A news item that hit headlines of almost all news papers some time ago stated, "The World's Richest 62 People Now Have as Much as Poorest 3.6 Billion". This was as per the latest Oxfam Report.
It was also said to have been given in that Report that the Top 1% people owned 99% of the wealth and the rest of the 99% population owns only 1%. This was very disturbing. So there were some angry outbursts, obviously against the super rich persons as well as nations, holding them directly responsible for the plight of the poor. The pet socialist or communist line of thinking that rich can become richer only robbing the poor and making them poorer!
However, the total wealth in the world does not remain constant, it has been growing steadily. Actually part of the earlier wealth is consumed or gets destroyed and new wealth is created all the time. If that newly generated wealth is unequally distributed, it is another matter. We cannot blame stalvarts like Jamsedji Tata, S.L.Kirloskar or Narayana Murthy for making poor people in India poorer. They have in fact helped many people in improving their living conditions.
Emperors, Kings, Czars, Nawabs, Shahenshahas, Rajas, Maharajas etc. ruled almost all parts of the world almost throughout the history of mankind. They and their Ministers, Generals, Sipah Salars, Senapatis, Jagirdars, Mansabdars etc also were very few in numbers but lived in palacial houses and owned huge wealth in terms of Gold, Diamonds, Ruby etc. and also lands. So this phenomenon of unequal distribution of wealth is not new. Whoever holds power manages to get much bigger share. Might is right is the law of nature.
However, this is certainly not fair and the struggle for equality goes on and on and is necessary to maintain some balance. The thread on this subject evoked good response from readers and finally ended only on the note of inequality in spirituality.
-----------------------------------
Ashok Malhotra wrote:
WORLD WEALTH DISTRIBUTION-THE SCOURGE OF THIS MILLENNIUM:
As per the latest OXFAM Wealth report, 1% of the population owns 99% of wealth.
This looks like any ordinary innocent data, but what it really means is that only 1% of the world resources are left for 99% of its population. This is what the modern market economy, driven by the modern education, information systems combined with the capture of the world resources have ultimately formulated for the mankind. But what the rich conveniently forget is that, as the history teaches us, remember the French revolution, the Russian revolution, the Chinese revolution, liberation of many nations from the colonisations of the west, burning of the Alexandria etc that, whenever the majority of the world is overexploited, the empire strikes back. So beware.
-------------------------------------
AKCHAKRABARTI :
THIS IS A SHAME ON WORLD POLITICAL SYSTEM THAT ONE PERCENT OF WORLD POPULATION IS CONTROLLING NINETY NINE PERCENT OF WORLD'S WEALTH. ONLY SIXTY TWO PEOPLE ON EARTH ARE CONTROLLING HALF THE WORD'S WEALTH. DURING THE LAST FIVE YEARS THE WEALTH OF THIS ONE PERCENT POPULATION HAS INCREASED BY FOURTYFOUR PERCENT. THIS IS MOSTLY DUE TO THEIR AVOIDING INCOME TAX. A WHOPPING AMOUNT OF 7.5 TRILLION US DOLLARS IS STASHED IN VARIOUS TAX HEAVENS OF THE WORLD. THIS MONEY COULD HAVE BEEN OTHERWISE UTILISED FOR BENEFIT OF COMMON PEOPLE I THINK THIS DESERVES SOME PONDERING.
-----------------------------
Ashok Malhotra:
Actually the business and political have either merged into one entity or are mutually supportive in
their endeavour to corner the world resources and wealth. But the moot point is "What's the way out".
--------------------------------------
Mohan Rao :
I have a different viewpoint. I agree with the fact that 1% is controlling 99% of the wealth. What exactly does it mean? All that it means in general terms is that the 1% have succeeded in building the large corporations, multi-nationals or whatever and simply have got to a point where they make and sell 99% of the worlds needs (maybe cars, may be canned food, maybe aeroplanes/jumbo jets, etc etc). They get to control them till being owners. What happens to the money afterwards? They put it back in
the banks or reinvest to make more money, some may give out in charity, some may put the money back into schools, universities and hospitals and lot more money into government treasuries in taxes. Do these so-called rich eat 99 burgers instead of one? Do they drink 99 bottles of beer instead of one? Do they ride 99 cars instead of one? What I mean to say is: Gentlemen, let us not disparage the few gooses that have laid golden eggs. Let us not be jealous. Do they hide the money under pillow? No. The money is back in circulation doing whatever the money is supposed to make in the economic system. Jealousy leads to communism, despotism, bloodshed, cold wars, and a toxic world. It is totally unnecessary to call it a scourge or whatever tempting word you may come up with. The fact is, Capitalism with all its stigma of “scourge” has been the only political system that has uplifted so many people, increased the net wealth. So much money has been doled out by the rich countries to the poor ones over the decades. All the scourge-mongers have produced in return is bad blood, further poverty, corruption, etc. We have been through this cycle. Let us not repeat it. The OXFAM report is out to lunch.
