Showing posts with label bank. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bank. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 23, 2017

Aadhaar and Bank Account

AADHAAR and BANK ACCOUNT

Aadhaar Seeding/Linking with Bank Account

If Bank Account is Seeded/Linked to Aadhaar - it facilitates credit of various Govt. sponsored subsidy/benefit schemes such as DBT, MGNREGA directly in Bank accounts through Aadhaar Payment Bridge System (APBS).

Aadhaar Updation in Bank Account

If Aadhaar is updated in Bank Account -  Aadhaar Number is updated only in Bank records and cannot be used for receiving credits of Govt. sponsored subsidy/benefit schemes.

Moral of the Story

You should Seed/Link Aadhaar to only One Bank Account where you want to receive Govt Subsidy/Benefit/Pension etc.

However - You may Update Aadhaar in all your Bank Accounts

(Above based on information recieved from my Bank)

Difference Between Aadhaar Seeding Linking and Updation

Please click link below and read in my blog

https://karve.wordpress.com/2017/08/23/aadhaar-and-bank-accounts-seeding-linking-updation-which-one-should-you-do/amp/

Wednesday, May 3, 2017

Is it better to be “Pound-Foolish” than “Penny-Wise”...?

BAD LOANS, NPAs and BAILOUTS

When I read about the “Rich and Famous” defaulting on paying back their loans to banks, resulting in bad debts and Non Performing Assets (NPAs) – resulting in the banks writing-off bad loans – which entails deploying honest taxpayers’ money to bailout the rich defaulters – I am amused at this ludicrous situation where – the hardworking honest taxpaying citizens subsidise and bailout the unethical rich businessmen defaulters. 

This reminds me of this article which I wrote 5 years ago...

BAILOUT – A PARADOX
DO THE “POUND-FOOLISH” ALWAYS EXPLOIT THE “PENNY-WISE”...?
WHY SHOULD THE POOR SUBSIDISE THE RICH...?
A Spoof
By
VIKRAM KARVE

I still vividly remember an incident which happened in the 1960’s – when I was a small boy and I lived in Pune.

My mother believed in the concepts of thrift and frugality – and she practiced what she preached. 

She believed in building up savings rather than borrowing money.

We were taught to live within our means. 

We never took loans. 

In case we wanted to buy something expensive – we saved money till we had enough funds to buy what wanted.

After I got my job – I opened a recurring deposit – saved money every month – and purchased my first scooter after nearly 3 years. 

I still remember that I bought my first car after working for more than 15 years. 

I bought it from my savings – and did not take a loan for buying a car. 

If we could not afford something – we had no hesitation in saying so – and we curtailed our desires instead of having false pretences. 

We had not fallen victim to the disease of instant gratification. 

We believed in “cutting our coat according to our cloth”.

We never lived beyond our means – and that is why we were financially sound – and our savings gave us a sense of security.

We did not believe in “keeping up with the Joneses” – and that is why – we never felt any sense of inferiority or envy if our neighbour was better off than us – or if he had something which we did not have.

I have digressed. 

Let me take you back to the incident which happened more than 45 years ago in the end 1960’s. 

As I have already told you – since my mother believed in thrift and frugality – she always travelled around Pune by Public Transport – Pune Municipal Transport (PMT) Bus. 

Commuting by auto-rickshaw or taxi was considered a luxury – and was resorted to only when absolutely necessary like when we had luggage and had to go to the railway station to catch a train – or when there was some elderly or ailing person who could not travel by bus.

One day – an aunt came to meet my mother. 

She was much younger and fitter than my mother. 

She had come to borrow money from my mother. 

At first – my mother was quite reluctant to lend her money. 

I too seemed quite surprised that my aunt wanted to borrow money from us – since she was quite well-off financially – as compared to us.

Seeing my mother’s unwillingness to lend her money – my aunt begged and pleaded desperately – to the point of emotional blackmail.

(I could overhear something about cheques bouncing etc). 

