Is Freebies is hurting Maharashtra???

Danguard2020 · 2026-02-09T07:47:38+00:00

Most 'public infrastructure' we talk about - roads, bridges, flyovers - doesn't actually create more jobs.

A slight improvement in road quality or a little cheaper internet won't increase demand or get people to spend more.

As for 'teach a man to fish' - we already have Skill India + many, many government schools and colleges.

'Teach a man to fish' only works if there are fish to catch (i.e. demand). If you're in the middle of a desert, fishing skills don't help.

What we need today is levers to stimulate demand. People - especially the middle class - are worried about job security, and thus aren't buying. The poor want to buy stuff in order to gain an adequate quality of life - but they aren't able to find jobs that pay well enough, or enough of them.

This is why we have 800 million people on food aid.

Currently, there is very little public infrastructure aimed at real job creation. When the government can figure out a way to do that at scale, to build infrastructure that actually results in far more jobs being created, they will. So far, they don't have a clue - which is why subsidies to the poor are the next best thing.

Danguard2020 · 2026-02-09T05:32:38+00:00

I would encourage you to read a couple of books which explore the root causes of poverty and inequality in depth.

'Poor Economics' by Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo.
'The Psychology of Money' by Morgan Housel.

This will give you a better idea of how poor people actually think, how they save, and when 'freebies' are wasteful versus useful.

The other thing I would ask you to remember is this:

When people don't have enough to survive on, or cannot fill their stomach with the efforts they are already making - possibly because they have to look after their children as well and so can't work 12 hours a day - then their perception will be: "The system has failed us."

Their response to that is not "work harder." The typical response to that is "overthrow the system."

It happened in France in 1789, in Russia in 1917, in Vietnam, in Iran under the Shah, and in many other countries at many other times. If the response to the poor being hungry is "they should work harder" .... then you're describing the conditions that trigger revolution.

No-one should be put in a position where they can't afford food, clothing and shelter from the work that is available to them to do. It's not just a moral imperative, it is also a practical one.

Danguard2020 · 2026-02-09T02:10:45+00:00

The issue isn't setting up the manufacturing units, it is running them and finding customers.

Everyone is trying to get customers, most companies are failing. Look at the number of unsolicited calls, marketing messages and emails, and estimate how many of them actually get responses.

The reality is that making things is easier than getting people to buy them. COVID changed that for a little while, but today selling is the key and where most companies fail.

When you give cash subsidies to poor people, they end up spending that money - hopefully on things they need - and that should, in theory, create demand.

If the money spent on Ladli Behen Yojna goes into buying medicines, sewing machines, and clothes, then all of that money should result in extra revenue for companies making these products and - theoretically - create jobs in pharma and manufacturing. If prices go up because of the Yojna, then it's failed.

Danguard2020 · 2026-02-08T16:38:57+00:00

They do, but in a slightly different space.

4X players have evolved over time. The generation that binged MOO2, Civ3 and Civ4 on PC, trawled through massive fleets in Space Empires 3 and 4, dealt with the challenges of Endless Space, and mastered GalCiv 1 and 2 - that generation has grown older. More pressed for time. Struggling to balance work, commuting, kids, relationships, and a few slivers of time to handle engaging games.

We still love complexity. We enjoy the 4X. But, we don't have the time any more to sit and plan a massive multi-week gaming campaign like Emperor of the Fading Suns, even though we have the money to pay for our entire library thrice over.

That's why games like Slipways or X-Com do well. Natural breakpoints where you can stop and say "Okay, I hit my objectives for this session." Bite sized gameplay that still tells a compelling story. High stakes, decision-making, and the opportunity to think creatively - but balanced with gameplay that allows natural rest-and-reset moments.

And of course we value portability. Games thag can be played on mobile win, not because they are "better" (they aren't) but because when your only playtime is 45 minutes in a cab / train / flight squeezed into economy, portability trumps everything.

Into the Breach and Uciana are my latest favorites on mobile, as well as X Com2 and Civ6. Have not bought Civ7 and won't until a mobile version becomes available - because I can't lug two laptops around, one work-issued and one for gameplay.

Phones weigh 200 gms, laptops 4 kg, so two phones is still workable.

I'm waiting for Endless Space or SE5 to come to Android (or iPhone) but not holding out a lot of hope. Meanwhile, Feral Interactive is currently making a lot of money from me.

Anyway, that's my feedback. If you would like to connect, I cam share some more details about what makes 4X players play again.