--------------------------------------
Shah Nawaz Ahmad:
But does this not give them too much power to control our lives through bribing bull dozing mafiaizing (if there is such a word) bulldozing away the needed investing in our needs Surely so much concentration of power,financial in this case, but political or other is bad news for all of us
Was not democracy meant to devolve power to the larger population But still Mohsn Rao saheb your argument is persuasive.
So the exchange is fun, the way life should be.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Taswir Singh:
The 1% 0f super rich are no more ordinary capitalists of Adam Smith time.
They are controller of world politics and fuel of modern day Imperialism. The political outcome of this is total crisis in middle East and terrorism almost everywhere.
----------------------------------------------------
Mohan Rao :
Although I would not go into the political issues (crisis in the Middle East, terrorism etc) resulting from the super-rich, I am hopeful that the ages of violence, wars, oppression, exploitation will be over one day and a new age will arise where non-violence becomes the international norm, freedom, international co-operation and globalism prevail, and the world becomes a better place for our children and grandchildren. With various means of self-destruction (WMDs etc) available world-wide, the alternative is imponderable. I still think that the larger population has the power to change. I really do not know how much of power-brokers the super-rich are, given the current state of democacy and human civilization. I think there are enough checks and balances to rein in the super-rich if you think they are the culprits.
---------------------------------------------------
Guntur Nageswara Rao:
Shri Moha Raoji's optimistic balanced view appears to be close to reality than too much helpless disturbing apprehensions.
----------------------------------
Ajay Chakrabarti :
AS LONG AS THERE IS NO CONTROL ON HUMAN GREED I DO NOT SEE ANY LIGHT. GREED FOR WEALTH, GREED FOR POWER, GREED TO CONTROLAS MANY AND AS MUCH. THREE OR FOUR AMERICAN SUPER RICH CONTROL AS MUCH WEALTH
AS TOTAL GDP OF 44 POORER NATIONS.THEY HAVE TREMENDOUS CLOUT. AS MOHANRAOJI HAD TOLD EARLIER THAT WHOLE UNIVERSE WOULD ONE DAY COME TO NOTHING. MAY BE WITH A NEW BEGINNING THINGS WOULD BE DIFFERENT.
------------------------------------------
Puran Dev Sharma:
In my view all political or governing systems are as good or as bad as the people who run it. History is witness to this fact. When military took over reigns of Pakistan they did wonderful job in changing the environment of Lahore and people loved it. After achieving the set task they retreated to the barracks. Civilian system took over and within short time rampant corruption set in as before and socio-economic degradation was the result. People prayed for the military to come back and it did come back but with a devastating results; the military personnel assumed power nay ABSOLUTE Power and adopted methods to improve their financial status. Both times the military coup was led by General Ayub Khan.
-------------------------------------
B.B.Narang:
In my view there is no problem if some people have amassed a lot of wealth. In a healthy democracy every one has equal opportunity,only some with foresight are able to take advantage of the ystem.There are cases where people have risen from the scratch.Indians go to U.S.A for higher studies,start business and amass wealth using their ideas and hardwork.Wealthy persons should be appreciated and we should be proud of them if:
1.They have created wealth using legal means.
2.Paying taxes honestly.
3.Contributing to the growth of country.
4.Creating jobs.
5.Helping society through philanthropy.
6.Taking care of welfare of employees.
------------------------------------------------
Raghuvir Rustagi
I wd agree any political system does not provide a lasting solution in all situations. Human frailty is to look always for a short term answer, then we forget the dynamics pf long term problem.
