postN105.1

India Insider: Agriculture Still Traps Nation’s Workforce

India Insider: Agriculture Still Traps Nation's Workforce

A Field Survey in South India’s Agricultural Towns

India’s growth story is usually told through noteworthy headline numbers. Yet beneath these aggregates lies a persistent imbalance, agriculture continues to employ a large share of the workforce, while contributing a much smaller share of output. This gap shapes income stability, consumption patterns, and the complicated experience of growth across much of the country for many people.

This essay uses field observations comparing two major agricultural towns in Tamil Nadu State in India, Tiruvannamalai and Kallakurichi. After analyzing their respective data and examining how this imbalance plays out on the ground, I offer my perspective.

postN105.1
Typical Agricultural Field in Southern India

Tiruvannamalai: Growth Without Employment Transformation

In Tiruvannamalai district, I visited several areas where housing conditions were poor and informal settlements were widespread. I have visited many households here since 2023. These conditions are now changing, but not in a way that fundamentally transforms employment.

Capital inflows from the neighboring State of Andhra Pradesh have fueled a real estate boom and expanded services such as lodging, restaurants, and transport. While this has altered the physical landscape and raised asset values, it has not created stable non-farm jobs at scale. Employment remains largely informal, seasonal, and low-paid, leaving the underlying agricultural labor trap intact.

Although Tiruvannamalai exhibits a relatively high services share in district GDP, the income generated by this sector accrues from a narrow group of asset owners, intermediaries, and rent-seekers. As a result, per capita income figures overstate the extent of broad-based welfare. A large share of the workforce remains engaged in low-wage service activities with limited income security.

Kallakurichi: Agricultural Dependence, Weaker Services

In Kallakurichi district, the structural imbalance is even more pronounced. Agriculture accounts for a noticeably larger share of district GDP than in Tiruvannamalai, while the services share is correspondingly lower. District level GDDP and sectoral composition data from the Department of Economics and Statistics, Government of Tamil Nadu (2022–23 provisional, current prices), show that agriculture contributes roughly one-fifth of district output, even as a disproportionately large share of the workforce continues to depend on this type of work for income.

This high dependence on agriculture results in extremely low output per worker, widespread disguised unemployment, and chronically weak incomes. Growth exists, but it is concentrated in activities that do not absorb labor effectively.

postN105.2
Gross Domestic District Product Comparison of Agriculture versus Non-Agriculture

Core Problem: Growth Composition, Not Growth Absence

The core structural problem in districts like Tiruvannamalai and Kallakurichi is therefore not the absence of growth, but its composition. Too many workers remain tied to a sector that generates relatively little value. Services and industry have expanded, but not in a manner that absorbs surplus rural labor at scale.

As long as labor remains trapped in low productivity farming, while non-farm sectors fail to provide stable employment opportunities, headline income measures will continue to overstate actual welfare.

Consumption Consequences of Agricultural Dependence

This imbalance has direct consequences for consumption. Towns that depend heavily on agriculture tend to exhibit weak and uneven consumption patterns. Farm incomes are inherently volatile, driven by fluctuations in commodity prices, weather conditions, and market access. In many cases, farmers are forced to sell produce at a discount, incur outright losses, or delay sales under distressing conditions. Only intermittently do they realize meaningful profits.

postN105.3
Chart Comparing Towns of Tiruvannamalai and Kallakurichi in Tamil Nadu

This volatility translates into cautious spending behavior. Consumption rises in short bursts following a good season, but thereafter contracts sharply. This pattern is clearly visible in districts such as Tiruvannamalai and Kallakurichi, where agricultural dependence suppresses steady consumption despite occasional income windfalls.

The same dynamic is visible at State level. Across Tamil Nadu, agriculture employs over 40 percent of the labor force, while contributing a far smaller share of output. The statistics exhibited at the district level are therefore not an isolated phenomenon, but a systemic one.

National Structural Imbalance

Zooming out further, what is visible in Tiruvannamalai and Kallakurichi mirrors India’s broader structural imbalance. Nationally, agriculture employs close to half the workforce, but contributes less than a fifth of GDP. This gap suppresses incomes, weakens consumption, and reflects India’s limited success in industrializing at scale.

postN105.4
India Agriculture as Percent of GDP from 1990s into 2020s

Services have grown rapidly, but they remain reliant on capital and skill intensive, and unable to absorb surplus rural labor in large numbers. As a result, economic growth continues without broad based prosperity. Headline GDP numbers improve, but the underlying structure remains fragile.

