Chacha Manmohan S Gandhi has said: “The election verdict is a verdict for inclusive growth. It is a verdict for equitable development.”
Bollocks!
No one voted for inclusive growth. They voted for secularism, for a party that was a lighter shade of black.
Anyway, the very idea of inclusive growth has produced some odd responses. The leader article in today’s ToI says that “inclusive growth will remain a pipe dream unless mechanisms are put in place for the successful coupling of technological capabilities with the engine of growth.” The article pleads for a big role for The State in science & technology.
But we had that for 60 years, and could not produce even a decent scooter. Science and technology have been harnessed for the benefit of our people only by entrepreneurs and markets. And, most importantly, by multinational companies.
Bollocks, once again.
The most thoughtful opinion piece on Chacha’s “inclusive growth” comes from an editorial in Mint today. The editors hit the nail on the head when they say:
The point is: What exactly does inclusive growth entail? Through the tough election campaign, Congress leaders touted inclusive growth to mean last year’s farm loan waiver and the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. These doled out lots of cash—but without delivering clear economic benefits. They are very basic social security schemes at best and lodestones of corruption at worst.
These schemes throw money at the poor and destitute without actually helping them climb the economic ladder. In the long run, they could perversely prevent people from moving out of their low-productivity traps in rural India. In a way, rural Indians now have incentives to keep digging a ditch and refilling it. Neither programme creates wealth.
True inclusive development would mean that even the poorest Indians get a chance to move into the modern, high-productivity sectors.
For that, we will need greater liberalization.
In other words, the poor have to be “included” in The Market.
This means Economic Freedom must be guaranteed to all.
Secondly, since markets are urban there must be heavy public investment in roads that connect remote and poor villages to urban market centres. The “rural-urban divide” that 60 years of “planning” has created, by not building roads, must be made a thing of the past.
Finally, predation by the minions of our The State must be swiftly ended. There is no city or town market anywhere in India where policemen, municipal functionaries, health inspectors etc. do not collect “huftha”: a bribe paid by poor people in order to be “included” in The Market.
Of course, none of these will happen.
Because Chacha is engaged in hawabaazi. The rhetoric is being used only to prop up senseless schemes like the NREGA, loan waivers and the like. There is no sincerity in Chacha’s idea of “equitable development.” This is just more socialist bull.
How I hate socialists.
"the poor have to be included in The Market."
ReplyDeleteThe socialists and state-capitalists continue to profess that the poor need to be protected from the market, not included in the market. Presumably the market is a wild, dangerous place, fit only for seasoned adults like the Tatas and the Ambanis. Poor people would be lost like babes in the woods. This paternalism has ensured two things: the incumbent companies don't have to worry about new entrants in their market-space. Secondly, the poor are trapped in a system that forces them to play by the rules created by the big players. This creates a steady stream of wage-workers (some would say wage-slaves) and consumers for the incumbent companies. A cynic might wonder if that's not the whole point of the bleeding-heart concern for the poor.
These fellows in the new govt. will continue creating more fancy buzzwords and fancier definitions and spend their time arguing over what word means what.
ReplyDeleteReal work will suffer in the process.
This is what goes on in this world, even otherwise!
Good observations.