Puzzles - Lock

A friend sent me this. 

Truth, Nothing But The Truth

Some people think of truth as binary. Either what a person x said did happen or didn't happen. Meaning of the event were recorded, the event would either prove x right. Or not.

But then there is another interpretation of truth. What I call the feminine or emotional interpretation.

If my emotions tell me something and if I say it aloud then I have been truthful from my point of view of EVEN IF A RECORDING OF THE EVENT MAY CONTRADICT WHAT I SAID.

That is amazing. An emotional person describes truth as something being in sync with their emotions. 

And what emotions tell us may not be corroborated by a recording. 

We are aware of a game children play. A child whispers to something to another child, who in turn whispers what he heard from the first child to another child and so on. Finally, what we hear from the last child is quite different from what the first child said. Why is this so? Is it not the same reason? That the emotions in children tamper with the truth. And the child interprets what he heard based on what his emotions tell him. 

Both kind of truths, the ones that are verifiable and those that aren't go under the same umbrella of "truth". 

Just like the word love means two entirely different things.

(https://vbala99.blogspot.com/2017/02/understanding-love.html)

So when someone promises to tell the truth and they genuinely believe they are telling the truth, what they say may not be true - to the extent that their emotions have played with the reality.

The more emotional one is, the more adulterated the truth is, more grey their statements are.

If you ask a person "did you do it?":

• A less emotional person will reply Yes or No.
• A more emotional person will start with an explanation leading ultimately to whether they did it or not. The explanation is a reflection of their emotional state.

Pop Quiz:

Is Donald Trump largely emotional or not?

Rich, no?

Can I Call You Tomorrow At 4PM

I thought such a request, as in the subject line, meant that the person has committed to call at 4. 

It turns out that the "can I call you?" for many people (P type, as in MBTI) is in fact about getting a right to call and not an obligation to call.

I always assumed that the question created an obligation.

It took me so many years to realise it's just a right.

A related anecdote:

A friend of mine wanted her brother to come to her place to get something done. She kept reminding him and then he asked her whether she would be home at 3PM. She confirmed. She was waiting from 2:45PM till 4PM for her brother. But he didn't turn up. When she called her brother and asked him what happened, he explained that HE had asked her whether SHE will be home at 3PM. He pointed out that he never told her he will come to her house at 3PM.

Another case of a right (to come) but no obligation (to come). My friend had interpreted her brother's question incorrectly.

So it makes sense to confirm whether someone is assuming an obligation or just a right when they say (or ask) something.

Additional reading 

https://vbala99.blogspot.com/2021/07/proposing-to-multiple-women.html

Selling And Repurchasing

Effect of selling in a falling market and buying at a lower price:

Let's assume we have 500 units of an equity mutual fund (MF) scheme at a current NAV of Rs100 per unit that were purchased at an NAV of Rs70. Total purchase cost = Rs70*500 = Rs35,000

Now let's assume the market is falling and I am very tense. The NAV has fallen to Rs 90. I decide to sell all the units. Assume my holding is for less than a year, so short term capital gains (STCG) will be levied (@ 15%).

Exit load will be 1%. 

What I get is 

500 units* 90*99% = Rs44,550. 

My gains will be (44550-35000)

= Rs 9550

My STCG will be 9550*15%= Rs1433

Nett of taxes and exit load what I have is 44550-1433 = Rs 43117

Now let's assume the NAV falls to Rs 80 and I invest all my proceeds into the same scheme at that NAV.

I get 43117 / 80 = 539 units.

Note that earlier I had 500 units.

Now let's assume that the NAV rises later to Rs115 and I again sell all the units at this NAV.

My redemption will now give me 539*115*0.99 = Rs 61365

My short term gains are now 

61365 - 43117 = Rs 18248

My tax will be 15% * 18248 = Rs 2737

What I will have nett of tax is 

61365 - 2737 = Rs 58628

If on the other hand I had never redeemed inbetween and I had held on the 500 units of the equity scheme and sold it at NAV of Rs 115 (and assume this happened after a year so it's long term capital gains).

My proceeds will be 500*115 = 

Rs 57500. Note that there is no exit load because I sold after a year.

My gains = 57500 - 50000 = Rs7500

My tax will be max 10%= Rs 750

If my total long term capital gain across all instruments is less than Rs 1lac, I don't pay any tax. Else I pay 10% of the gains exceeding 1Lac.

So my tax in this case will be between zero and Rs750. 

My nett will be between Rs 56750 and Rs 57500. And this is still less than Rs 58628 which I would have had if I had sold the scheme and repurchased and incurred TWO exit loads and TWO STCG @15%.

