"Growth is a necessary condition and we must unhesitatingly embrace growth as the highest mantra"said Finance Minister P. Chidambaram during his budget and he also said inclusive and sustainable development as ultimate mate goal.. Although it is not the right thing to begin with a quote, I must do so here because the quote signifies and hides many things at the same. I am okay with growth as long as this is not only economic growth that signifies an increase in GDP and a bull run at the stock exchange. I am all for growth if the increase in government revenues leads to higher spending in the social sector- health, education and social safety for the poor- and better outcomes. I am all for growth if it means better public transport, law and order, electricity and safe boundaries.
India has had a decent spell of growth in the last twenty years and even the "disappointing" 5% growth in 2012-2013 is not something to be scoffed at- any of the non-German europeans would be gladly willing take that growth rate and the US too. But then why is it that India has more poverty than sub-saharan africa, more children malnourished than the poorest of the poorest and a 136th rank in th Human Development Index?
The growth that India has witnessed has been the growth of the middle class and also the growth of a few individuals with good contacts with the government. The wealth of the richest Indians have grown mostly in the real estate, energy or natural resources sector and not in creation of advanced technology products or manufacturing. This was mainly gained as a result of exploitation of natural resources that belonged to the nation given away for dirt cheap prices. There are attempts to gain more of these at the cost of displacement of millions in Central India which has given rise to the red-corridor- more than anything, the red-corridor is a result of land grabbing under state sanction under the guise of development and when this is resisted, the state uses "eminent-domain" or weapons to silence the voices who try to fight back with a rag-tag army and an ideology.
The only real growth has been restricted to IT, Banking, some Public Sector Undertakings and even retail(but this merely fed on the other growth sectors) which do create products and deliver services without the need for government sops. The growth in the stock market creates no real assets as it is just the money that money makes making more money. A hoax message on twitter about a White House attacks show how volatile and unreasonable it is (a).
It is true that the government revenue has increased as a result of the growth, but not due to high taxes paid by the rich since there are only 42,800 crorepatis in the country according to the government. The increase in corporate taxes is only matched by the revenue foregone by the government (b) and so the real increase in revenue comes in large part from income taxes and indirect taxes. This from the middle-classes benefitted by the growth in a few sectors. But does the increase in revenue translate into better outcome in the social sector? Not really since we still have more poverty than sub-saharan africa, 44% of our children are undernourished and the government is nowhere near providing any sort of adequate healthcare for its people. The much lauded Right to Education has not been implemented and in places where implemented, the learning outcomes have been poor. Merely having more revenues do not translate into better social sector outcomes because sufficient money must be allocated and it must be spend accordingly.
There was a clamour that growth is necessary for national security. Well, I guess when we forget to build submarines to launch underwater missiles (c) or face inexcusable delays in delivery of defence equipment (d) it really is growth and better defence capabilities.
I do not see a growth here. I see growth in farmer suicides and in unsustainable exploitation of our environment as projects clear forests, pollute water bodies, damage eco-systems and more of the very same are offered in the name of growth. The growth that we have is coming at the cost of our environment and is not reaching the majority of our population. When Amartya Sen and Jean Dreze spoke about growth-mediated development, they meant development for everyone and not merely insane riches for a few that can remove roadblocks to access precious national resources and developing a small middle class large enough to buffer the government against nation-wide outrage.
The government does say a lot about inclusive growth, increase in social sector spending and allocation for health, education and sanitation- it has been nothing more than words. Once these words are put into action and their outcomes show they have achieved the necessary goals, then we can say that it is inclusive growth and growth is the ultimate goal. When the green cover is maintained and environment is protected, when growth is in the wealth, health and safety of all individuals, when there is access to education and jobs for all, when no one is deprived of their traditional lands, beliefs, social ties and culture to make way for a short cut to growth- then we can say India has grown.
India has had a decent spell of growth in the last twenty years and even the "disappointing" 5% growth in 2012-2013 is not something to be scoffed at- any of the non-German europeans would be gladly willing take that growth rate and the US too. But then why is it that India has more poverty than sub-saharan africa, more children malnourished than the poorest of the poorest and a 136th rank in th Human Development Index?
The growth that India has witnessed has been the growth of the middle class and also the growth of a few individuals with good contacts with the government. The wealth of the richest Indians have grown mostly in the real estate, energy or natural resources sector and not in creation of advanced technology products or manufacturing. This was mainly gained as a result of exploitation of natural resources that belonged to the nation given away for dirt cheap prices. There are attempts to gain more of these at the cost of displacement of millions in Central India which has given rise to the red-corridor- more than anything, the red-corridor is a result of land grabbing under state sanction under the guise of development and when this is resisted, the state uses "eminent-domain" or weapons to silence the voices who try to fight back with a rag-tag army and an ideology.
The only real growth has been restricted to IT, Banking, some Public Sector Undertakings and even retail(but this merely fed on the other growth sectors) which do create products and deliver services without the need for government sops. The growth in the stock market creates no real assets as it is just the money that money makes making more money. A hoax message on twitter about a White House attacks show how volatile and unreasonable it is (a).
It is true that the government revenue has increased as a result of the growth, but not due to high taxes paid by the rich since there are only 42,800 crorepatis in the country according to the government. The increase in corporate taxes is only matched by the revenue foregone by the government (b) and so the real increase in revenue comes in large part from income taxes and indirect taxes. This from the middle-classes benefitted by the growth in a few sectors. But does the increase in revenue translate into better outcome in the social sector? Not really since we still have more poverty than sub-saharan africa, 44% of our children are undernourished and the government is nowhere near providing any sort of adequate healthcare for its people. The much lauded Right to Education has not been implemented and in places where implemented, the learning outcomes have been poor. Merely having more revenues do not translate into better social sector outcomes because sufficient money must be allocated and it must be spend accordingly.
There was a clamour that growth is necessary for national security. Well, I guess when we forget to build submarines to launch underwater missiles (c) or face inexcusable delays in delivery of defence equipment (d) it really is growth and better defence capabilities.
I do not see a growth here. I see growth in farmer suicides and in unsustainable exploitation of our environment as projects clear forests, pollute water bodies, damage eco-systems and more of the very same are offered in the name of growth. The growth that we have is coming at the cost of our environment and is not reaching the majority of our population. When Amartya Sen and Jean Dreze spoke about growth-mediated development, they meant development for everyone and not merely insane riches for a few that can remove roadblocks to access precious national resources and developing a small middle class large enough to buffer the government against nation-wide outrage.
The government does say a lot about inclusive growth, increase in social sector spending and allocation for health, education and sanitation- it has been nothing more than words. Once these words are put into action and their outcomes show they have achieved the necessary goals, then we can say that it is inclusive growth and growth is the ultimate goal. When the green cover is maintained and environment is protected, when growth is in the wealth, health and safety of all individuals, when there is access to education and jobs for all, when no one is deprived of their traditional lands, beliefs, social ties and culture to make way for a short cut to growth- then we can say India has grown.
No comments:
Post a Comment