India’s central economic scrouge is growth without labor mobility. Until workers move out of low productivity agriculture jobs and into stable non-farm employment at scale, income volatility and weak consumption will remain defining features of the economy. Regardless of how strong the headline growth numbers appear, a national challenge remains.

postN104

India Insider: Weakening the MNREGA Employment Guarantees

India Insider: Weakening the MNREGA Employment Guarantees

When the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act was enacted in 2005, it was conceived as more than a poverty-alleviation program. It was a direct intervention in India’s rural labor market. By guaranteeing employment on demand at a statutory wage, MNREGA established what the agrarian economy had long lacked – a credible wage floor.

For India, where nearly half the workforce remains trapped in agriculture and align activities often involuntarily, this mattered enormously. Rural labor markets are structurally weak in India. They are seasonal, informal, and dominated by excess labor. In such conditions, wages do not rise organically. MNREGA altered that balance by providing an outside option. A worker who could demand public employment could also refuse exploitative private wages. That is why rural real wages rose meaningfully during the first decade of MNREGA’s implementation.

postN104
MNREGA Rural Poverty Data from 2005 to 2018

The figure above illustrates the broader context in which MNREGA operated. Rural poverty declined sharply after 2005, falling from over 40 per cent in the mid 2000s to below 20 per cent by the late 2010s. While this decline reflects multiple forces like overall growth, structural change, and social programs, micro-level studies consistently find that districts and households with higher exposure to MNREGA experienced significantly larger gains in consumption and poverty reduction compared to areas where the program was weakly implemented.

The scheme also acted as a counter cyclical stabilizer. During droughts, agrarian distress, or macro slowdowns, MNREGA expanded automatically, injecting purchasing power into rural areas. This supported consumption, reduced distress migration, and softened downturns. In macroeconomic terms, MNREGA transferred income to households with the highest marginal propensity to consume, precisely where fiscal multipliers are strongest.

Despite its strong design, MNREGA has long suffered from implementation weaknesses. Chronic delays in wage payments undermined its credibility as a reliable source of income. Corruption has generated fake muster rolls, ghost workers, inflated material bills, and substandard asset creation. Social audits which meant to be the backbone of accountability were uneven across states while effective in some.

Technological reforms such as Aadhaar linked payments, and digital attendance reduced certain leakages but introduced new problems, including worker exclusion, authentication failures, and further payment delays. The result was not only fiscal leakage, but a weakening of MNREGA’s core economic function which had promised a dependable wage floor.

Yet instead of fixing these implementation failures, a new policy chose to change the promise itself. In December 2025, this shift became explicit with the passage of the VB-G RAM G Act, 2025 in Parliament, replacing the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act with a redesigned rural jobs framework.

Under MNREGA, employment was a legal right, if work was demanded, it had to be provided. The new framework reverses this logic altogether. Employment now depends on budget limits, administrative approvals, and notifications from the center, not on demand. What was once automatic is now conditional.

This change also quietly shifts risk onto States. With limited revenue powers and tight borrowing limits, States responded by rationing work and delaying payments. As a result, the employment guarantee weakens, rural workers lose bargaining power, and wages come under pressure. What appears as fiscal control for the central government to rein on capital expenditures on paper thus becomes wage suppression in practice for rural workers.

Almost half of India’s workforce, around 46 per cent, still depends on agriculture and allied rural activities for employment, even though agriculture produces a much smaller share of the country’s total output. This gap between employment and output signals very low productivity in rural work and a large pool of surplus labor. For most of these workers, moving out of agriculture is difficult. They face barriers because of a lack of skills, weak urban job absorption, high migration costs, and social constraints. As a result, the ability to bargain for higher wages is structurally limited.

In such an economy, rural labor markets tend not to be competitive. Employers often face many workers competing for few jobs, while workers have few alternative sources of income. This creates conditions close to monopsony, where employers have disproportionate power in setting wages. In the absence of an institutional counterweight, wages tend to settle near subsistence levels rather than reflecting productivity or broader economic growth.

