Congress and the beginning of the end of the conventional one. He has sent a clear signal to party leaders and the PM that he is no more just a vice-president. He has taken charge and would like to eject those who can’t deliver according to his expectations. It’s not a mere coincidence that the Congress GenNext, comprising scions of many top leaders, is leading the Congress Spring. The fruits of political family trees are ready for harvest as the party’s core team is flooded with sons and daughters of former ministers, current and former CMs and state Congress leaders. Even progenies of retired civil servants are active as members of Rahul’s backroom organisational team. Does it mean that his latest offensive against the government is an attempt to directly dictate and decide future policy formulations and replace an outdated leadership with younger leaders who have more at stake in future of the Congress? Or is it prompted by frustration stemming from his own failure to effectively lead the party in the past nine years? Rahul has spoken out to prove that he not only has views but also enjoys the authority to admonish his government when required.
Gandhi Jr’s opponents have ridiculed his rare parliamentary appearances and occasional disruptive interventions in public debates. Rahul has been under attack for his silence over mismanagement of the government and party. He has been accused of performing vanishing acts when his party was looking towards him for guidance. His acerbic, contemptuous and piercing remarks against the dubious ordinance have more to do with redeeming the sagging image and plummeting fortunes of the party, which he inherited from his mother Sonia Gandhi. Rarely has a leader of a ruling party termed an action of his or her government as “nonsense” and advised followers to tear up a decisive document and throw it away. Rarely has a leader publicly questioned the wisdom of his PM by instructing him to retract his ‘nonsensical’ decision taken at the behest of his Cabinet comprising 30 ministers who belong to his own party and allies. Rarely have young ministers protested a decision of their own Cabinet. But the Congress is not a political party. And Rahul is not just any leader. He is an owner who expects rich dividends. Singh was chosen as PM or CEO of the government not because of merit. He was picked by the Gandhis to lead a political company that they own. As it happens in many family-owned corporates, young inheritors rarely get along with executives chosen and trusted by forbearers since they have been brought up in a different milieu and play by their own rules. Initially they tolerate the status quo but are always on the lookout for an opportunity to dismantle the old edifice and replace with their own. The Gandhis are no exception. It’s in their DNA to encourage dissent against the establishment and discard the antediluvians. Indira Gandhi defenestrated the Syndicate and reinvented the Congress in her own image. Her son Sanjay Gandhi introduced Youth Dominance. He was a young man in a hurry and would have changed both the Congress culture and ideology had he not been snatched away by a divine nemesis. Rajiv Gandhi, who became an accidental PM after his mother’s tragic assassination, was already in the process of superimposing suave urban technocrats on the Congress structure and inducting them in the political process. Though a natural charmer, Rajiv was also abrasive in his public outbursts. He sacked and replaced senior civil servants and CMs. A reluctant politician, Rajiv also created the dismal dynastic landmark of being the first Gandhi who failed to win a second electoral mandate.
His wife Sonia turned out to be the exception. No doubt, she was guided by Machiavellian elements to get rid of P V Narasimha Rao, and then Sita Ram Kesari as Congress Presidents in a questionable manner. But she retained old family loyalists and brought the Congress back to power within six years of taking over as party president. She realised that a person like Manmohan Singh with his impeccable track record minus political ambition would be the best choice to run the country. She made him the PM but retained the power to choose his ministers and exercised her right to provide mandatory policy instructions on many issues. He turned out to be an asset who delivered handsome dividends. The Gandhis have now realised that CEO Singh and his executives have outlived their utility and can’t ensure profits anymore. As a single shareholder, Rahul wants a CEO who understands not stock exchanges in New York and Mumbai but political markets in Muzzafarnagar and Madurai. He feels that the current government leadership can’t retain the current market of the Congress, which will shrink if corrective measures aren’t taken. He wants the endorsement of the masses, not markets.
After Nehru and Indira, it was under Sonia’s leadership that the party won for a second time with a record number of 206 seats—more than what Rajiv garnered in 1989. Now, almost 24 years later, his son, who is seen as a part-time politician, has realised that he would be held accountable for the lapses of the government, which is misperceived as functioning through remote control by the Gandhis. With his mother taking lesser and lesser interest in party affairs, it is for Rahul to revive the Congress and take it to victory in 2014. So far, he has been an outsider crisscrossing the country in search of Bharat, accompanied by close aides. Hardly have the PM and other senior party leaders consulted him on national issues. So, the young inheritor finds himself disconnected with their style of working. By projecting Rahul as India’s future prime minister, party veterans have already made him the general who has to win the war of 2014. Rahul understands the trap. From being a frequent traveller within and outside India, he is now forced to become a full-time politician and face the heat and dust of dirty Indian politics. Rahul has taken the plunge by sending a message. He has taken a risk, which could mar or make his career. He has minimised the PM, but it takes much more than just talk to become the country’s maximum leader.; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Monday, September 23, 2013

