India 2.0 The Future is Today

That India is a technological leader, not marching but rather moving smoothly and swiftly into the future, is seldom a matter for dispute. In fact, it is not really discussed but simply assumed as the conversation progresses.

Still, as with any country or economy, there are adjustments to be made in the economics of a country's economy.

The issue of food is uppermost on the minds of the people of India. In a previous monograph, I referred to increased supply. A literal understanding would be counter productive. The issue is not resolved by saying, "Grow more food." However, if we were to discuss the issue from that statement, we would have to ask, "Do the same number of farmers increase their output, or do we need an increase in the number of farmers?" A subtext would involve farmers joining to take advantage of economies to scale, and form large farms. (Remember, the absence of primogeniture caused the collapse of pre Soviet Russia. The absence of private ownership led to the collapse of post-Czarist Russia. Conclusion: many small farms don't satisfy the need; collective farming won't solve the problem.

The first issue to address is that India has a culture of co-operation. This will serve India well as time marches on. However, on the question of supply, we are not simply suggesting more food for today; but a stable supply of food for a foreseeable future.

Two problems indicated in recent reports from the media are that

1. India cannot get food to the market. It rots before it can be sold or eaten; and 2. That the fluctuation in food prices in a largely agricultural nation has a greater impact in that nation than they would in a heavily industrialised nation.

Some options to consider.

If there is difficulty getting food to the market,

the food can be preserved at the source. Canned and frozen foods, processed at the source, can be stored as a hedge against future food supply failures. In addition, they can be sold on the national and international market. (The marketing of Indian cuisine can become a larger industry. I had curry for the first time when I was about 9 years old. Only recently have Indian food products made their appearance in supermarkets. That is a gap of almost half a century.)

The food supply prices can be leveled slightly through the investment in commodity options. This would allow investment consortia to

a. Have food available at a more affordable price if food prices rise considerably
b. Provide a return on the investment if national supplies are sufficient to meet demand
c. Provide the necessary supply of food to process for market and hedge against a future crop failure
d. Attract investors to partner with the agriculture, manufacturing, and finance industries to bring in money for capital investment.

The government can assume the responsibility of developing roads; negotiating trade deals (read: taxes, tariffs, concessions, etc.), and provide for a stable food supply and food pricing system to stabilise the government.

The economic growth, political stability, national unity, can be promoted.

Now, many people are skilled in the various areas mentioned above. The only thing necessary is what is too often referred to as a shared vision. This monograph is a demonstration of one of the few times that the term, shared vision, may perhaps have been used appropriately.

Sincerest regards,

Slim

Mail slimfairview@yahoo.com


Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

The Food Crisis in India: The Price is the Crisis

Food: The Price is the Crisis

At the risk of sounding trite, the law of supply and demand still functions. To solve the price crisis in India, supply must be increased. This is a matter of "time place utility"; "form utility"; "economies to scale"; and direct foreign investment. I mention the last consideration because the advice to some can also be considered advice to another. In short, if you know where and how people are being advised to invest, you can position yourself to be the where and the how.

I've included "Having Problems with Foreign Direct Investment?" to give insight into what investors can look for. This can also give insight into those who want to benefit from the investors. I've included The Marketing of India. I've included a metaphor: Starving Nations and Food Equations: A metaphor. This is not to be interpreted as reference to people actually dying. It is to discuss the economics of agriculture.


Having Problems with Foreign Direct Investment?


What are some of the barriers?

Leverage.

ROI.


It is easy to see that start up costs in some countries are much lower than start up costs in another. If the other country does not have the physical plant for example, it will be cheaper to build that plant in the other country.

Currency considerations are another factor

Incentives from a country with little industry are greater than they are from a country where you will compete with the locals.

Market penetration. Would people in countries in the region be more inclined to buy from countries in the region or from western nations.

Partnering. It is easier to partner with business in some countries where western technology is not readily available by making that technology available.

Just a few thoughts.

Regards,

Slim

mail slimfairview@yahoo.com

Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview



The Marketing of India


Find a need and fill it.

Who has a need for what you can produce?
Partner with that (nation's) companies.

