It is refreshing that the Finance Minister has admitted that the Atal Pension Yojana (APY) is coercive and forces people to enrol without their consent. It is a very simple fact - the Indian Council of Social Science Research’s study shows that banks are taking money from people’s accounts under the name of APY. The FM hides this reality behind “verbal sophistry” like “best practice choice architecture” and various foreign academics, a community often derided by her boss. While “nudges” are certainly important, here’s the catch: 1. Nudges cannot be a synonym for “non-consensual.” Nudges to keep APY recurring in subsequent years are fine. The Government can perhaps even make opening APY accounts the default. But doing so without the knowledge of the beneficiaries is beyond the pale 2. Bank officers who are made to meet quotas, are opening APY accounts even for those who do not have enough income to contribute regularly. The Finance Minister has levelled the accusation of being unbothered to “check facts” - but it appears that she is unaware of the basic design of her own Ministry’s scheme! The Finance Minister claims that the rate of return is an “attractive 8%”, and that therefore this is not a “fixed income” scheme. However, the APY guarantees only Rs. 1,000 per month as a minimum pension for the overwhelming majority of its subscribers. With a social security scheme, like with pensions, the key metric is what minimum support it will offer in bad times. And that value, for the majority of its subscribers, is a fixed Rs. 1,000 per month, beginning in the year 2035. Keep in mind, a Rs. 1,000 per month pension in 2035 is equivalent to just Rs. 617 rupees per month in 2024 prices (assuming a continuation of Modi-era inflation rates). This is the kind of erosion of value that makes the APY a poorly-designed scheme. The “flagship” scheme is actually a “sinking ship.” (1/n)
It is refreshing that the Finance Minister has admitted that the Atal Pension Yojana (APY) is coercive and forces people to enrol without their consent. It is a very simple fact - the Indian Council of Social Science Research’s study shows that banks are taking money from people’s accounts under the name of APY. The FM hides this reality behind “verbal sophistry” like “best practice choice architecture” and various foreign academics, a community often derided by her boss. While “nudges” are certainly important, here’s the catch: 1. Nudges cannot be a synonym for “non-consensual.” Nudges to keep APY recurring in subsequent years are fine. The Government can perhaps even make opening APY accounts the default. But doing so without the knowledge of the beneficiaries is beyond the pale 2. Bank officers who are made to meet quotas, are opening APY accounts even for those who do not have enough income to contribute regularly. The Finance Minister has levelled the accusation of being unbothered to “check facts” - but it appears that she is unaware of the basic design of her own Ministry’s scheme! The Finance Minister claims that the rate of return is an “attractive 8%”, and that therefore this is not a “fixed income” scheme. However, the APY guarantees only Rs. 1,000 per month as a minimum pension for the overwhelming majority of its subscribers. With a social security scheme, like with pensions, the key metric is what minimum support it will offer in bad times. And that value, for the majority of its subscribers, is a fixed Rs. 1,000 per month, beginning in the year 2035. Keep in mind, a Rs. 1,000 per month pension in 2035 is equivalent to just Rs. 617 rupees per month in 2024 prices (assuming a continuation of Modi-era inflation rates). This is the kind of erosion of value that makes the APY a poorly-designed scheme. The “flagship” scheme is actually a “sinking ship.” (1/n)
It is important to note that the coercive nature of the Atal Pension Yojana is not an isolated instance - many other of the Modi Sarkar’s “flagship” government banking schemes are implemented forcefully. Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana (PMJJBY) and Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana (PMSBY) have illegally debited money from customers' bank accounts without their consent. Is the FM of the opinion that taking money from Indians without their consent is a “nudge”? These schemes have also been found to be full of “bogus nominees” and forged documents, as per a recent investigative report. Fraudulent practices are used to meet huge targets by bank officers. article-14.com/post/banks-wan… (2/n)
Mr Piddi of Highest Grade, In your rush to disseminate misinformation and propaganda, you appear to have disregarded the fundamental principle of transparency that forms the bedrock of APY. It's worth highlighting that whenever Mr. Jairam Ramesh is caught lying, he consistently resorts to deflecting responsibility, revealing a recurring pattern of behavior. Mr. Ramesh's failure to acknowledge the comprehensive procedural framework in place and his misrepresentation of APY's objectives and outcomes are concerning. Firstly, it's crucial to underline that under APY, direct debit is exclusively permitted with the explicit consent of the subscriber. The enrollment process entails transparent authorization from the subscriber regarding contribution amount, frequency, and auto-debit arrangements. Notably, subscribers receive regular mobile notifications to stay informed, a fact corroborated by the report, affirming subscribers' agreement with this practice. Secondly, Mr. Ramesh's assertion regarding bank officers being incentivized by quotas to enroll individuals without assessing their financial capacity overlooks the scheme's affordability and accessibility. The minimal subscription fee ensures participation even for financially underserved populations, aligning with APY's aim to promote financial inclusion among marginalized sections of society, in line with broader government initiatives. Regarding the adequacy of the pension amount, Mr. Ramesh's dismissal of the scheme's significance by terming the minimum guaranteed amount of Rs. 1000 per month as insufficient is misguided. The enrollment of 6.4 crore subscribers underscores the scheme's widespread appeal and relevance. APY has been meticulously designed to offer a guaranteed pension amount at an affordable subscription fee, catering to the diverse needs of a vast demographic. It's evident that Mr. Ramesh's criticisms lack substantive understanding and fail to acknowledge the positive impact of APY in ensuring financial security for millions of individuals across the country. Grow up Mr Jairam Ramesh. I know you are too old to learn on standing instructions in bank accounts. But there is no limit on age if you want to learn new things.
In the application form for APY, the banks seek the approval & consent of the subscribers. and beneficiaries under the scheme can exit the scheme as and when they desire. So, @Jairam_Ramesh is just trying to mislead people by twisting the facts and picking anecdotal incidents as some kind of gospel truth. But, people like @Jairam_Ramesh & @INCIndia, who could do nothing for banking the unbanked, are always trying to demean the Modi Govt which they are very good at.
Atal Pension Yojana is a pioneer scheme which was started with the intention to provide a security net to unorganised sector workers. The scheme is one of the most popular pension schemes with over 6 Crore subscribers. Your Govt despite being in power for decades couldn't think about something like this. Rather than telling all these rhetorical things, shouldn't you first answer on your incompetency to never start any scheme like this?
Atal Pension Yojana has over 6 Crore subscribers and numbers are increasing every year. And you are discrediting this scheme based on a survey of less than 2500 people. And it's a bit hilarious to hear lectures about coercion from Congress leaders who castrated people without consent during emergency.