Re: [Assam] Fw: India's booming economy has bypassed the rural poor
Ofcourse, India has always followed the Tricle Down Theory appraoch -since
Nehru rule . Wealth will trickle down to the masses -- just the way it has been
trickling across the globe from richer nations to poorer ones for ages.
Umesh
barua25 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
BODY { FONT-SIZE: 11px; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif } A { FONT-SIZE: 11px; COLOR: #0b2345; FONT-STYLE: normal;
FONT-FAMILY: verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none } A:visited {
COLOR: #1f1f1f } A:hover { TEXT-DECORATION: underline } P {
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 11px; COLOR: #1f1f1f; FONT-STYLE: normal;
FONT-FAMILY: verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none } H1 { FONT-WEIGHT:
bold; FONT-SIZE: 14px; COLOR: #1f1f1f; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY:
verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none } H2 { FONT-WEIGHT: bold;
FONT-SIZE: 13px; COLOR: #1f1f1f; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,
sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none } H3 { PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT:
0px; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 12px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px;
COLOR: #1f1f1f; PADDING-TOP: 0px; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: verdana,
sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none } H4 { PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT:
0px; FONT-WEIGHT:
bold; FONT-SIZE: 11px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; COLOR: #1f1f1f;
PADDING-TOP: 0px; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, sans-serif;
TEXT-DECORATION: none } HR { WIDTH: 100%; COLOR: #ff9900; HEIGHT: 1px;
size: 1px }
INDIA ABROAD, APRIL 13, 2007
PRINT EDITION, PAGE A-40
'THE HIGHER THE GROWTH, THE GREATER THE ANTAGONISM'
Economist Prabhat Patnaik discusses the dark side of India's economic growth
with Senior Editor Suman Guha Mozumder
India's economy may be booming, its industries thriving, its middle class
heady with the promise of a great future. But Prabhat Patnaik, a professor of
economics at Jawaharlal Nehru University, worries what the changes augur for
the rest of the nation. Patnaik was in New York last month to take part in a
public conversation on 'An Emergent India: Problems and Prospects' along with
Nobel Laureate and Columbia's economics Professor Joseph Stiglitz. In an
interview with INDIA ABROAD after the discussion, Patnaik, who is also
vice-chairman of the Kerala State Planning Board, talked about his concerns
about modern India.
Q. There were concerns, especially during the rule of the government led by
the Bharatiya Janata Party earlier that while India was shining -- a slogan
coined by the BJP -- it was not shining on all its population. Have things
changed under the Manmohan Singh government?
A.I think they are continuing pretty much the same way. But one of two things
that have happened is of some importance. One is the passing of the Employment
Guarantee Act, which promises every rural household 100 days of guaranteed
employment. It was initially launched only in 200 districts but it's understood
that it will be extended to the whole country.
A lot of campaigning was done to get this through. This act differs from
every other previous employment program as it actually makes it a right [to be
employed]. But the only problem with it is the state machinery is so enmeshed
in neo-liberalism that I do not think that even though it is rights based --
even though it is the case that anybody who demands employment and does not get
it can take the government to court -- much might happen. The problems of
non-implementation are to be found almost everywhere. Poor and unemployed
people do not take the government to court. They just cannot. But, at the same
time, I think this is something that gives us a handle, at least when public
and political organizations take the cause of the poor and fight on their
behalf. So it is a very enabling thing to do. The basic directions of
neo-liberal policies have not changed, but because of intensive campaigning,
this act has been passed, which is of potential significance.
Q. If the basic policies have not changed and, as you mentioned, poverty is
actually increasing in India despite the growth ...
A. I would not even say that poverty is increasing despite the growth. I
would say that the kind of growth we are experiencing in India is actually
based on an exacerbation of antagonism. As a result it is growth where to
expect a trickle-down effect would be absurd. In fact, the higher the growth,
the greater the antagonism. Suppose you have higher growth. Then there will be
even more demand for, let us say, a Wal-Mart to be opened. Therfore, there will
be an even greater dispossession as far as petty and retail traders are
concerned.
So, it is a kind of growth where it is not that higher growth would pull
everybody up, but on the contrary higher growth would actually make things
worse for a whole lot of people at the bottom.
Q. Could you elaborate?
A. When you hav
[Assam] Fw: India's booming economy has bypassed the rural poor
INDIA ABROAD, APRIL 13, 2007 PRINT EDITION, PAGE A-40 'THE HIGHER THE GROWTH, THE GREATER THE ANTAGONISM' Economist Prabhat Patnaik discusses the dark side of India's economic growth with Senior Editor Suman Guha Mozumder India's economy may be booming, its industries thriving, its middle class heady with the promise of a great future. But Prabhat Patnaik, a professor of economics at Jawaharlal Nehru University, worries what the changes augur for the rest of the nation. Patnaik was in New York last month to take part in a public conversation on 'An Emergent India: Problems and Prospects' along with Nobel Laureate and Columbia's economics Professor Joseph Stiglitz. In an interview with INDIA ABROAD after the discussion, Patnaik, who is also vice-chairman of the Kerala State Planning Board, talked about his concerns about modern India. Q. There were concerns, especially during the rule of the government led by the Bharatiya Janata Party earlier that while India was shining -- a slogan coined by the BJP -- it was not shining on all its population. Have things changed under the Manmohan Singh government? A.I think they are continuing pretty much the same way. But one of two things that have happened is of some importance. One is the passing of the Employment Guarantee Act, which promises every rural household 100 days of guaranteed employment. It was initially launched only in 200 districts but it's understood that it will be extended to the whole country. A lot of campaigning was done to get this through. This act differs from every other previous employment program as it actually makes it a right [to be employed]. But the only problem with it is the state machinery is so enmeshed in neo-liberalism that I do not think that even though it is rights based -- even though it is the case that anybody who demands employment and does not get it can take the government to court -- much might happen. The problems of non-implementation are to be found almost everywhere. Poor and unemployed people do not take the government to court. They just cannot. But, at the same time, I think this is something that gives us a handle, at least when public and political organizations take the cause of the poor and fight on their behalf. So it is a very enabling thing to do. The basic directions of neo-liberal policies have not changed, but because of intensive campaigning, this act has been passed, which is of potential significance. Q. If the basic policies have not changed and, as you mentioned, poverty is actually increasing in India despite the growth ... A. I would not even say that poverty is increasing despite the growth. I would say that the kind of growth we are experiencing in India is actually based on an exacerbation of antagonism. As a result it is growth where to expect a trickle-down effect would be absurd. In fact, the higher the growth, the greater the antagonism. Suppose you have higher growth. Then there will be even more demand for, let us say, a Wal-Mart to be opened. Therfore, there will be an even greater dispossession as far as petty and retail traders are concerned. So, it is a kind of growth where it is not that higher growth would pull everybody up, but on the contrary higher growth would actually make things worse for a whole lot of people at the bottom. Q. Could you elaborate? A. When you have higher growth, there is more income at the upper level. Because of the kind of growth, which inequalizes growth any way, there will be more demands, let's say, for a golf course, or luxury apartments and therefore agricultural land will be taken away and there will be more dispossession of the peasants. So, it is not just that higher growth is associated with greater poverty, but actually this is a kind of growth where it is part of the intrinsic nature of the growth itself. Q. So you mean this kind of higher growth would spell out displacemement from traditional occupations like agriculture and, in turn, lead to poverty? A. Yes. That is the kind of situation I am talking about.[The result can be] unemployment, dispossession and displacement of petty producers and peasants, and a greater agrarian crisis etc. Suppose you have an even higher growth rate, there will be more people demanding that an airport be constructed. If there are more people demanding such things, investments will go there and not to social sectors or to the rural infrastructure development. So, in that sense, the increasing growth on one side and the increasing poverty on the other side are in fact interlinked. Q. So, as they say, the rising tide will not lift all the boats. A. Exactly. It's futile to expect that higher growth will actually have a trickle-down effect. Even now, higher growth has not touched the poor; if we still have even higher growth, it is not going to touch the poor. That is not going to happen. Q. Tell me then, how does one go about industrializing a c