In UPA Il's twilight, PMO takes wings..Power & Politics/The Sunday Standard /September 22, 2013

In UPA II's twilight, PMO takes wings for smooth takeoff of Manmohan's dream project

South Block’s current fatal obsession is not about engaging friends and foes of the world’s superpowers. For the past few weeks, the goalposts of Indian diplomacy have changed. All energies of the Indian establishment’s many paid and unpaid megaphones are being diverted to get the PM’s dream project airborne. Since the Nuclear Civil Agreement is Manmohan Singh’s single genuine achievement in his two terms in office, he wants to ensure that it takes off in with fanfare and fireworks. He couldn’t have chosen a better venue than Narendra Modi-ruled Gujarat. Suddenly, the diplomatic discourse that had moved towards peace talks with Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif has become just a footnote in the discussion papers in the dossiers prepared for the PM’s US visit next week. Since it is customary for all visiting Heads of State to carry gifts for their counterparts, the Indian PM has been advised to take along a copy of the pact between the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) and Westinghouse, the US multinational which supplies nuclear reactors to many.

Since the PM is an accidental politician who trusts more in his academics than political polemics, he doesn’t mind ignoring the electoral compulsions and fallout of his actions. It is not a coincidence that NPCIL was suddenly activated to seek legal opinion from the country’s top law officer on how to bypass nuances and legal bindings of the nuclear law passed by Parliament. The Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) reports directly to the PM and all nuclear-related establishments like NPCIL and Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) fall under the ambit of PMO. According to reports and senior diplomats who facilitated the agreement in 2008, India promised various US globocorps over 10,000 MWs of power, worth over $20 billion in contracts. Five years later, not a single deal has been finalised because of the protective Clause 17 in the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act. It was understood that the Indian operator would insert a clause in the agreement which provides heavy compensation in case of any accident. But not only the US but also its corporates have mounted pressure on India to dilute this clause. For the past few months, top leaders like Vice-President Joe Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry have been protesting to Manmohan on the delay in the dilution of the liability laws. Even the heavyhitters in the Senate have been relentlessly attacking the UPA for its inaction.
Only last month, Mark Warner and John Cornyn wrote a strongly worded letter to President Obama: “Eight years later, the agreement has not been implemented and we have yet to see India provide a workable nuclear liability agreement that allows companies to move forward.” Curiously, US corporates are not mounting pressure on their own government to encourage the setting up of nuclear power plants at home. Even America’s steadfast ally Japan is dismantling its nuclear plants following Fukushima. Hence it was puzzling that Ashwani Kumar, the PM’s temporary special envoy to Japan, should boast about the assurance he claims to have received from the Japanese on extending help to India in our nuclear energy programme. Ironically, on the same day, Japanese PM Shinzo Abe had announced that the toxic remains of the Fukushima plant would be destroyed.  While the world can ignore the might of the greenback, it is India which dances to the tune of the American corporates.  
