A FARMERS BUDGET! - REALLY?

I am no economist and do not claim to be one(being a doctor by profession). These are some of my views on the budget as I understand it from various newspaper articles and magazines especially the Frontline.
.
This budget is dubbed as a populist one targeting the common man especially those in the agricultural sector. The loan waiver announced by the Finance Minister Chidambaram is viewed by many(especially in the print media) as one that will bring a huge relief to the debt ridden farmers

However there are two clauses to the loan waiver: one is that only farmers who have borrowed from the banks could avail of the loan waiver and the other is that only farmers who have a land holding of two hectares or less could avail the loan waiver. So essentially the relief is going to reach only 25% of the farmers. It is especially not going to give relief to farmers from the suicide prone Vidharba district as most of the farmers there own more than two hectares though they are the most hit by the drought and the agrarian crisis. (This paradox is because most of these farmers have arid lands with little access to irrigation and hence the produce from each land is limited and meagre. Therefore inspite of having more than two hectares their agriculture produce is pretty less when compared to farmers who have access to irrigation and who can make a huge produce with one or two hectares.

Most of these farmers have also acquired loans from private moneylenders who charge exorbitant interest rates which have added to the farmers misery. Hence the debt relief package will not reach farmers such as those in Vidharba who are the ones in a quagmire.

Also it is touted that the debt relief package will cost the exchequer. This is not true as the banks have to write off the loans and receive bonds from the government in return and receive a steady interest rate which will cost the government only 4000 crores.

The government should have instead settled the loans borrowed from private money lenders by providing loans through co-operative banks in this regard. This proposal was mooted but was not taken up by the government.

The farmer’s predicament is truly miserable. Imagine that you have a part-time job with a company. Instead of the steady salary you receive every month the company decides to hold up your salary every time it goes through a bad patch even tough you work regularly. This comparison may sound dubious but this is somewhat the state of the Indian farmer. This is where insurance schemes can help the farmer but the government has failed to implement it properly.

The cost of input for agriculture has increased because of subsidies for fertilizers have largely decreased over the past decade. Add to this the compounding problem of drought and the increasing price of seeds.

The farmers borrows from a private moneylender and invests into his land. If a drought season comes he is left with little or no output and no money left to pay his loans which drives him to penury and suicide. Even if the rains come on time and the farmers produces a bounty of harvest he is given a minimum procurement price by the government. Though the cost of input has increased exponentially over the past few years the government keeps the support price of procurement to a minimum level. The prices are kept low so that the prices of foodgrains do not increase and contribute to further inflation. The farmers have been made the scapegoats and shock absorbers here. And the government proudly proclaims that that most of its policies are pro-poor and pro-agrarian.

Have we strangulated our farmers in our quest for liberalization? Liberalisation brought with it the upward moblility of the middle class and an increased access to consumer goods and durables such as computers and mobile phones. India was touted as the perfect destination for MNCs by the government and sops and subsidies were extended several IT companies to set shop here. However with the era of liberalization the farmer has been marginalized more and more and pushed to the background. Farmers income have declined over the past decade thanks to the policies of the government.

Many people say that Nehru made a big mistake by pursuing socialist policies in the post independence era. However they do not realize that it was his socialist policies which gave a firm support base for the economic growth of the country. If we had followed capitalist policy we would have ended up like one of the present African countries.

It is shameful that India has four billionaires in the Forbes list while simultaneously having a human development Index (HDI) of 128. I do not blame them for India’s record. However no other country from which the top ten were listed had such a dismal record except us. We are much behind Srilanka, China and even Namibia. HDI is based on gross domestic product(GDP), literacy levels and human life expectancy at birth.
India has one of the highest rate of malnutrition and underweight children at birth. Over the past few years inspite of a G.D.P of 9% we have fallen in the HDI from 126 to 128. This is because of our dismal literacy levels and life expectancy. G.D.P per capita is basically a non indicator in this regard.

By pursuing such policies India is going to put itself in deeper inextricable problems and the disparity between the rich and poor is going to increase alarmingly. We cannot be happy that a few people have reached the super-rich category while million others are struggling for three meals per day. This kind of unsustainable policies are going to wreck the country in the long run. The government can pursue liberalization policies if it simultaneously decides to protect the interests of the poor , but I don’t see this happening at all. The way we are going we will end up as brain deficient, retarded free market fundamentalists.

WOMEN'S DAY- CAUSE TO CELEBRATE?