It really does not much depend on the people who are burdened with day to day bread and butter issues. Once in a blue moon a super leader comes to give proper direction to the masses. FDR was one such US president in recent history- he really pondered over long term issues of the common men.
Such leaders are not born out of wishful thinking, or a gift from the heavens.
In the final interpretation of karmic laws, the whole society has to be responsible- quality is definitely related to quantity.
India's freedom movement in the 1930s 1940s is a beautiful example of this class. I was a small kid then but I have heard stories of rampant patriotism.
---------------------------------------------
Ajay Chakrabarti
TAKING CUE FROM NARANGJI AND JOHOREYJI WHY DONT EACH OF THE SUPER RICH ADOPT A FEW POOR NATIONS AND TURN THEM AROUND. TAKE FOR EXAMPLE AN AFRICAN NATION LIKE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO. THE NATION IS VERY RICH IN MINERAL RESOURCES. BUT IN UTTER CHAOS. MILLIONS OF PEOPLE HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES BECAUSE OF INFIGHTING GOING ON FOR THE LAST 30-40 YEARS. OR IS IT IN THE INTEREST OF THE SUPER RICH TO MAINTAIN THE CHAOS?
--------------------------------------
Raghuvir Rustagi
Sh BB Narangji's thinking reminded as if I am attending an online lecture on Carnot Cycle, the ideal heat engine. Thank god, there was no exam. As we know, a practical or actual engine is different. Engineers still try to approach the design objective to match the ideal. I remember in the college in Delhi, my professor Sh Bhimrao would ask us to pre-calculate the Carnot efficiency, to compare the actual efficiency, and list the reasons of shortfall. It was a nice learning system. Those were the days to remember, similar to Tasvirji’s rustic poem about life in Punjab.
The ideal in life has value, has inspiration, and is worthy of worship- regardless if we can reach in our lifetime or not.
The example of Bhagwan Ramchandraji, hero of Ramayan, is hailed as an ideal person- ideal son, ideal brother, ideal husband, ideal father, ideal fighter, ideal winner, ideal king, ideal ruler, ideal in life as well as in death, ideal in this world, or in Baikunth dham beyond.
It will be a wonderful world if the rich people perform on all or some of the 6 fronts you listed- if
1.They have created wealth using legal means.
2.Paying taxes honestly.
3.Contributing to the growth of country.
4.Creating jobs.
5.Helping society through philanthropy.
6.Taking care of welfare of employees.
In the Anand Bhawan days in late 1970s, early 80s my mom used to live with us, and she will walk to Sadhubela temple in Mahalaxmi daily. I had not realised the value of an honest central government officer until the head Swamiji invited me in his private chamber on the top floor of the building. There were many rich and famous business men of the Bhulabhai Desai Road and Pedder Road areas waiting to get Swamiji’s darshan. They would visit the temple to donate a fixed percentage of their black money. Swamiji’s blessings will convert black to white, it was their belief.
So, in the last 40 years, things would only go more south……This is an American slang.
In conclusion, we must not lose hope; whatever is unjust is unstable, and it must change. I said the other day, mere wishful thinking is not enough. Each one of us has a role to play, to perform our act in right ways- then we are slowly and surely reaching the ideal goal.
----------------------------------------------------
Anand Ghare:
I can appreciate the pain and anger expressed by Shri Ashok Malhotra on the reported terrible inequality of 1% people owning 99% of the wealth on the earth leaving only 1% for 99% people. He has sighted revolutions in France, Russia and China as a result of glaring inequalities and expressed
an apprehension of history repeating again in a horrible form. We have seen violent revolutionary incidents on local scale in the film Nishant. We have also seen the discontent among villagers around project sites because of the 'islands of affluence' created amidst the sea of poverty. Though they
did not take violent turn they was simmering for quite some time and needed major PR exercises.
I have not read the Oxfam report and have no desire to read such voluminous document. However, I have serious doubts about whether such measurement of wealth and identifying its owners is reasonably possible because of following reasons.
1. All the land, mountains, lakes, rivers etc. on the earth are not owned by individuals. Even now maximum portion of them is the property of Governments and there are also many No man's lands. The next major owners are Corporates, whose ownership is distributed into millions of shareholders. We know that Tatas and Birlas have made several trusts who own the shares of their companies. So their names do not figure in the rich peoples' lists.
