Election once again has started throwing data on the public forum, when the services of the economists are being used to measure the merits of the development. The key holed eyed economist are again judging using the time and variables which they only can define as the unit for the representation of their argument. The reinvention of the data takes place which even the original collectors of information like NSSO, RBI, WB, or others would have imagined to use. The deconstruction of the economy in the claim to be politically correct development jumps out of the economic boxes and does a shadow boxing for the political masters. The utility of the Nobel and ultra Nobel, elite economists thrown out of race of award often fight for the opposition whom this gentlemen represent. The representation of data in the favour of the parties who tries to disown the economic preferences of the ruling parties often treat the data from the government as farce and not to be quoted. In most of the cases they build the economic argument based on the political notion of the justification as if the data (if its so) can be manipulated to suit a political agenda.
In a way the political masters do not control the economic affairs as it is made to believe, they are not one who can feed the poor or even stop the down slide of the economy. They are no way responsible for the development status of the people, why the economists make us believe that what you are looking at is the outcome of the political gentlemen/women who tried very hard to save you from economic oblivion.
The international development forums have often rejected, economic indicators as true representative of the 'development' of the people and regions. What macro economy represents anyway..a state of health regarding the country. There are some who tries to overthrow the planning commission, who rather shall be strengthened for whatever they would have done in last 60 plus years. Is it so easy that for the sake of the political freedom the division of the nation should be accepted. Whether there is political nexus between a national and regional parties to weaken the development strategies from central organisation, for more federal power to the state in the name of financial autonomy. In the competition between the political parties, which in India is getting transformed into the state autonomy (which on the ground is not true) in the macro economic debates turns out to decentralization of power for the sake of political benefits. If at all the states transfers similar financial autonomy to the constituent districts.
Development in the election year have become a show game for the political parties often reflecting the feudal mindset with exclusive political strategies to corner maximum funds from the corporate. The deprived social class as always were granted little political mileage in the development debate since they rather contribute little to the national and state domestic product. The growth charts cannot be filled while the poor are serviced by the state, the free education, land rights, rights to health, forest rights, creation of wealth at grassroots shows no insight from the popular economic theorists and thinkers who run after the political masters for the sake of intellectual acceptance. The realization of the development inputs cannot only be take if there is public-private participation where public means government and private means corporate. The sectors which were limited to the government departments mainly tribal, forest, irrigation, education, health etc were privatized by the government citing bad economics after the post liberalization. But these social change by installing the corporate partners did not help in improvement of social sectors. Most of the economically developed states are examples of giving not so good human development indicators. In fact HDI is common indicators where the economic development has lesser impact if the fundamental resources of the respective states remain intact.
In fact the economic principles practiced by many intellectual who often que before the political class are nurtured by desire to gain the power to have say in handling millions of rupees often at the cost of the common men. The idea of the projects and crores of rupees in the schemes gives immense satisfaction to such who are often not bothered to understand the outcome or forget about the social audit. Most the million rupee scheme are wasted on the lack of monitoring, where outcome is not the goal to which economists have worked rather they limit themselves to the funding.
In a way the political masters do not control the economic affairs as it is made to believe, they are not one who can feed the poor or even stop the down slide of the economy. They are no way responsible for the development status of the people, why the economists make us believe that what you are looking at is the outcome of the political gentlemen/women who tried very hard to save you from economic oblivion.
The international development forums have often rejected, economic indicators as true representative of the 'development' of the people and regions. What macro economy represents anyway..a state of health regarding the country. There are some who tries to overthrow the planning commission, who rather shall be strengthened for whatever they would have done in last 60 plus years. Is it so easy that for the sake of the political freedom the division of the nation should be accepted. Whether there is political nexus between a national and regional parties to weaken the development strategies from central organisation, for more federal power to the state in the name of financial autonomy. In the competition between the political parties, which in India is getting transformed into the state autonomy (which on the ground is not true) in the macro economic debates turns out to decentralization of power for the sake of political benefits. If at all the states transfers similar financial autonomy to the constituent districts.
Development in the election year have become a show game for the political parties often reflecting the feudal mindset with exclusive political strategies to corner maximum funds from the corporate. The deprived social class as always were granted little political mileage in the development debate since they rather contribute little to the national and state domestic product. The growth charts cannot be filled while the poor are serviced by the state, the free education, land rights, rights to health, forest rights, creation of wealth at grassroots shows no insight from the popular economic theorists and thinkers who run after the political masters for the sake of intellectual acceptance. The realization of the development inputs cannot only be take if there is public-private participation where public means government and private means corporate. The sectors which were limited to the government departments mainly tribal, forest, irrigation, education, health etc were privatized by the government citing bad economics after the post liberalization. But these social change by installing the corporate partners did not help in improvement of social sectors. Most of the economically developed states are examples of giving not so good human development indicators. In fact HDI is common indicators where the economic development has lesser impact if the fundamental resources of the respective states remain intact.
In fact the economic principles practiced by many intellectual who often que before the political class are nurtured by desire to gain the power to have say in handling millions of rupees often at the cost of the common men. The idea of the projects and crores of rupees in the schemes gives immense satisfaction to such who are often not bothered to understand the outcome or forget about the social audit. Most the million rupee scheme are wasted on the lack of monitoring, where outcome is not the goal to which economists have worked rather they limit themselves to the funding.
No comments:
Post a Comment