Express Explained — ✅ خرید وی پی ان ❇ ip ثایت vPn آی پی اختصاصی ◐

آگوست 5, 2022

Explained: What are live-fire exercises, recently conducted by China?

In a massive show of strength, China began its live-fire exercise near Taiwan on Thursday (August 4), launching at least 11 ballistic missiles into the country’s coast, a day after US House speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan.
Taiwan’s defence ministry announced on Friday, that multiple Chinese ships and planes had once again crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait, which separates the two countries. Calling the military exercises “highly provocative,” the defence ministry states that it had dispatched aircraft and ships and deployed land based missile systems in response to the situation.
Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida condemned China’s largest live-fire exercise in the region, calling it a “serious problem that impacts our national security and the safety of our citizens,” after 5 ballistic missiles launched by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) landed in Japan’s exclusive economic zone
What are live-fire exercises?
They are exercises primarily used by military personnel, in which live ammunition is used to create training conditions that are as close to real combat scenarios as possible. Live-fire exercises are also used by law enforcement and firefighters as a form of field training, to train them to act calmly in real-life emergency situations in the future.
During live-fire training, soldiers are placed in simulated combat situations and are given the opportunity to use their weapons and equipment (like ships, aircraft, tanks and drones). Such exercises are invaluable in maintaining combat readiness of troops, the cohesiveness of units, and instilling confidence in their ability to use their weapons and equipment correctly.
It also involves testing the effectiveness of vehicles, weapon platforms and weapons systems (such as intercontinental ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, anti-aircraft weapons), so that any design flaws can be resolved before the weapons are fully operational.
As we see in the recent case in the Taiwan Strait, live-fire exercises allow countries to brandish their military prowess and capacity for destruction. As the Associated Press notes, the drills involving warplanes, ships and missiles are designed to show the level of lethal force that China could unleash on Taiwan, if the country refuses to toe the line set by Beijing.

Have they been done in the region before?
China had previously undertaken a similar show of force during the Third Taiwan Strait Crisis in 1995-1996, when it fired missiles into the waters near Taiwan, after former President Lee Teng-hui visited the US, despite China’s strong objections.

Between July 25-29, the US army resumed its live-fire drills in South Korea after a hiatus of three years, in response to the series of weapons tests undertaken by North Korea this year. The deadly Apache helicopters stationed in South Korea were allowed to fire rockets and guns at the Rodriguez Live Fire Complex, south of the Demilitarised Zone (DMZ) that divides North and South Korea. The live-fire exercises had been previously cancelled in 2019 after residents living in the vicinity of the area had complained about noise and raised concerns about safety, as reported by Reuters.
After North Korea launched 8 short-range ballistic missiles on June 5 , the US and South Korea responded in a tit-for-tat fashion, by firing 8 of their own into the sea.
.

جولای 25, 2022

Explained: Why have Zomato’s shares fallen to their lowest ever price?

Zomato’s shares fell to under Rs 50, an all-time low, on Monday (July 25), as the year-long lock-in period for its pre initial public offering (IPO) ended on Friday (July 22). In the early hours of trading, the company’s scrip fell to as low as Rs 46, nearly 40 per cent down from its issue price of Rs 76.

Why did Zomato’s stock see this massive sell-off?
On Friday, the mandatory lock-in for promoters, employees, and other shareholders who bought Zomato’s stock before its IPO, ended. This means that these shareholders are now free to sell their shares — which, according to analysts, is the major reason behind Monday’s massive sell-off.
According to rules laid down by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), if a company has no identifiable promoters, then its pre-IPO shares are locked in for a period of one year. “Following the lock-in period of one year, the pre-offer shareholders may sell their shareholding in our company, depending on market conditions and their investment horizon. Further, any perception by investors that such sales might occur could additionally affect the trading price of the equity shares,” Zomato said in a Red Herring Prospectus before its IPO.

At the time of reporting this explainer, the company’s market cap stood at Rs 37,911 crore, well below its valuation as a private company, when it was valued at around Rs 43,200 crore. At its last peak, the company’s stock was trading at Rs 169.10 apiece with a market capitalisation of Rs 1.33 lakh crore — meaning more than Rs 95,000 crore of investor wealth had been wiped out by the time of publishing.
The last time the company’s stock took such a severe beating was after its acquisition of quick commerce startup Blinkit (formerly Grofers) last month. In the subsequent four sessions, Zomato’s stock had plunged by more than 20 per cent.

How are other startups’ stocks performing?
Zomato was the first major startup to list on the bourses in July last year, and had seen a blockbuster opening after its shares were listed at Rs 116 apiece — a premium of 53 per cent over the IPO price of Rs 76. However, the stock’s value has consistently fallen after it attained its peak of Rs 169.10 apiece in November last year.
Other startups that followed Zomato to the bourses have also seen a steep correction in their stock prices since listing. Paytm, which had an issue price of Rs 2,150, was trading at Rs 740.35 at the time of publishing — a decline of more than 65 per cent.
E-commerce startup Nykaa, which had an issue price of Rs 1,125 per share, saw a bumper listing as its shares were up 78 per cent when it was first listed. However, since then, the value of the share has fallen, with its scrip trading at Rs 1,410.35 at the time of publishing.

!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s)
{if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod?
n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};
if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version=’2.0′;
n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0;
t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,’script’,
‘https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js’);
fbq(‘init’, ‘444470064056909’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘PageView’);
.

جولای 15, 2022

Simply Put | Fasal Bima: who’s in, out & why

The Union Agriculture Ministry announced on Tuesday that Andhra Pradesh has decided to rejoin the crop insurance scheme Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) from the ongoing kharif season. Andhra Pradesh was one of six states that have stopped implementation of the scheme over the last four years. The other five, which remain out, are Bihar, Jharkhand, West Bengal, Jharkhand, and Telangana.
Why did these states opt out?
ANDHRA PRADESH: The state left the PMFBY from rabi season 2019-20. Sources said the state had mentioned several reasons: that the scheme should be voluntary; that states should be given options to choose the risks covered; the scheme should be universal; the cut-off date for enrolment should be flexible; and fourth, the state should be given option to use their own database of E-crop, an application used by the state government to collect information about crops.

“All these issues have been resolved now,” the sources said.

On Tuesday, the Agriculture Ministry announced that Andhra Pradesh has decided to rejoin the PMFBY following talks between Agriculture Minister Narendra Singh Tomar and the Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy.
The move comes days after Union Agriculture Secretary Manoj Ahuja met the CM. On July 7, a team headed by Ahuja gave a presentation to Reddy.
BIHAR: The first state to opt out, from 2018-19, after implementing the scheme in 2016-17 (27.1 lakh farmers insured) and 2017-18 (23 lakh). Sources say there were main three reasons for the state’s decision.
First, the state wanted universal coverage.
Second, the state government wanted zero premium for farmers (meaning the entire premium should be paid by the government.) Under the PMFBY, a farmer is required to pay as premium 2% of the sum insured or actuarial rate, whichever is less, for all kharif foodgrain and oilseed crops; 1.5% of sum insured or actuarial rate, whichever is less, for all rabi foodgrain and oilseed crops; and 5% for horticultural crops. Sources said the Centre can not make farmers’ premium zero. However, states such as Haryana, Goa and Puducherry are paying farmers’ share from their own budget for selected crops.
The third reason was that the rate of premium was very high for Bihar because of the history of claims under earlier schemes.

The Agriculture Ministry is trying to persuade Bihar to rejoin the scheme. On July 1, Ritesh Chauhan, CEO, PMFBY and Joint Secretary in the Ministry, wrote to the Bihar government about addressing its concerns, the sources said.
JHARKHAND: Jharkhand stopped implementing the scheme soon after the Centre revamped it in February 2020, effective from kharif 2020. Under the revised guidelines, “The non-payment of the State Share of premium subsidy within the prescribed timelines as defined in the seasonality discipline will lead to the disqualification of the State Government to implement the scheme in the next season.”
Sources said Jharkhand’s share of premium subsidy was overdue for 2018-19 and 2019-20. This was the main reason that Jharkhand opted out from 2020-21. Besides, there were other “operational challenges” and “political reasons”, the sources said.
Ministry data shows that in Jharkhand 8.8 lakh farmers in 2016-17, 12.0 lakh in 2017-18, 12.9 lakh in 2018-19, and 10.9 lakh in 2019-20 had availed the scheme.
WEST BENGAL: Sources said the reason for West Bengal not implementing the PMFBY is purely “political”. The state wants to implement the scheme without mentioning Pradhan Mantri in the scheme’s name, which is not possible, sources said.
West Bengal implemented the scheme for three years from 2016-17 to 2018-19, covering 41.3 lakh farmers in 2016-17, 40.4 lakh in 2017-18, and 51.3 lakh in 2018-19.
GUJARAT: Gujarat implemented the PMFBY from 2016-17 to 2019-20, covering 19.8 lakh farmers in 2016-17, 17.6 lakh in 2017-18, 21.7 lakh in 2018-19, and 24.8 lakh in 2019-20. Sources say, after the scheme was revamped, Gujarat invited tenders for three years in 2020 but insurance companies quoted a very high premium, and hence the state opted out.
TELANGANA: Telangana too implemented the PMFBY for the initial four years, covering 9.7 lakh, 11 lakh, 8 lakh in 2018-19 and 10.3 lakh farmers in successive yaers before stopping in 2020-21. Sources said Telangana’s share of premium was overdue for 2018-19 and 2019-20, the main reason why it did not notify the scheme for 2020-21.
The Agriculture Ministry is in talks with the state government to bring back on board. A central team made a presentation before of a Group of Ministers of Telangana on June 23, said sources, who expect the state to rejoin from the coming rabi season or next year.
How was the scheme structured, and what has changed since?
The government had launched PMFBY from kharif 2016. Under the scheme, all farmers including sharecroppers and tenant farmers growing “notified crops” in the “notified areas” are eligible for coverage.
Initially, the scheme was compulsory for loanee farmers; in February 2020, the Centre revised it to make it optional for all farmers.
In the initial scheme, the difference between actuarial premium rate and the rate of insurance premium payable by farmers, which is called the rate of normal premium subsidy, was to be shared equally between the Centre and states. However, states and Union Territories are free to extend additional subsidy over and above the normal subsidy from their budgets.
In February 2020, the Centre decided to restrict its premium subsidy to 30% for unirrigated areas and 25% for irrigated areas (from the existing unlimited). Earlier, there was no upper limit for the central subsidy.
Food crops (cereals, millets and pulses); oilseeds; and annual commercial / annual horticultural crops are covered under the scheme. In addition, pilots for coverage can be taken for those perennial horticultural/commercial crops for which standard methodology for yield estimation is available, state the scheme guidelines.
What is the coverage?
As per information shared by the Agriculture Ministry to Lok Sabha in April this year, the number of farmer applications insured increased to 7.65 crore in 2021-22 from 5.83 crore in 2016-17 when the scheme was launched. However, the number of states implementing the scheme had gradually come down from 27 in 2016-17 to 20 in 2021-22.