2. Value, cost and price are different entities. Cost is historical, price is determined at the time of sale and purchase transactions and value is almost indeterminate in monetary terms. Which one is taken by Oxfam for their calculation and how?
3. We read about prevalence of black money, Benami properties etc in India and they may be prevailing in other parts of the world also. These properties will be out of any official records.
4. Different countries have foreign exchange rates determined by their Governments and not by market forces. So there is no uniformity in prices converted in $s.
5. Prices of urban real estates are blown out of proportion by builder lobbies and can crash if events like 'Mortgage scam' in USA take place. Similarly share prices are also artificially jacked up by people like Harshad Mehta and the bubble can burst any time. The share price indices have already reached pre NM levels.
6. Major industrial establishments such as railways, shipyards, power stations, other public sector companies, Defence production units and assets of all these are owned by the Governments in India and all socialist countries. Hospitals, schools, colleges etc. are owned by the Governments or charitable trusts. Archeological buildings, sculptures, paintings and monuments etc. are simply invaluable.
So in my opinion only a small part of the national wealth of our country is owned privately and 99% 1% distribution does not apply. Since the Oxfam report is for global assets and if we think globally, most of the points mentioned above would be applicable to some extent.
Considering these factors and the fact that the population of the world in Billions, how is it possible to say for sure who owns how much? I hope conditions are not as bad as they appear to be.
We should also look at how and where these assets ae used or are they lying idle. If they are put in business as productive assets, it is good for the society, no matter ho ons themIf that money is simply taken out of circulation, it may not cause much harm. The real danger is if it is used for bad use like smuggling, gambling, getting political power etc. the issue is not as straight forward as it is made out to be.
------------------------------
Ashok Malhotra:
The doubts raised by Ghare are pertinent in theory for any one, but we are not the accounting people and so I would rather leave their validity or resolution to them.
To my mind, the Oxfam consider only the tangible assets in the denominator for the 100%. To estimate or to even evaluate the total assets of the universe or even the earth itself for the denominator, would be a never ending problem. More over the assets of nature, lying idle, that belong to nobody, can not be ascribed to anybody.
-------------------------------------------------
Guntur Nageswara Rao :
Thanks for a very simple lucid narration of assets and truth of real ownership. Ideally every one should be able make decent earning for the work one is performing with out being exploited by others.
Real concerns are earning with out contribution, not able to earn even after working hard, not able to get work to earn, earning through cheating, corruption or disproportionately earning for the traits like acting, singing etc which have no tangible contributions. No violent revolutions ever in the history solved the problems of exploitation of the situation by some.
We are fortunate to have got associated large portion of our lives in the company of decent people and continue this cemented association. Let us be happy about it with good impressive narrations being given by talented few in our group.
-----------------------------------
Mohan Rao:
With the discussion of the OXFAM Report that we all started with, the 99% in hands of 1% has become the elephant in the room. The inequities that result from such a distortion of wealth distribution is nothing new, and the governments who might have benefited from this ‘ism’ thing have not turned a blind eye to this issue in my view. I agree with you that the issue of who owns what is a never-ending one. Over time the governments all have developed social security nets, healthcare, financial assistance to those who are old, homeless, disabled etc. minimum wages, as you all know and the process is a continuous one, improving over time. In U.S and Canada where I happen to reside, no one really cares that a few people have billions; what they care is whether the government is doing the right things for the citizens and if they, on the whole are succeeding in life in terms of family life, rearing of children, education, health, opportunities etc. There may be countries who are left out of the wealth have the right to get rich, take control of their resources and self-manage them and
safeguard their sovereignty from those who may be trying to exploit them.
The world is a system. There are international systems specifically to help global economies, education and various items where co-operation can be brought to bear. Having said, the 99% in hands of 1% issue is a moot one and no reason for a paralysis. 1% may have all the wealth, but 100% still
have all the power in the world to change especially electoral power to have the governments act the way they should.
---------------------------------------------------
Ashok Malhotra :
I pray to God for India to achieve a GDP of $55000 like the US or even $45000 like Canada from its present miserable $ 1700 or so, so that I can also appreciate these views from a vantage point.
-------------------------------------------
Anand Ghare :
I had visited some factories in UK around 1984 in connection with my official work. One day I was taking lunch with the manager of a small factory making very high precision components. He was also a mechanical engineer of my age. We started discussing our lives. Though it is not considered good manners, he enquired about my salary income, perhaps out of pure curiosity.
I told him, "Look, instead of that let us compare how do we live. I am living in a 3 bedroom apartment on 19th floor of a skyscraper, where do you live?"
He answered he lives in an apartment of about the same size.
I told him that I am having all the modern gadgets like TV, fridge, washing machine, mixer, oven etc that are needed by my family. He also had almost the same, in addition he had a couple of cars. We also cooked sufficient amount of good food for our daily needs and went out to a restaurant once in a while for a change. My sons were attending good reputed schools and we had reasonably good medical facilities (CHSS).
I told him "You must be coming to office driving your own car. My company provides me transport."
In short my standard of living was not much lower than his though my salary converted into £s would be about one tenth of his monthly income. From then on I stopped feeling bad about the much publicised disparity between per capita incomes.
I also told him that he can visit India any time he wants, by spending less than his one months income, where as I could not have ever seen UK from my savings, if I did not make that official tour.
That meant our daily lives were comparable, but accumulation of money through savings was hugely different. Our incomes almost matched our expenditures, but Balance Sheets were vastly different. There was a huge disparity between his net worth and mine, but I did not feel jealous of him.
Economics has changed afterwards and air travel became affordable. I was able to visit UK, USA and go on a Europe tour out of my accumulated savings.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ramesh Kumar Suri:
Disclaimer: My personal views, not based on published/authentic data.
We are more familiar with Exchange rate Say 1$ =67 ~68 Rupees. However there is one more (not so common Exchange) rate called PPR i.e. Purchase parity rate.
Here you consider normal day to day necessities ( including food, shelter, clothing and common gadgets like TV, fridge, washing machine, mixer, oven etc.(not very high end type) Consider the cost for these items in rupees (local currency) and compare these with $ or currency of rich country.
You may be surprised to note that PPR of 1 $ works out to be 4 to five rupees.
This means that a person earning 45000/= rupees a month can have life style of 10000 $ (Approx) a month in US (excluding savings) including notional salaries (Wages) for aid serrvant/ driver/ plumber/ carpenter/ cleaner/ electrician
Difference comes when you convert your $ saving in Indian Rupees.
There is great consiperrency in keeping international value of Rupees and other similar currencies low priced compared to $. and we are also happily doing it. You require $ to purchase what you do not have. So you purchase $s $s are in short supply in poor countries so $ is costly.
Supply/demand Rule. America can Print $s. To sell local produce more you want your Currency to be cheaper so that you you can export more compared to others.
Consider this:
If PPR us 4 to 5 rupees a $ then you are selling goods wort 68 Rs to earn a $ where as In PPR you earn 1$ i.e. 4 to 5 rupees worth local consumables.
China is reducing its currency rate to export more and forcing other countries to devalue their currency. Oil Rich countries are flooding markets with oil so that they can earn
more $s compared to other smaller oil producers.
Consider this:
If you flood market with cheap goods (e.G. oil) you get less $s (30$ a barrel of oil) If you cut oil production you get more $s for same amount of oil (.>100$ per barrel of oil)
This is a systematic looting by Rich countries and we are happily encouraging it.
I feel (most of you will feel that I am wrong) do not sell your resources material resources at throw away prices like iron ore/oil/metals.
Sell your services which uses man power/brain and you get over valued $. and you will have more $s (less requirement of $s and Richer) By earning $s (By seling services/brain power/manpower/muscle power and not material) and converting to rupees your life style improves Now We are Comparatively better off with our foreign exchange reserves.
Stop exporting Iron Ore In Next 2 to 3 years you may get double the price in $s for iron ore.
Sounds impossible?
---------------------------------------
Ashok Malhotra :
I was a bit surprised to read your remarks that the Rs value of $ based on PPR comes to Rs 4, but based on the World Bank data for India this conversion factor has been constant at 0.3 since last 18 yrs. Accordingly this, value will be 1$=68×0.3=20.4Rs and not 4 to 5. Please review, as we
are not the accounts people.
-------------------------------------------------
Ramesh Kumar Suri :
Pls. see Disclaimer stated by me: My personal views, not based on published/authentic data.
Even at rates quoted by World Bank data, bulk of content of my mail are still valid.
Are we selling 68 rupees worth of Indian material and getting 24.3 rupees worth foreign exchange in Indian context
Can we stop official plundering of our national material wealth/Raw material. When British people were sending cotton to Britain we were calling it loot by the Britishers.
Now we are encouraging same by willful depreciating of Rupee. And Remember in 1947 , ONE Indian Rupees was approx equal to 1$
-----------------------------------------------
Ajay Chakrabarti:
MALHOTRAJI IS RIGHT IN TELLING THAT THE PPP CONVERSION FACTOR FOR INDIA IS 0.3
BASED ON PPP EXCHANGE RATE CHINA BECOMES THE LARGEST ECONOMY, USA SECOND AND INDIA THIRD.
----------------------------------------------------
Mohan Rao :
I think the nations have to draw a line what to export and what not to. Exporting resource and strategic materials (uranium, thorium) has to be carefully considered as to what is in excess and is marketable at fair prices. On the other hand, marketing services (IT, technological, economical) seem to be the money-makers and in this age of technology, computers, financial etc) have a lot of potential in nations with educated/skilled manpower. Textiles, Indian cuisine-related goods, film-related (Bollywood) have a niche in the international market as well.
Sending cotton to Britain was a historical exploitation which Gandhiji and others fought so well and might have had an immense role in the independence movement. In the case of China, the country encourages production of goods for international buyers (such as Wal-Mart) and has a strategy of developing a highly planned economy (different towns/villages specializing on different goods and dumping the goods on the international markets). It may not be suitable in the Indian context.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Raghuvir Rustagi:
1. The east coast of America is experiencing the first major snow storm of 2016. Today Sat. 23-Jan, everything went standstill. I didn’t see a single soul, nor any car on the street, no push or pull, simply obeying Newton’s first Law of motion. We cooked, ate, watched movie in home theatre, and had fun a lot. Kids, elders, and seniors- had their own ways. For a change, no body discussed politics of America or India. Complete peace within and without.
2. At the time of writing this e-message, it is 9:00 p.m. I am looking out of the window at the playful snow stream more clearly in the close vicinity of street light, and not seeable at all a yard away. Snow has accumulated 2 ft or more on the front of the house, and on the cars standing on the drive way. Yet the open deck and green bushes in the backyard are telling a different story- the large deck is almost bare, untouched of snow, only a few small bushes near the boundary line are thickly laden.
Is it not reminding us? Of what?
The Lord is ever present everywhere in the form of unending snow. We catch the glimpse only if we happen to be
i) near the light
ii) oriented or poised in the right direction, and finally
iii) pure or empty
3. The New Year in America is also a renewal of the Medicare enrolment and health insurance for all seniors 66+. No body really likes, as if it sounds like a renewal of the marriage vows each year. Anyway, the good news is we can switch the old private Insurance company with the new, we can drop the old benefits and sign up for the new, which appear to save some money due to lower monthly premium, or more benefits without more premium. We are given a month or so open enrolment in December to make up our mind. It is very confusing for senior folks to sign up online or send a paper application by mail. Too many choices- the husband can have a policy, his wife does not know about and vice-versa. Privacy law- you know.
But now comes the interesting part!
The Insurance works if all the following three terms and conditions are met, else we run the grave risk of no health insurance-
i) you have to prepare or send the application yourself, or authorise someone to do on your behalf with formal power of attorney
ii) you have to pay the monthly premium each month by the deadline date- zero tolerance policy
iii) you have to satisfy the co-payment amount, before the insurance benefit kicks in
Why don't we use the same day to day experience in our routine relationship with the supreme lord?
Godly grace is like an insurance payment. We have to be responsible on our part, then and only then we qualify for His grace.
4. Finally, let us dwell on the Inequality clause where we started.
I am reading BG Chapter 6 Sankhya Yoga. The commentator Swami Prabhupadji says, “in the age of Kali, if only 1% of population becomes truly Krishna Conscious, we can achieve the turn around in our favour”
So friends, there will always be a disparity among haves and have-nots, not only in the material world, but in the spiritual world too. Still the have-nots share a bigger responsibility in the God’s democratic scheme. No need to feel pale. Godly grace never gets empty. My son wonders if the Medicare funds will be still available 25 years hence??
---------------------------------------------------------------------