In addition to the profits, offer a minority interest in the company. (This will give investors an incentive to succeed.)

Offer a profit share to the suppliers. (This will give the farmers(?) an incentive to join in the venture.

In addition to money, offer other incentives. [Prestige]. For example: Build schools in the areas where the people are most enthusiastic.

If one or two small companies cannot find the funding (through govt. funding--a bad idea) go to the marketplace.

Economies to scale.

Create a marketing group for the several smaller companies, so they can pool their resources.

In Vermont there is a joke:

Q: "Do you think the rain will hurt the rhubarb?"
A: "Not if they're in cans."

If produce spoils before it hits the market, set up a joint effort to can the produce at the source.

Roads are a government responsibility.

Just a few ideas. (Call me old-fashioned)

Anyone care to amplify, amend, or correct?

Sincerest regards,

Slim

PS. Read The Caste Busters article in the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/02/magazine/02Striver-t.html

Mail slimfairvew@yahoo.com

Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

Starving Nations and Food Equations: A Metaphor

[This metaphor does not refer to people actually dying. This refers to the discordance in the economy of agriculture specifically and in the economy as a whole.]

If one person in the group does not have enough food to eat, he may die.

For a while, that means more food for the rest of the group. However, that also means one less person to work the farm. That means less food to eat. Less food to eat means someone will die.

For a while, that means more food for the rest of the group. However, that also means one less person to work the farm. That means less food to eat. Less food to eat means someone will die.

Soon, there won't be enough people to work the farm. That means there won't be enough food to eat.

Get the idea?


Slim

Mail: slimfairview@yahoo.com


Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

Having Problems with Foreign Direct Investment?

Having Problems with Foreign Direct Investment?


What are some of the barriers?

Leverage. ROI.

It is easy to see that start up costs in some countries are much lower than start up costs in another.

If the other country does not have the physical plant for example, it will be cheaper to build that plant in the other country.

Currency considerations are another factor

Incentives from a country with little industry are greater than they are from a country where you will compete with the locals.

Market penetration. Would people in countries in the region be more inclined to buy from countries in the region or from western nations.

Partnering. It is easier to partner with business in some countries where western technology is not readily available by making that technology available.

Just a few thoughts.

Regards,

Slim

mail slimfairview@yahoo.com

Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

Internet Disconnect? NO!

Internet Disconnect? Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

Among my "skills set" in addition to starting out life as an English major, and transferring schools to major in Finance, I also left the corporate world to write an unpublished (able) novel. I took unique jobs. Steel Fabricator. 10 hours a day on a brake-press, a spot welder, etc.

Plan B. 8 - 10 hours a day at a keyboard.

A. Hot, dirty, heavy, low pay, long hours.....
B. Keyboard, share ideas, connect with people globally!

Type a novel, enter an email, click attach and away we go. See an article -> twitter. Share it with thousands. (Okay, only seven.) Copy paste, high-light, add a link, add a mail to. Or, copy paste a photo, a graph, a chart, or a dozen links to same. Sit down to dinner with a friend across town, across the country, on the other side of the world. Free. (Did I hear someone say skype?)

I heard a rumour you can even run for President using the Internet.

http://slimviews.blogspot.com/

Regards,

Slim

Starving Nations and Food Equations

A Metaphor:

If one person in the group does not have enough food to eat, he may die.

For a while, that means more food for the rest of the group. However, that also means one less person to work the farm. That means less food to eat. Less food to eat means someone will die.

For a while, that means more food for the rest of the group. However, that also means one less person to work the farm. That means less food to eat. Less food to eat means someone will die.

Soon, there won't be enough people to work the farm. That means there won't be enough food to eat.

Get the idea?


Slim

Mail: slimfairview@yahoo.com


Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

The CSO: Chief Strategic Officer

We all know the C-Level jobs. Which one is in charge of strategy? And don't say all of them.

A company has to have a metaphorical motion detector that detects changes. That motion detector is the Chief Strategic Officer.

Part One

Is the turn around time getting shorter or longer?
Is the ROI going up or down?
Are sales rising? Are they rising at a slower rate or a faster rate?
Have competitors entered the market?
Are clients/customers starting to ask questions about innovations, discounts, delivery dates?