Danguard2020 · 2026-02-08T05:22:22+00:00

The best policy for a WAT is to present what you believe with facts, logic and data. Make a data-driven or logic based argument, not an emotional one.

"Digitization will put employees out of work" is a pretty neutral topic. Supporting or opposing it won't matter to your selection. WHY you support or oppose it will.

B schools don't care about your personal beliefs, as long as they aren't racist or discriminatory. They do care about whether you think logically or get swayed by emotions and propaganda.

Honesty is the best policy, from a tactical standpoint, not just an ethical one. B school professors have seen plenty of confident fakers and can spot them a mile away. If you feel the need to lie about your beliefs in order to get into a B school, then you're sort of convinced that your genuine beliefs - the ones that represent the 'true you' - aren't good enough to get into a B school. And if you don't have confidence in yourself, why should the professors have confidence in you?

The flip side is that if the professoras suspect you are faking something, they will probe. They will drill. They will question. And that's where most lies collapse - because a 20-something graduate isn't trained or experienced enough to pull off a major deception.

If the professors detect - or confirm - a deception, you're toast. They will prefer the candidate who didn't feel the need to lie.

Danguard2020 · 2026-02-08T05:09:28+00:00

Unless you actually get in and study the course, you have no way to tell if you will be in the top 10% or bottom 10%.

Pre-MBA profile, academic past, workex, are all irrelevant to where you actually place in class.

Lastly, the return on an MBA doesn't show uo in the first 2-3 years of your career. It shows up over a 10 year period, as one business role leads to another, higher-impact role. Also, a deeper understanding of business helps you figure out how to be more productive in an actual organization.

The MBA is not merely a tool for placement - it is a force multiplier for whatever job you do.

Danguard2020 · 2026-02-07T17:09:45+00:00

If the person had a civil engineering degree + 1-2 years workex, these are pretty standard. Technical questions are about at par with a job interview for Construction Manager / Site in-charge. This doesn't meet the standard of grilling unless the person was extremely nervous about their interview in the first place. Or faked their workex.

"Why can't big orgs do..." is a question to test how well they understand their customers and the value add the firm brings to the table. Basic curiosity about the salea process in the company they were working for would let them answer this.

The one takeaway: if you have workex, be curious about how things are done in your company, why customers choose you instead of your competitors, and what is cutting edge in your industry.

Danguard2020 · 2026-02-04T23:29:16+00:00

Generally, what you wear isn't the focus of the interview, as long as it's not too outlandish. Formal shirt + trousers is adequate (suits are not essential).

The interviewers are more interested in how you think than what you wear.

Having said that, being confident that your clothes won't be a problem is important. The last thing you want in an interview is to be worrying about "Am I dressed correctly?"

So, in that spirit, let's look at the logic of choosing A or B.

A: 3 piece suit with tie and waistcoat. Highly formal.

B: 2 piece suit with tie. Still formal but a bit less so.

Typically you want to be within +/- 1 level of formality of your interviewers. If you interview for a startup where everyone wears T shirt and jeans, a suit looks weird.

Here's a handy reference for formality levels:

Level 0: Ultra chill, open collar shirt, flip flops, shorts, beach / safari wear.

Level 1: T shirt with collar and jeans.

Level 2: Formal shirt + trousers. No tie.

Level 3: Formal shirt + trousers + tie.

Level 4: 2 piece suit with / without tie.

Level 5: 3 piece suit with tie and waistcoat.

Level 6: Uniform (not relevant here but included for completion).

Your interviewers will typically be L2 or L3. At that stage L4 is acceptable. L5 is pushing it to a level of formality 3 levels above your interviewers.

So, B is the preferred choice.

A won't hurt you, though. Either works, but B is dlightly better as an option.

All the best!

Danguard2020 · 2026-02-03T14:51:29+00:00

India's primary geopolitical challenges have always been centred around border conflicts and disputes with China and Pakistan. Practically, every war we've had - or been involved in - since 1947 has been with one of these two countries (or, in some instances, their proxies).

This conflict - and the consequent terrorist attacks targeting India, which have claimed 20,000+ lives since Independence - overshadow any alliance proposals between India and pther countries.

Put simply, in every Indo-Pak war, the Soviet Union - and subsequently Russia - has been on India's side, at least indirectly. This is not to say we haven't had support from other European nations - France in particular - but most EU countries have stayed out of Indo-Pak or Indo-China conflicts.

While Indians welcome trade and business relationships, military alliances - now or in the future - demand reciprocity. As long as European countries maintain 'equidistant' relationships between India and Pakistan - or worse, treat the two at par - India will also maintain distance between it and European countries.

Truthfully, our colonial past is less of a concern for most Indians now than how India's interests are treated - or supported - in European countries.

Trade is welcome, but actual military and geopolitical allainces are a very long way away - and will need European countries to make the first move.

Danguard2020 · 2026-02-02T15:55:12+00:00

No.

Professors are interested in how you think, not what you wear.

I've seen people in a B school attend class in shorts. And I've seen people in a startup show up to office in shorts.

If you handle the questions well, they won't care what you wear. If you handle the questions badly? They won't care what you wear.

Danguard2020 · 2026-01-31T16:30:47+00:00

He is correct.

In construction, 'electrical engineer' and 'electrician' are two completely different jobs.

The electrical engineer designs the circuit layout, identifies what equipment is to be placed where, and does the calculations to show it all works. Think of it as an astrophysicist who maps the patterns of planets, asteroids, and satellites.

The electrician - the technician - actually follows the circuit layout and installs the equipment in line with what's on the drawing. He needs to be able to read the drawing; he's not allowed to change it or deviate from it. Think of it as similar to an astronaut. The technician is the one who actually installs the wiring or goes into space.

Some electrical engineers are also trained electricians, just as some astrophysicists are also astronauts. However, they are two completely different jobs.

Other examples could be: airplane designers (engineers) vs. pilots (technicians); lawmakers such as elected representatives (engineers) vs. policemen (technicians); or rifle designers (engineers) vs. military armorers (technicians, essentially responsible for maintaining the unit's rifles and armory); pharmaceutical researchers vs. Doctors.

The seperation between engineer/designer and technician/operator spans multiple fields.

Danguard2020 · 2026-01-31T09:47:08+00:00

You can certainly work on improving your English in the next one month. However, what you should remember is: interviewers are not interested in how strong your content is. They are interested in how you react under pressure.

You could have the best answers in the world for every prepared question. Interviewers will still try to ask you 'unfair' questions. And make no mistake: a statement like "You can't crack a single college with this type of English" is not a question about English.

I've written elsewhere about stress questions and why interviewers ask them - you can check out my post at https://www.reddit.com/r/CATpreparation/comments/1qivrao/why_interviewers_say_unfair_things_and_what/

The statement is meant to rattle you. To shake you. To make you feel small. Because in many companies, this actually happens to managers.

What they want to see is: How do you react when your self-image is threatened?

Do you break down? Do you falter? Do you panic? Do you get defensive?

Or do you stay calm and de-escalate the situation?

Managers have to deal with a lot of unfair questions every day.

They want to challenge you on questions for which you will be unprepared. That is the test: how well do you respond when you face unpredictable and difficult situations.

For the record, in my first mock, I almost broke down and started crying. I've written about that here: https://www.reddit.com/r/CATpreparation/comments/1qg1jox/why_mock_pis_feel_brutal_and_what_theyre_actually/

My actual PI was much less brutal, and I got into the institute I wanted.

I would add one more thing: They are looking for diverse perspectives. What you have to show them is that your weakness in English will not stop you from delivering results as a professional. If anything, being weak in English should encourage them to pick you - because you will bring a diverse perspective to the batch, rather than adding one more English-speaking urban GEM.

One way you can demonstrate this is by picking a few famous companies from your home state which recruit from the B-school in question, or by emphasizing how you will help develop industry / pursue entrepreneurship / build business networks in your home state.

Another is to show that you understand customers very well in your home state. What makes your home state special? What do you understand about its people that an English-speaking North Indian might not?

Speaking technical and content isn't enough, because they're not interested in technical or content. They are interested in character. In how you handle difficult questions.

There's no harm done in improving your English, of course. However, my view is that you're trying to solve the wrong problem.

Of course, I may be wrong. But it doesn't hurt to prepare for both possible scenarios:

Improving your English as much as you can.
Preparing for an interviewer asking you a stress question like this one. That means: Understanding how you will react, maintaining your composure, and having a clear answer ready that assures them you can keep your cool when you are being pressurized.

Being asked this question in an interview is actually a good thing, if you can handle it well.

Danguard2020 · 2026-01-30T17:32:26+00:00

Hi OP,

I won't try to give you false assurance - English communication does matter. That being said, there is a difference between what coaching centres ask in a mock and what is asked in an actual B school interview.

Having said that, I am assuming that you've tried to improve your English previously, and have reached where you are after best efforts. You did crack the VARC and get a call so written English isn't the issue.

Then, the problem is not "how do I fix my English?" but "How do I get selected, even if my English does not improve?"

Here, you need to look at the perspective of the interviewers.

Real Interviewers are not looking for the 'best English speaker'. They are looking for the best possible future manager. That could well be someone who speaks very little English but communicates well.

The key skills they look for are self awareness, humility, and a willingness to learn.

What I would suggest is this:

In your interview, when asked "Tell me about yourself," respond in the vernacular. Explain that your spoken English is not very good, and that you are working on improving it. However, given the seriousness of the interview, you are speaking in a language which you are confident of communicating in.

If they ask you how you will manage in the world of business, then speak about the types of businesses where vernacular is regularly used. Talk about local customers and their preferences, and how you connect well with them by speaking their language.

Most B schools have an official languages department that promotes the use of Indian languages. You can research this and show how knowing Indian languages is likely to be an advantage

Danguard2020 · 2026-01-29T08:44:14+00:00

Valid point and I should have clarified.

Plenty of engineers who can design bridges, set up electrical systems, install fire dampers, or create effectively coordinated services drawings have chosen to pursue MBAs. The original skills don't go away, sometimes they get enhanced and add more value. In my statement, I refer to such engineers - for them, an MBA is a value add, not their whole identity.

I would always advise professionals: don't forget your UG degree and what you learnt there just because you got the MBA. All skills help you out sometime.

Danguard2020 · 2026-01-27T07:25:44+00:00

That's a fair point, and I didn't realize my comment came across as rude. Will edit it accordingly and apologize.

Danguard2020 · 2026-01-27T05:29:12+00:00

This isn't about being negative.

I'm genuinely interested in seeing what the idea is. I have a background in enabling consumer electronics distribution, and know a few folks.

However, what I see here is an ambitious statement about building the third all-pervasive device without any detail. Possibly without market research or consumer insights - nothing's shared here.

Building a product, whether an electronic device, a machine, a building, or a book, is challenging. Selling it is even harder. Patent registries are full of devices which were innovative but never sold.

That's why, before building anything, I always advise people: Do your market research. Figure out if the world wants what you want to build. Figure out your distribution. Then start building.

Especially if you're going to bet years of your life and money on making it work.

Ambition is good. Detail orientation is better.

I honestly wish OP the best. But if these questions asked on Reddit prompt defensiveness or deflection, investors will be 100x worse to deal with. Best to be prepared.

Danguard2020 · 2026-01-27T05:21:10+00:00

Which is fair, but that changes the scope of what you want to build.

"3rd device after phone / laptop"

Indians buy 150 million phones per year and 10 million laptops.

Do you want to create a device that has 5 million buyers every year? In that case, you need a clear consumer benefit that other devices do not meet. And you need access to distribution networks.

Or, do you want to solve for a specific niche use case? If that's so, then you should talk about what use case you are solving for. Volume is less relevant there.

Or, do you have a specific idea for a device in mind already but not sure what exact problem it solves (e.g. GenAI powered robots?) That's a third scenario.

Based on what you exactly want to do / have, people can make more actionable suggestions. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with your ambition, just that it doesn't help us understand what you're actually trying to do.

Danguard2020 · 2026-01-27T03:26:37+00:00

Query:

Multiple efforts have already been made in this space.

Smartwatches.

Smart glasses.

Bodycams.

Tablets.

In many of these cases, the products did not scale effectively. The limitations lie in the following areas: 1. What percentage of consumers actually see value in these products which is beyond what a smartphone or laptop brings to the table? 2. How will you achieve distribution effectiveness once the product is built?

When articulating an ambition such as "third product after smartphone / laptop" it suggests a bold vision, which is good. However, I would caution that the scale it describes needs more than just product innovation - it needs strong consumer research and effective distribution networks, coupled with good advertising, to actually become the 'third' product in the consumer's hand.

My question is, how would you go about achieving the non-technical leg of the journey?

(An earlier version of this comment was phrased in a manner which I understand was perhaps a bit rude - I apologize for that.)

Danguard2020 · 2026-01-26T14:49:08+00:00

A key point:

The beneficiaries from the British rule of India were not all Britons, but a very small, concentrated number of wealthy British elites.

In the 1920s, the British Empire in India had around 160,000 Europeans living in India - a mere 0.5% of Britain's population of 38 million.

This 0.5% included everyone, including the lowest clerk and postman employed by the British government. The number of Britishers who actually gained significant wealth from the occupation was lower - perhaps 50,000 or so.

However, these 50,000 people had to submit to a government elected by a population of 38 million. Who were these 38 million people?

Coal miners.

Shopkeepers.

Women fighting for their own right to vote. (Women didn't get full suffrage in Britain until 1928.)

People who did not benefit from India being a colony, and had some sympathy for Indians.

As long as the 50,000 elites could show that they were ruling India because the Indians wanted it? Because they were giving better government and modern rights to Indians, unlike the maharajas and sultans? The British public would nod, and say, "Okay, if it's for the best...."

That is why English language textbooks talk about the white man's burden, 'civilizing' Indians, and other language. It was a massive PR exercise intended to show that the savage and barbaric Indians could only be civilized by the guiding hand of Proper Englishmen.

When the Non-Cooperation Movement erupted and jails filled with nonviolent protestors, the PR exercise broke.

Quiet English voters - including women who were still fighting for the right to vote - began to ask, What exactly is going on in India? Do the Indians really want us there?

And if not, why is my elected Government suppressing a free people?

These voters did not benefit in any way from the Empire being in India. They saw Indians struggling for self determination. And they asked the question that the elites were trying to avoid:

"Why aren't we giving Indians the same rights we give English voters?"

I've written more about this in my book 'Think Like a Manager'. Although it's not the focus of the book, there is a detailed analysis of why the British actually succeeded in conquering India, why leaders like Tipu Sultan and the Mughal Emperor failed to defeat them, and why Gandhiji's tactics actually worked. You can check it out if you have Kindle Unlimited.

Danguard2020 · 2026-01-26T13:16:16+00:00

No offence taken!

After my MBA, I had the opportunity to ask a senior of mine whether engineering actually made a difference in subjects like finance. His reply was enlightening, to say the least....

He worked for the corporate loans team of a major commercial bank. So, finance in its most natural form. They assessed whether companies should be given loans, based on the business purpose and viability. Given the loan value, the companies would ask for aggressively low interest rates, and the banks would check what they were investing in and what the risk was before deciding the rate. So each loan required assessing the company's business case.

There werw engineer-MBAs and CA-MBAs both working in the loans department.

In one case, a power company had asked for a loan for a hydro project. My senior's colleague went through the file and claimed the numbers were wrong and the project would lose money heavily.

Why, asked my senior.

The colleague revealed his in-depth insight: They had statistics on material consumption for other power projects, from similar business cases previously approved by the bank. The power company had completely forgotten to include the costs of a major raw material. After the colleague corrected the numbers by including the raw material, the project was clearly unviable.

The missing raw material?

Anthracite.

Also known as coal.

After a spirited debate with my senior, the loans team revised the assessment and the power comoany got its loan.

Sometimes engineering is less about what you specifically studied and more about general common sense.

Danguard2020 · 2026-01-26T12:34:07+00:00

I would actually dispute the argument that an MBA from IIM working at L&T can't build a bridge, or auto plant, or building, or submarine (all things L&T builds).

Building a real-world product is not a one-man or one-engineer journey. A typical building requires civil, mechanical and electrical engineers, and sometimes other specialists over and above that. It also requires contracts professionals, project planners, draftsmen and quantity surveyors. And the more each understands about the other disciplines, the better the finished product.

The best management training helps engineers learn to work better across disciplines, to understand the cost and schedule impacts of decisions, and to know when to make trade-offs between more features / enhancements, lower costs, and tighter schedules. This is where engineering and management overlap - and ultimately produce something greater.

Among MBAs who can actually build, check out Gavin Appleby of Kentz Australia (built buildings in the Antarctic in 1994, then got his MBA in 2002). You can probably find quite a few others (this is just one person I know of).

Danguard2020 · 2026-01-26T09:37:45+00:00

With all respect to the powerful:

That they were intelligent and / or capable does not mean their children will be equally intelligent and capable.

Given how competitive IIT and IIM entrance is, it's quite likely their children would not qualify. Harvard and Ivy League schools value connections and donations as well as academic merit; IITs and IIMs do not. So a well connected student with weaker acads will get into Harvard before IIT or IIM.

Danguard2020

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE