Multiplying Wealth By Dividing It

In one of the forwarded posts recently, it stated:

"You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it"

This got me thinking. Read below:

393 million have USD 200 trillion

3207 million people have USD 7.3 trillion

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth#/media/File:Distribution_of_wealth_globally.jpg )

So, let us say, by dividing the $200 trillion by half, that is taking away $100 trillion from the rich and giving it to the 3207million poorest people

This will then mean the 3207 million poorest people will now have 107.3 trillion (i.e. increased their wealth by 14.7 times)

Hence, by dividing the richest 393million peoples wealth by half we would have multiplied the poorest 3207 million peoples wealth by 14.7 times (50% reduction of wealth of the richest, results in 1400% increase in the wealth of the poorest)

Therefore, the response to the original statement is:

Yes, you can multiply wealth of people by dividing it.

This is just the mathematical calculation.

We can similarly work out economics, social, health and other calculations; my prediction is that it could work out similar to the mathematical effect.

We could argue that while we have multiplied wealth for large many people, by reducing the wealth of a small number of people, but we have not multiplied wealth itself.

Can we increase wealth itself by dividing it?

Try this.

The wealth of the richest are not stuffed in notes and coins in their mattresses and pillows. They are invested to provide a return.

Let us say for the purposes of illustration, that some of the wealth of the rich are invested in toothpaste, with every rich person buying one tube of toothpaste per month bought at $1 with a profit of 25% per tube. And for the purpose of illustration that the poor cannot buy the toothpaste.

Before dividing any wealth the rich 393million persons get a return of $969 million from the sale of toothpaste.

Let us assume that after the wealth from the poor was given to the rich, the toothpaste still manufactured by investment by the rich, becomes affordable for the poor with a tube sold every alternate month for 50 cents with a profit of 25% - this will provide the rich with a profit of $ 2.4 billion. The wealth made by ‘toothpaste’ profits alone multiplies by 2.47 times.

Therefore the answer to the original statement is still

Yes, you can multiply wealth by dividing it.

In fact I would argue that the rich are getting richer by this method, in the modern world. Like in ancient times if the rich had to mobilise armies to fight for wealth, artisans were making things traded by barter, this phenomenon seen in the modern world by the rich parking the money and themselves not doing a lot thereafter would not happen.

Hemadri 

©M HEMADRI

Follow me M HEMADRI on Twitter @HemadriTweets

M Hemadri’s mini e-book 'Standardised Management Conversation' is available - click http://www.amazon.co.uk/Standardised-Management-Conversation-Hemadri-ebook/dp/B018AWBJTU 

My main healthcare blog: http://successinhealthcare.blogspot.co.uk/

Africa-France link must be broken to ensure peace

I have been thinking of the Paris attacks. They are abominable. Such future attacks must be prevented. The attackers and their evil ideology must be confronted and defeated.
 
I also heard (personal verbal secondary conversations) recently that some African intellectuals were not surprised, nor shocked with the Paris attacks; they do not support such attacks, vehemently condemn them, but apparently understand why Africans might want to be involved in such attacks. Nothing to do with religion directly (the religion element is a superimposition under current circumstances).

The issue seems historical, philosophical, etc
 
I believe they have a number of arguments. One is that France intervenes in Africa more often that we get to hear about. French troops intervened militarily in Africa 54 times since 1962.
 
So if you are an African picking a fight with your government and they get the French troops to sort you out for generations - you develop a certain tendency - if you then happen to be from a religion that is different from most of the French - it becomes a combination of politics-race-religion-social inequity; noxious.

Posting this at a time when France was going through a crisis could be seen as insensitive (hence, while I wrote this some time ago, I am publishing it now). I see it as being comprehensive in attempting to learn about something.
 

African Economics
 
Many west African countries share the same currency - it is called a west African franc; many central African countries share a currency - that is called the central African franc. The first question that arises is why are they called franc? - They are independent sovereign countries, even the french currency is no longer called franc. The second question is why have so many independent countries been sharing a currency for a long time? We did think the Euro was a new concept - No. Shared currency has been the norm in those parts of Africa for many decades.
 
It does not end there. Both the west and central African francs are guaranteed by the French treasury and administered by France. They have a fixed exchange rate against the Euro. This ensures that the governments of those African countries have very little flexibility in the way they can manage their economies.
 
If my references are right and I think they are; both the African francs need to have a very high currency reserve (70% or higher) to be held in France. These countries can borrow from their own currency reserves at high interest rates.
Here is the final bit, both the west and central African francs are technically exactly the same but they cannot be accepted in each others' territories.
 
It therefore begins to emerge that while UK uses commerce/business/finance to 'control the world', France seems to use its government directly to control its former colonies.
 

African-French: Natural resources and ‘trade’
 
France generates 25% or more of its energy from nuclear power. For other countries is about 10%. How come?
 
Apparently there is something called a post-colonial pact (here my knowledge and references are unsure) which gives France the first option or the first right of refusal of any natural resource produces by any of its former colonies. Imagine that. France can import what it wants (at a fixed exchange rate) from its former African colonies. They can sell to others only stuff that France does not want. That is a structural trade imbalance by design permanently favoring one party.

Niger is a former colony of Africa and is the largest producer of uranium in Africa (and 4th largest in the world) - all the uranium is owned by the French. I don't think we can be really sure if Niger actually has assured power supply, nuclear or otherwise.
 
If you were an intelligent person from a former French colony in Africa, how would you feel? If you were a nasty person from the same region, how would you feel?
 
We must not condone violence in any form. We must explore and understand reasons so that we can prevent it. Talking about 'making sure this doesn't happen again' has to include these issues.

The problem is not so simple as the west or France simply walking away from Africa or whatever; resources will fall into wrong hands, since there are very few good hands left in those completely undermined countries. It is about gradually creating good hands so that when the French 'leave', Africans can become true equals.
 
I hope there is peaceful living in Paris and equity for ex-French Africa in the medium term. 

©M HEMADRI

Follow me on Twitter @HemadriTweets

My book Standardised Management Conversation is available at  http://www.amazon.co.uk/Standardised-Management-Conversation-Hemadri-ebook/dp/B018AWBJTU

(nothing to do with Africa or France; everything to do with applying a new model for senior management to interact with their reports especially in healthcare)

Caste away - some thoughts

Why are many people in India asking for an end to 'reservation' when they should be asking for an end to 'caste'? Solving the wrong problem is the seed for a future problem.

Reservations and other affirmative actions are variables to be directed to whom and where it is needed. It is something you can do about when there is a problem. Caste like race is a non-variable. It is something that you cannot do anything about.

'Discrimination' can be on the basis of variables (marks, grades, performance, etc).
'Discrimination' cannot be on the basis of non-variables (caste, race, etc).

When a non-variable suffers disadvantage it is important to look at whether the non-variable can be removed or the disadvantage can be removed. For instance a person's height is a non-variable so that means we cannot do anything about the height so any disadvantage that relates to the height ought to be removed. So is race.

Caste however though a non-variable is one we could do without. So caste can be removed/eliminated from the equation. Indian caste based reservation system is based on a utility free non-variable, so remove the caste (non-variable) and redirect the reservation to variables that can actually be improved over a period of time.

I am not against reservations but I am against caste. That is more or less like, I am not against intensive care but I am against poor healthcare. If you reduce poor healthcare, then intensive care begins to be used appropriately. Otherwise intensive care becomes the only right place for everyone - that would not make sense, would it?

An ancient oral tradition story of the origin of caste (no religion, scripture, or god invoked and from a perspective not normally known to us - caste as a betrayal) from An Ancient Śūdra Account of the Origin of Castes Hyla S. Converse and Arvind Sharma Journal of the American Oriental Society Vol. 114, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1994), pp. 642-644 http://www.jstor.org/stable/606171

There was once a great and powerful man who ruled over all the land. He had four sons, all of whom were intelligent and gifted. When the man died he left his undivided property to all four sons. For a time they lived contentedly together, sharing the work and the wealth.

Then the second son went off, with other warriors, to seek adventure and further riches. He asked his youngest brother to take care of his share of responsibilities for the property while he was gone and to see to what- ever his family needed done, promising to re-assume these burdens when he returned. The youngest brother generously agreed. After a time the oldest brother decided to go to a hermitage and seek spiritual fulfillment. He, too, asked his youngest brother to take over his chores and family cares. The third brother was very clever in business and became so preoccupied in trading ventures that he also left to his younger brother the everyday burdens of property and family. So the youngest brother rendered service to the older three for some years. 

At last the older three brothers returned, each successful in his own endeavors. And they no longer wished to re-assume the burdens which their youngest brother had carried for them in their absence. They preferred to continue to pursue their own interests unhampered. And so, instead of showing their youngest brother gratitude and honor for all he had done for them, the older three banded together and burdened him permanently with all those tasks that were distasteful to them, requiring him to be their servant. 

