Wednesday, June 04, 2014

Fundamental Microfinance

English: Roadside billboard of Deng Xiaoping a...
English: Roadside billboard of Deng Xiaoping at the entrance of the Lychee Park in Shenzhen (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
I am a huge fan of microfinance. But it has to be reimagined. It is one of the three basic ingredients, the other two being education and health.

A country like Nepal can not afford to only educate the kids, although it currently does a poor enough job of that as well. But adult education has to step in. You use the same school buildings, but perhaps in the evenings and during weekends, for adult education. Everyone, child or adult, needs at least 10 years of schooling. And you should be able to pick up no matter where you left. And you should have the option to move at your own pace sometimes. Perhaps you put FM radio to use. People could tune in at a certain time of the day to listen into lessons. There is one frequency for the first grade, another for the second grade and so on. Lessons should be available in your primary language. The Chinese have proven beyond doubt that you don't have to learn English first before the world opens up for you.

People like Mao and Fidel Castro have done impressive work in basic health. You provide basic training to a large number of workers who then fan out to where the needs might be. There is a fundamental need to take up this work with revolutionary zeal.

But a left leaning country like Nepal where even the so-called right of center party like the Congress calls itself "socialist" sometimes tends to not grasp entrepreneurship well. You can educate your people all you want, you can turn them into fighting shape in terms of health, but unless you can create jobs for them they are going to rust with disuse. You are going to pump up a population that is all ready with nowhere go to.

Left leaning political leaders should cultivate a healthy respect for entrepreneurs who might be millionaires. They are like hens that lay the golden egg. You don't kill those hens. You don't get in their way. When they create more wealth for themselves, they pay more in taxes. You can use that tax money to serve the poor all you want.

But then entrepreneurship goes way beyond people who establish and run big factories. Small businesses are all the rage. Even in a country like America the vast majority of new jobs get created by small businesses.

And then there are micro businesses. I am talking raising goats to sell, or cultivating vegetables to sell, small businesses that you could start with a hundred dollar loan. Access to credit should be like a right, just like basic education and health.

But then sometimes it is hard to create any meaningful business with just a hundred dollars. China does not have a track record in microfinance, but it has lifted more people out of poverty than anyone else. And they have done that by creating jobs at large scales through large scale factories.

Very few rich people choose to become entrepreneurs. I like to say being an entrepreneur is kind of like being gay. It is assumed perhaps one per cent of the population is biologically gay. So if very few rich people are entrepreneurs, it is erroneous to think all poor people are inclined to entrepreneurship.

Another dimension to microfinance would be that you would have something like a right to a hundred dollars in business loans every year, but you would also have the option to pool your resources. So 100 individuals should have the option to bring together 100 dollars each into a pool of 10,000 dollars for a one per cent share each in an enterprise led by one entrepreneur who perhaps ends up employing most or all of those 100 people.

If you make room for the fact that 5-10% of those loans will fail that you will happily write off, I think that could create a lot of small business action. And you will end up with a lot of workers who are also part owners in enterprises. That is key. Deng Xiaoping started by letting Chinese farmers own small plots of land. The sense of ownership is key. The right to property is a fundamental human right, like free speech. And the act of exercising free speech takes some practice.

Completely state owned enterprises are not simply failed Soviet era ideas. Modi proved in Gujrat they can outperform the market if they are kept free of political interference and are allowed to run on meritocratic guidelines. It makes sense for some companies and some enterprises to be 100% state owned. As long as they perform is all that matters. What is dead weight is companies that are state owned and run losses year after year.

You can also have companies that are partly owned by the state. You can have companies that are partly owned by foreign investors.

There is no one size fits all. The key point is entrepreneurship has to be nurtured. It has to be allowed to flourish. There does not seem to be only a left or right way of doing it. State owned enterprises can work. Private companies can fail. Small business owners can create jobs. Large companies can stagnate. The job market is and should be a dynamic situation. As long as the cat catches mice is all that matters.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Nepali Angels



(written for Vishwa Sandesh, the leading Nepali language newspaper in NYC)

I have an impressive track record as a Nepali in New York. I was the only full timer among the 200,000 Nepalis across America to have worked full time for the democracy movement back in 2005-06. It was not journalism, it was political work. It was digital activism. Then I did full time work for the Madhesi Movement a year later. Again, I was the only full timer among the 1,000 or so Madhesis that might be spread across America. That number is so discouraging. It is worse than the Madhesi representation in the Nepal Army, in the Nepali bureaucracy at large. A 1,000 to 200,000 ratio is not healthy. Madhesis are 40% of Nepal, but there is not proportionate representation in the diaspora any more than there is in the Nepali state apparatus. I have little patience with Madhesis with the Panche mindset, even for Madhesis with the Congress mindset. There is too much internalized prejudice going on.

Federalism has not happened yet. State restructuring has not happened yet. The agenda is very much alive. Although I personally feel like I have moved past all that to shift my focus to matters economic. What would be the lifestyle of someone who feels Nepal now needs to focus on economic development like a laser beam for the next 30 years?

Social justice for the DaMaJaMa - Dalit, Madhesi, Janajati, Mahila - is important in its own right, but it is also important because Nepal can not realize its full economic potential unless there is full blown social justice.

If the last election was a mandate for geographic federalism, I stand for Ek Madhesh Do Pradesh. Nawalparasi and west, Surkhet included, because Bhitri Madhesi is still Madhesh, could be a state called Western Terai. Chitwan and east, Udaypur included, could be Eastern Terai. Of course Jhapa and Morang will have to be part of it. You can’t take Surkhet, Chitwan, and Udaypur out of the Terai. Taking Morang, Jhapa, Kailali, Kanchanpur out of the Terai is outlandishly out of question.

Two states in the Terai, and four in the hills would work for me.

The more challenging part of state restructuring is where you eliminate several national ministries, where you downsize the Nepal Army to maybe 10,000 soldiers so as to open up funds for more teachers and health care workers, where you downsize ministries, because a federal setup should end up with at least one third fewer bureaucrats at all levels combined than what we have today. Federalism is supposed to be more efficient than the unitary state.

NRNs argue for dual citizenship the wrong way. They make it sound like they are these deprived people who need to be given their due rights. The truth is NRNs are the cream of the crop even when they go to some place like Qatar to do menial work; you have to at least be enterprising to be able to do that. The case for dual citizenship is that you put that arrangement in place so as to maximize the inflow of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) into Nepal. I took up Ram Sharan Mahat on this topic the last time he was in the city, and he did not seem to see the connection, and the dude is Finance Minister. Dual citizenship for NRNs truly is the magic bullet that would transform the Nepali economy. In this age of globalization all of the two million Nepalis spread across the world have to be thought of as ambassadors, and not just the less than 100 officially appointed ones.

And that brings me to the cream of the crop among the Nepalis in NYC. I have approached most of them for angel investing into this or that idea. You angel invest so an idea gets fruition enough that it is able to tap into the capital markets in this money capital of the world. But it is like the cream of the crop lack imagination. They don’t seem to connect the dots any more than Ram Sharan Mahat.

There is economic growth, and then there is economic revolution. Growth is around 5% whereas revolution is when you can make the Nepali economy grow at double digit rates year in year out for 30 years. That requires radical thinking, like angel investing.

A high school classmate/housemate of mine in Munich, Germany, across the pond, a biotech guy, recently wired 5,000 dollars to me to invest in my tech startup’s first round, and I am going to help him raise money for his biotech startup’s second round. What goes around comes around.

I highly recommend angel investing.
Enhanced by Zemanta