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

Re: Free trade: a debate



---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
------------- Original Message --------------
venugopal <gvvs@nird.ap.nic.in> wrote:
To:debate@indiapolicy.org
From:venugopal <gvvs@nird.ap.nic.in>
Date:Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:20:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject:Free trade: a debate

Is it fair to allow the markets with presently defined parameters to
operate?
-------------
Defintely not, because we don't have full responsibility of private
property yet. If property was defined in such a manner that included
rights to air quality, water quality, lack of noise, we could have a
true free market which would include costs to the environment.
-----------
Is it proper for the State to refuse to intervene on the ground that to
do so would be acting as per old 'socialistic' notions?
----------------
After 50 years of socialism, this ?? Please we don't want the government
in more places, sir.
-----------
Is it
fair to leave everything to the markets, ignoring ecological costs and
other social costs?
-----------------
Include them, as i said.
-----------------

 It is dismissed as 'utopian'.  If  Narmada Bachao

Andolan takes up this as the basis and works out a 'cost: benefit'
analysis, the courts do not accept.
---------------

the narmada dam is a clear violation of the property rights of the
villagers. It is just the march of socialism.
------------------

 It would mean that the present demand and supply
curves are not accepted as the final authority to determine the
equilibrium price, but new types of demand-supply curves are to be drawn
or alternatively new variables of energy have to be built  into the
existing formulae and accordingly a conscious  State intervention would
be necessary to see that some other price, which may be called the true
energy price, prevails over the normal equilibrium price arrived at by
present methods.
--------------------
In my solution, (not mine actually - it was proposed by ronald coase ),
this will be taken care of.
 ---------------
This  means favouring some players and penalizing some
other players in the present economy. Therefore we have to begin with
the understanding that free markets are not a solution and there are
many areas in which government needs to control, by learning from the
mistakes of the past.
-----------
The GOI is needed only for definition and implementation of property
rights. People will then define their own trade-offs between pollution
and development.


regards
Prakash



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