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

Re: Method of privatization, etc.



---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof Roy,

a) I think this is the still the 'right' time for your agenda (of 1990-1,
to Rajiv Gandhi) to circulate all over the world. Pl. send it over to IPI
as assured by you on my visit to IIT. We must discuss it and circulate it
widely. 

b) Your fantastic IEA monograph of 1984 has been finally scanned. Should be
up in a few days. 

c) >we are seeing requests from rather fat and rather lazy
>cats for discounted purchases of relatively profitable public
>enterprises....

This is a genuine problem which leads to a very bad name for
'liberalization.' Just like giving guarantees of 16% ROI to Enrons is
WRONG, plain and simple, so also selling off public assets without
transparency and thus possibly at major loss, is WRONG. Please let us
discover a general method which will be free and fair, and widely publicise
it. 

How was my recent proposal on this subject? 

At 08:42 PM 02/29/2000 -0800, Prof. Roy wrote:
>
>>Either the Suboroto Roy method of early 1990s (vide his agenda for the
>>Congress, the copy of which I have requested him to share with us) of
>>ensuring that each citizen is provided a share of the public assets
>>directly through a share of bundled equity should be followed, or some mix
>>which is practical, such as the following:
>
>-- Dr Sabhlok has kindly named a possible method of privatization after me;
>it is not exactly as good as having a subatomic particle or a major physical
>constant named after one, but it is a kind thought nevertheless.
>
>Since the time I did the work for Rajiv Gandhi, I have had the following
>additional thoughts on this subject -- business involves risks, and profits
>or losses on capital risked are the rewards of good or bad decisions.   When
>businesses were sinking for whatever reason (in the 1960s and 1970s) there
>was demand from businessmen often enough for nationalisation... i.e. for the
>Union or State Governments to absorb the costs of bankruptcy.    So the
>taxpayer absorbed those costs, or rather the general public did via
>inflation.   Now the reverse is called for... we are not seeing our famed
>businessmen come forward and offer to TURN AROUND bad Government companies
>(e.g. like Indian Airlines) through the alleged excellence of their
>entrepreneurship; we are seeing requests from rather fat and rather lazy
>cats for discounted purchases of relatively profitable public
>enterprises....
>
>Subroto Roy.
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
>Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>

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