It is, therefore, not surprising that the government is determined to exploit the loopholes in the manipulated and mutilated mandate it got in Parliament to pass the nuclear agreement. Obama and the US nuclear lobby hustled the agreement through at home. But invisible and lucrative assurances given to the US during the 2008 negotiations through interlocutors are now beginning to surface. The mandarins of both White House and South Block with the backing of powerful business forums in both countries are now working overtime to finalise the fineprint of a draft which will allow Westinghouse entry in India’s nuclear energy business. But the roadblock is within. According to unconfirmed sources, the AEC which dealt with superpowers and the US to push the deal through is angry because DEA had bypassed it. Also, supporters of the well-tested Indo-Russian strategic relationship are of the view that the Americans can’t be trusted as they are guided by profit motives and would subvert any legal provision which ensures the security of Indian citizens. The fight between the pro-Russian and pro-American lobbies in India is acquiring dangerous proportions, leading to the leakage of several classified  documents. Even senior diplomats are surprised over the speed with which the PMO is promoting the nuke deal. Since most have been chosen for their ideological commitment to the US model and nuclear energy, they are likely to win in the end. On the other hand, those who are pleading for slow action feel that the next government may dilute the agreement. But these critics have been silenced by the PMO with the excuse that the BJP’s opposition to the unfolding revelations is pathetically feeble. Since the beneficiary of the dilution of the liability clause would be Gujarat—the palatine of BJP’s PM candidate—the PMO expects a rough but safe ride to Washington. Ironically, though Modi never misses an opportunity to attack Manmohan as a ‘maun pradhanmantri’, on nuclear projects for his state, Modi’s maunvrat has become Manmohan’s mantra for his mission. The PM may return to India wearing a broad smile and showing the V-sign even if it means an embarrassment to Congress and BJP leadership.
PS: Dr Rakesh Sood’s appointment as PM’s Special Envoy on Disarmament has stirred a hornet’s nest in the nuclear lobby within. As the PMO readies to take the N-deal forward, those who have failed to secure any post-retirement sinecures have started a whisper campaign. Their novel epiphany is that Sood would work against the deal. Some are even trying to restrain his responsibilities and minimise his say in any future nuclear engagement with the US. But the PM is in no mood to patronise the saboteurs.; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Monday, September 16, 2013