Finally my mother succumbed to the emotional blackmail – and she gave my aunt the money. 

Then – my mother asked me to see off my aunt to the bus stop.

As we were walking towards the bus stop – my aunt asked me to hail an auto-rickshaw.

“You want to go by auto-rickshaw...? Why don’t you go by PMT bus – it goes right near your house...?” I asked my aunt, surprised

“I am not used to travelling by bus. These PMT buses are so dirty, crowded and uncomfortable – I just can’t travel in these terrible buses. You just call me a auto-rickshaw...” my snobbish aunt said snootily. 

And so – off she went travelling in the luxury of an auto-rickshaw.

Of course – my snooty aunt would pay the “exorbitant” auto-rickshaw fare out the money borrowed from from my mother – while my mother would travel by bus – that’s what hurt me the most.

A question arose in my mind.

How can a person who borrows money have a higher “standard of living” than the person who lends them the money...?

In fact – why should someone who is well-to-do and has a higher standard of living – borrow money from someone who is less well-off?   

Isn’t it logical that the standard of living of the lender should be much higher than that of the borrower?

My mother travelled by economical public transport bus. 

My aunt travelled by expensive auto-rickshaw.

We lived in a modest home in a middle-class neighbourhood – whereas my aunt lived in a stylish house in a posh locality.

Yet – my aunt would always borrow money from my mother – when logically it should have been the other way round.

My spendthrift “pound-foolish” aunt kept on exploiting my thrifty “penny-wise” mother.

I did not understand the paradox.

How can the rich borrow from the poor?

Does it make any sense?

And – why should the rich borrow from poor...?

But now – I see this happening all around – when I hear that familiar term “BAILOUT”.

Rich organisations like banks and airlines (who have the most highly paid employees) are being “bailed out” by the comparatively poorer taxpayers. 

Yes – the poor taxpayer is being penalised for the extravagance of these lavish spendthrift organisations – who have landed themselves in dire straits because of their own incompetence and profligacy.

Why should a person who earns much less than the highly paid employees working in these organisations be expected to bail them out...? 

Why should rich bad loan defaulters be bailed-out at the expense of the honest taxpayers...?

Is it fair to ask the middle class to bail out someone who is much more financially well-to-do...?

Why must the economically prudent subsidize the financially reckless...?

It seems the same thing is happening with nations too. 

Developed nations like Greece are seeking bailouts. 

If you have a look at the luxurious lifestyle and plush high standard of living of these European Nations as compared to underdeveloped or developing nations – you really wonder why these developed and modern nations should be “bailed out”.

In fact – it is the less-developed Asian and African nations who need a “bailout” – not developed European nations. 

It is inexplicable.

How can someone with a lower standard of living “bail out” someone with a higher standard of living...?

It would be much better if these cash-strapped nations and bankrupt organisations be asked to cut costs, reduce salaries, prune expenditure, implement austerity measures and practice thrift and frugality – rather than giving them bailout after bailout – despite the fact that they continue with their spendthrift lifestyle. 

And if they refuse to mend their profligate ways – then it is better to let them go bust.  

The poor subsidize the rich.

The “pound-foolish” always exploit the “penny-wise”.

Strange but true – an inexplicable paradox – isn’t it...?

VIKRAM KARVE
Copyright © Vikram Karve 
1. If you share this post, please give due credit to the author Vikram Karve
2. Please DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Please DO NOT Cut/Copy/Paste this post
© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Disclaimer: 
1. This story is a fictional spoof, satire, pure fiction, just for fun and humor, no offence is meant to anyone, so take it with a pinch of salt and have a laugh.
2. All Stories in this Blog are a work of fiction. Events, Places, Settings and Incidents narrated in the stories are a figment of my imagination. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Copyright Notice:
No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.

