Sorry if I created confusion instead of understanding. >you feel Smart City is a project that fits within this paradigm, which creates *opportunities or jobs*.
Smart City certainly creates jobs and opportunities but it doesn't fit well into the paradigm of individual freedom and private ownership well, in its current form. The process of the government acquiring land from private individuals for a pittance and selling it to the companies at a profit (but still below market rate) fits into an autocratic regime like the Chinese, not a democracy. This should be the biggest criticism of Smart City and SEZ, not the objections based on Marxist ideology. The current policy may suit some companies and they will be loath to change it, but the governments responsibility should be to foster competition by allowing market forces to operate. But greedy companies alone are not the problem - archaic land acquisition and ownership laws, interestingly formulated during the heydays of socialism, is the major culprit. And of course, the critics should suggest solutions rather than presenting doomsday scenarios alone. Of course, I consider Marxian ideology a failed one. It is as much a faith based and psuedoscientific creed as say, Creationism is. It should not be the basis of any policy initiative. Best regards, Murali. On 7/24/07, CK Raju <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ greenyouth mailinglist is the activist support mailinglist for kerala To post to this group, send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
