While debt has been found to be an important reason for migration, it seems that the reverse is also true: migration is leading to an increase in indebtedness
A CHAPTER on migration in the latest World Development Report raised a storm in the tea cup recently when activists objected to its characterisation of NREGA as an example of how policy makers do not always recognise the economic benefits of migration. NREGA has indeed stemmed migration — there is widespread anecdotal evidence from all over the country of how contractors have had to raise wages in cities to attract workers from the surrounding countryside, of how it has given a fillip to mechanisation, and according to some accounts how even states like Bihar are sending fewer agricultural workers out to work in Punjab and elsewhere. However, what NREGA has reduced most is seasonal distress migration, of whole families, including women and children, who can now stay back in their villages to the huge benefit of the children’s health, education and nutrition. Thus the WDR chapter itself fell victim to the confusion it describes between voluntary migration based on “pull” factors, as opposed to involuntary migration based on the “push” factors of over population, drought, non-existent social services, and environmental stress. Much of the migration NREGA has stemmed is of the latter kind, which is a good thing. The World Bank’s Delhi office had to issue a clarification recognising as much.
Migration (of both kinds) has a long history in India and is as old as the country itself. The phrase ‘money order economy’ is not of recent vintage, with whole areas (such as the UP hills) earning the epithet long ago. With the advent of the green revolution by far the largest flows have been rural-to-rural, with migrants from agriculturally lagging states moving seasonally, to states like the Punjab, Gujarat and Maharashtra to work on farms. However, there has also been a steady flow of longer-term migrants into the cities. They are pulled in by economic growth, or what the WDR calls the “agglomeration economies” and increasing returns to scale obtainable by the clustering of skills and talent. The case of Oriya migrants to the cities of Gujarat makes an interesting case study of this type of migration.
First, it illustrates how particular pairs of sending and receiving areas have emerged in different parts of the country as a response to the information and search costs migrants face. The four lakh Oriya workers in Surat’s powerloom industry come overwhelmingly from a few contiguous blocks in Ganjam district, just as the smaller number of Oriya migrants around Gandhidham and Kandla come from another set of blocks in Puri, Khurda and Nayagarh districts. After the initial migrants had established a beachhead right across the country in Gujarat, in the sixties, it was much easier for the rest to follow. Today, young men from the sending villages just land up at the destination in Gujarat, knowing that a friend or relative will help them find a job.
Second, these migrants do not come from the poorest Dalit families, but tend to be from BC joint families with a little education and a little land (but not nearly enough — the density of population in Puri and Khurda is twice as high as the state average). Joint families make it easier to leave the wives and children behind. The womenfolk do not as a rule work, and males are shy of performing manual labour for others for the loss of prestige this entails. Factory employment in Gujarat is well suited to this background. Those who start off performing manual labour (for example loading ships in Kandla port) before they manage to land a factory job, don’t talk about it back home.
THIRD, the emergence of these migration “corridors” across the country has led to the development of some unique institutions to serve them. Thus on the financial side a set of money transfer intermediaries have emerged in Surat who offer what is known as a Bayu Seva Service. Through correspondents in Orissa they deliver remittances (which constitute as much as half of total earnings) to recipients back home within six to 48 hours, at a much lower effective cost than that the 5% charged by the post office on money orders (which can take two weeks). Bank drafts are much cheaper than money orders, and were indeed the preferred option, until the private operators emerged to obviate the need to open a bank account or lose precious earning time queuing up and doing all the paper work. With the advent of these private operators the formal sectors’ share of the remittance market has shrunk to 10%. Other informal financial institutions that have proliferated are bishis (chit funds) and “committees” (informal credit unions) to cater to savings and credit needs.
Fourth, the case raises interesting questions about the economic impact of remittances in the sending area, and in particular on the relationship between migration and debt. A quick survey, conducted by the author, of households who had send migrants to Gandhidham, found that roughly one third of household resources came from remittances, another third from local income including cultivation, and the remaining third from borrowings. On the expenditure side, the largest single item was on dowries and marriages. Given the high rate of interest on informal loans, retirement of past debt through remittance proceeds would have yielded very high rates of return.
Unfortunately the hold of the social system among these families decreed high marriage and dowry expenses, and did not allow this to happen. Indeed the existence of migration opportunities is strengthening the dowry system, by raising the market value of grooms and the creditworthiness of their families. It is evident that debt is an important reason for migration. Many of the young men I met in Gujarat were working off expenses incurred in connection with their sisters’ marriages. However, somewhat discouragingly, at least in this case, it seems that the reverse is also true: migration is leading to an increase in indebtedness.
