Archive for the ‘Discussion’ Category

The part-time critics of central banks…

July 19, 2017

Nice article by Mark Spitznagel, Founder and Chief Investment Officer of Universa Investments.

He says most experts defend and criticise central banks based on whether central bank actions have hurt or benefited them:

There seems to be no shortage today of investors and pundits criticizing the market interventions of the world’s central banks. Monetary stimulus in the form of artificially low interest rates and bloated central bank balance sheets ($18.5 trillion, to be exact), the argument goes, have created another dangerous financial bubble (evidenced by ubiquitously bubbly stock market valuation ratios) that ultimately threatens the financial system yet again. The author shares wholeheartedly in this criticism.

The ethical problem is, where were these voices when this all started, with Greenspan in the 1990s and, more specifically, with Bernanke in 2008? The central bank critics today who were not critics of — and in most cases were even sympathetic to — the great bailouts and stimulus that started almost a decade ago have reserved their criticisms only for those interventions that appear to hurt their interests, as opposed to those that have helped them. After all, no one would disagree that bailouts and monetary stimulus got us out of the last financial crisis, but they also certainly got us to where we are today, vulnerable to another even bigger one.

You cannot be a part-timer in these matters:

One cannot be a part-time classical liberal, criticizing central planning only when it runs contrary to one’s interests. Indeed, this is the very problem of Socialism: there are winners and losers; the winners are in the here and now — the seen; the losers are in the future — the unseen. The winners don’t complain, and the losers can‘t until it is too late.

But as the future becomes the here and now, the unseen becomes the seen, those who now think they are anticipating a problem and its cause, yet supported that same cause when they stood to benefit, must be seen for what they are: fellow travelers in the central planning ideology that grips today’s financial markets. They are too late.


How to think like an economist (if you wish to)…

July 19, 2017

Brad DeLong has a long post on the topic:

I have long had a “thinking like an economist” lecture in the can. But I very rarely give it. It seems to me that it is important stuff—that people really should know it before they begin studying economics, because it would make studying economics much easier. But it also seems to me—usually—that it is pointless to give it at the start of a course to newBs: they just won’t understand it. And it also seems to me—usually—that it is also pointless to give it to students at the end of their college years: they either understand it already, or it is too late.

By continuity that would seem to imply that there is an optimal point in the college curriculum to teach this stuff. But is that true?

Every new subject requires new patterns of thought; every intellectual discipline calls for new ways of thinking about the world. After all, that is what makes it a discipline: a discipline that allows people to think about a subject in some new way. Economics is no exception.

In a way, learning an intellectual discipline like economics is similar to learning a new language or being initiated into a club. Economists’ way of thinking allows us to see the economy more sharply and clearly than we could in other ways. (Of course, it can also cause us to miss certain relationships that are hard to quantify or hard to think of as purchases and sales; that is why economics is not the only social science, and we need sociologists, political scientists, historians, psychologists, and anthropologists as well.) In this chapter we will survey the intellectual landmarks of economists’ system of thought, in order to help you orient yourself in the mental landscape of economics.

Nice bit..

Indian economy: A tale of two narratives (and a missing narrative)..

July 19, 2017

I came across this piece on two narratives on Indian economy. One of impressive macroeconomic stability and two of dipping growth which cannot be stimulated by monetary or fiscal policy.

Despite impressive statistics quoted in the piece one clearly sees how much of Indian economic story has been around government policy. The author says there are two narratives but actually there is just one: the role of government in Indian economy.  This is obviously ironical in its own way as we would imagine economy to be shaped mainly by several private hands rather than the one hand of government.

I don’t know but reading the various articles today take you back to yeseteryears when all that mattered to Indian economy was the Indian Government. But we are told that since 1991 things have changed and it is private sector which rules the roost. However, ever since the government was voted in power in 2014, the focus of economic performance of the country is only seen from what government is doing. We have celebrated 100 days, 1 year, 2 years and now 3 years and 2 more to go. There are pieces after pieces highlighting the role of the government which is all so ironical. There is very little on what India’s private sector is really doing.  If Indian economy is indeed doing so well, we need to know about new products being made, new services being created, entrepreneurship and so on.

This glaring missing narrative also perhaps explains the puzzle between the two aspects of Indian economy discussed by the above piece. If macrostability is indeed so great, why is growth dipping? The piece as expected can only think in terms of policy:

How should policy respond? The key is not to panic, but keep fixing the economy’s plumbing. Double down on asset resolution in the banking sector, plow stronger tax-revenue from demonetisation/GST into higher public investment, rein in state deficits to push down the private sector cost of capital, and keep plugging away on reducing infrastructure bottlenecks. Put differently, hang in till the growth dividend from deleveraging and productivity-enhancing reforms (GST, Aadhaar) kicks in. Unfortunately, there are no quick fixes at the moment. Furthermore, overreacting to the second narrative (slowing growth) simply risks jeopardizing the first one (macro economic stability).

Well, what eventually matters is how private sector and households responds to most of these initiatives. It is this narrative which eventually matters. We are told that private sector investments are hardly picking and then there are always talks of jobless growth.

This clearly is the missing narrative which needs more attention than merely looking at government measures..

Improving money through competition….

July 19, 2017

Interesting piece by Norbert Michel, Director, Center for Data Analysis.

He says most forms of money have been discovered by the private sector only to be monopolised by State later. The State’s record in monetary matters has been mostly poor barring a few period. Even in those periods there must have been unintended consequences which are rarely mentioned. Best way to restore monetary stability is to improve money through competition. This is also what supporters of free banking also argue:

Money is the means of payment for virtually all goods and services. Most innovations in the means for payment have originated in private markets, but they were later monopolized by the government, thus mitigating their benefits. Policymakers rarely think about improving money with the same competitive market forces that improve other goods and services. That competitive process is the best way to expose weaknesses and inefficiencies in existing products, thus improving people’s lives.

Congress should avoid policies that single out alternative forms of money and impede people from using their preferred medium of exchange. Although it cannot provide absolute protection, allowing competitive private markets to provide currency would present as powerful a check on the government’s ability to diminish the quality of money as possible.

He says Post World War-II there are two types of money in US:

The U.S. monetary system consists of two types of money:

  1. Base money, often referred to as outside money, is the ultimate means of payment in the economy, and it comes from outside the private sector (i.e., the government).
  2. Inside money, often called credit money, consists of claims to the underlying base money, and it comes from inside the private sector.

Private financial firms compete to provide various types of credit money, such as checkable deposits with bankcards, money market accounts, and travelers’ checks. These financial firms are heavily regulated, often to the detriment of their ability to operate, but few policymakers question whether they should actually provide money.

Even fewer policymakers question whether anyone other than the federal government should provide base money, despite its fundamental economic importance. Because the Federal Reserve is the monopoly provider of base money, the U.S. government ultimately determines the total amount—and type—of money that private firms can create.  This monopoly necessarily limits the extent to which competitive processes can strengthen money, and exposes the means of payment for all goods and services to the mistakes of a single government entity.

Precisely because people are so vulnerable to the abuse of money (including modern monetary policy errors), Congress should not interfere with citizens’ ability to opt out of official currency.The competitive process is, ultimately, the only way to discover what people view as the best means of payment.

There are interesting references here which are not part of monetary economics syllabus in most universities. In all other things we are taught competition matters but not in money where powers are to reside with central bank. There is wide history of free banking which was quite successful as well but we hardly look at the evidence.

There is a reason Friedman said: Most economists do not question central banks as it provides them glamorous job opportunities. It is not just quetioning central banks in op-eds but even in teaching…


Smart or dumb? The real impact of India’s proposal to build 100 smart cities

July 18, 2017

Hugh Byrd Professor of Architecture at University of Lincoln has a piece:

The quest to make cities smart and liveable has been promoted alongside increased population densities and urban compaction. We argue that this planning goal is reaching a point where resources are inadequate for the functioning of a city.

Case studies such as Bhendi Bazaar provide an example of plans for increased density and urban regeneration. However, they do not offer an answer to the challenge of limited infrastructure to support the resource requirements of such developments.

The results of our research indicate significant adverse impacts on the environment. They show that the metabolism increases at a greater rate than the population grows. On this basis, this proposed development for Mumbai, or the other 99 cities, should not be called smart or sustainable.

With policies that aim to prevent urban sprawl, cities will inevitably grow vertically. But with high-rise housing comes dependence on centralised flows of energy, water supplies and waste disposal. Dependency in turn leads to vulnerability and insecurity.

Suburbia offers some buffer. Water and power can be collected from individual roofs and food produced in individual gardens. However, we argue that vertical urban form on this scale offers little resilience.

Smart may be, but questions on sustainability are always there..

20 Years of South East Asian Crisis: How Clinton, The IMF and Wall Street Journal toppled Suharto

July 18, 2017

Interesting piece by Prof Seteve Hanke who was in the thick of things during the SE Asian crisis. He suggested to Suharto to implement Currency Board which was poosed by IMF and Washington. Why? They wanted to get rid of Suharto and only a deep crisis could have helped in the cause.

By late January 1998, President Suharto realized that the IMF medicine was not working and sought a second opinion. In February, I was invited to offer that opinion and was appointed as Suharto’s Special Counselor. Although I did not have any opinions on the Suharto government, I did have definite ones on the matter at hand. After nightly discussions at the President’s private residence, I proposed an antidote: an orthodox currency board in which the rupiah would be fully convertible into and backed by the U.S. dollar at a fixed exchange rate. On the day that news hit the street, the rupiah soared by 28% against the U.S. dollar on both the spot and one year forward markets. These developments infuriated the U.S. government and the IMF.

Ruthless attacks on the currency board idea and the Special Counselor ensued. Suharto was told in no uncertain terms — by both the President of the United States, Bill Clinton, and the Managing Director of the IMF, Michel Camdessus — that he would have to drop the currency board idea or forego $43 billion in foreign assistance.

Economists jumped on the bandwagon, trotting out every imaginable half-truth and non-truth against the currency board idea. In my opinion, those oft-repeated canards were outweighed by the full support for an Indonesian currency board by four Nobel Laureates in Economics: Gary Becker, Milton Friedman, Merton Miller, and Robert Mundell. Also, Sir Alan Walters, Prime Minister Thatcher’s economic guru, a key figure behind the establishment of Hong Kong’s currency board in 1983, and my colleague and close collaborator, endorsed the idea of a currency board for Indonesia.

Why all the fuss over a currency board for Indonesia? Merton Miller understood the great game immediately. As he said when Mrs. Hanke and I were in residence at the Shangri-La Hotel in Jakarta, the Clinton administration’s objection to the currency board was “not that it wouldn’t work, but that it would, and if it worked, they would be stuck with Suharto.” Much the same argument was articulated by Australia’s former Prime Minister Paul Keating: “The United States Treasury quite deliberately used the economic collapse as a means of bringing about the ouster of Suharto.” Former U.S. Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger weighed in with a similar diagnosis: “We were fairly clever in that we supported the IMF as it overthrew (Suharto). Whether that was a wise way to proceed is another question. I’m not saying Mr. Suharto should have stayed, but I kind of wish he had left on terms other than because the IMF pushed him out.” Even Michel Camdessus could not find fault with these assessments. On the occasion of his retirement, he proudly proclaimed: “We created the conditions that obliged President Suharto to leave his job.”

Why did Suharto have to go? President Clinton had his own personal reasons for leading the charge for a regime change. This presented a golden opportunity for the neoconservative regime changers led by Paul Wolfowitz, a former U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia (and subsequently a key figure in the Pentagon — Deputy Secretary of Defense — who pushed for the invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein). Their agenda was for the U.S. to control the Greater Middle East, a swath stretching from Indonesia to Morocco.

Fascinating tales if you believe them. These conspiracy theories have just such an amazing appeal to them..

Learning economics from Amol Palekar..

July 12, 2017

Well one Amol is still trying to figure economics, but the other Amol despite not being concerned with the subject has useful lessons. Such is the irony of economics as well. Those who study it get lost in the subject and have nothing much to say, those who don’t study make statements about economics pretty freely in their conversations.

So here goes the brilliant Amit Varma again who points to housing economics lessons from Amol Palekar’s songs. Earlier he pointed globalisation lessons from Raj Kapoor’s Mera Joota Hai Japani song.

He picks two songs this time:

Ek akela is shahar mein/ Raat mein aur dopahar mein/ Aab-o-daana dhoondta hai/ Aashiana dhoondta hai. – Amol Palekar in Gharoanda.

One person, alone in the city/ At night and in the afternoon/ Looking for food/ looking for shelter. In the film Gharaonda, Amol Palekar plays a young man who has come to Bombay (as it was then), and is worried about food and shelter. I can identify with this, as I too was a young man in Bombay once with identical worries. Indeed, most young people migrating to big cities would empathise with Palekar.

Most of us get by when it comes to aab-o-daana, but aashiana can be a different matter. Housing in Mumbai (as it is now) is incredibly expensive, and most middle-class people cannot dream of buying a house. There are two important things I would like you to note here.

One, prices are a matter of supply and demand, and if there is relative scarcity of housing, prices will seem high. That’s just how it is.

Two, the supply of housing is artificially kept low by government regulation. If not for the government, real estate in our cities would cost a fraction of what it now does. If you cannot afford to buy a home where you live, then repeat after me: This is the government’s fault.

There are a number of terrible regulations that lead to this effect. I want to focus on two in this piece.

The culprits are well known: Floor Space Index and Rent Control.

In the end, he picks the second song:

Let’s shift to a pleasant subject now: from real estate to love. As Gharoanda progresses, Amol Palekar finds romance with Zarina Wahab, and the two then sing a version of the song that he sings earlier alone.

Do Diwaane shahar mein/ Raat mein aur dopahar mein/ Aab-o-daana dhoondte hai/ Ek aashiana dhoondte hai.

Two lovers in a city/ At night and in the afternoon/ Looking for food/ looking for shelter.

The two young people have the same problems that the one young person did earlier – but as you can guess, they are considerably happier at the time of singing this song. Thank goodness the government does not regulate Love like it regulates Land.

(Spoiler alert: The artificial scarcity of Land eventually destroys their Love as well. Sigh.)


But there is much more to Mumbai real estate which is not present in most Indian cities. Things like FSI etc will help lower the pressure but not much.  Some apartments where allowed FSI is much higher, the difference between top floor and ground floor apartments could be several lakhs. And for most even the ground floor is unaffordable, so the story ends there.

One can always argue how much more expensive NY would be if FSI were like Mumbai. But even with such high FSI, the one big issue with NYC remains – high cost of apartments. It is perhaps something in these financial centres where property remains unbelievably costly and is such a privilege.

Even the whole property broker market in Bombay is unlike any other. People are migrating to other cities as well, but it is only in Mumbai where you see the clout of the broker. The broker is as big and even bigger than apartment owners. It keeps making your life miserable every 11 months!

Perhaps the song which fits the real estate market in Mumbai is from another movie which showcased crime in the city. The movie was D Company and the song was ” Ganda hai par dhanda hai yeh…”.

South Africa needs a sensible debate about its Central Bank. Here’s a start..

July 12, 2017

Prof Vishnu Padayachee of University of the Witwatersrand and Bradley Bordiss PhD candidate at the same University argue for a more sensible debate on their central bank – SARB. Just recently, the Public Proctor asked the central bank to have a broader role leading to a lot of noise.

They say there are 2 mon pol camps:


20th anniversary of Start of Asian Crisis: Is China making the same mistakes?

July 12, 2017

Prof Barry Eichengreen points to several things South East Asian Countries have done since the 1997 crisis.

For starters, the crisis countries have ratcheted down their investment rates and growth expectations to sustainable levels. Asian governments still emphasize growth, but not at any cost.

Second, Southeast Asian countries now have more flexible exchange rates. None is perfectly flexible, to be sure, but the region’s governments have at least abandoned the rigid dollar pegs that were the source of such vulnerability in 1997.

Third, countries like Thailand that were running large external deficits, heightening their dependence on foreign finance, are now running surpluses. Running surpluses has helped them accumulate foreign-exchange reserves, which serve as a form of insurance.

Fourth, Asian countries are now working together to ring-fence the region. In 2000, in the wake of the crisis, they created the Chiang Mai Initiative, a regional network of financial credits and swaps. And now they have the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank to regionalize the provision of development finance as well.

Ironically, the more things change the more they remain the same. In 1997, China was not a risk. This time it is as it seems to be following the same model followed by SE Asian countries 20 years ago:


Could You Live 90 Days on Bitcoin?

July 11, 2017

A couple just did and here is their story:

Like most newlyweds, Austin and Beccy Craig were excited about returning home to Utah after their honeymoon and beginning their new life together. But unlike most couples who find their lives calming down after the chaos of wedding planning is over, the Craigs were about to embark on an adventure no one had ever attempted before: Beccy and Austin were going to spend the next three months living solely on Bitcoin.

The Life on Bitcoin Kickstarter launched in 2013, four years after the elusive Satoshi Nakamoto had published his treatise on Bitcoin and then walked away from the entire project and dissolved into anonymity. The timing of the film is also important, as it came right after Bitcoin had rallied and crashed and critics proclaimed that the currency was dead. But as Austin points out in an exclusive interview with FEE, “A lot of people were saying Bitcoin is dead, but it was ten times more valuable than before the rally started.” He continues, “I learned enough to know that this was a revolutionary technology… it was essentially a pandora’s box. There was no way to close it up and pretend it didn’t exist. Bitcoin wasn’t going away.”

And how did Beccy feel about Austin’s desire to be involved in a documentary about cryptocurrency? As Austin says, “To my great amazement, when I asked Beccy about it she was onboard.”

The rules of the Life on Bitcoin documentary were relatively simple: Bitcoin would be the only medium of exchange permitted for all financial transactions made by the couple for 90 days. All cash, credit, and debit cards were to be confiscated and phones, internet, and any other accounts not currently set up to accept payment with Bitcoin would be shut off as well.

The Craigs have become modern pioneers in the world of cryptocurrency.

Each transaction made would also be limited to include only the buyer(s) and the seller, without a middleman exchanging US dollars for Bitcoin. For this experiment to really work and prove Bitcoin’s value as a form of real world currency, it would need to be as practical as possible.

Using a third party to exchange Bitcoin for USD, and then giving the USD to the seller would be a mere currency exchange rather than an actual transaction of money in exchange for goods or services. So an intermediary was only permitted for transactions after all other avenues had been attempted.

Since Utah is a tightknit community where its members care for each other often without being asked, there were also rules placed on the ability of family and friends to help out the couple. Unless the family or friends in question had legitimate commercial businesses, they would not be allowed to assist the Craigs. The only two exemptions to these rules were payroll taxes withheld from the couple’s paychecks, and of course medical emergencies.

To keep the experiment both interesting and applicable to the real world of Bitcoin transactions, the experiment was set to grow as the Craigs achieved success. If the couple proved that they were able to master the art of using Bitcoin to pay for food, rent, internet, and all other bills in Utah, then the limits would be pushed to include interstate travel and then international travel.

Amazing stuff..

Case Study of a Unique Digital Museum: Itihaasa App which looks at history of Indian IT industry..

July 11, 2017

I blogged about this itihaasa app earlier in 2016 when the app was just launched. It is a brilliant and a unique initiative of using the app platform to tell history about an industry, Information Technology in this case.

N Dayasindhu who is one of the key architects of the app has written a paper about this unique digital museum:

This industry case study describes the genesis and development of itihaasa history of Indian IT, a unique digital museum chronicling the evolution of Indian IT over six decades. itihaasa is a free mobile app that captures important milestones defining the history of Indian IT in the voice of key actors who shaped them. It has a rich repertoire of original oral history videos, digital documents, and photographs from personal archives and publications. Users can navigate the itihaasa app based on timeline, people or organization views. Or they can search tags to access specific content. It is unique because the evolution of Indian IT is captured as oral histories of multiple key actors who shaped important milestones, and business history is presented in an entirely digital format.

Useful stuff…

We clearly need more of such apps which gives us atleast some sense of how businesses evolved..

Regulations for Small Finance Banks: A bit too many?

July 11, 2017

Yesterday Ira Dugal tweeted about AU Small Finance Bank trading at 7.5 times its Price/Book Ratio, much more than any other Private Bank.  Case of early froth/bubble in valuation of Small Finance Banks? We will get to know soon. Markets hype both ways – upside and downside- very quickly.

Anyways, over the weekend RBI released a document called: “Compendium of Guidelines for Small Finance Banks”.  Compendium is a deceptive word as it means- a collection of concise but detailed information about a particular subject, especially in a book or other publication. Concise yet detailed.

So are RBI’s guidelines for Small Finance Banks:


What lies behind the rise of Christian universities in Africa?

July 10, 2017

Fascinating article by Joel Carpenter, Director of Nagel Institute for the Study of World Christianity, Calvin College. The role of religion in shaping education has been critical. I doubt other religions have excelled in this shaping as much as Christanity has. Be it primary or secondary education, the Christian education places generate a lot of trust.

In Africa, there has been a rise in Christian Universities. Reason is both demand and supply:


World Bank’s shifting role: From development bank to an investment bank?

July 10, 2017

Prof. Steven Friedman of University of Johannesburg points to the shifting role of World Bank:


Lessons of economics and globalization from Raj Kapoor’s song – Mera joota hai Japani

July 10, 2017

Amit Varma, the editor of Pragti has a nice piece.

He says one can learn economics lessons from the famous Raj Kapoor song: Mera Joota hai Japani.


How did usury stop being a sin and become respectable finance?

July 7, 2017

This is just a superb article  by Alex Mayyasi who is a freelance writer. He looks at one of the most fundamental questions of finance: How did usury stop being a sin and become respectable finance?

There is never one answer to such questions but several plausible ones. He brings the contribution of Scholastics to making finance respectable:


How Governments protect their Lutyens Bungalows but remain ignorant about historic monuments…

July 7, 2017

Prof Nayanjot Lahiri of Ashoka University alerts to this new Amendment of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.

The amendment allows construction of public works in area of protected monuments which was prohibited till now:


When big corporates avoid taxes it is called cleverness/arbitrage, when small companies avoid taxes it is called fraud..

July 7, 2017

Nothing is more ironical than seeing big corporate honchos talk about how we should be paying taxes. Their constant ire is at the small businesses who is always blamed for not paying taxes.

However, if one looks at history of global corporates in general, one thing is constant : their figuring ways to avoid paying taxes. Just that most of these ways are termed as clever, arbitrage and so on. Whereas any similar effort by smaller entities is called as fraud. Thus the irony.

One continuously heard these cries during demonetisation and the same is going on in GST as well. Both the big corporates and political class are continuously emphasizing how GST will lead to people paying more taxes. Some others even say those who oppose GST are the ones who don’t want to pay taxes. Really?

The media too is to be blamed here for continuously streaming these messages making the small business player appear as a thief of sorts. The small business player hardly has the time or the graft to defend his case and media does not even care for them barring a few pieces here and there.

The reality is very different of course. The big companies have an army of soldiers with a nice job title as “tax consultants” who try and identify best ways to avoid paying taxes. They create all kinds of mechanisms to hide revenues and profits by creating multiple shell companies . Some others just open a standalone registered office in so called tax-free countries from where they operate all around the world.

Until recently, both big corporates joined hands with small ones to look at ways to protect their earnings against the ever tax hungry government. But now the large corporates have increasingly joined hands with government to shift all problems on to the smaller brother.

To see a government whose base is (or forgotten past) was that of small business/trader make all these claims, makes the Indian case even more ironical.


Pakistan Rupee devalues by 3.5% in a single day leading to war of words…

July 7, 2017

In its recent State of economy report released on 30 June 2017, State Bank of Pakistan reported that its current account deficit was highest since Q2 2009.

Pakistan’s overall external balance recorded a deficit of US$ 1.6 billion in Jul-Mar FY17, against a surplus of US$ 1.1 billion in the same period last year. This was mainly caused by a large trade deficit on the back of high imports– without a matching performance by exports. The imports of fuel, machinery and food items (mainly palm oil and pulses), all increased sharply due to robust domestic demand and ongoing power and infrastructure development activity. This dynamic pushed the current account deficit (CAD) to US$ 2.6 billion in Q3 – the highest since Q2-FY09. The higher CAD was recorded despite the receipt of US$ 550 million inflow under Coalition Support Fund in the third quarter. For Jul-Mar FY17, the current account gap amounted to US$ 6.1 billion, over twice the level recorded in the same period last year.

Just a few months ago, on 2 May 2017 the government appointed an interim chief of the central bank for 3 months till a new appointment:

It is informed that the Federal Government vide its Notification No. 3(4)-Bkg-I/2013 dated 1st May, 2017 has appointed Mr. Riaz Riazuddin, presently serving as Deputy Governor State Bank of Pakistan, as Acting Governor State Bank of Pakistan with immediate effect, for a period not exceeding three months or till appointment of a regular Governor, State Bank of Pakistan whichever is earlier, in terms of sub-section (3A) of Section 10 of the State Bank of Pakistan Act, 1956.
Thus, a new Governor was to be appointed by Aug 2.
However. on July 5 2017, the currency depreciated by 3.1% in a single day. SBP termed it as adjustment against the high CAD:


When a journalist warns other journalists of being sycophantic to Governments at power…

July 7, 2017

Sidin Vadukut picks books which glorify Emergency and Sanjay Gandhi like no other.