From then on, all the descendants of the youngest brother were named Sudras and were required to be the servants of the descendants of the three older brothers.
(http://www.jstor.org/stable/606171)

Understanding social classifications ( the Indian caste system)

Varna is often thought of as caste, it is also thought to refer to colour. The original meaning of Varna seems to refer 'to choose'; the word and its meaning is therefore very empowering. It indicates free will combined with responsibility. 

Here is when we need to refer to Atreya Smriti. Atri is a Brahmarishi and one of the saptarishis directly from the Rg Veda. (in the grand scheme Atri is more ancient, authentic than Manu of manusmriti).

Atreya Smriti states:

"janmana jayate shudrah
samskarad dvija ucyate
vedapathi bhaved viprah
brahma janati brahmanah

Everyone is born a Shudra
By following disciplines (samskaras), he becomes a dwija (twice born).
By study (of Vedas/scriptures), he becomes a vipra (Learned/wise/scholar)
By knowing/realising the supreme spirit (brahman), he becomes a brahmin."

Hence Varna is a choice that is guided by aspiration, ability and achievement. Nothing to do with birth. Varna is found within families, among tribes/communities. Varna is not transferred or transmitted by birth.

The desire to pass on our credentials to our future generations is of course incredibly attractive (for instance monarchy and hereditary peerage etc). It is the Indian races' extraordinary and ultimate selfishness that created the heredity based caste system. It is one of the greatest example of anti rtu (the natural way of things) and hence in my view anti-vedic.

Genealogy, tribes and communities are extremely important to our identities - no one can deny that. The caste system as practiced currently in India, is the grotesque permanent disfigurement of Indian society by turning an achievement based recognition as heredity, that is the bane of the land now called India.

May the future heal these thousands of years of injuries in a principled manner.

Wrong Influences that persist till today

Manu and Manusmriti is a source of many of the current problems in India's social systems. There is not much doubt that Manu and Manusmriti are great works. How did a great work of the past became a problem of the current times?

This is when it is important to recognise the criticality of language, culture and heritage - when they are interfered with, problems happen. Dharma does not translate to or mean religion; Sanatana Dharma does not translate to or mean Hinduism. Sanskrit words often have no real English equivalents and when translation into English is attempted it often becomes meaningless (yet due due to the dominance of the English language, the distortion becomes the norm).

Similarly, Manusmriti was never 'hindu law' it was observations, aide-memoire, a reference book for the powers of the society to reflect on before acting. The East India Company and the British crown due to the lens of their own culture and background of the Abrahamic (Judeo-Christian-Islamic) nature wanted a Hindu law and the most recent, accessible and detailed text was the Manusmriti which was one of the first texts they translated (so that a equivalent of Koranic law was available for the majority of their subjects); they even coined the term Hindu(ism) in the 18th/19th century thus creating the current 'religion' of 'Hinduism'. The word Hindu never referred to a religion, it originally refers to a region and its people.

While Manusmriti remains a significant source of reflection, it bears the curse of the East India Company. Time to shake it off. The British did not create caste in India, social problems indeed existed for ages. What the British did was to lock out many angles of Bharath's own reflection and replaced it with a dominant stream of thinking that was not Indian. Translate that which is not translatable, codify that which should not be codified. In the case of Manusmriti they treated a thesaurus as the book of law.

This is an example of what happens when language, culture and history gets distorted and replaced - the soul of entire populations are left in disarray for many generations. It is important to mix freely and add richness to each others cultures but foolish to abandon your own in the process.

My conclusion is that the people of the country now called India need to reclaim a range of aspects/lenses/angles/views then apply those to abolish the current abhorrent social injustice called the caste system. Calling for new/additional reservations is very divisive for the Indian society, calling for abolition of caste based reservation when caste persists is mind numbingly illogical due to thousands of years prejudice that is built into Indian genes in the matter of caste. My prediction and hope is when the caste system is abolished it will herald a new dawn not just for the land of Bharath but for the whole world by unleashing an unstoppable energy that comes from one of the oldest well developed civilisations on earth. Time to unshackle.

©M HEMADRI

Follow me on Twitter @HemadriTweets

My mini e-book 'Standardised Management Conversation' is available - click http://www.amazon.co.uk/Standardised-Management-Conversation-Hemadri-ebook/dp/B018AWBJTU 
till 31 December 2016 all my earnings from the sale of this book will be donated to charity  http://successinhealthcare.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/standardised-management-conversation.html

Why do you celebrate 'Happy New Year' on 1 January?