It may make sense to sell and repurchase at a much lower NAV. Note a lot depends on the difference between the NAV that I first redeemed and the NAV I repurchased at. If this spread was much less than Rs 10 (=90-80), this tactic wouldn't make sense.

What we have with this tactic is just a peace of mind that we have got out of a falling market. And if in fact we re-enter the market at a sufficiently lower NAV we stand to make a little extra money in the bargain. This is counter to the strategy of holding on for the long term.

Note also that the two STCG will result in tax cash outflow earlier. 

Now let's make it a little more abstract.

Assuming that the first redemption was at NAV of x (=90)

And let's repeat the same calculations.

Proceeds from 1st sale

495x - (495x-35000)*.15

=420.75x+5250

New number of units

(420.75x+5250)/80

2nd redemption value

(420.75x+5250)/80*.99*115

=(420.75+5250)*1.423

=598.78x+7471

2nd STCG

(598.78x+7471)-(420.75x+5250)

=178.03x+2221

2nd STCG tax

=(178.03x+2221)*.15

=26.7x+333

Nett after 2nd redemption

=(598.78x+7471)-(26.7x+333)

= 572x+7138

Nett after LT redemption

= 500*115=57500

At what NAV are the two nett equal?

572x+7138=57500

X=88

So long as x> 88, double redemption gives more.

The question that remains is how is this value of x dependent on the other three NAV (70, 80 and 115).

Let's assume a, b, c are the three NAV, respectively.

Proceeds from 1st sale

495x - (495x-500*a)*.15

=420.75x+5250

=420.75x+75a

New number of units

(420.75x+5250)/b

=420.75x/b+75a/b

2nd redemption value before tax

(420.75x+5250)/80*.99*115

=(420.75+5250)*1.423

=598.78x+7471

=(420.75x/b+75a/b)*0.99*c

=416.5cx/b+74.25ac/b

2nd STCG

(598.78x+7471)-(420.75x+5250)

=178.03x+2221

=(416.5cx/b+74.25ac/b) -

(420.75x+75a)

=(416.5c/b-420.75)x+(74.25c/b-75)a

2nd STCG tax

=(178.03x+2221)*.15

=26.7x+333

=((416.5c/b-420.75)x+(74.25c/b-75)a)*.15

=(62.5c/b-63)x+(11.14c/b-11.25)a

Nett after 2nd redemption

=(598.78x+7471)-(26.7x+333)

= 572x+7138

416.5cx/b+74.25ac/b - ((62.5c/b-63)x+(11.14c/b-11.25)a)

=(354c/b+63)x+(63.11c/b+11.25)a

Nett after LT redemption

= 500*c=57500

At what NAV are the two nett equal?

572x+7138=57500

X=88

So long as x> 88, double redemption gives more.

(354c/b+63)x+(63.11c/b+11.25)a > 500c

X> (500c - (63.11c/b+11.25)a) / (354c/b+63)

(57500-7138) /571.9

=50362/571.9

=88

In the above equation, x is higher (desirable) as c/b becomes lower and as a is lower.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1oIC6BHc1h7CJZ4qmKIPJ0uvBr2DyFe85ZXQMg257skk/edit?usp=drivesdk

Proposing To Multiple Women

It's often held that males tend to stray more often than women. That they tend to propose love when in fact they were already in committed relationships. 

I would assert that here is more than a modicum of truth in this, without going into the reasons. The symptom is verifiable, notwithstanding the reason for such behaviour.

Now comes the interesting part. Some men and women, the P's (as in MBTI) tend to be less committed to their words. When they have committed to meeting you or doing a specific activity by a certain date they go ahead and commit their time to another activity that would definitely conflict with their earlier commitment made to you. 

The J type (as in MBTI) would think through and then only commit, they would avoid such conflicts. The P's have no such issues, they are like men proposing. 

The final decision of which activity to do (or which girl to go with) depends largely on exigencies (whose father holds a shotgun to the man's head) or where their heart is. 

Both the tendencies, allocating the heart or the time, have similar engines running. Of not blocking the heart or the time slot as anyone meticulously using a calendar would do. In both cases, the perpetrators do not see any issue. It's the J types (in the latter issue) or women (in the former) that are appalled.

Dainik And Divya And IT Raids

https://m.thewire.in/article/health/not-covid-stunned-by-data-gujarat-blames-death-certificate-spurt-on-duplicate-registrations

Above is an article that tried to explain how Gujrat government had understated the Covid deaths. The article refers to a study by the Gujarati daily Divya Bhaskar, which you can see referred to in the screenshot below from the article above. 

Today, I read this article below:

Income Tax department raids media group Dainik Bhaskar's offices at multiple locations

I found that Divya Bhaskar, which alleged that Gujrat undercounted Covid deaths, and Dainik Bhaskar, whose offices were raided by Income Tax, belong to the same group.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divya_Bhaskar

Is it a case of retribution? Or just coincidence? 

After I published this post, I read the articles below. Does it seem like The Hindu has the same suspicion?

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/it-raids-on-dainik-bhaskar-group/article35458142.ece

Even Indian Express seems to think the same: https://indianexpress.com/article/india/dainik-bhaskar-tax-raids-7416460/

Additional reading 

• https://vbala99.blogspot.com/2021/04/covid-deaths-in-india.html
• Scroll.in: The lights begin to wink out in India’s democracy.
• India Today: Dainik Bhaskar Group evaded taxes on Rs 700 crore of income over 6 years: IT Department.
  

Lizard And Me

Today a garden lizard happened to enter the back side of my house. It stood on its legs a few inches from the ground with a tail about 4 inches long, longer than it's body. 

Its posture looked like that of a miniature dinosaur. Inside my house it tried to find it's way about but was locked in the wash area with buckets and brooms and no way out except through an iron gate through which it had come in. I was standing at the gate encouraging it to get out, but the lizard was wary. I poured a mug of water over it and it tried to avoid getting wet and ran towards the gate but didn't quite reach the gate since I was standing there.

I poured a few more mugs over the lizard and stood out of it's way and finally the lizard escaped outside. Both of us heaved sighs of relief. 

We like our natural habitats and our regular residents. Strange ones are no no.

Trump's Character - My Take

Barring few people most have a drive to succeed or what I call "survive" the way animals do. Animals have a no holds barred (no rules, anything goes) survival mechanism. Actually animals do follow rules. But for the sake of putting my thoughts together i call the "no holds barred" behaviour "survival Instinct".

Incidentally humans do have conscience and morality though the degree varies from person to person. You have a king Harishchandra and you have a Trump.

Trump is a person who has little conscience, his behavior is largely defined by survival Instinct. Born to a wealthy father he learnt that survival at any cost was the way in life. He has lived that way in every aspect of his life. Including finally claiming that he won the election by a huge margin. It's difficult to think of any depravity that he won't indulge in.

It's this behavior of his that alternately fascinates me and disgusts me.

Here is an article that shows his character. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-organization-investigation-property-values-vance-james/2021/11/19/78c15850-4706-11ec-95dc-5f2a96e00fa3_story.html

Here is another article around Jun 17 or 18, 2022. Hence, Mike Pence: Quote from it: "Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify,” Trump tweeted. “USA demands the truth!” 

Here is the interesting thing about Trump. He believed firmly that he won the election. And hence any data that indicated otherwise was fraudulent or inaccurate. This is a core trait of Trump. What he felt was the truth. 

From https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0408ca2e-19a7-11ed-b4a0-f11f082a3a3c?shareToken=b0d09ffe1f82cbd86d7542971bec975d

From the above article. This is one major difference between US and UK. The question of intention. Trump gets away with every crime because American system requires that it be proved beyond reasonable doubt that he had the intention. A second issue with the American way is their predilection in thinking that if something were done in broad daylight there cannot be a nefarious intention. Trump does everything visibly and gets away

I get a thought. We often say that the enemy of our enemy is our friend. This paradigm is what makes him win. People hate something and Trump also claims to hate those things. And hence people see him as the enemy of an enemy and stand by him  

Shown below is Trump's response to questions about his involvement in Jan 6th events. 

And my comments about this: 

Of course the wolf's rendition of the encounter with red riding hood was a cartoon. And meant as a joke

Trump's recollection of Jan 6th and blaming tech companies for the issue.. is no different from the wolf's recollection. Except that in the case of Trump, he (his spokesman) is very serious.

Idiotic things said in jest are funny. When they are said in seriousness it's ugly.

Trump is a narcissist. He can comfortably arrogate to himself non existent qualities. He can lie through his teeth and expect people to accept it even if they didn't think it was true. He creates an alternative version of reality that he believes in. 

For example, His assets would be inflated if he needed money (for example while borrowing from a bank) and shown to be substantially low if he had to pay money (while filing his taxes).

There was no such thing as truth in his mind. His claims are usually preposterous.

Additional reading:

• https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sanctions-hearing-2020-lawsuit/2021/07/16/90392266-e661-11eb-b722-89ea0dde7771_story.html : Very interesting. How strong belief is taken as a substitute for factual data
• https://vbala99.blogspot.com/2020/11/trumps-character.html
  
• Report Cites New Details of Trump Pressure on Justice Dept. Over Election