Most studies of migration have revealed beneficial economic impacts of various kinds at the remittance receiving end, although the migrants themselves may have to bear a high social cost. In this case too, there was some increase in expenditures on house construction and repairs, and essential consumption expenditure. However, because the economic benefits were mediated by social factors, the productive impact was greatly attenuated.
A person is playing a game operated by the Predictor, an entity somehow presented as being exceptionally skilled at predicting people's actions. The exact nature of the Predictor varies between retellings of the paradox. Some assume that the character always has a reputation for being completely infallible and incapable of error. The Predictor can be presented as a psychic, as a superintelligent alien, as a deity, etc. However, the original discussion by Nozick says only that the Predictor's predictions are "almost certainly" correct, and also specifies that "what you actually decide to do is not part of the explanation of why he made the prediction he made". With this original version of the problem, some of the discussion below is inapplicable.
The player of the game is presented with two opaque boxes, labeled A and B. The player is permitted to take the contents of both boxes, or just of box B. (The option of taking only box A is ignored, for reasons soon to be obvious.) Box A contains $1,000. The contents of box B, however, are determined as follows: At some point before the start of the game, the Predictor makes a prediction as to whether the player of the game will take just box B, or both boxes. If the Predictor predicts that both boxes will be taken, then box B will contain nothing. If the Predictor predicts that only box B will be taken, then box B will contain $1,000,000.
By the time the game begins, and the player is called upon to choose which boxes to take, the prediction has already been made, and the contents of box B have already been determined. That is, box B contains either $0 or $1,000,000 before the game begins, and once the game begins even the Predictor is powerless to change the contents of the boxes. Before the game begins, the player is aware of all the rules of the game, including the two possible contents of box B, the fact that its contents are based on the Predictor's prediction, and knowledge of the Predictor's infallibility. The only information withheld from the player is what prediction the Predictor made, and thus what the contents of box B are.
| Predicted choice | Actual choice | Payout |
|---|---|---|
| A and B | A and B | $1,000 |
| A and B | B only | $0 |
| B only | A and B | $1,001,000 |
| B only | B only | $1,000,000 |
The problem is called a paradox because two strategies that both sound intuitively logical give conflicting answers to the question of what choice maximizes the player's payout. The first strategy argues that, regardless of what prediction the Predictor has made, taking both boxes yields more money. That is, if the prediction is for both A and B to be taken, then the player's decision becomes a matter of choosing between $1,000 (by taking A and B) and $0 (by taking just B), in which case taking both boxes is obviously preferable. But, even if the prediction is for the player to take only B, then taking both boxes yields $1,001,000, and taking only B yields only $1,000,000—taking both boxes is still better, regardless of which prediction has been made.
The second strategy suggests taking only B. By this strategy, we can ignore the possibilities that return $0 and $1,001,000, as they both require that the Predictor has made an incorrect prediction, and the problem states that the Predictor is almost never wrong. Thus, the choice becomes whether to receive $1,000 (both boxes) or to receive $1,000,000 (only box B)—so taking only box B is better.
1. NEVER OUTSHINE THE MASTER.
Finance Minister Fouquet unintentionally outshone his master, King Louis XIV, making the King feel insecure by throwing a lavish party that would show off Fouquet’s connections, cultivated manner and charm. Thinking this move would make him an indispensable asset to the king, Fouquet had actually offended his master who did not like the fact people were more charmed by his finance minister than by him. The King found a convenient excuse to get rid of Fouquet.
Galileo was clever in observing this law by giving glory to his patrons. In order to solve his perennial problem of funding, he dedicated his discovery of the moons of Jupiter to the Medicis, since the royal symbol of the Medici family was the planet Jupiter. He then commissioned an emblem for them, with each moon representing one of the sons who revolved around the patriarch. The Medici family became his major patron, appointing him their official court mathematician and philosopher, thereby giving him a more comfortable life and a steady salary.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. NEVER PUT TOO MUCH TRUST IN FRIENDS, LEARN HOW TO USE ENEMIES.
Michael III of the
Emperor Sung of
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. CONCEAL YOUR INTENTIONS.
The Marquis de Sevigne was young and inexperienced in the art of love. He confided in the infamous courtesan of seventeenth-century
Otto von Bismarck was a deputy in the Prussian parliament at a time when many fellow deputies thought it was possible to go to war against
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. ALWAYS SAY LESS THAN NECESSARY.
