To C'da's question on where he is going wrong with his analysis, he might want to look at the following other indicators that would be relevant:
a. Daily wage laborers don't have any work b. Shops are closed and the shopkeepers - masses of lower to middle class assamese that do not have government jobs do not earn the money. c. The low paid employees of small shopkeepers do not make any money d. Buses and cars and motorcycles don't ply - the entire workforce force of the public transport sector do not make money. That includes bus conductors, drivers, gas station attendants etc. In case of government public transport bodies, they need to pay salaries but do not end up making revenues hence they run into losses. When they run into losses, they cannot pay salaries on time to their Assamese employees. e. Government offices stay closed so public services remain closed. So roads don't get to be built on time. People go without electricity and that is considered ok. Hospitals cannot receive patients. Pharmacies don't work etc. etc. People do think this lends an air of pessimism about the state. The person who wants to invest in a small shop decides against it. The person sitting outside, like in the US - when he is asked whether he would invest in the state looks incredulously at you. So when someone computes Rs. 41 Crores - and I think that is way too low a number - it is computed out of the revenue losses of the people of Assam, not the colonion government of India. I think what afflicts the votaries of separatism is that they forgot the basics of economics after someone told them about the loss of crude royalty. So none amongst them talk about the humongous loss that day to day bandhs have on the average people of the state. Most don't get it and don't want to get it. I am sure in this whole game of Bandhs the average Assamese are a forgotten and expendable entity. Incidentally even the commie foggies of Bengal have been forced to tell their compatriots not be inconveniencing the public when they do their usual gheraos. Strikes have gone down dramatically ever since the state (the government that is) decided to lay down the law to its employees and trade bodies who are the usual culprits. --- Ram Sarangapani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > C'da, > > That was one of the best spins I have heard all > year. Inspite of the > fact that you do acknowledge that there could be > negative effects of > bondhos, you seem to say that such numbers don't > matter much since > (if) > > (a) its a loss to to State exchequer (as they don't > produce anyway) > (b) to the Center (well - thats a good thing, since > thats one more > strike against the Center ie. more bondhos the > merrier, as its the > Center that hurts in the end). > > (just because we don't want to render unto Caesar, > it surely doesn't > mean we would need to throttle ourselves first - a > fast track to > self-destruction?) :) > > The State Govt. inept as you may think it is, does > provide some > essential services to the common man. > Whether its releasing funds for retired teachers or > releasing > fertilizers or seeds for the farmer, or pensions, or > salaries (a lot > of which does go to to the lower strata) are all > affected. > > The theory that bondhos will affect the receipts to > the Center is also > flawed. The Center (right or wrong) receives a > percentage of revenues > from the State. So, if the State's receipts are > reduced, yes the > Center would also see a reduction, but the State > will now have to > contend with a smaller portion too. > > Then there is another crucial factor: When receipts > to the Center are > reduced, it tells the Center some particular > industry (Tea/plywood) is > not doing that great, investments to such industries > from the Center > could be reduced. > > Cost of bondhos is obviously in loss of > productivity. We all know the > effects of that. > > There are some hidden costs too: like discouraging > private investment > is a state plauged by bondhos every second day. That > could lead to > lower employment rates in that sector. > > The fact is bondhos affect the state/people all > around. Rs. 41 crores > per day may have been pulled from some hat (if thats > what you want to > believe). > > Rest assured, the costs must be substantial. > Prohibitive enough for > the people and intellectuals to recognize them. > Prohibitive enough for > intellectuals to discourage bondhs and suggest other > ways for people > to express grievances in ways OTHER than bandhs. And > prohibitive > enough for intellectuals NOT to encourage bondhos on > one pretext or > another. > > --Ram > > > > > On 9/6/05, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > I am an economically challenged person. Don't > understand the meaning > > of the numbers being cited. It does not matter > about the magnitudes, > > the quantities, and the accuracy of the stats. But > what in essence > > does it mean, when someone cites X-crores being > lost in Y number of > > Bondhos and thus Assam is set beck by Z number of > years? > > > > ** Does it mean that the 'sorkar' lost > revenue? If so, which > > sorkar, Assam or Central? > > > > ** Does it mean that amount of money has > evaporated or does it mean > > that exchange of goods and services > estimated to be worth that much > > did not take place? > > > > ** Does it mean productivity amounting to > that much did not take place? > > > > ** Does it mean the numbers are a > combination of some or all of the > > above? > > > > The reasons for my asking are these: > > > > I think ( I am not sure obviously), the > numbers do not tell us much. > > They would mean something substantial only > when PRODUCTIVITY of goods > > and services produced is impacted > substantially, and when salary > > and profits are impacted. > > > > What is the worth of goods produced in > Assam? Not much to begin with. > > > > Assam gets peanuts for its oil, paid as > royalty for crude. The rest > > goes to the Center, doesn't it? The > employees get paid anyway. > > > > The govt. and the lrgest employer does not > produce anything--or > > almost nothing, anyway. So any value > assigned to it would be a fiction. > > > > Commerece, exchange of goods in trade may > suffer, consumption > > level may drop on those days of the > Bondhos, but will be compensated > > by increases on the non-Bondho days. Again > the employees will get paid > > anyway. > > > > > > Not to suggest here that the Bondhos don't have > negative impacts on > > society. They obviously do. > > > > But those numbers? I think they are mostly an > attempt to look > > 'scientific', meaning very little. > > > > > > So where am I wrong :-)? > > > > > > cm > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > assam mailing list > > [email protected] > > > http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > assam mailing list > [email protected] > http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ assam mailing list [email protected] http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
