[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A refutation of Naveen's opinion

Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
most of the arguments against laissez faire capitalism rely on the 
fear of capitalists consuming large amounts of resources for their 
own enrichment. This is countered by the land tax. 

The land tax or resource rent will charge the companies for usage of 
resources without bringing in the ineffieciency of Public management.
It will also assure every adult a basic "safety net" in the form of 
the citizens dividend.

We can have open auctions of resources for exploitation on the basis 
of the rent the companies are willing to pay. This will have to be 
done at a local level.I believe that the further the distance of the 
government from the people, the worse the government. I do not 
understand how decisions concerneing the life of people of india can 
be taken in GENEVA {??} in a laissez faire environment.

Naveenkj@aol.com wrote on Monday August 21, 2000 at  7:40am:
>Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate 
>In a message dated 8/20/00 12:24:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
>Cprakash@goplay.com writes:
><< ? In most of the cases the reply is "Bijli,SAdak, pani, skool" 
> remains at their core. they also want that their life be left alone
> for them to lead. i.e - "laissez faire". >>
>Exactly!  They want the basic necessities that any community strives 
for, and 
>their cries to be "left alone" should certainly be addressed.  
However, their 
>cries to be left alone by a bureaucratic government should not be 
dealt with 
>by installing a further bureaucratic system, one that they will have 
>control over.  A system that makes its decisions in Geneva and in 
New York, 
>and decides what is best for them and what is best for its own 
>gains.  Throughout history, and this is the only way globalization 
can work, 
>corporate societies have led to further involvement by the police 
state to 
>disturb the livelihoods of its citizens.  To phrase it differently, 
>laissez-faire does not translate to more autonomy to local people 
but merely 
>more autonomy to corporations to function in whatever manner they 
>Even if this meant destruction of environmental resources vital to 
>survival of a local population, or acquisition of resources in an 
>manner, etc.  When the indigenous people oppose such unfairness and 
>"exploitation", the police will be brought in to protect the 
interest of 
>corporations against the interests of the people.  Since clauses 
under the 
>WTO agreements guarantee safeguards for the foreign cartels.  
>As Vandana Shiva noted, "Globalization does mean "less government" 
>regulation of business and commerce.  But less government for 
commerce and 
>corporations can go hand in hand with more government in the lives 
>ordinary people.  As globalization allows increasing transfer of 
>from the public domain - either under the control of communities or 
that of 
>the state - discontent increases, leading to law and order 
problems.  In such 
>a situation, even a minimalist state restricted only to policing 
will become 
>enormously large and all pervasive, devouring much of the wealth of 
>and intruding into every aspect of citizens' lives."  
>In another passage she adds, "Two million weavers in Andhra Pradesh 
>their livelihoods when free export of cotton was allowed, taking 
>beyond the access of weavers.  200,000 producers of Bikaneri Bhujia 
>regional snack specialty) are threatened with the entry of PepsiCo 
in the 
>manufacture and marketing of Bikaneri Bhujia.  New power plants have 
>established by bypassing the requirements of Environmental Impact 
> Deregulation does not imply an end to the state - it is a change in 
>function of the state.  THe state is now exclusively an instrument 
of global 
>For you die-hard capitalists who might argue that Bikaneri Bhujia if 
>preferred by the market should not survive, need to realize the 
>capital available for PepsiCo to market its product against the 
local sellers 
>who are bound to perish in an unleveled playing field.  You also 
need to 
>realize the govt. support of corporations against the local business 
>protectors of self-reliant local economies. If the middle class is 
to gain 
>from introduction of Pepsi Cola, it is the poor that will suffer the 
>consiquences of their livelihoods, their family businesses and only 
source of 
>incomes being destroyed.  
>This is the National Debate on System Reform.       
>Rules, Procedures, Archives:            

| The coolest site for free home pages, email, chat, e-cards, movie info.. |
|               http://www.goplay.com - it's time to Go Play!              |

This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/