Coriolanus was a great military hero of ancient
Masters of enigma Andy Warhol and Marcel Duchamp knew the power of saying less and keeping people guessing. The less Duchamp talked about his work, the more it was talked about in the art circles. Andy Warhol recognized it was hard to talk people into doing what you wanted, so when interviewed, he would give vague and ambiguous answers and let the interviewer find his own interpretation.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. SO MUCH DEPENDS ON REPUTATION – GUARD IT WITH YOUR LIFE.
During
P.T. Barnum was an expert at destroying his competitor’s reputation. He published letters in newspapers, warning the public against buying his opponent’s stock. He was a master at poking mockery at the tactics of his rivals.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. COURT ATTENTION AT ALL COST.
P.T. Barnum learned about courting attention to his favor. Any form of publicity would benefit his entertainment business, no matter if it were bad publicity. He promoted his shows of curiosities to audiences with all kinds of gimmicks. He would offer Free Music for Millions, but hire bad musicians, so the crowd would end up buying tickets to the show so they could avoid the bands. He planted articles in newspapers and even sent anonymous letters to keep his name in the limelight.
Margaretha Zelle was able to use this law to make a name for herself as the mysterious exotic dancer Mata Hari. It was rumored she was from
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. GET OTHERS TO DO THE WORK FOR YOU, BUT ALWAYS TAKE THE CREDIT.
Nicola Tesla was a Serbian scientist who never learned how this law was used against him time and again. His invention, the AC or alternating current system was associated not with his name but with that of George Westinghouse, who funded his research. Both Thomas Edison and George Westinghouse were ruthless businessmen who took credit for Tesla’s work. In the end, Tesla was living in poverty, while royalties for his life’s work went to Edison and Westinghouse. He accepted small sums as buy-outs for his work, when in reality his creations could have been worth millions. Even Marconi made use of a patent filed by Tesla in 1897. Tesla was the real “father of radio” but received no money or credit for this invention.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. MAKE OTHER PEOPLE COME TO YOU – USE BAIT IF NECESSARY.
Napoleon’s former foreign minister Talleyrand was master of this law. He knew Napoleon loved the adoration of the masses, and this was the perfect bait to make the former ruler play into the hands of his opponents. In 1814 Napoleon was banished to a small island called Elba near
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. WIN THROUGH YOUR ACTIONS, NEVER THROUGH ARGUMENT.
Michelangelo knew how to satisfy a patron while getting his way at the same time. Piero Soderini,
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. INFECTION: AVOID THE UNHAPPY AND THE UNLUCKY.
In the 1840’s Marie Gilbert, better known as Lola Montez, came to
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. LEARN TO KEEP PEOPLE DEPENDENT ON YOU.
Michelangelo was able to keep his patron Pope Julius II dependent on him. When he and the pope quarreled over the building of the pope’s marble tomb, Michelangelo left
Michelangelo’s power was intensive, depending on one skill. Henry Kissinger’s power was extensive. He was so involved in so many areas of the political structure that to remove him would lead to chaos. The intensive form of power provides more freedom than the extensive.
Machiavelli said it is better to be feared than loved. Fear can be controlled; love, never.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. USE SELECTIVE HONESTY AND GENEROSITY TO DISARM YOUR VICTIM.
Count Victor Lustig promised Al Capone into giving him $50,000 on the terms that he would double this investment in sixty days. Lustig kept the money untouched in a safety deposit box. After the sixty days were up, he apologized to Capone saying he had failed to double the money. Capone expected either $100,000, or nothing, what he did not expect was an honest gesture of Lustig actually returning the $50,000. Al Capone was a man who lived in constant mistrust of people around him, and was so touched by the honest gesture he gave Lustig an extra $5,000.
The classic tale of the Fall of Troy is one example of hiding your ulterior motives within a gift. The Trojan Horse was designed to hold soldiers that would attack the city of
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. WHEN ASKING FOR HELP, APPEAL TO PEOPLE’S SELF-INTEREST, NEVER TO THEIR MERCY OR GRATITUDE.
Genghis Khan was known for his greed and self-interest. When he conquered
Most people are very pragmatic, and when negotiating, do not bring up the need for gratitude for what you have done for others in the past. These appeals will be ignored. Pragmatic people look towards the future, so it is best to emphasize how they will benefit from an alliance with you.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. POSE AS A FRIEND, WORK AS A SPY.