Modi must become an institution ... Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard/September 15, 2013

Modi must become an institution like Vajpayee to become a symbol of India

The old BJP is dead! Long live the new BJP! The operatic anointment of 61-year-old Narendra Damodardas Modi as the BJP’s new helmsman doesn’t reflect just a generational shift. He epitomises a new breed of politicians whose words speak louder than their work. The Modi marvel is an antidote to Vajpayeeism—the pause generating a faster pace of political acceptability. It also marks the end of L K Advani’s agenda based on evolving and tweaking ideology according to the need of the times. Modi is now the BJP’s modern mascot and mantra. He is seen as the most visible, decisive and credible alternative to the Gandhis. He is also perceived as a leader who would sacrifice systems and formalities for the Modi Model of Governance. For him, the democratic process is just another exercise to acquire legitimacy and authority to achieve his targets. The new BJP under Modi is sure to run politics on the lines of a business model, in which time-bound achievements and not excuses will decide the fate of the stakeholders. His track record in office is the envy of his adversaries. He knows how to sell an idea to both the masses and the classes. The villain of 2002 is now the hero of 2013.
No such parallel exists anywhere in the democratic world of a minimised leader becoming the maximum leader by nudging out all his contemporaries within and outside the party. Modi’s propulsion to the national stage is the sign of a new India where degree, pedigree or an elitist social tag can no longer dictate a leader’s destiny. Modi is the first state satrap who has been chosen to lead the national party, superseding the claims of upper caste, well-spoken and elitist national leaders who have no state to call their own.
Though the choice of Modi was finally dictated by the emotional fortissimo of political necessity, both the BJP and RSS had found it difficult to spot a leader who could energise a demoralised cadre and defend Hindutva’s core ideology. They saw in Modi a commander who could communicate with the people directly and connect with the aspirations of the youth. Vajpayee could, with oratory and an affable persona. Modi has done it with his performance and aggressive personality. He is neither a team leader nor a team player. Modi is the team and the leader all rolled into one because he firmly believes that democracy ends when action begins. Ever since he won the Gujarat Assembly elections for the third time, he was projected as the only saviour of the faction-ridden BJP in which there are more candidates for prime ministership than the number of national parties in the country. By choosing Modi, the Sangh Parivar has closed the door on others—at least for now.
Both the BJP and Modi have taken a big risk. The party has handed over its leadership to a person who trusts only his spoken words and his tested wisdom. No one can find fault with his decisiveness, clarity of thought, personal integrity and missionary zeal. It is because of these unique selling points that the entire party ignored Advani’s well-reasoned opposition to Modi’s elevation. Advani was never against projecting Modi as PM, but was dissentient on the timing, as he felt that the 2014 election should be fought on the issues of corruption and non-performance of the UPA government. Advani and others were also of the view that once Modi became the face of the party, the Congress and other parties would sweep their poor governance under the carpet and turn  the election into a Mahabharata between secular and communal forces.
But the patriarch’s objections were ruthlessly overruled because of the massive pressure mounted by impatient cadres and middle-level leaders on the party high command. They are convinced that Modi would run the party like the chief executive of a big corporation whose targets and means are well defined and result-oriented. They think that he is the only one who can expand the market share of the BJP by promoting it as a unique product, bearing the distinctive Modi brand name. The Gujarat chief minister has already mastered the art of communication using cutting-edge technology. He always thinks out-of-the-box and comes out with schemes and ideas that has never been seen before in politics. For example, projecting holograms using 3D technology to ensure that his presence is felt in all districts in Gujarat is a device that has never been used by any political leader to connect with voters. Such persuasive instruments prompted foreign diplomats, who abhorred him for over a decade, to seek a minute of his indulgence now. Modi’s novel delivery mechanisms also forced leaders of India Inc who once shunned him as a political bezonian to seek photo-ops with him.
Achieving status is altogether a different ball game than living up to it. Now that Modi has crossed internal hurdles within the party, he has to soothe all genuine fears about his style and substance. Running a state government with a brute majority is not the same as managing a coalition at the Centre in which every leader is a kingmaker. Modi’s first challenge is to ensure that none of his senior leaders are ignored in the party and he doesn’t run the BJP with the help of corporate paratroopers. After all, party workers and middle-level leaders are not shareholders looking for monetary dividends. They want an ideology to dictate governance. Modi is labelled as a divisive leader. He has to get rid of this lethal label because the BJP is unlikely to win a majority on its own in 2014. Since Modi has taken a big risk, he has to learn to respect the ones with genuine differences of opinion. With the birth of new BJP, a new Modi, too, has to be born. The idea of a ‘Modi from Gujarat’ cannot become a symbol of India unless he becomes an institution like Vajpayee.; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Monday, September 9, 2013

New dispensation will inherit... /Power & Politics /The Sunday Standard, September 08, 2013