The consequences are visible in wage outcomes. Daily wages in rural areas stagnate or decline in real terms, failing to keep pace with inflation. Over time, this suppresses labor incomes relative to profits and rents, leading to a further decline in labor’s share of national income. In effect, weakening the employment guarantee shifts income distribution away from workers and back toward employers, reinforcing existing structural inequalities in the economy.

postN88

Iran, Oil and The Crumbling of a Criminal Dictatorial Wall

Iran, Oil and The Crumbling of a Criminal Dictatorial Wall

Step aside for a moment from the conspiracy theorists and let’s consider that the U.S did not take out Maduro of Venezuela in order to facilitate more supply of oil. Let’s consider the possibility that Maduro was removed because he did not facilitate free enterprise and ran a criminal enterprise that did not favor the U.S.

postN88
WTI Crude Oil One Year Chart as of 9th January 2026

Venezuela has the largest demonstrated oil reserves in the world, but the U.S has done rather well without it for years. The Trump administration’s move to take over Venezuela deters China and Russia’s influence in the Americas, while also putting another nail in the coffin of the Cuban regime. The word regime is used implicitly to point out that Venezuela, Russia, China and Cuba are all regimes of one sort via their one party ruling systems. Yes, you can argue the United State has returned to an imperialist philosophy, but that doesn’t mean it has dictatorial rule. Some will argue that point, I understand. But let’s step away from the complexity of political biases – including my own – and insights and discuss oil for a moment.

The takeover of the Venezuelan oil infrastructure, which has not happened in full yet via the U.S military action, does not mean U.S oil companies will make trillions of dollars from the adventure immediately. In fact a glut of oil is one of the potential consequences if Venezuela were to return to an open market system with its energy supply. Yes, the price of oil would in theory likely get cheaper. While it can be argued that this will help the U.S consumers, however many U.S producers of the shale oil industry would be put in a difficult spot. Producing oil from shale deposits requires hydraulic fracturing – known as fracking – and is an expensive endeavor. Cheaper oil from Venezuela in other words could put small and medium producers in the U.S out of business if supply becomes too ample

Now let’s turn our attention to Iran and the attempted revolution that is fomenting a reaction from the regime of that nation. Oil supply is certainly at stake for the world, but there is the overwhelmingly important possibility of allowing 90 million plus people to live in a system without repression. As of last night internet and telephone lines have been shuttered by the dictatorial government. There is a legitimate fear that many people protesting for their rights to be free now face the risk of violence and some have already begun to pay with their lives. Freedom is more important than oil for the people of Iran and Venezuela. It should also be pointed out that Venezuela and Iran are members of OPEC and this is likely not going to change.

The Trump administration is threatening military action against the Iranian rulers, but it is questionable how the regime of Iran could be overthrown by outside forces if there are not active combat boots the ground. While it may be possible to attempt a Venezuela like mission in Iran, that would be difficult at best considering the regime is already paranoid and on high alert. The civilians of Iran will have to do a lot of the work by themselves. Which means the populace of Iran will need to be able to organize and collectively topple a dictatorship, and this is unlikely to be done by handing out flowers. The regular army of Iran must disobey orders and the police must decide not to participate in violence against the protesters, allowing a seizure of power by the people.

At this juncture it remains difficult to say what will happen in Iran, except to say that there is likely going to be blood spilled. The Berlin Wall fell after decades of Cold War between the West and East. The wall of the Islamic Republic of Iran which was declared in the first week of April 1979 has nearly been running its dictatorship as long as the communists controlled Eastern Europe.

If and it is a big if, the Iranian people are able to topple the Islamic Republic of Iran it would be a game changer the world over. The complexity of the mafia style state that the current dictatorship has controlled not only in the Middle East, but throughout South America and elsewhere via influence with its proxies like Hezbollah is enormous. The dismantling of this network would take longer than the toppling of the Iranian regime. The world is unlikely to ever know in full detail the criminal activity of the current Iranian government and its proxies worldwide.

This is not about oil, it is about freedom. However, if the oil of Iran suddenly came under the control of a Western looking Iran that was unshackled, yes it would add to a vast amount of energy that the world already enjoys, but OPEC would find a way to manage the supply.

If Iran were to join the ranks of free nations and castoff its current leadership the world would benefit greatly. Only nations and proxies that gain from the exploitation of the Iranian dictatorship would worry. If the Iranian dictatorship falls there will not be paradise, but the event would be significant and transform the current state of global affairs.

Copy and paste the text from AMT that you want to share

postN76.1

India Insider: Strategic Memory and Why Unilateral Power is Resisted

India Insider: Strategic Memory and Why Unilateral Power is Resisted

After Independence, India was often described as “tilting” toward the Soviet Union. In reality, this was the outcome of India’s pursuit of Non-Alignment at a time when the United States was actively backing perceived rogue actors in South Asia, most notably Pakistan. What appeared as ideological preference was, in fact, strategic necessity born of hard experience.

postN76.1

The Soviet Union supported India on core security concerns when few others would. The first major Soviet defense deal was not merely a weapons sale. It included licensed production in India through Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, full technology transfer, and made India the first non-Communist country to receive the MiG-21. This distinction mattered. India was treated as a sovereign partner capable of absorbing technology, not as a dependent client expected to align unquestioningly.

By contrast, Washington’s alignment with Pakistan was driven by Cold War geopolitics rather than South Asian stability. Despite repeated military coups, wars with India, and regional destabilization, the United States armed Pakistan, provided diplomatic cover during conflicts, and sustained the relationship through military rule and nuclear proliferation. These experiences deeply shaped India’s strategic culture and explain its enduring emphasis on autonomy, redundancy, and diversified partnerships rather than alliance dependency.

This history is one of the central reasons India resists Washington dictating regional dynamics. South Asia, in New Delhi’s view, is not a chessboard for external powers to reorder at will.

Democratic Republic of the Congo Example

The same pattern is visible beyond Asia. Take the Democratic Republic of Congo. After decades of horrific colonial exploitation, the Belgians realized by the mid-20th century that they could not hold on indefinitely and exited abruptly, having never prepared the country for self-rule. What they left behind was not independence, but a political vacuum. The United States and the United Nations intervened, but their actions were shaped less by concern for Congolese society than by geopolitical rivalry, ideological competition, and racial hierarchy.

The assassination of Patrice Lumumba destroyed the Republic of the Congo’s (as it was known then) only credible attempt at building a unified nationalist state at independence. The dictatorship of Mobutu Sese Seko that followed did not merely fail to develop institutions; it actively hollowed them out. Corruption became a governing principle, loyalty replaced competence, and the state turned into a vehicle for extraction. Today’s instability in the Democratic Republic of the Congo is not a governance failure in isolation—it is the predictable outcome of a political system designed to rule without building state capacity. For countries like India, this is not ancient history, it is a warning.

Washington’s unilateralism reinforces this mistrust:

The recent military operation to remove Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro without U.S Congress authorization, international legal justification, or an imminent threat would have been unthinkable as recently as the first Trump administration. It became possible in 2026 only because of congressional capitulation, judicial immunity, and the transformation of an apolitical defense establishment into a politicized instrument of executive power. To much of the world, this signals that restraint is no longer embedded in American decision making.

Europe exposes another contradiction. The post war order was built on liberal democracy and collective security through NATO. When that order is weakened by unilateral action, trust erodes, even among allies expected to align automatically.

Even before Trump, the U.S – India relationship remained cordial rather than fully strategic. Before 9/11, India was the most natural regional ally against Al-Qaeda, yet Washington lacked patience and local understanding to navigate India’s complex democracy and nationalism. That failure was not tactical, it was conceptual.

India’s neutrality today is deliberate:

It prioritizes diplomacy over military actions that violate international law. India sees a multipolar world emerging, not as disorder, but as the end of unchecked unilateral supremacy. This is not ambiguity. It is a strategic memory.

postN75

U.S National Security, Part 3: Don’t Underemphasize Freedom

U.S National Security, Part 3: Don't Underemphasize Freedom

Opinion: The following article is commentary and its views are solely those of the author. This article was first published the 30th of December via The Angry Demagogue.

 
postN75

Conclusion

The post-Cold War world that the Strategy Paper tries to figure out is much more than the collapse of the Soviet Union and the rise of China. One of the main goals of the Trump administration is to turn the clock back on “globalization”, be it via tariffs, other economic ways or even, military means.

While the world is panicking over AI’s destruction of good white collar jobs, it has, paradoxically, created a world where the auto industry can’t find enough qualified mechanics at nice six figure salaries. Not even ten years ago the journalists were haranguing out of work blue collar workers with “go learn to code”, the beer guzzling crew can now tell the tearful journalists and Hollywood “writers” who can’t write better than AI to “go learn how to weld” (or at least handle a screwdriver). But the strategic issues we are facing go beyond manufacturing jobs.

The challenge to the United States and to other free countries is how to handle a new reality where massive debt threatens the diminution, if not the destruction, of the life style we have all come to take for granted and where revanchist regimes don’t quite understand that their power and “prestige” is a result of what has been built in those free countries they want to replace. China, like Russia, Iran, Turkey, Qatar and the non-state actors like Hamas, Hezbollah, the Moslem Brotherhood and others don’t quite understand that while they can use, and even sometimes improve on what freedom has provided them, they will stagnate once they attain their goal of defeating and destroying the free world.

As advanced as China becomes and even if it flies to the moon, overtakes the United States in AI and quantum computing and manages to make the United States into only the breadbasket of the world, they will stagnate as only free markets and free people can move the world to the next step. Growth can only be accomplished by free people. True enough, the economy often grows in ways that we don’t always like, the alternative is stagnation and a return to the pre-scientific age. For all the talk of “new man” and “progress” and everything else that the Soviet Union strived to create, they produced no medicines, no medical devices and no medical treatments.

Therefore, the defeat of the revanchist world and the preservation of freedom needs to be the paramount goal of American foreign policy. This does not mean the creation of democracies where none have ever existed and it does not mean sending troops in every time a political prisoner is arrested or even a plan to militarily defeat the CCP, but it does mean always supporting free countries against the unfree even when the United States is also “friends” with the unfree one.

This means that it will also give free countries leeway when their interests do not align perfectly with America’s (non-core) interests. America as sole protector of the free world has leverage that America as midwife to a set of regional alliances does not. This is a choice that America can make and a correct reading of the Strategy Paper tells us that the United States no longer wants to or can be the main power in every region in the world. This means that there needs to be a change in attitude in America so that it cannot force its will on its allies just because there is another contract to be had or another “cause” that has caught the eye of the country’s establishment.

Encouraging regional alliances of free countries such as the new Eastern-Med Alliance that has already been established between Greece, Cyprus and Israel is a prime example. In addition to the economic cooperation there has been joint defense training and there are agreements that will lead to a defense cooperation pact if not a NATO-like security treaty. Turkey is the common competitor, or enemy, of these three countries. Turkey claims certain Greek islands, occupies parts of Cyprus and has designs on Israel as it strives to be the Islamic “liberator” of Jerusalem. There are gas exploration agreements and cooperation and there would have been a pipeline to Europe if the Biden administration had not stopped it (while they approved the Russian-German pipeline).

Italy ought to be a natural member of the East-Med Alliance and maybe the dissolution of NATO will make them realize that they have more in common with Israel and Greece than they think they do. If Italy were to join then that would create a powerful naval and air deterrence of free countries against aggressors in the eastern Mediterranean. The addition of Malta, a small but strategically important country south of Sicily would provide naval bases that could control the sea lanes between north Africa and Europe helping to stem illegal migration and Turkish attempts to control those same lanes. Malta also brings with it a history of defeating Suleiman the Magnificent in a four month siege when the Ottomans tried to conquer this important island. As we stated before, the United States as a “midwife” to alliances cannot instruct countries on their own national interests. That means that allies of the United States will clash but America must always come down on the side of the free countries and not the revanchist power – in this case, Turkey.

There are of course other regional alliances that can come into being and a remake of the post-WWII world is in order. The end of the cold war created economic booms across the globe raising hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, but recent decades have seen an increase in terror and tyranny and that itself needs to be dealt with. If not by the United States alone then by the US along with the regional alliances that the Strategy Paper has highlighted and we have demarcated (partially) here. But concepts like “territorial integrity” (see Syria, Somalia and the rest of Africa) and “sovereignty” have lost their moral imperative as they are used as excuses by tyrants (and their enablers at the UN) to further their cruelty. One of the faults of the old “liberal international order” has been allowing tyrannies the same rights and respect as free countries. During the Cold War, when nuclear war loomed, this might have made sense but after the fall of the Soviet Union these “principles” have created more harm than good.

In the National Security Strategy of the administration, the words “free” and “freedom” appear twenty times, but never in the context of an alliance of free countries. While it speaks of freedom of religion and speech and free markets it never speaks of the need to put allies that are free ahead of friends that are not free. Allies are those countries that share values and will come to your aid because of that. Friends, in international affairs, are those that look to short-term gain and have no desire to further your values or interests. There is no reason that the United States, in its current fiscal condition needs to fight the fight of freedom around the world alone, but neither can it abandon that fight in the pursuit of short-term contracts or frivolous causes.

Disclaimer: the views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of the author, and not necessarily the opinions reflected by angrymetatraders.com or its associated parties.

You can follow Ira Slomowitz via The Angry Demagogue on Substack https://iraslomowitz.substack.com/