Copyright © Vikram Karve (all rights reserved)
  

and  http://karvediat.blogspot.in/2016/02/bad-loans-npas-and-bailouts.html  etc

Tuesday, September 6, 2016

Financial Planning Mantra for “Soldiers” in Uniform (Not Applicable to “Businessmen” in Uniform)

NB: The generic term “Soldier” refers to all Defence Service Personnel (Officers, Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen of the Army, Navy and Air Force) who have a “Military Mindset”

FINANCIAL PLANNING MANTRA FOR DEFENCE PERSONNEL
For “Soldiers” in Uniform 
(Not Applicable to “Businessmen” in Uniform)
Musings of an “Antiquated” Navy Veteran
By
VIKRAM KARVE 

“Put all your eggs in one sturdy basket – and keep an eye on the basket”.

If you are a defence officer, serving or retired, from the army, navy or air force, or a soldier, sailor or airman, you know that the money you earn is truly hard-earned money.

Also, by their very nature, attitude and temperament, most defence personnel are not money-minded. 

Military persons are not money-smart. 

In view of their way of life – soldiers are not financially astute.

A money-minded individual will never join the military – he will prefer to open his own business, become an entrepreneur and make money rather than earn a salary by working for someone else.

Even if a money-smart person decides to work, he will take up a job in the financial world or in an industry where his career prospects are much better and where he can earn much more money than in the defence forces.

A quintessential soldier has another curious quality – he will be ready to risk his life but he is averse to taking financial risk.

Thus, he looks for safe risk-free investments.

Owing the nature of his job – a defence person is posted to remote desolate areas or on a ship on the high seas where he may not even have immediate access to information on stock markets – in many cases he may not even have internet access or reliable swift communication facilities. 

This makes it difficult for a defence person to keep track of equity related investments.

In view of remote postings and frequent transfers – investing in real estate entails too many hassles.

You have to keep regular track of various property taxes, society charges, water and electricity charges, rentals and lease paperwork (in case you have rented or leased out your flat).

Owning to your physical absence for the entire time, renting or leasing your house has an element of risk too. 

Also remember that real estate property investment is:

1. indivisible (you cannot sell 10% of your flat) 
and 
2. illiquid (selling property is very cumbersome process).

And if you have invested in land it is very difficult to protect and look after your land since you are posted so far away.

What a defence person wants is hassle-free investments.

And for a soldier, investing in equity and real estate involve a lot of hassle because of the nature and requirements of his job.

In a nutshell the two essential attributes of financial planning for defence personnel are:

1. Risk-free Investments

2. Hassle-free Investments


While you are in service it is best to invest your savings in your Provident Fund (DSOP Fund or Defence Services Officers Provident Fund).

The DSOP Fund is probably the safest place to put your money and is a totally risk-free investment.

It is a totally hassle-free investment too since your subscription instalment gets automatically cut from your monthly pay and is immediately credited every month to your Provident Fund Account.

Also, wherever you are located, tracking your investment is easy since details of your DSOP Fund investments are given to you every month on your payslip.

Investing in DSOP Fund has tax benefits too – you get tax rebate on your investment in your Provident Fund and even the interest you earn is tax-free. Thus, you are saved income tax hassles too. Also, in view of cumulative interest, the returns are quite good too.

Let us reiterate the financial planning “mantra”:

“Put all your eggs in one sturdy basket – and keep an eye on the basket”.

Provident Fund fits the bill because the DSOP (Provident) Fund is indeed a very “sturdy” basket and it is very easy for you to “keep an eye” on this “basket”.


RETIREMENT – Financial Planning for Veteran Ex-Serviceman

And what do you do after retirement?

When you retire you may get a substantial sum of money including the accumulated savings in your DSOP Provident Fund and other retirement benefits like gratuity etc.

So what do you do with all that money?

Simple – just put your money in a Fixed Deposit in a Nationalised Bank (preferably the State Bank of India) [Risk-free] and give standing instructions for crediting Quarterly or Monthly Interest to your Savings Account [Hassle-free].

In case you have a pension and do not require monthly interest income, you can open a Multi Option Deposit (MOD) Account (a savings accounts with benefits of Fixed deposit higher rate of interest) where your money is automatically swept in or swept out on Last-In-First-Out (LIFO) basis as per your requirement. 

This too is hassle-free since all operations and renewals are done automatically.

When you retire – you want peace of mind.

Investment in Equity and Mutual Funds – Trading in Stocks and Shares – all this is not only a risky proposition – but involves a lot of hassle – as you have to constantly keep track of your investments – and – monitor your investments.

If you put your life savings into investments which are risky and involve hassles – your peace of mind will be disturbed because of the anxiety caused by the financial risk and the bother caused by the hassle in money management.

This will result in stress and disturb the tranquillity of retirement bliss.

Yes – you may make more money in the stock market.

But then – is it worth making money at the cost of disturbing your peace of mind – especially in the evening years of your life....?

Tell me – after a certain age – what is the point of making more money...? 

Can you carry all that money with you to heaven – when you take leave of this world and depart for your heavenly abode...? 

VIKRAM KARVE
Copyright © Vikram Karve 
1. If you share this post, please give due credit to the author Vikram Karve
2. Please DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Please DO NOT Cut/Copy/Paste this post
© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Disclaimer:
1. This article is based on my personal experience. It may or may not work for you. So please do due diligence before trying out this technique.
2. All stories in this blog are a work of fiction. Events, Places, Settings and Incidents narrated in the stories are a figment of my imagination. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Copyright Notice:
No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.

Copyright © Vikram Karve (all rights reserved)

Repost of my article FINANCIAL PLANNING MANTRA FOR DEFENCE PERSONNEL posted online by me earlier on March 23, 2013 in my Academic and Creative Writing Journal Blog at url: http://karvediat.blogspot.in/2013/03/financial-planning-mantra-for-defence.html

Friday, February 12, 2016

BAD LOANS, NPAs and BAILOUTS

BAD LOANS, NPAs and BAILOUTS

When I read about the “Rich and Famous” defaulting on paying back their loans to banks, resulting in bad debts and Non Performing Assets (NPAs) – resulting in the banks writing-off bad loans – which entails deploying honest taxpayers’ money to bailout the rich defaulters – I am amused at this ludicrous situation where the poor hardworking citizens subsidise the unethical rich businessmen – and – I am reminded of this article which I wrote around 5 years ago.

THE “POUND-FOOLISH” ALWAYS EXPLOIT THE “PENNY-WISE”
BAILOUT – A PARADOX
WHY SHOULD THE POOR SUBSIDISE THE RICH?
Musings
By
VIKRAM KARVE

I still vividly remember an incident which happened in the 1960’s – when I was a small boy and I lived in Pune.

My mother believed in the concepts of thrift and frugality – and she practiced what she preached. 

She believed in building up savings rather than borrowing money.

We were taught to live within our means. 

We never took loans. 

In case we wanted to buy something expensive – we saved money till we had enough funds to buy what wanted.

After I got my job – I opened a recurring deposit – saved money every month – and purchased my first scooter after nearly 3 years. 

I still remember that I bought my first car after working for more than 15 years. 

I bought it from my savings – and did not take a loan for buying a car. 

If we could not afford something – we had no hesitation in saying so – and we curtailed our desires instead of having false pretences. 

We had not fallen victim to the disease of instant gratification. 

We believed in “cutting our coat according to our cloth”.

We never lived beyond our means – and that is why we were financially sound – and our savings gave us a sense of security.

We did not believe in “keeping up with the Joneses” – and that is why – we never felt any sense of inferiority or envy if our neighbour was better off than us – or if he had something which we did not have.

I have digressed. 

Let me take you back to the incident which happened more than 45 years ago in the end 1960’s. 

As I have already told you – since my mother believed in thrift and frugality – she always travelled around Pune by Public Transport – Pune Municipal Transport (PMT) Bus. 

Commuting by auto-rickshaw or taxi was considered a luxury – and was resorted to only when absolutely necessary like when we had luggage and had to go to the railway station to catch a train – or when there was some elderly or ailing person who could not travel by bus.

One day an aunt came to meet my mother. 

She was much younger and fitter than my mother. 

She had come to borrow money from my mother. 

At first – my mother was quite reluctant to lend her money. 

I too seemed quite surprised that my aunt wanted to borrow money from us – since she was quite well-off financially – as compared to us.

Seeing my mother’s unwillingness to lend her money – my aunt pleaded desperately to the point of emotional blackmail.

(I could overhear something about cheques bouncing etc). 

Finally my mother succumbed – and gave my aunt the money. 

Then – my mother asked me to see off my aunt to the bus stop.

As we were walking towards the bus stop – my aunt asked me to hail an auto-rickshaw.

“You want to go by auto-rickshaw?” I asked her, surprised, “Why don’t you go by PMT bus – it goes right near your house?”

“I am not used to travelling by bus,” my aunt said with disdain, “these PMT buses are so dirty, crowded and uncomfortable – I just can’t travel in these terrible buses. Just call me a auto-rickshaw.”

And so – off she went travelling in the luxury of an auto-rickshaw.

Of course – my snooty aunt would pay the “exorbitant” auto-rickshaw fare out the money borrowed from us – while we would travel by bus – that’s what hurt me the most.

A question arose in my mind.

How can someone who borrows money have a higher standard of living than the person who lends them the money?

In fact – why should someone who is well-to-do and has a higher standard of living – borrow money from someone who is less well-off?   

Isn’t it logical that the standard of living of the lender should be much higher than that of the borrower?

My mother travelled by economical public transport bus. 

My aunt travelled by expensive auto-rickshaw.

We lived in a modest home in a middle-class neighbourhood – whereas my aunt lived in a stylish house in a posh locality.

Yet – my aunt would always borrow money from my mother – when logically it should have been the other way round.

My spendthrift “pound-foolish” aunt kept on exploiting my thrifty “penny-wise” mother.

I did not understand the paradox.

How can the rich borrow from the poor?

Does it make any sense?

And – why should the rich borrow from poor?

But now I see this happening all around – when I hear that familiar term “BAILOUT”.

Rich organisations like banks and airlines (who have the most highly paid employees) are being “bailed out” by the comparatively poorer taxpayers. 

Yes – the poor taxpayer is being penalised for the extravagance of these lavish spendthrift organisations – who have landed themselves in dire straits because of their own incompetence and profligacy.

Why should a person who earns much less than the highly paid employees working in these organisations be expected to bail them out?

Is it fair to ask the middle class to bail out someone who is much more financially well-to-do?

Why must the economically prudent subsidize the financially reckless?

It seems the same thing is happening with nations too. 

Developed nations like Greece are seeking bailouts. 

If you have a look at the luxurious lifestyle and plush high standard of living of these European Nations as compared to underdeveloped or developing nations – you really wonder why these developed and modern nations should be “bailed out”.

In fact – it is the less-developed Asian and African nations who need a “bailout” – not developed European nations. 

It is inexplicable.

How can someone with a lower standard of living “bail out” someone with a higher standard of living?

It would be much better if these cash-strapped nations and bankrupt organisations be asked to cut costs, reduce salaries, prune expenditure, implement austerity measures and practice thrift and frugality – rather than giving them bailout after bailout – despite the fact that they continue with their spendthrift lifestyle. 

And if they refuse to mend their profligate ways – then it is better to let them go bust.  

The poor subsidize the rich.

The “pound-foolish” always exploit the “penny-wise”.

Strange but true – an inexplicable paradox – is it not...?

VIKRAM KARVE
Copyright © Vikram Karve 
1. If you share this post, please give due credit to the author Vikram Karve
2. Please DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Please DO NOT Cut/Copy/Paste this post
© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Disclaimer:
All Stories in this Blog are a work of fiction. Events, Places, Settings and Incidents narrated in the stories are a figment of my imagination. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Copyright Notice:
No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.

Copyright © Vikram Karve (all rights reserved)