As these matters come up, they are indicators that the strategy and the process need to be reviewed and refreshed.

Part Two

To remain competitive, the CSO has to look to opportunities to make changes to stay ahead of the competitors, the market demands, and the changes in the financials.

This is not something to be done occasionally. This is an ongoing process.

Any thoughts on the matter?

Regards,

Slim

Mail: tilden9@yahoo.com

Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

Contact

Contact Information:

For Global Interests: tilden9@yahoo.com

For Domestic Interests: slimfairview@yahoo.com


Thank you.

Sincerest regards,

Slim

More to View

Slim Fairview's PowerPoint Presentations on SlideShare.

Global Management: A Shift in the Paradigm of Corporate America.

The Future of the G-20 in Good Times and Bad

Preview: Fairviews: The Quotations of Slim Fairview

The Multiplier Effect: Illustrated

Regards,

Slim Fairview

Also available on LinkedIn.

Mail: tilden9@yahoo.com

copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

ECONOMICS ILLUSTRATED: A Primer in Economics, by Metaphor

Primer in Economics by Metaphor:

This is how economics evolved. This is a metaphor.

Bill is a cave dweller back in primitive days. He lives in a cave. He lives in a community among other cave dwellers. Some hunt, some gather, some cook, but not Bill. Bill crawls in the dirt, using his hands to make holes in the dirt. He drops seeds into the holes. When he is finished planting, he goes out to gather. He is not good at hunting so he only gathers. The seeds grow. Bill and his friends share. All, barely, subsist.

However, Bill has a neighbour, Tom. Tom is a hunter. He works hard. Hunting is dangerous. Some of his friends have been killed hunting. Still, he does it.

Now, Bill and Tom have a neighbour Jack. Jack thinks. He thinks what Tom does is dangerous and only marginally profitable. He thinks what Bill does is not the most effective way of doing what he does. Jack comes up with an idea.

Jack takes a stick; he walks across the field poking holes in the ground. Then using a hollow reed, he drops a seed through the reed into the hole. He plants many seeds.

When Jack is through, he gathers. Because he has more time to gather than Bill does, Jack gathers more food than Bill does. Jack has more food to share, so he trades food with Tom who hunts. This causes Bill a problem. He does not have enough food to buy meat from Tom, so he eats less.

Jack’s farm prospers. He not only gathers and trades he now reaps and trades. He trades food with Bill for labour. Bill now works on Jack’s farm in exchange for food.

Jack now has twice as much food so he stops gathering. He cultivates more land. He grows more food. Now he can trade more food for more labour. The gatherers find Jack’s steady supply of food to be a better alternative to gathering.

Tom, seeing how the investment system works, and with meat scarce and vegetables in plentiful supply, he charges Jack more for the meat. Jack pays happily. In addition, with the lessons he’s learned, Tom teaches others how to hunt, where to hunt, and supplies them with the tools to hunt. They pay for their lessons with some of their meat. He pays them for hunting with some of the vegetables.

Tom’s hunters increase the quantity of meat. Jack’s farmers increase the quantity of vegetables.

However, there is another problem. It takes time to make tools to farm the land, weapons to hunt for meat, and it takes time to make clothes from the skins.

Enter, James. James also thinks. He sees an opportunity. He agrees to supply the hunters and the farmers with tools and weapons and clothes.

He gets together with some of the less successful hunters and gatherers and promises to pay them in meat and vegetables in exchange for their labours making tools and weapons and clothes. They don’t have to hunt. They don’t have to gather, and they can eat. That works for them.

James begins his business. Soon, more people are making tools, weapons, and clothes. More people are farming. More people are hunting. However, things are a bit dull despite the prosperity. Enter the arts. (It will be centuries until things become dull because of the prosperity.)

Tom, Jack, and James can afford to take time to pursue the arts. However, they are not very good at it. Enter, Dave.

Dave tells stories. He is paid with food.

Susan can paint. Susan is paid with food.

Peter, Paul, and Mary can sing. They are paid with food.

Mark and Lorraine get an idea. They seek out people who can tell stories. They arrange for storytelling. They charge people to come to listen to the stories and pay the storytellers with a part of the profits.

Susan, who can paint, teaches promising students to paint and helps them sell their paintings taking a commission on the sales.

Things are moving along reasonably well with the exception of dragging around sacks full of food and dead carcases. Moreover, there is quibbling. They agree to seek a solution from the elders. There, they listen to the elders suggest the formation of a council.

With time on their hands, and the evidence of intelligence, Jack, Tom, and Dave become leaders appointed by the elders. For whom everyone has respect.

Together they create a medium of exchange. Then, they issue an RFP and subsequently someone creates a food storage system. The people start schools where the experienced hunters and farmers can teach hunting and farming. Singing, storytelling and painting are also taught. However, there will always be troublemakers. At first, they are handled by a few of the leaders. Then the leaders appoint a shire reeve who calls a posse comitatus to handle problems when they arise.

Some people are smarter than others are. However, they are not creative; but they are inventive. They invent ways to make tools using metals. Some invent more expansive tools and machinery. They learn to grind wheat and make bread. Others figure out how to harness the water to turn gristmills. Others are natural born salesmen. They go out to sell the products of the industrious people of the community.

The community grows. Soon, other communities follow suit. People take what they have learned, their stock-in-trade, to other communities to help them plan their communities.

Some communities with more of something to sell sell it to those communities with more of something else to sell in exchange. Foreign trade is born. Treaties are signed. Thus, civilisation arises from the very dirt that Bill used to crawl in digging holes with his hands to plant seeds.

This is the entry to understanding economics.


Regards,


Slim Fairview

 

PS.  I am not Paul Harvey.  Still, I am open to becoming a paid blogger, columnist, or commentator.

In the meantime, if anyone finds the monographs on my blog to be especially helpful, please do not hesitate to send me on of those tricked out laptops and few dollars tucked into the envelope with the thank you note.

Sincerely  

Slim

Mail slimfairview@yahoo.com

Copyright (c) 2011 Slim Fairview

More on Global Management

Global Planning, eh? Did anyone tell the other guy?

Okay, now you are getting ready to plan globally. You are going to discuss:

Strategic Planning
Innovation
Team Building
Market Penetration
The Visioning Process
Consensus Building
Project Management
and so on.

You will also consider financing, information technology, cloud computing, virtual servers, capital investment. You will achieve consensus the way others achieve nirvana. You will plan your work and work your plan.

You will fail.

Why?

You forgot to tell the other guy.

Read on.

Too many of our efforts are designed to fail. We make great plans, however we fail to understand that what we want to do and the way we want to do it is not the way things are done globally. Also, the global landscape is changing faster than we are.

The best analogy I can come up with in such short time is this:

"If you are going hunting, you get up, get dressed, get your gear, and go out into the field. If you are being hunted, you move more quickly." Slim Fairview

Others are on the move. China, Japan, South Korea, Russia, India, Pakistan, Turkey, Brazil, Argentina, and so on.

Some have not been emerging nations in many years. Then there are the emerging nations. Who will be doing business with whom?

In too many nations, horizontal management does not exist. And there is a reason for this. If you want to debate the causes, effects and remedies, you will be spinning your wheels. Other people don't want to talk about it.

In this country, we are charmed by the promises of horizontal management. In addition, we are always delighted to talk about it. You don't believe me?

Consult. Syn. Confer with, confer, confabulate, confab, and chew the fat.*

*http://www.synonyms.net/synonym/consult
We are hunting for business globally. What about people in other nations? Well, what about people in other nations?

In other nations, those being hunted by poverty, disease, unrest, and a fierce competition for food, have found that things move along more quickly with a vertical management style.

People with very limited resources do share with those among them who have equally limited resources. They are not about to share with you.

MicroFinance $10.00 to the road to prosperity

http://slimviews.blogspot.com/2010/11/microfinance-1000-to-road-to-prosperity.html

Then there are those in the global community who are coming into their own in a big way. Imagine Russia becoming a capitalist country; China, dominating global manufacturing, sales, finance, currency; India a powerhouse of technology. Just don't sit around letting your imagination run amok.

Our business culture has been transmogrified. The change is the difference between the ideologue and the technocrat. (Do not confuse the technocrat with the techno-pimple. He is more focuses on pedantry.)

Transmogrified: Altered, transformed, or mutated into a form that is grotesque or amusing
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/transmogrified
The solution, however, is the problem. That is, as we look to solutions we find that the advise we get is descriptive (see above) and not prescriptive. The articles for we are told to read tell us what the problem is. Some go a step further. Some tell us:

This is what you did wrong.
This is what you should have done.
This is what you should do next time.

The tone:

Client: "But I'm in a jam now!"

Consultant: "What do you want me to do? Solve your problems for you?

The aforementioned bulleted list

Strategic Planning
Innovation
Team Building
Market Penetration
The Visioning Process
Consensus Building
Project Management

has to be handled from a different viewpoint--many different viewpoints. It is necessary to engage many people in the discussions--in the many different discussion.

The expression "The Friendly Way" has been too often interpreted as promoting collusion. People who want to do business with you don't want to compete with you. They want to cooperate with you. (Hint: it takes at least two to cooperate.)

Team building may mean bringing people to agreement. It may also mean bringing agreeable people together. The friendly way would suggest that agreeable people means people who know what they are doing. There won't be consensus building because the goal has been spelled out and each person knows what he or she is responsible for doing.

The visioning process. There is no nice way to say "baloney" unless the word sandwich is attached.

Too often, the visioning process is used to bring different ideas to the fore. The ideas can be discussed. People can agree. Everyone can take his or her share of ownership in the project. This builds commitment to the project and to achieving the goal. (I not only heard this stuff before people started saying it, I heard this stuff before the people who are saying it ever heard it in the first place.)

There is a temptation to believe that people in other nations are naive. However, you are not going to convince them that they were the ones who thought up your idea and therefore should want to work to make it happen.

In this country, when other people listen, we tend to think that they like what we are saying. In other countries, when people listen, it is possible that they are merely being polite. I know this because my parents taught me to be polite.

Instead of the visioning process and shared goals, think in terms of finding out what other people want, the steps necessary to achieve this outcome, and how to make it mutually beneficial.

I am not now purporting to know all the answers. I am merely setting an agenda for action (as opposed to an agenda for discussion) so corporate executives can assign people to the tasks necessary to do business globally.

Sincerely,

Slim

Mail: slimfairview@yahoo.com

http://slimviews.blogspot.com
Copyright (c) 2010 Slim Fairview

Innovation! Again?

.
All I've read recently about innovation discusses a myriad of subtopics and views. With one exception: Adaptation.

Innovation can be changing a product to improve it. It can be changing the way we do things. It can involve where we do things.

Topics like these are sometimes linked to basic principles in economics: Time/place utility, form utility, and so on.

However, in every article I've read about innovation, competitiveness, even in my own writings, what has been omitted seems not to be conspicuous by its absence.

A new boss once said, in his hello speech, "The ability to adapt is a sign of intelligence." What he really meant is that we would have to recognise the fact that he is the boss now, not the other guy, and that we would have to do things his way. Fair enough.

However, the first thought that came to my mind was this: Intelligent people have the ability to change their environment.

Humanity did not survive based on the ability to grow fur to adapt to the cold. We either migrated or learned to build shelters with a heat source in order to survive the cold. However, I said nothing. I did not want to be pedantic and I did not want to be fired.

As nations go global to do business with others, the question of adapting arises.

First, and foremost, we want to adapt to the environment: Business, Financial, Economic, Social, Cultural, Legal, and so on. However, if there is no adapting by others, this will create a lopsided form of change. True, we can use the term evolve. We can suggest that others will evolve. However, that is condescending, patronising, and rude. The method, subject to much spirited debate, is that others must be aware of the fact that they too must adapt.

Change, for the sake of change, may not satisfy the demands of a new market, culture, customer needs. If we use the word innovate as interchangeable with change we are missing the point. In addition, how much change can we expect will be accepted by a broad range of markets, cultures, and customer needs?

Henceforce, let's relegate the word "innovation" to the same scrap heap of linguistic legerdemain as the term, "strategic planning". Let's use the word adapt. Let's be clear about what the adaptation involves. Then, we can move forward from a different perspective with a different view, and better results.

Regards,

Slim

Copyright (c) Slim Fairview

The Fall and Rise of Empires

Empires rise and fall. The Byzantine Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and before The Soviet Union was called the Evil empire, Russia had an empire extending down into what is now Poland.

Correct my history if necessary. Russia was beaten back by the emergence of the Polish empire, which extended toward Western Europe. They were driven back by the rise of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which collapsed with WW I.

However, in each case, the empire, as it grew to include vast and divergent territories, became not merely too large to manage, but too fractious. What played well in Italy, closest to Rome, did not play well in France. Less so in Egypt and England.

In addition, we all remember, The Sun never set on the British Empire. I always wondered how that Sceptred isle set in a silver sea managed to dominate the world. India, Australia, Hong Kong, Canada...It may well have been the delegation of authority.

The Evil Empire collapsed because Eastern Europeans grew weary of a system that destroyed what they had spent centuries to build. The U.S. however, never really had an empire. Too often, we've been isolationist. We have not been networking.

Wouldn't it be lovely if nations had Linkedin accts and Facebook pages? Germany could ask Portugal to join its network on Linkedin. China could friend Brazil on Facebook. Japan could friend India. Pakistan could friend Canada.

Our problem lies not in the empire we don't have. Our problem is conspicuous: our problem is our lack of allies. Our lack of metaphorical Facebook friends. We still have an isolationist mentality.

The delegation of authority? We can't even accept the concept of the 10th Amendment in The Bill of Rights, the concept of States Rights.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

With apologies to Charles de Gaulle:

It's a good thing we have only three political parties. We have only three kinds of cheese.*

Sincerely,

Slim

* [American, Cheddar, and Cream]


Coipyright (c) 2010 Slim Fairview

Monograph on the Population Shift to Cities in Emerging Nations

GLOBALLY, the population is moving to urban areas. Food and Jobs are two topics that arise for discussion. This suggests that by talking about it we will solve the problem. Which problem? The problems suffered by the people who move from rural areas to urban areas. Abolishing farm subsidies in Western countries is not the solution.

Farming is a job. In addition, it is hard work. Moreover, it doesn't pay well even under the best of circumstances. Then, when the population increases, it gets harder because plots get smaller. What helped the decline of Russia was the absence of primogeniture.

Cities had to start somewhere. England and France were emerging nations at one time in history.

The rural populations is moving to cities rather than building cities.

The affluent leave the cities and move to rural areas because they can afford to escape the cities.

Cities are indeed vibrant areas of creativity. This even in emerging nations. (We don't need a new world big city to have creativity. The WSJ published an article:
Why Some Islanders Build Better Crab Traps (about the creativity in commerce of emerging communities. It is well worth reading.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704523604575512071789091444.html?mod=wsj_share_twitter



There is a very unpleasant step between reduced subsidies making cheap food available in emerging nations, and farmers in emerging nations becoming 1. Self-sufficient and 2. Being able to produce a sufficient amount of food to feed the large numbers of people.

That unpleasant step is where abolishing subsidies comes up against phasing out subsidies.

(The banning of DDT was a positive environmental move that created the unpleasant step of increased deaths due to the spread of malaria.)

One trendy catch phrase used by the media vis-à-vis our current governmental conundrums is "unintended consequences." That phrase has the moral equivalent of a little boy outside church on a Sunday morning tossing a hand-full of change into the air and saying what God wants he'll take and the rest belongs to me.

There really are no unintended consequences.

True, globally, people are moving en-mass into urban areas. There is no work in rural areas and there are no jobs in cities. Migrations to European countries confound the migrants. "How come in such a wealthy nation the government cannot provide 300,000 jobs?"

However, abolishing subsidies will have consequences. If our leaders stop referring to unpleasant consequences as unintended consequences, they may start to focus on solving the problem--micro finance was one of the solutions propounded by an economist in an emerging nation. That earned him the Nobel Peace Prize.

Regards,

Slim

Mail: tilden9@yahoo.com

Copyright (c) 2010 Slim Fairview