On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Financial reforms versus gravy train subsidy? Mismanage and then sell bonds,
> raise rates on freight etc?
I assume you are asking for examples where the government has backed
big business policies and found itself in a fight with the people?
Glad to supply, there are many - but first, I want to point out that
economists like Jahangir Aziz, the Chief Economist of JP Morgan Chase,
with his column in the WSJ
{
FEBRUARY 3, 2012
India's Intractable Inflation
Recent good news obscures serious long-term problems.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203711104577198512286220678.html
}
(Full text pdf: http://d.pr/LPzD)
who proclaim that social welfare schemes like the NREGS are bad
because they are causing inflation by putting money in the hands of
the rural poor are false prophets.
These are economists who have forgotten the meaning of equitable
social progress and economics led development. Economics isn't only
about increasing the assets on the balance sheets, it is about
restoring the dignity of humanity and eradicating poverty. It is about
fulfilling the human promise.
BTW, it is also about respecting Article 47 of the Indian
constitution. [http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1551554/]
Indian law stipulates no forest land can be cleared without the
approval of people who stake claim to the land. This has been violated
numerous times (Vedanta, POSCO, Navi Mumbai Airport - the total list
goes into the hundreds of instances) by the Singh government with
expected consequences - either there are poor tribals who find
themselves joining the ranks of urban poor, or the ranks of Maoists or
the ranks of protestors or there is massive ecological disaster and
irreversible destruction of scarce natural habitats.
BT Brinjal was stopped on health and safety grounds, however not
before Bolgard 1, the Monstanto BT Cotton seed was allowed into India
with much fanfare in 2009 - it uses the same gene Cry1AC as BT Brinjal
and it has been rendered ineffective in the field - net result more
pesticides are needed than ever before and new varieties of pests have
been created.
{
DINESH C. SHARMA NEW DELHI, MARCH 6, 2010
Bt cotton has failed admits Monsanto
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/Bt+cotton+has+failed+admits+Monsanto/1/86939.html
}
Walmart and Tesco were stopped from entering India thanks to massive
protests and political opposition. Why, is this good? After all
Walmart & Co bring in supply chain efficiencies that are much touted
by the false prophet economists.
Protectionism is necessary in a world where capital flight holds
democracies to ransom. Large scale efficiency as promised by Walmart &
Co is beneficial in the short term, only because it socializes the
cost.
The self-employed retailers form a large part of the Indian work force
- it helps keep the Indian family system together, as family run shops
decline and people abandon villages and suburbs to work in the city a
single household bifurcates into many nuclear households - where the
sum of costs is greater.
Mothers having to work, a new life amidst urban chaos all lead to
greater stress levels leading to lower health, mortality and social
unrest and eventually much greater financial burdens. These costs are
hidden because the reporting of these costs is hard and there is an in
built human weakness to think short term (I wonder how many of you are
following along even at this point in my email).
Out of work retailers who have never been trained to work in the "wage
slave" economy will suddenly find themselves facing starvation and
economic depression. These are otherwise skilled people who suddenly
face a life where their livelihood has been robbed from them.
Large scale unemployment has a direct correlation to increase in crime
rates, increase in poverty, a decline in moral values, societal
unhappiness, stress levels, divorce rates, falling infrastructure
standards and so on.
Walmart & Co will force farmers who are holding out against GMO crops
to comply with uniform sourcing guidelines. When farmers sign
contracts with companies like Walmart they assume all the risk of crop
failure. In a lean season farmers currently get by with sustenance
farming; when they face penalties for non-delivery they face a debt
trap. An illiterate farmer cannot hope to negotiate a fair deal with a
multinational giant corporation.
It could tragically even spell the death of the small farmer, because
it is not in W&Co's interest to deal with numerous small farmers.
Large land holdings farmed with massive farm equipment and combine
harvesters is better for the bottom line. However, the costs of
thousands of unemployed farmers on society is enormous and vastly more
than any tax on profits that society can hope to earn.
W&Co will force cities and states to compete against each other to
offer tax havens. One state which is facing the socialized debt caused
by unemployment and lifestyle loss due to W&Co will be unwilling to
settle for less, yet a smaller neighboring state that hasn't been
affected by W&Co as much will have the incentive to offer lower taxes
- because they think they are insulated from the losses of the
neighboring state. (Well not fully insulated, but since most people
think in short term time windows, they will underestimate the hidden
cost of migration and social unrest)
The modern supply chains of Walmart are going to be very reliant on
power and fuel which use scarce carbon resources - which are hard to
find in a country of limited means - less than 45% of India's fuel and
electricity needs are currently met.
Economic growth and consumer choice alone isn't social progress, no
matter what popular belief has been for a while now.
Three examples are enough for now I think?