Joseph Duveen was the greatest art dealer of his time; from 1904-1940 he single-handedly monopolized the art-collecting market through his ingenious spying tactics. He would place the household employees of his potential clients on his own payroll. These spies would provide him valuable information as the tastes of his mark. He would arrange “accidental” meetings in elevators, leading his prey of wealthy patrons right into his trap. When clients came to visit his galleries, they found themselves surrounded by works they would most likely buy.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. CRUSH YOUR ENEMY TOTALLY.
The great Empress Wu of
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. USE ABSENCE TO INCREASE RESPECT AND HONOR.
This law is most appreciated in matters of seduction and love. Make yourself too available and your presence will be taken for granted. In the Middle Ages, ladies played the game of presence and absence by sending their knights off on long arduous quests. Sir Guillaume de Balaun wanted to taste the joy of love after reconciliation, and twice he intentionally made himself scarce, withdrawing his affections from Madame Guillelma de Javiac. The first time he drove his lover wild with grief, the second time she became angry and cut him off. When he wrote her begging to be let back into her favor, she allowed him back only on the condition he do penance for his cruelty.
With business, an early retirement at the height of your career will keep people holding you in high regard, and waiting to see you make a comeback.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. KEEP OTHERS IN SUSPENDED TERROR: CULTIVATE AN AIR OF UNPREDICTABILITY.
Bobby Fischer beat chess champion Boris Spassky using this law of unpredictability. Spassky’s method of playing chess was to base his strategy on the patterns he read in his opponent’s moves. Fischer unnerved him by arriving late for the first two tournaments, even letting a match get forfeited. On the third game he made moves that were so uncharacteristic and bold Spassky was thrown off balance. Fourteen games later Spassky claimed Fischer was probably putting drugs in the orange juice they drank while playing. Spassky resigned a few months later and never recovered from his defeat.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. DO NOT BUILD FORTRESSES TO PROTECT YOURSELF – ISOLATION IS DANGEROUS.
King Louis XIV recognized the importance of always keeping his eyes and ears on everyone and everything around him. He built a palace in
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. KNOW WHO YOU’RE DEALING WITH – DO NOT OFFEND THE WRONG PERSON.
In the early thirteenth century, Muhammad the Shah of Khwarezm made the grave mistake in offending a new tribal leader who was emerging in the east. His name was Genghis Khan. Khan offered to share the
Learn to distinguish from opponent, sucker, and victim. The five difficult and sometimes dangerous marks are: the arrogant and proud, the hopelessly insecure, the suspicious, the serpent with a long memory, and the plain, unassuming, unintelligent man.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. DO NOT COMMIT TO ANYONE.
Queen Elizabeth I managed to avoid the trap of marriage and war, by dangling the possibility of marriage to all who courted her. She forged alliances with the countries these suitors came from, all for the benefit of
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. PLAY A SUCKER TO CATCH A SUCKER – SEEM DUMBER THAN YOUR MARK.
In what was the biggest diamond scam of the century, prospectors Philip Arnold and John Slack fooled the biggest financiers of the time, Asbury Harpending, Baron Rothschild, and William Ralston into investing their millions in a fake mine site. The two men played up their small town, scruffy image; convincing the sophisticated tycoons that they would easily be bought out for their discovery of the mines. In the end, after the legal pay-off was made to the two men, the investors realized the mine had been salted with uncut gems by
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. USE THE SURRENDER TACTIC: TRANSFORM WEAKNESS INTO POWER.
German writer Bertolt Brecht was called to appear before the US Congress’s House of Un-American Activities Committee during the heyday of the Communist investigations. Unlike his companions in the
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. CONCENTRATE YOUR FORCES.
The Rothschild banking family concentrated its wealth within a very tight-knit structure. Five brothers each controlled a part of the empire from
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. PLAY THE PERFECT COURTIER.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. RE-CREATE YOURSELF.
Observance of the Law
Julius Caesar always incorporated drama and theatrics in his speeches and daily appearances. He was a great public showman, timing his entrances and exits, sponsoring extravagant spectacles, gladiator shows and theatrical events. The masses loved him, but his rivals feared him.
Aurore Dupin Dudevant left her husband and family in the provinces to become a writer in
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. KEEP YOUR HANDS CLEAN.
Observance of the Law:
Cleopatra was always able to get people to do her bidding without them realizing she was manipulating them. She was able to charm Julius Caesar into restoring her to the throne of
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. PLAY ON PEOPLE’S NEED TO BELIEVE TO CREATE A CULT-LIKE FOLLOWING.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. ENTER ACTION WITH BOLDNESS.