HAPPY NEW YEAR 2016
 
What exactly are you celebrating the ‘Happy New Year’ for?

Background
1 January 2016 is the new year from the perspective of the Gregorian calendar. Gregorian calendar was introduced by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582 to ensure a standard date for Easter. What exactly are we celebrating on new year’s day (1 January)? We celebrate the circumcision of Jesus (assuming Jesus was actually born on 25 December and not on 6 January as many Christians believe)

Fascinating to find that till late 1700s in England, New Year day was celebrated in March as protestants and other Christians resisted the calendar for nearly 200 years. In most traditions and cultures in the world new year is, was, or ought to be celebrated in or around March/April with some cultures in September/October. That is where the clustering lies. However, a sub-group of Christians called Catholics who currently are about 17% of the world population have a calendar which defines new year as the 1st of January.

Further reform of the calendar on a scientific basis (such as the proposed Holocene calendar which retains the current catholic calendar format but wants to begin about 10000 years earlier) faces great resistance. Under these circumstances the determination of the middle-eastern Arabic-Muslim countries has to be really appreciated in the sense that irrespective of the calendar they have kept their weekend around Friday (Friday being Muslim prayer day); equally appreciated is the determination of Israel who has its weekend as Friday-Saturday (Saturday being Shabbath) though the Gregorian calendar’s weekend is Saturday-Sunday (Sunday being the day of the Lord).

So there is obviously a religious dimension to this 1 January New Year celebrations, many people who celebrate seem to think of it as a secular date.
 
Catholics – may or may not know when really the new year is but Pope Gregory XIII decided it will be 1 January – Happy New Year
 
Non-Catholic Christians – this is actually a Catholic invention but it has been accepted after centuries of resistance that this will be a Happy New Year.

For non-Christians which is about 70% of the world – have a great party, because it is a holiday and so on but the 1st of January is actually not a ‘new year celebration’ for non-Christians.

Being aware of what you are doing and why you are doing it is part of intelligent living; do enjoy the 1st of January with awareness of its background.
 
If our specific religious or cultural backgrounds have another New Year day – how seriously do you take it and how well do you celebrate it?

Interesting socio-mathematical-statistical observation on this ‘New Year’ idea.  
It is how democracy works, for instance in the UK Prime Minister won power with 17% of UK population voting for the Tories (with a little more than 30% of votes cast) and India Prime Minister Modi won power with 21% of eligible voters (14% of Indian population) voting for the BJP (again with a little more than 30% of the votes), in the USA President Obama was voted for by 20% of the American population and won the Presidency (the percentages of these personalities will increase if eligible voters are taken into account for the purpose of simplicity and illustrating socio-mathematical principles the whole population is taken into account in my calculations); similarly Christians with a little more than 30% of the population get to decide the calendar. Looking at the Gregorian calendar from a ‘Normal Curve’ as applied to the Roger’s Innovation curve template it is understandable that Catholics with about 16% world population took the lead as early adopters of the calendar and they were helped by having other Christians as a part of early majority (Roger’s threshold is 16% and that is about what falls outside of a standard deviation from the median in the normal curve). (As an aside, in my mini e-book Standardised Management Conversation  I write about how these numbers can be used as a part of good management).

What is the future of the 1st of January ‘Happy New Year’?
 
At about 20% of the world population Islamic calendar is poised just about right to make a bid to change it; however whether it will get any traction is doubtful. At about 14% the world population the Hindu related calendars cannot make a bid for a new ‘New Year’ day as their almanacs have a variety of New Years for various regional and language groups – but would they bid for rationalisation and ask for a Holocene calendar (which interestingly maintains the Gregorian format but begins 10000 years earlier, hence only partly rational) or perhaps they will dig deep into their Vedic and Dharmic history to come up with a common date? With an Astronomic background, Hindu calendars have strong logic and ancient history to support a bid for a different date for celebrating new year, can they come up with a cogent argument? 

In the meanwhile, as I already said, have a party, know why you are having a party and also aim to enjoy a number of happy new years throughout the year!

©M HEMADRI

Follow me on Twitter @HemadriTweets
 
Reading
Gregorian calendar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_calendar
Holocene calendar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_calendar
Rogers curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_innovations
 
My book Standardised Management Conversation - http://www.amazon.co.uk/Standardised-Management-Conversation-Hemadri-ebook/dp/B018AWBJTU 
My book has no reference to calendars, religion, new year, etc. My book is about a proposed new model on how senior people in management can interact with their junior colleagues. The book uses the innovation curve number as a logical argument on how to agree on projects.

TESCO's new CEO could be successful

Super retailer TESCO has been having trouble lately with lack of increase in its sales and threats to its profits. This saw an exit of its CEO Philip Clarke who is a veteran TESCO. The new CEO is Dave Lewis, he comes from Unilever. I think Dave will be successful.

I believe Dave Lewis was responsible for the success of Dove soap from the early 1990s. For a long time Dove was a high price product, people wanted it but could not afford it. Then due to a combination of circumstances such as the expiry of patents and change of marketing strategy, the price fell. This made an aspirational product affordable and peopled voted for it with their purses. The internet also tells me that Mr Lewis knows a thing or two about price wars. I have a feeling he knows the link between aspiration, affordability and pricing.

Unilever itself seems a sort of place which knows about innovation and how to put it across. Pepperami is a Unilever product. Read its constituents. They tell you it is made with 145% pork. Now that should make anyone think. They take 145 grams of pork and dehydrate it to make 100 grams of pork which is then used to make Pepperami sticks.That is certainly innovation, marketing and value creation all in one.

Each of us will have our own views about the usefulness of the products made by multi-national companies but we cannot deny they do know a thing or two about adding value into a product and creating value for their customers. Unilever certainly does.

While I am aware that many predictions will turn out to be wrong, the combination of Unilever, Dave Lewis and TESCO seems very positive. Time will tell whether it really turns out positive.

HEMADRI

follow me on Twitter @HemadriTweets

On Dealing With Marital Troubles

Prequel to Some warnings on dealing with marital problems

Dear Boys and Girls

Expectations are very different these days from a marriage and from spouses. Quite rightly these will be changing and some will struggle to cope. It is true that often the trigger is trivial which blows up into rows which may lead to permanent hurt and its effects (separation, divorce etc)


We face trivia and put up with it all the time (stuff related to neighbours, friends, relatives, traffic, work place, et al) yet we sometimes find it difficult to cope when it happens due to your spouse. Reflect on that.


They also say once you are married a bad marriage is better than no marriage at all. It is not always true but I have seen cases where people have put up with terrible behaviour in the past and now live happy lives with the same spouse. You see times change things could get better over a period of time or you could simply get used to (thick skinned) as a trade off for any other benefits (social, financial, stability, money, visa, kids, etc). Sounds awful but it is practical truth.


Of course this does not mean you should not have some clear cut red lines. Some common red lines are:

Violence (physical)
Unrevealed/hidden history of pre-existing and persisting alcoholism or serious persisting sexually transmitted disease or addictive drug usage
Adultery

To these many add their own personal red lines - go easy on personal red lines - do not make it so harsh that it is easy to fail - after all it affects both of you. What are your personal red lines?

Remember that (mother)-in-law is only good in small doses in any situation especially when the situation is turning bad. Avoiding references to in-laws or parents (and other family members) is actually a decent thing to do when having a row as it always escalates a dispute (often even when the reference is a positive one).

Be very forgiving, be very tolerant.

Marriage is a very strange thing - two people of the opposite sex (overwhelmingly) who are essentially strangers (in most cases even when you think you know the person) decide to share everything hopefully for the rest of their lives. If there was no such thing as marriage and you were creating one today on the above principle most reasonable people would say it was a mad unworkable idea. So most of us who are married, who hope to be married or who were married are all miracle workers (and it is no surprise that sometimes these miracles do not happen - that is not a failure but it is more likely a default position).


Okay. I have said enough. I must reveal that the main reason I wrote this prequel was because I have received a few private emails after I posted the below in a British-Indian doctors forum with people briefly describing their difficulties and thanking me for doing my original post. My thoughts and prayers are with them. I thought if that previous post has provoked thought in a few this might also be some food for thought for others.




WARNINGS ON DEALING WITH MARITAL DIFFICULTIES
Especially relevant to doctors in UK (even more so for doctors or Indian/Asian origin)

Dear Boys and Girls

Actually I write this quite seriously.

When you are married, sometimes for some people, things do not go so well. For some it gets so problematic that you consider leaving or actually leave your spouse (separation, divorce). This always uncomfortable often unpleasant.

During this process a common emotion is anger. Tempers flare. Real or perceived slights, insults, words, actions, emotions can cause quite severe long term harm to the psyche. It can be so bad that you want to retaliate and do so in a way that hurts the other person really badly. Some go ahead and really retaliate.

Now this is where it get really complex and ugly. For doctors please remember once you start off on an angry path or retaliation to your estranged or to be estranged spouse you are not going down the drain alone, your career goes down the drain with you. At least in UK.

At the risk of provoking a degeneration into a gender bias debate - which is not my intention it will be reasonable to say that though things are eventually quite fair in UK systems when they deal with this issue, often in the initial stages the benefit of doubt is towards women. Given the broader context and history of the issue that may be acceptable.

If you are Indian man and your spouse decides to take the debate across to India, it can get very murky not just for you but for your family as well - I believe the laws are different in India and apparently for good reason. Though I learn that some men feel that these laws are not always applied evenhandedly.

Now, why I am I writing this. I have had the occasion to support and advice boys and girls who were having marital difficulty to put euphemistically, directly and indirectly. I have also supported and advised people who were dealing with such boys and girls.  I can tell you it is very messy.

This does not mean boys and girls will never have to separate or divorce - that will happen from time to time. What I recommend to doctors (and anyone for that matter) is to keep it decent and polite.

I have been told about abusive vulgar intimidating language used (which was recorded), texts sent, emails sent (obviously those are records as well); police being involved, hospital security being called (that will be evidence for or against one party). Once anger turns into words, letters, sounds, threats, it very soon becomes actually or potentially illegal. The police wants to know that and for doctors the GMC wants to know that. There have been some pathetic attempts by some boys and girls to get the home office involved to use the visa status as another item of ammunition in their battles; after all at this stage it becomes a personal power game.

You do not want arrests, cautions, investigations, prosecutions, convictions, GMC hearings, monitoring programs, etc. You know its not good for you.

I am not the expert in this, luckily I have not seen too many boys and girls like in this situation, However, here is what I have to say - keep it polite, keep it civil, keep it legal. Do not threaten anything (threatening is what the weak minded do when they get irrational). Stay calm, stay stable, stay rational. It is not worth the hassle especially for a man or a woman who is decided to leave you or has left you or if you have decided or actually left a man or woman.

In reality, if it is so bad that you have to leave somebody or someone is leaving you, the more appropriate reaction might be to think what the future might bring, how bright the future might be; an anticipation of peace, quiet, new adventure, happiness (or at least the lack of sadness) and so on.

Behaving badly in a troublesome situation quite simply multiplies your agony.

© HEMADRI

Follow me on twitter @HemadriTweets

PS: BTW alcohol and (mother)-in-law topics usually makes these situations worse; stay away from those.

Kolaveri & Soup Boys

Kolaveri Di - sang by Dhanush, music by Anirudh for the film 3 (Moonu - meaning Three) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YR12Z8f1Dh8 was a raging international sensation. In 10 days it had 5 million hits; the official version now has more than 68 million hits, if you count all the versions it probably touches or crosses 100 million. Belly achingly hilarious.

But what the hell do those lyrics mean? You need to be really local to Chennai, to get into the heart of the song, to feel the underbelly of the true meaning. I tell you the meaning is even more hilarious.

'Kolaveri' is literally translated into 'murderous rage'. In Chennai lingo thats not what it means - Kolaveri is the feeling of something unreasonable that provokes you to retaliate unreasonably. Mind you its only a feeling, when it translates into action of actually doing something to retaliate unreasonable, the term 'kolaveri' is not normally used (at least in a trivial sense). So when Dhanush sings 'Why this Kolaveri Di?' all it means is 'Why did you do this to me?'

Okay. So what about 'Soup boys'.

The soup in the song does not mean the soup that is made or served during a meal. No. It means a messed up situation and hence soup boys refers to young men whose life is distorted by difficulties in romantic relationships which may be real or imagined.

In Tamil if you said soup it means suck as in thumb sucking or slurp as in slurping down a soup. The soup boys hence simply alludes to the young men who are at various stages of rejection and are trying to cope; like a child does by sticking a thumb in its mouth and sucking it. It alludes to varying degrees of helplessness, frustration, feelings of powerlessness, sulking, inability to act and so on - usually of a temporary nature.

Most 'soup boys' do suffer from 'Kolaveri' and if you had 'Kolaveri' you are best advised to use the 'soup boy' technique to get over it.

Go Chennai (I still like Madras)

©M HEMADRI 

Follow me on twitter @HemadriTweets