In this post I'm not going to start singing paens to those few women who have made it big in their life. I'm going to talk about the vast majority who haven't. I am warning beforehand that this post is loaded with pessimistic thoughts and sweeping generalizations.
The other day I was reading Forbes list of the ten most richest people in the world. Most of those listed were industrialists. Obviously there was not a single woman on the list. This was hardly surprising. Women have never been in the upper echelons of business and industry.
Constituting roughly 50% of the world's population women are hardly represented in the top ranks of any field. In fact when you go through the list of Nobel prize laureates the results are even more enbarassing. Women contribute to just a handful of recepients. Is this due to the 'glass ceiling' or is the problem more deeper?
Is it that women are just not motivated or passionate enough to make it big in the world? (I know I am sounding remarkably juvenile when I say this but I don't know how else to put it). Or are their priorities just different from guys? Do they value raising children annd starting families more than they value their independence, career and profession?
When a system (ex: religion) oppresses women and puts them on a lower social status than men why aren't the oppressed raising their voices against it. Clearly it seems women just aren't interested in coming out of their 'comfort zones'. It takes a great deal of persevearence and courage to fight the system and women just aren't upto the task. They are contented in being second class to men as long as they remain in their comfort zones. They don't even support other women who have the guts to speak out. (How many Muslim women are ready to support Taslima Nasreen?) Women constitute half the population and I don't think it is impossible for them to break the shackles of a system if only they want to.
However most women (atleast in India) are contented in being a docile wife and mother as long as thier positions are not jeopardized. Surely the housewives are the bane of women's liberation.
They also blame men for their woes while it was they who played a major part in legitmizing and condoning the system in the first place. If women are not adequately represented in every field they have no one to blame but themselves. They are just inheriting their ancestor's complacency in not fighting for their rights all these years which has contributed to the sad state of affairs today. How long can one blame a society which was formed and legitimized by women? The society simply would't exist without them.
Depiction of women as sex symbols in commercial movies and advertisements doesn't help either. It only reinforces stereotypes about women and their (lack of) intellectual capacities.

REMINISCING POTTER

It has been a wonderful, mindboggling journey. One filled with happiness,sadness, joy ecstasy, hope and sorrow. I am talking about my journey with Harry Potter.
Now you might say ‘She is one of those delusional Potter maniacs who are crazy about all things Harry”.And I say “Yes!” A resounding yes. Our love for Potter extends beyond liking a well written book with an excellent plot. It has been an emotional and thrilling experience too.
How can a book, a mere book make you feel happy and sad at the same time? This one can. You’ve got to be reading Potter for a while for the experience to sink in.
I am going to confine myself to describing certain parts of the book for obvious reasons.

I first read Potter when I was in my eleventh standard. I enjoyed the first book but thought it was way too childish for my taste. However I loved the plot and Rowling’s way of bringing of the magical world of Hogwarts right in front of your eyes.This lady has tremendous imagination and creativity! Most of us Potter fans had imagined the Hogwarts castle complete with its revolving staircases and talking portraits even before the movies got released, thanks to Rowling’s beautiful descriptions.

The books started more like a beautiful fairytale and became more engaging, macabre and dark by each installment. Her last book “the Deathly Hallows” is hardly a children’s book, more to be read by teens and adults.

The best part of these books are the well fleshed out characters. Each character in the book have a three dimensional personality, a story of their own and black and white and shades of grey. This is one of the most important reason for the immense popularity of the books. There is such a variety of characters that everyone reading the book can identify with atleast one of them. Rowling highlights the positives and negatives of each character in a beautiful manner. Be it the motherly Mrs.weasley, the ever sarcastic Severus Snape or the benevolent Dumbledore each character has been brought out in its entirety. Mrs.Weasley is not only motherly but courageous, defiant and proud, Snape can also be caring and loving and Dumbledore of all people a powerhungry and cunning man.

The next best thing about the books are its plots and subplots. Rowling masterfully weaves a web of stories and and branches them out into delightful subplots with each character having a central space in the individual subplots. Her books contain heavy doses of foreshadowing and glib oneliners which become the predictions for the future books. She is also an expert at planting red herrings all the way to fool the unsuspecting readers to reach wrong conclusions which they realize only in the next book.
Her books also contain delightful little intricate details like the origin of the names of the different characters. There is also an entire family tree who have been named after stars and constellations!

A master storyteller Rowling has thrilled us like no other.