The first class in economics I attended in college was in July 1967. The country was still reeling after the massive droughts of 1965 and 1966. Food was scarce and everyone was being exhorted to observe a non-cereal day in the week.

It was in this general atmosphere that the Indian economy was introduced to us 16-year-olds. Referring to the food problem and the attendant nutrition problems, the professor declared, “India will soon be a land of idiots.”

We tittered nervously, unsure of what he meant. But now, 44 years later, given all the debate around food security, nutrition and all that, he seems to have been devastatingly prescient.

But it is not food alone that is the problem. There are two other dimensions to the nutrition challenge that are falling through the cracks. One pertains to women and the other to the legacy of Steve Jobs.

The women problem was identified by Amartya Sen way back in 1982 in his book on quasi-inequality. In India, said Dr Sen, women feed the men and the sons first and eat whatever is left, which isn't much usually.

The mothers also feed the daughters before eating and so often eat close to nothing themselves. The implications for children born of under-nourished mothers don't bear thinking about.

So here's my suggestion for the nutrition problem: first target pregnant mothers, especially those below the poverty line, very aggressively.

The legacy of Steve Jobs, on the other hand, has a direct bearing on the opposite end of the social spectrum — the rich. Rather like trained animals, they will only need to know which buttons to press.

The calculator decimated Americans' ability to do mental sums. The i-products will generalise this problem in two ways: beyond mental arithmetic and beyond America.

Overall, it seems to me, the size of the lower brain will shrink over the next few hundred years.

SBI and Bhatt

Now that State Bank of India has been downgraded somewhat by Moody's, the time has come to revaluate the tenure of its last chairman, Mr O. P. Bhatt. Four questions need answering.

First, to what extent are decisions taken by him responsible for SBI's ignominy; second, what was the RBI doing about these decisions; third, why did the Government, which owns SBI, not rein him in; and fourth, what was the Board doing?

The first question has an obvious answer but it doesn't solve the problem. The answer is that had it not been for decisions taken by him, the SBI would not have been looking at so many loans that will not be repaid. But he can always plead contextual judgement. We will have to leave it at that.

As to the RBI, it got into a running battle with SBI from Mr Bhatt's second year as chairman. It did its best to restrain him but failed. Its representative on the SBI board would have a few stories to tell. Someone should ask her.

The third question is about the Government. It is not as if the Finance Ministry didn't know of the too-clever-by-half approach of Mr Bhatt. So why did it not have a quiet word with him to do things by the book?

This brings up the fourth and most important question: what role did the Board play and what role was it assigned by Mr Bhatt? What was the Executive Committee through which he operated and who were on it? Everyone in the banking circles knows the answer. It's the public's turn now, to be told.

Lest someone think that I am, as they say, going after Mr Bhatt, let me say this: a downgrade of the SBI is no small matter nationally, and Mr Bhatt needs to answer some questions. Any former chairman under whom the bank took such decisions would have to do as much.

Modi and Nixon

Through much of the 1960s, Americans would draw back in horror if someone mentioned Richard Nixon as President. Then, in 1968, he won the position and went on to become perhaps one of America's best presidents.

One of the reasons why so many Americans disliked Nixon was that he never tried to win over the intellectuals. Narendra Modi reminds me of Nixon.

Like Nixon he has made no effort to cultivate Delhi's seminar circuit. I told him as much once, the only time I met him.

But he seems to suffer from the same complex as Nixon did — an abiding dislike and distrust of highly educated people. That said, Indira Gandhi had a similar problem. But she was lucky because the socialist ideas she espoused appealed to the intellectuals and they flocked to her, not least for the patronage the Government dispensed. After he became President, even Nixon found some uses for the Ivy League-wallahs. We will have to see what advice Mr Modi's favourite intellectual gives him.

>(blfeedback@thehindu.co.in)

Related Topics
comment COMMENT NOW