New dispensation will inherit injured economy and diminished diplomatic legacy

Diplomacy is not just the art of sweeping difficult situations under the carpet. It is also an instrument to score invisible victories. Indian diplomats have acquired new expertise in converting inconvenient realities into inglorious heritage. Last week, when Defence Minister A K Antony was cornered for his ministry’s failure to contain the Chinese Army’s growing incursions along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), he blamed the 1962 war for India’s current border woes. Antony hardly speaks his own mind. But he was told by diplomats that sending strong signals of protest to the Chinese would provide fuel to warmongers and pseudo-nationalists. For the past few years, Indian diplomats have become internationalists who care more about how their words impact international community than their domestic consequences. Never before has the Indian Foreign Service been so concerned about kowtowing to aggressors like Pakistan and China as they are during the UPA regime. Absolving our hostile neighbours is their new mission. For example, for the past few months China’s People’s Liberation Army has been arrogantly establishing physical control over large areas falling on the Indian side of the LAC. But India’s Ambassador to Beijing Subrahmanyam Jaishankar is more concerned about his future responsibilities as India’s next ambassador to the US. It is during his three-year tenure that China successfully captured not only India’s markets by dumping cheap goods but also expanded her geographical girth. Yet he has been rewarded with a better assignment for failing to raise the alarm and advising the government to take corrective measures against our neighbour’s hostile intentions. Jaishankar represents the new breed of Indian diplomats who are successful in pursuing their own agenda even at the cost of damaging the political credibility of the government they serve. It is not surprising that not even once have the Opposition and foreign policy experts blamed our diplomats for ignoring the national mood. After some of them realised that in the New World Order, strategic and security considerations play an important role in their future prospects, they are succumbing to the pressure mounted by strategic thinkers. Since adopting an aggressive posture against Pakistan and China is deemed as going against global strategic considerations, South Block mandarins are willing to sacrifice good diplomacy to protect strategic dialogue, whether in India or abroad.
AK Antony's speech on China in Parliament reflects that Indian diplomats have become internationalists who care more about how their words impact the international community than their domestic consequences.
In the past decade, the offices of the National Security Advisors of countries, from the US to India, define the contours of diplomatic moves. Their objective is to ensure an unreal yet tenuous global peace even if the results are lethal economic and security blowbacks in the long run. It is not just a coincidence that both China and Pakistan have taken on India at a time when America is involved in containing or toppling regimes in West Asia using its military might. The US establishment is determined to ignore domestic opinion against military intervention in Syria. It’s no wonder that the US advises India to exercise restraint but ignores China and Pakistan’s military adventurism. Taking a cue from Big Brother, Indian opinion-makers and think tank “intellectuals” have maintained a diplomatic silence against US aggression in West Asia. New York was the centre for launching the US economic doctrine for the rest of the world. Now Washington has become the launching capital for defining the template for global security.
Last fortnight when I wrote about the collapse of Indian diplomacy, a failed and accidental diplomat launched a diatribe against me. Short of calling me names, he questioned my sources and logic, forgetting that I knew more about his kind of diplomacy and other shenanigans going on in South Block. There were a couple of factual errors in my column. The thrust of the article, however, was that cronyism is the key determinant for choosing diplomats to key positions. Some officers like Ashok Kantha and P S Raghavan mentioned in my column are outstanding officers with impeccable integrity, but their appointments were marred by the ad hoc selection of other colleagues for better sinecures. Now the government is moving fast to fill vacant posts and correcting past errors. For example, I questioned the absence of an expert to deal with the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Last week the Prime Minister chose Dr Rakesh Sood as his envoy to deal with disarmament. Sood is one of the rare diplomats who knows nuclear diplomacy and science like the back of his hand. Similarly, the foreign ministry finalised the appointment of the current Ambassador to Malaysia, Vijay Keshav Gokhale, a 1981-batch officer as India’s next envoy to Germany. His compulsory foreign language is Chinese, yet he has been picked to replace Sujatha Singh who took over as foreign secretary recently. T S Tirumurti, an Arabic-speaking officer of 1985 batch, replaces Gokhale. An excellent diplomat, Tirumurti has been “rewarded” for his rebellious nature; in 2011, he was moved from the key position of joint secretary (BSM). The Prime Minister, however, is yet to find a candidate for the UK because he has to make a choice between a person who can protect both the Indian market and security or one whose only concern would be to become a part of the diplomacy dictated by Big Brother.
As the elections draw near, the PMO is moving very cautiously, since the next government would scrutinise in detail the credentials and credibility of those diplomats who have been or would be chosen for important assignments. With half a dozen of them retiring within the next few months, Indian diplomacy is also likely to suffer much damage to its authority and effectiveness along with the political establishment. The new dispensation will not only inherit a mauled economy but also a diminished diplomatic legacy.; Follow  on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Monday, September 2, 2013

Don't lose sleep over mauling.. /Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard, September 01, 2013

