Tag: Nicholas Epley | Vivek Kaul

Vivek Kaul

Sometimes it takes a small nudge to start doing what might later seem obvious. A few months back I happened to read Nicholas Epley’s Mindwise—How we understand what others Think, Believe, Feel and Want. Epley is a professor of behavioural science at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business.
In this book Epley writes that “isolating activities like commuting are some of the least pleasant of any day.” “Not only is isolation unpleasant, it is bad for your health as well.” Hence, he goes on to suggest that it always makes sense to communicate with your fellow commuters or in case of taxicabs, the drivers.
“In fact, the positive effect of talking to one’s taxi driver is particularly large. Perhaps because taxi drivers come from interesting and varied backgrounds, they seem to make especially pleasant conversational partners, at least for the length of your ride…The stories I get are fascinating, the conversations are almost always interesting, and my experience is consistently better than if I had simply stared out of the window instead…Your ability to engage with minds of others is one of your brain’s greatest abilities. You’ll be happier if you actually use it,” writes Epley.
After reading this book I have “nudged” myself in the direction of trying to have a conversation with the taxi-driver, every time I use a taxicab. Late last night I was coming back home after having dinner and starting talking to the driver. Over the last few weeks the conversation usually starts around the recent increase of the minimum cab fare in Mumbai from Rs 19 to Rs 21. And then it goes off in different directions.
Yesterday night was not different from the usual except for the way the driver reacted. He was of the opinion that the decision to increase the minimum fare from Rs 19 to Rs 21 was a stupid one and that the taxi union hadn’t been doing its job properly. The response intrigued me, given that this was the first time I came across someone who did not seem to be happy at the prospect of a higher income in these inflationary times.
I asked him to explain in detail what he meant. “Main to kehta hoon minimum pandrah rupaiye kar dena chahiye, (I think the minimum taxi fare should be reduced to Rs 15),” he immediately responded. This intrigued me further. “Log taxi le nahi rahe hain. Kaafi samay khaali baithe rehna padta hai (People are not taking taxis and for long periods of time I am just sitting idle),” he continued.
And then he went on to explain that at a lower fare he would get more customers, wouldn’t have to sit idle for long periods of time during the day and would in the process end up making more money, even though the amount of money he would make per kilometre would be lower. Sometimes wisdom strikes you at the most unlikely of places. Last night I had that kind of a experience.
High inflation has been the bane of this country over the last five years. And that has hit all kinds of people including the taxi-driver I was talking to last night. When fares are raised, it means a higher price for hiring a cab for the end consumer. And he or she is not always ready to pay for that. Hence, an increase in taxi fare, which is basically inflation for the end consumer, leads to loss of business for the taxi-driver.
The way it works for the taxi-driver at the individual level, also works for the society as whole at a much broader level. As prices rise, people cut down on the consumption of non-essentials. Due to high inflation people have had to spend more money on meeting daily expenditure. Food inflation in particular has been greater than 10% over the last few years, and has only recently started to come down a little.
Given this, people have been postponing all other expenditure and that has had an impact on economic growth. Anyone, with a basic understanding of economics knows that one man’s spending is another man’s income, at the end of the day. When consumers are going slow on purchasing goods, it makes no sense for businesses to manufacture them.
This is reflected in the index of industrial production, which is a measure of the industrial activity within the country. Numbers released yesterday by the Central Statistics Office showed that for the month of July 2014, the index of industrial production grew by a minuscule 0.5% in comparison to July 2013. This was largely on account of a slowdown in manufacturing, which forms nearly three-fourths of the index of industrial production. It contracted by -1%. Many sectors within manufacturing like tobacco, apparels, paper and paper products, communication, publishing, furniture etc, contracted majorly.
This is worrying given that the expansion of the manufacturing sector remains India’s best bet to create jobs at a fast pace, for its semi-skilled workforce. And manufacturing cannot be turned around unless inflation is brought under control, so that consumer demand revives, and in turn encourages businesses to increase production of goods. Interestingly, August 2014 saw a major revival in car sales with sales going up by more than 15%.
Along with the index of industrial production, the Central Statistics Office also released the consumer price inflation number, yesterday. Inflation in August 2014 stood at 7.8%. This was a tad lower in comparison to the inflation in July 2014, which was at 7.96%. The inflation in July 2013 had stood at 9.52%.
While this is clearly good news, the worrying bit is that food inflation continues to remain high at 9.42%. In July 2014 the number had stood at 9.36%. In August last year, the number had stood at 11.11%. “In the case of food articles, price pressures were seen building up in pulses, condiments & spices and milk & milk products. Inflation in each of these categories has been rising for the last 3 months,” Crisil Research pointed out in a research note yesterday.
As I have often pointed out in the past, half of the expenditure of an average household in India is on food. In case of the poor it is 60%. If consumer demand is to be revived then food inflation needs to be brought under control.
Analysts believe that consumer price inflation will continue to fall in the months to come. A major reason for this is the fall in global oil prices. “A significant decline in petrol prices (Rs 5.4 per litre since July in Mumbai) due to lower crude oil prices globally, is also likely to have contributed to the downward price pressures in transport & communication. We expect this to continue going forward as no further hike in diesel prices is expected as long as crude oil prices stay at current levels,” Crisil Research points out.
On the flip side, a weak monsoon has led to the build up of “inflationary expectations” (or the expectations that consumers have of what future inflation is likely to be). And this could play a spoiler in reviving consumer demand.
In the long run, other than bringing down inflation the government needs to carry out structural reforms in order to revive Indian manufacturing. As Crisil Research points out “Incremental policy measures and bureaucratic improvements that the new government has taken in its first 100 days to improve the ease of doing business, has had a positive impact on business sentiments. However, it will take some time for these to translate into growth. While these are critical to lift growth in the short-term, the government needs to move forward with structural policy reforms such as implementation of GST (Goods and services tax), easing labour laws, rationalisation of fiscal subsidies, and amendment of land acquisition norms, to maintain the growth momentum beyond this year.” And that is easier said than done.
The article originally appeared on www.FirstBiz.com on Sep 13, 2014

(Vivek Kaul is the author of the Easy Money trilogy. He tweets @kaul_vivek)

Vivek Kaul

We live in an era of instant coffee and analysis.
Even before something has happened, the analysis on why it has happened is ready. Given this, it leads to situations where we analyse using what we think is “common sense”.
But common sense does not always work. The simplest answer is not always the right one. Life can get a little more complicated than that.
Consider the story of a woman who the economists Abhijit V Banerjee and Esther Duflo met in the slums of Hyderabad. The economists recount this story in their book Poor Economics-Rethinking Poverty & the Ways to End It: “A woman we met in a slum in Hyderabad told us that she had borrowed Rs 10,000 from Spandana and immediately deposited the proceeds of the loan in a savings bank account. Thus, she was paying a 24 percent annual interest rate to Spandana, while earning about 4 percent on her savings account.” Spandana is a micro-finance institution.
Common sense tells us that anyone in their right mind wouldn’t do anything like this. But the economists soon found out that there was a method to the madness, once they saw the context in which the woman was operating.
As they write: “When we asked her why this made sense, she explained that her daughter, now 16, would need to get married in about two years. That Rs 10,000 was the beginning of her dowry. When we asked why she had not opted to simply put the money she was paying to Spandana for the loan into her savings bank account directly every week, she explained that it was simply not possible: other things would keep coming up…The point, as we eventually figured out, is that the obligation to pay what you owe to Spandana – which is well enforced -imposes a discipline that the borrowers might not manage on their own.”
Once viewed in this context the story makes immense sense. The woman was borrowing at 24% and investing it at 4% in order to build a savings kitty for her daughter’s dowry. Of course, prima facie this wouldn’t have seemed obvious at all. As Nicholas Epley writes in Mindwise: How We Understand What Others Think, Believe, Feel, and Want “The mistakes we make when reasoning about the minds of others all have the same central outcome: underestimating their complexity, depth, detail, and richness. When we’re indifferent to others, it’s easy to overlook their minds altogether, treating such people as relatively mindless animals or objects than as fully mindful persons.”
Epley gives a brilliant example of people who chose to stay back in in New Orleans when Hurricane Katrina hit the city in August 2005. The experts were at it with their instant analysis. As ABC News put it, “It’s hard to understand the mind-set of those who ignored evacuation orders.” Michael Chertoff, the Chief of Homeland Security said that those who stayed back made a “mistake on their part”. Psychiatrists suggested that there was a “certain amount of denial involved” on part of those who had chosen to stay back in New Orleans, given that they believed that they could handle the storm.
All these explanations sound pretty convincing, “but it does not resonate as well with the actual experience of most who left and stayed, because the broader context is not quite as easy to see.” It is simple to come to the conclusion that anyone choosing to stay back and take on a category 5 hurricane was not right in the head. But anyone who came to that conclusion ignored the context in which the people who had chosen to stay back, were operating.
As Epley writes “Compared to those who left, those who stayed were disproportionately poor, had geographically narrower social network, had larger families (both children and extended members), had less access to reliable news, and were considerably less likely to own a car.” And given this it was not easy for these people to just pack up and leave.
“If you had money to pay for an extended hotel stay, relatively small family to move, a car to get all of you there, or had far-away friends to stay with, you could choose to leave. If you had no money for an extended hotel stay, no car to get you out, a large family to move and no long distance-friends to stay with, what choice did you have?” asks Epley.
Of course, people who analysed the situation did not understand this broader context. Given this, before passing judgements it is important to understand the context in which people are operating. People who chose to stay back when Katrina hit New Orleans, did not need convincing to leave the city, what they needed was a bus. As Epley puts it “Many who stayed wanted to desperately to leave but couldn’t. They didn’t need convincing, they needed a bus.”
And what about the woman who borrowed money at 24% and invested it at 4%? What it clearly tells us is that there is a need for a savings solution which allows the poor to save on a daily basis. If they can discipline themselves to pay back micro-finance institutions every week, they can easily discipline themselves to save small amounts on a daily basis. Of course, there are financial institutions which cater to this market, but most of them are of dubious nature. Hence, there is a clear market out there for anyone who is willing to take the risk.

The article originally appeared in the Wealth Insight magazine August 2014

(Vivek Kaul is the author of Easy Money: Evolution of the Global Financial System to the Great Bubble Burst. He can be reached at [email protected])

Lessons for govt from a Mumbai taxi driver: Why inflation is killing growth

The power of context