ژوئن 25, 2022

Explained Books | Prescription for post-Covid world: resilience

“The Covid-19 pandemic has worked like an X-ray machine, revealing the hidden challenges under the surface of many societies,” Markus K Brunnermeier says in the introduction to his book. Indeed, the pandemic has hit every country — the adverse health impact was just the starting point; the virus ended up disrupting every aspect of society, and the global economic order.
Complex supply chains built and refined over decades had to be abruptly shut down or broken to prevent or slow the infection’s spread. Jobs and livelihoods were lost, inequalities of all kinds widened, governments were pushed to pile on millions of dollars of debt to extend relief, and central banks had to resort to every possible way to stimulate the economy even as health systems collapsed and countries and societies turned more insular and protectionist.

The Covid-19 shock pushed back most countries by several years, possibly decades. And just as it appeared that the world was starting to break free from the seemingly unending cycles of lockdowns, Russia invaded Ukraine, unleashing consequences that reverberated around the world — from costlier fuel prices to scarcity of food items to dramatically heightened geopolitical tensions.
Within just a couple of years, the world economy has swung from trying to avoid a prolonged deflation to desperately fighting inflation. The post-Cold War consensus around globalisation, already under strain from the time of the global financial crisis of 2008-09, has now developed into a militant desire to reduce dependence on other countries.
🚨 Limited Time Offer | Express Premium with ad-lite for just Rs 2/ day 👉🏽 Click here to subscribe 🚨
Was the world prepared to survive these shocks in 2020? Is it prepared in 2022? More importantly, will it be prepared in the future? If so, how?
In The Resilient Society, Princeton University economist Brunnermeier details the global economic fallout of the Covid disruption. Many of the book’s key insights are distilled from a Princeton webinar series called Markus Academy, which featured influential economists, including more than a dozen Nobel laureates.

In the end, for the author, the touchstone for any society, economy, or indeed the world is “resilience”, or the ability to rebound. It is resilience that sets the reed apart from the robust oak, which has the ability to resist. “I bend but do not break” — that is the essence of resilience.
After explaining the concept and how societies could be redesigned to become resilient in part 1 of the book, Brunnermeier uses Covid to explain the core elements of resilience management in part 2. In parts 3 and 4, he looks at macroeconomic and global challenges that countries face.
The book was released last year, but the Ukraine crisis shows, even though the world has moved to the next shock, Brunnermeier was spot on in underscoring the need to be resilient. The main lesson for societies
is to give up the “just in time” production approach that accords primacy to efficiency, and instead move towards a “just in case” approach that allows for safety buffers.