Ivan the Terrible waited five years before executing his first major bold move. After years of persecution by the Shuisky family, the poisoning of his mother Helena, and the banishment of his only friend Vorontsov, the thirteen year-old Ivan invited his rival Prince Andrei Shuisky into his room. No one feared the young boy and the boyars often ridiculed him. When the guards were suddenly ordered to seize Prince Andrei and execute him, no one saw it coming. This one swift and bold act secured Ivan’s power for decades to come.
Ivan initially lay low, showing neither ambition nor discontent. He waited until he had won over the palace guards to his side. They had come to hate the cruelty of the Shuiskys over the years, and the time was at hand to strike boldly and swiftly.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. PLAN ALL THE WAY TO THE END.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. MAKE YOUR ACCOMPLISHMENTS SEEM EFFORTLESS.
Observance of the Law:
Sen no Rikyu was an important tea master and adviser on aesthetic and political matters to the Emperor Hideyoshi. He despised hosts who looked like they were trying to hard. Cha-no-yu, or the Japanese tea ceremony, is an art form, from the preparation to the serving; the whole process must look natural and easy. Accidental grace and beauty were Rikyu’s specialty. On the night before the Emperor was to visit him for a tea ceremony, he artfully laid cushions in the snow on each stepping-stone to his house. In the morning, he removed the cushions revealing the pattern of the stepping-stones like a perfect mold within the snow. This was just one of Rikyu’s clever aesthetic tricks which impressed the Emperor, never calling attention to the work gone into it, but implying a polite gesture in itself.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. CONTROL THE OPTIONS: GET OTHERS TO PLAY WITH THE CARDS YOU DEAL.
Observance of the Law:
Seventeenth-century French courtesan Ninon de Lenclos needed to devise a way of maintaining her lifestyle while having the freedom no woman could achieve in her day. She gave her lovers and suitors three choices, a payeur would pay for her services, but she would only sleep with him when she liked, a martyr would not have to pay, and be part of her harem of men, and from the martyrs she would choose a favori, or one man to whom she would abandon herself to totally until she was tired of him. The payeurs were able to finance her needs while she enjoyed complete freedom, independence, and variety from her lovers. She had the equality to men no married woman of the time could possess.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. PLAY TO PEOPLE’S FANTASIES.
Observance of the Law:
In the 1700s, a mysterious stranger named George Psalmanazar came to fame with his books and lectures on the language, culture and history of the
Abraham Lincoln created an image of himself as the homespun country lawyer with a beard. He played to the fantasy of the common man’s president.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. DISCOVER EACH MAN’S THUMBSCREW.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. BE ROYAL IN YOUR OWN FASHION: ACT LIKE A KING TO BE TREATED LIKE ONE.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. MASTER THE ART OF TIMING.
Time as a human-made concept
There are three kinds of time we deal with when building power: the Long Time is the years-long period of waiting for the right opportunity while creating a strong foundation or base to work from. Forced Time is upsetting the timing of others and setting their deadlines for them. The opponent will be more likely to make mistakes because of the need to hurry, or in the case of business, will be forced to buy whatever you offer because the time to make a decision is limited. End Time is when we execute a plan with speed and absolutely no hesitation.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. DISDAIN THINGS YOU CANNOT HAVE: IGNORING THEM IS THE BEST REVENGE.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. CREATE COMPELLING SPECTACLES.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. THINK AS YOU LIKE BUT BEHAVE LIKE OTHERS.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. STIR UP WATERS TO CATCH FISH.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. DESPISE THE FREE LUNCH.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. AVOID STEPPING INTO A GREAT MAN’S SHOES.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. STRIKE THE SHEPHERD AND THE SHEEP WILL SCATTER.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. WORK ON THE HEARTS AND MINDS OF OTHERS.
Transgression of the Law
Marie-Antoinette was put to death by guillotine in 1793, after the French monarchy was ended by the revolution. Not a single soul came to her defense. Marie-Antoinette brought upon herself the hatred of all. Her jewelry, wardrobe, hair, and masked balls, her lavish lifestyle had been more important to her than the needs of her people.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. DISARM AND INFURIATE WITH THE MIRROR EFFECT.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. PREACH THE NEED FOR CHANGE, BUT NEVER REFORM TOO MUCH AT ONCE.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. NEVER APPEAR TOO PERFECT.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. DO NOT GO PAST THE MARK YOU AIMED FOR; IN VICTORY, LEARN WHEN TO STOP.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
1. ASSUME FORMLESSNESS.
Wisdom in a nutshell:
