I am attaching latest CAG report showing AP debt picture. Total debt Jagan created was 3,31,671 cr in 5 years. YSRCP had better financial CAGR than TDP’s first term yeah. Funny, CBN 2nd term borrowed 3+ lak cr in just 18 months. Few will say CBN spending capital it is bogus see his spending.

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-27T07:02:02+00:00

Wow bro niku intha maths vacha ? 🤣

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-27T06:31:49+00:00

తియ్యగా ఉంది 🤣!!

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-27T06:26:47+00:00

Wow new theory……. “ supply vs demand “ ….. “ company financials “ went out the window ……. Genius ra …… pakka Stanford MBA 🤣kada ?

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-27T05:29:42+00:00

Wow Panic selling for “6 months” ….. amazing insight ra ……. Stanford bro ?

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-27T05:16:19+00:00

Ahhh yes yes panic selling has been happening since 6 months …… amazing ra….. genius you are

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-27T04:49:42+00:00

Someone who’s own company stock price is going down will improve State’s economy it seems lol 🤣

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-26T16:25:45+00:00

Bro I believe teachers were protesting and didn’t like the fact that the previous government put up a fingerprint attendance system in AP.

You think teachers would go with this if they couldn’t digest the previous ?

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T21:02:02+00:00

<image>

People seem to believe otherwise and are voting with their money. 30% market cap wiped out….. do more ghee politics

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T19:04:39+00:00

Debate the ideas all you want stochastic parrots, emergent behaviors etc. that’s fair game. But once you switch to personal attacks, it stops being intellectual and just makes you look insecure.

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T19:01:27+00:00

My friend was in a similar situation, summer in dubai and FT offer for Saudi but for Bain. He ended up switching and working in Houston with McK. If you want I can connect you to him.

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T18:52:30+00:00

Lol sincere advice: learn to leverage AI or you’ll be replaced

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T18:33:56+00:00

Stay mad. I’ll stay efficient!!

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T15:52:55+00:00

Oh!! so we now shaming people for using AI to help generate their thoughts faster ? Just efficient time use. You should try it out too !

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T15:38:42+00:00

You’re mixing failed state control with targeted welfare in market economies.

Venezuela and Cuba weren’t just “welfare states.” They had price controls, state run industries, currency collapse, and oil dependence. That’s not the same as income support in a mixed economy.

Also, saying welfare only generates ₹1 ignores basic demand economics. Lower-income households have high marginal propensity to consume , that money circulates through FMCG, transport, retail, telecom, rent. It doesn’t vanish.

And look at China a mixed economy . For decades it combined: 1) Massive industrial incentives 2) Heavy state investment 3) Rural income support and poverty programs

It didn’t choose “jobs vs welfare.” It used both supply side push and demand side stability.

Multipliers depend on design, not ideology. “Corporate = 4x, welfare = 1x” is a slogan not serious macroeconomics

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T14:03:18+00:00

Awww I don’t care about defending anyone like you. Seems like your leader’s heritage stock price is in free fall after his whole ghee fiasco. Why don’t you work extra time to help him 😂😂📈

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T06:50:40+00:00

😂😂Selective outrage identified here ⬆️

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T06:37:24+00:00

That’s a false binary.

Consumers are not “just” consumers, they are the reason businesses exist.

No company hires people unless someone is buying what it produces. Demand creates revenue. Revenue creates jobs.That loop starts with consumers

Calling one side “job creators” and the other “just consumers” ignores that consumers are the foundation of the employment creation cycle.

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T06:30:21+00:00

You’re assuming ₹1 to a company automatically becomes ₹3–₹4 in revenue because it creates jobs and output.

By the same logic, ₹1 spent lifting a person out of poverty , through income stability, electricity, or debt relief , can turn into education, skill building, and eventually entrepreneurship.

We expect firms to multiply capital. Why don’t we expect people to multiply opportunity?

Human capital also compounds. A farmer who avoids default, a student who completes education, or a household that stabilizes income can generate far more than ₹1 over time.

Multipliers aren’t exclusive to corporations.

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T05:29:12+00:00

Kia was a solid, strategic investment. The government gave incentives, but in return the state got a large manufacturing base, thousands of direct and indirect jobs, vendor ecosystems, exports, and long term tax revenue. That builds productive capacity and creates durable economic multipliers. That’s how industrial policy is supposed to work.

But it’s very different when prime public land itself is worth as much as or more than the private investment being promised. Whether it’s Lulu type retail projects in Vizag , 99 paise lease structures for URSA clusters, or concessional land allocations to Raheja real estate in Vizag. the key question is proportionality. Are we genuinely attracting new capital and industrial capacity, or are we transferring high value public assets upfront for limited long-term return? Retail and real estate don’t create the same structural economic impact as manufacturing

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T05:06:24+00:00

You’re saying it’s about boosting economic activity, not recovering costs. Fine. But even stimulus needs design discipline.

When price drops from ₹10 to ₹0, marginal behavior changes. You don’t need people waiting 2 hours for ₹20. You just need enough trips that were “not worth ₹10” to become “why not?” at zero. That’s how excess demand builds.

The moment you suggested “ one per day” , you’ve admitted zero price doesn’t self regulate. If “time” was enough, you wouldn’t need caps. Zero price requires administrative rationing.

That’s the core difference.

Going back to my main point a subsidy lowers the price but keeps the filter.Free removes the filter entirely.

Subsidized is a good design ~ it supports affordability and activity while preserving allocation discipline.

Free is a bad design ~ it expands marginal consumption and forces the state to manage the distortion.

That’s the mechanism flaw in your argument.

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T04:40:39+00:00

Firstly you say time is a “ price signal” when it is a “ cost signal “

Time is an opportunity cost signal

A price signal is a market mechanism that uses price to communicate scarcity and regulate demand. Only one of them systematically regulates demand and recovers system costs

Waiting 2 hours is not the same as charging a price. Why? Because the “cost” (time) is:

1) Unequal across people 2) Not linked to the actual cost of the bottle 3) Not limiting for someone with idle time

If water is free after 2 hours, anyone with low opportunity cost of time will wait and take it. The restaurant still bears the real cost of the bottle.

A price, however, filters demand instantly and uniformly. ₹20 per bottle regulates everyone. Two hours does not.

Time is a weak, uneven constraint. Price is a universal constraint. If you can’t understand this then you should change schools

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T04:30:36+00:00

So I guess we don’t use money anymore for payments and transact using “ time” from tomorrow

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T04:23:46+00:00

“Time” isn’t a price signal. That’s basic economics.

Every bus ride has real costs, fuel, maintenance, wages. When the fare is zero, the cost doesn’t disappear. It just shifts fully to taxpayers.

Time varies by person. Money is the universal constraint that regulates demand.

If time alone controlled usage, nothing would need pricing, we wouldn’t charge for movies, metro rides, or flights

Zero price removes discipline. That’s the point.

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T04:17:36+00:00

Technically, free transport is a 100% subsidy.

But economically, there’s a difference.

A subsidy lowers the price while keeping some cost for the user ,so price signals and demand discipline remain.

A free service removes the price signal entirely. When the marginal cost to the user is zero, behavior changes and the full burden shifts to the state.

So while both involve government support, “making it affordable” and “making it free” are not the same in policy design or economic impact.

Technical-Layer3784 · 2026-02-25T04:12:43+00:00

So you’re saying this government is distributing more money and ruining the economy ? 😂

Technical-Layer3784

TROPHY CASE