Already there is so much of global thinking on sustainable development. Exchange of thoughts and views is so common. And no dogma or theory is going to make much of a difference if decision making is dragging. So let the economists keep on debating the pros and cons of one theory or the other. Government may choose to do what they suggest or just do the opposite -as The Shah of Iran perhaps did. Meanwhile the bold decision making is going to make all the difference.If budgetary resources go up as a result of such bold steps, we will have more money n the kitty to spend on education, healthcare, employment generation and good governance. Not a bad idea at all to encourage Ambanies, Adanies , Tatas and Birlas to join in making life of our people more comfortable- just imagine the effect of a free smart phone with every family. So where is the conflict. Pure Marxism and Capitalism are Passe. It is this change that gives us hope. Who could ever imagine to see Amitabh and Akshay persuading people to use toilets or garbage cans. This is epochal change. And it is going to make all the difference. SJM is very right in boycotting dumped Chinese goods if PRC gives priority to territorial rather than economic interests. Even otherwise inherent conflict between technology and employment is going to make it very difficult to convert the demographic disadvantage into dividend. So let the economists from Oxford and Stanford discuss and debate while the government works on Agenda 2022.
"We need jobs and for that we need to focus on boosting our domestic manufacturing and not rely on imports,” Mahajan said." One of the best opportunities for this was when we were discussing the manufacture of 126 Rafale aircraft in India. NO matter how tough the discussions, we should have somehow concluded them and got a factory going to make these modern planes. Why then did the PM pre- empt even his own DEfence MInister and order 36 planes off the shelf ? Why didn't Mahajan question Mr MOdi at that stage ?
ventured right into it but then pulled up immediately and wonders how or where to go further !
He says he neither believes in the Amartya Sen model nor the *growth* model advocated in such a shrill manner by Bhagawathy or Panagariya.
He wants a *middle path* but apparently is not sure what such a path is !
Does he agree with the labour reforms aggressively pushed for by the Bhagawathy team (and which the Modi govt initially tried so clumsily to implement) ? Or is he as confused and uncertain as the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh, which keeps making contradictory noises in the matter ?
Does he go with the kind of *land reforms* tailored by the Bhagawathy team to suit the rapacious interests of big capitalists and by which large tracts of mountains, forests and rivers besides fertile farmland are proposed to be given away cheap to individuals for them to indulge in wanton pillage of mineral wealth at gigantic costs to livelihoods and to the environment ?
Or does he believe that the roughly 40 crore Indians who have no land of their own and toil on the farms of others for a pittance must be given a part of that farm land as envisaged in the constitution ?
Does he agree with the prescriptions of the WTO for international trade? If he does not as he has been labouring lately to convey in his peculiar way (by seeking to target imports from just 1 country, China), what remedy does he have to advise the govt on dealing with the after effects (WTO strictures) ?
Does he have a stand on the extent to which the social sector services (public healthcare, education, water supply, sanitation, etc) must be supported by the exchequer ?
Or does he agree with the Bhagawathys and Panagariyas that these services for commoners must be increasingly left to the mercy of big businessmen and that the govt must keep withdrawing from them as it has been doing for several years now ?
Does Mahajan agree with Panagariya and Bibek Debroy on GM seeds and the terminator technology ?
Just what is that middle path you are talking about, Mr Mahajan ?
Very amusing to see the verbal fights between economists. As it is a pure economist is not suitable for any job except as journalist. One should be first a master of Engineering, Agriculture or any applied sciences and then pursue a course in Management in the top institutes of India or abroad to have a better, down-to-earth approach. Pure graduates/ PGs / Doctorates from Schools of Economics are little use in assessments.