Don't lose sleep over mauling of money-minded markets, instead join the masses

Dear Prime Minister,
As a former student of yours, I must confess that your speech in the Rajya Sabha was shockingly un-Manmohanlike. The content, diction and body language gave your adversaries enough ammunition to dub it a speech delivered by a backbencher looking for attention. You are still respected globally and in a large part of India as a leader who knows his economics right but his politics utterly wrong. Survival in office for nine years is no mean feat. But you are not associated with that kind of politics of survival in which convenience, and not conviction, plays an important role. Sonia Gandhi chose you as PM over senior Congress leaders who were once your bosses in government only because she wanted a reputed economist with impeccable personal integrity to improve upon the record set by the NDA government in reviving the economy. You weren’t expected to lead the political discourse. That was to be defined and dictated by her. It was a clear division of power between the head of the party and the head of the government.
It worked during UPA I as you decided to run the government on your own terms and achieve your mission of becoming the darling of Global Capital. You staked your government to get the Indo-US Civil Nuclear Treaty through in Parliament not because you were feared but because you stood firm in your conviction. International leaders always gave you a place on the high table of economic diplomacy.
During the past few years, Newton’s law of “what goes up must come down’’ validated itself in your career. If we trust the opinion polls conducted by various media organisations and marketing agencies, your popularity has plummeted faster than the value of the rupee in the past few months. Silence is always a potent weapon for a credible Prime Minister. Your predecessor, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, hardly spoke. And when he did, after a pause he demolished his detractors. It’s no wonder that even after being out of power for 10 years, his popularity is intact. On Friday, you spoke too much after having kept silent on a wounded economy and fractured politics. More than half the members of your own party were missing from the Treasury benches. The Congress’s habitual rabble-rousers who have mastered the art of filibusting were conspicuous by their absence. Barring an unusually aggressive Finance Minister P Chidambaram, over two-thirds of your mammoth Cabinet chose to stay away to nurse better platforms than the Rajya Sabha. Some of your colleagues felt that your aggressive offence against the Opposition turned out to be your weakest defence. Otherwise, a widely admired economist like you wouldn’t blow your own trumpet when you claimed that “despite what some members may say, I do command a respect in the Council of G-20 (a forum of top 20 powerful nations)... Have you ever heard of any democracy where the Opposition doesn’t allow its Prime Minister to introduce his ministers?” Your agonised expression reflected the crises of identity and authority which were bothering you.
Parliament expected a doctor-like PM to tell its members about what was ailing the economy and what needs to be done individually and collectively. Instead, you were finding fault with the rotten food rather than the rot in the vegetables. You failed to fix any accountability or suggest remedial measures. You wanted the country to believe that the use of chemical weapons in Syria has inflicted wounds on the Indian psyche. While you did admit to some mistakes, the thrust of your extempore narrative was that it is the entire country that has let the people down. Don’t forget that your team of advisers trained and educated abroad gave every possible concession and encouragement to investors, both in India and overseas. You opened up every sector so that they could get the environment they need to boost economic growth. Your government even made the import of pricey foreign liquor free for all five-star hotels so that their rendezvous in India would bring in more dollars. All these supporters were your most powerful megaphones as long as the going was good for them. But they failed to create wealth in India. They ignored unskilled labour. They went on pushing you to give them more incentives and withdraw subsidies from products, which the middle and lower classes use. Moolah for the rich and misery for the poor became the hallmark of your government’s economic philosophy. SEZs went underground even before their foundations were dug. FDI in retail is still a mirage. The corporates got what they wanted and termed your team a dream. Now they are the same people who are running your government down. They want to avoid your government’s company. They are blaming your policies for their non-performance and asset stripping. They have spent their money on luxuries, and now want more to run their businesses. They neither want to invest nor make their units more productive. Parliament wanted you to assert your authority on these avaricious corporate buccaneers. Your party expected you ensure that over $40 billion stuck as Non-productive Assets with corporate leaders are recovered and put to use. The Opposition wanted you to unfold a road map, which would restore your credibility as an economist, revive the India Growth story and make you the mascot of good news for the Congress. Your advisers must study and analyse how those who once saw Narendra Modi as the villain of disharmony and divisive politics now perceive him as their hero and the saviour of a sinking economy. For them, once you were the God of Boom. Now they feel your government is the harbinger of doom.
Moral of the story: Those who use you for their success also dump you when you lose your utility. You will lose nothing and make monumental gains if you don’t lose sleep over the mauling of money-minded markets and instead join the masses.
( Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla)