The Jagadguru says:
What I am against is the deregulation of the banking sector. Cutting off or weakening the regulatory arm is not good for the country. Letz have private players, with a strong regulatory body, under the control of a democratically elected government. I think this will ensure the best of both worlds. We will have private players in the industry bringing in the much needed competition (and hence better service) and we will also have strong regulations ensuring that needy people are not sucked out of their blood.
The only way to stop such misuse is by having strong regulations on the market. Only strong regulations can stop ICICI kinda atrocity or zamindari system.
The RBI had come up with a regulation against employing goons or intimidation for collections two years ago. But ICICI kinda atrocity wasn’t stopped. Why is this?
Dumbhead free market fundamentalists will tell you it’s because regulation makes honest people overcautious while not changing the behaviour of rogues. But they are wrong. The true reason the strong regulation failed was because K V Kamath has not let the Jagadguru into his heart. When he surrenders himself to the Jagadguru, ICICI Bank will be transformed, and so will its outsourced collections agencies.
Even strong regulations are useless if we do not surrender ourselves to the Jagadguru.
//Since the regulatory body will be under a democratic government, we can avoid any communist kinda abuse in the society.//
I have an even better idea. Lets start a system of licenses and permits, where private players have to take permission from the democratically elected government before doing anything. Because, of course, democratically elected governments are totally immune to lobbying, rent-seeking and, of course, stupidity. I have no doubt this will lead to less corruption, greater efficiency, and high rates of growth.