ژوئن 17, 2022

Explained: How Saudi big money has shaken up golf’s status quo

This week, Brookline, Massachusetts is hosting the ‘toughest test in golf’, as the US Open is often described as. But the last few weeks can also be referred to as the ‘toughest test of golf’ as developments on the course and off it threaten to tear the professional game apart.
The US-based PGA Tour has been the toughest, most prestigious and most lucrative golf circuit in the world, with most upcoming players aspiring to it as if it were the Holy Grail. Together with the DP World Tour (formerly called the European Tour), it has dominated the golfing scene for decades.

Now, a Saudi-funded venture with immensely deep pockets has threatened the status quo, tempting the best players in the world with lucrative contracts and guaranteed prize money to play in their LIV Golf events. Some of the top golfers have jumped ship and the PGA Tour has wasted little time in suspending their membership.Best of Express PremiumPremiumPremiumPremiumPremium
But the big names who have opted to switch sides are free to tee up at the US Open and, in all likelihood, next month’s 150th Open Championship on The Old Course at St. Andrews, considered the home of golf.
However, it seems likely that they will not be allowed to be involved in any capacity in future Ryder Cups or Presidents Cups.
What is the row all about?
The Public Investment Fund (PIF), the sovereign wealth fund of Saudi Arabia, has spent a lot of money on elite sports, which critics allege is a means to spruce up the image of the Saudi ruling regime, called ‘sportswashing’. The kingdom is accused of several human rights violations and also came under a cloud after the murder of The Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The launch of a rival venture against an established US-based tour touches a raw nerve in the USA as 15 of the 19 hijackers in the 9/11 attacks hailed from Saudi Arabia.

The PGA Tour refused to grant waivers to its players for playing in the LIV Golf events. Some of the players even resigned their membership to avoid future sanctions or litigation.
🚨 Limited Time Offer | Express Premium with ad-lite for just Rs 2/ day 👉🏽 Click here to subscribe 🚨
What is the format?
LIV stands for 54 in Roman numerals and the tournaments are 54-hole affairs, in contrast to 72 on traditional tours, and played over three days, not four as is generally the case.
Each event features 48 players and has a team and individual competition. The teams have four members each. The players tee off at the same time on different holes in what is termed a ‘shotgun start’. This is to reduce the time taken for a round, in a bid to make it more TV-friendly.
How much money is on offer?
The biggest names in golf have been offered astronomical sums – often in hundreds of millions of dollars – to join the new venture. This is just the signing amount.
Fronted by former world Number 1 Greg Norman, LIV Golf has lined up eight events in 2022. Each of them will have a prize fund of $25 million, making them comfortably more lucrative than any tournament on the PGA Tour. The winner will take home $4m, another high. The final event will see the winning team getting $16m, with each member getting 25 percent.
There is no cut and the player finishing last will still be richer by $120,000. In contrast, on other tours, players missing the cut don’t get any prize money.
Who all have joined and why?
Dustin Johnson, Bryson DeChambeau, Patrick Reed, Charl Schwartzel, Louis Oosthuizen, Ian Poulter, Graeme McDowell and Phil Mickelson are some of the prominent names on the LIV Golf roster.
Some of them like Poulter and McDowell have justified their decision, arguing that they are global professionals, while sidestepping the moral questions thrown at them.
“No one’s going to argue that fact but we’re golfers. We’re not politicians. If Saudi Arabia want to use the game of golf as a way for them to get to where they want to be, we’re proud to help them on that journey,” McDowell said.
Poulter said: “I regard myself as a global golfer and I have been for 24 years. I’ve played on numerous tours and events around the world and that is what I’m continuing to do.”
Others didn’t hide the fact that it was about the money.
Johnson had earlier pledged his allegiance to the PGA Tour before having a change of heart and resigning his membership.
“I don’t want to play for the rest of my life, this gives me an opportunity to do what I want to do,” Johnson said.
DeChambeau calls his move “a business decision, first and foremost.”
“There was a lot of financials to it and a lot of time. I get to have a life outside of the game of golf as well. It’s given me a lot more opportunities outside of the game of golf and given me more time with my family and my future family,” DeChambeau said.

Some others are in their late 40s and early 50s and know their best golfing days are behind them. They may want to cash in while they can.
Why are so many LIV Golf players still in the US Open field?
The golf establishment hasn’t hidden its disappointment at the big names deserting the official tours. But the US Open is organised by the United States Golf Association (USGA), and not the PGA Tour. The criteria for earning a berth in the Major was decided much before LIV Golf emerged on the scene, so it was argued that denying them the opportunity to play would be unfair on those who have made it on merit. Many of them are past champions and have gained exemptions.
Are there any parallels in other sports?
If one can earn much more by playing much less, there’s a great temptation. It is the logic of T20 cricket professionals who go around the world playing in various leagues while not always turning up for their national teams. It is less taxing on the body and leaves one with ample time for themselves.