[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: WTO and socialism
---Vinay Chandekar <email@example.com> wrote:
> This topic started off by your statement that Indiahad not made
> progress. This is not a matter of debate but ofStatistics. Just compare
> the respective figures for 1947 and present day forproduction of Steel,
> Sulphuric acid, Textiles, No. of Universities &other learning
Whatever success india has had is isolated. We shouldstop patting ourselves
on the back for isolated achievements. Why do we repeatedly keep talking
about foodgrain production, milk production, space technology, nuclear
bombs and a few nobel laureates?
The reason is that we have nothing else to show. The system has not
contributed to the above successes either. Individual brilliance mattered.
The system has ruined the country. I do not doubt the ability of indians.
Indians have great potential. I do not doubt the system we have. I know it
is useless. As useless as any system based on socialism can be.
> It is useless to link progress to any one political system - political
> systems are composed of men who run them : if the warehouse keeper is a
> thief, don't blame the producer if the good stored do not reach the
The point here is that we don't have a warehouse. what we have is a
> The business climate today is quite open - you can open any business you
I have answered this elsewhere.
> want. The reason why investment has not flooded India in the way it has
> into SE Asian countries is because India, very rightly, does not allow
> unfettered profit repatriation facilities, as well as putting curbs on
> hire and fire policies.
So you say that being unemployed is preferable to being employed for say,
three years and then being fired? I am not trying to put words in your
mouth. I also know that you do not intend that but that is exactly what
will happen. Unless there are industries, there won't
be jobs. As for repatriation of profits, I am sure we can work out a way
where both parties benefit. At this point please note the following four
concepts should not be confused. They are different from each other and
there is no reason why we should not accept one while rejecting another.
(1) Capitalism (2) Free Trade (3) Floating Currency (4) Convertibility
I am all for the first three. I am for convertibility where there is no
speculation. Permit it for genuine business, not for gambling.
> You can draw your own conclusions from the financial crisis in SE Asia
> which has come about solely because of the free flow of capital in and
> out of these countries. Even World Bank, IMF and anybody who matters is
> coming to this point of view.
As I said, free flow of capital, i.e., convertibility is different from the
other 3 concepts. Why oppose them tooth and nail. There is no reason for
convertibility. The question came up a few months back and no sound
economic reason could be found for having free flow of capital.
> You should concentrate on finding the loopholes thru' which the fruits
> of Indian efforts are leaking out and stop them.
If you have a system where the loopholes are bigger than the system, it is
time to do some soul searching. In india, that is the case now. All thanks
to Nehruvian Socialism.
> I think our undestanding of gold standard and floating rate of exchange
> is diametrically opposite. Gold confers a certain value on the currency
> of a country - floating rate of exchange depends on Speculators.
Floating rate reflects the true worth of a currency. It is the market rate.
Holding it at artificial levels does not solve any problem. It does not
come down because of speculation. If it comes down, it means the
productivity has come down. In case of SEA countries, it did not come
down. It came to its REAL worth. It was highly inflated due to speculation
for the past few years. It is not that these countries have lost anything.
They should be happy that they had an inflated lifestyle for at least a few
years. A lifestyle which they did not earn.
(Of course, even this REAL level is better than india's current level.)
> By your statement that Elephants should behave like elehants, you seem
> to mean that India has become a Superpower econo-mically. Well, I would
We have the potential. We have not become one but can definitely become one
> very much like that to come about but as the situation now stands we are
> far from that goal. Our Industries, especially the smaller ones, are not
> in a position to compete with Western institutions. Even a food producer
> such as Sarah Lee is too organized for the Idli-wada South Indian Snack
> sellers. So what do you want ? Do you want all indigenous sellers of
> these cheap snacks to disappear throwing thousands of low-level
> wage-earners on the street
YES!! If there is a demand for idli-vada, they will find alternate
employment. Obviously the millions who consume the idli-vada deserve
consideration over the thousands who sell them. They deserve better
quality. In all probability, what will happen is that they will improve the
quality and it will be safe to eat even at their stalls. If their business
it is because they supplied inferior and dangerous foodstuff. Again, as
long as there is demand for idlis, they will find such jobs.
> so that you can justify your intellectual
> prejudices of free market.
"intellectual", "philosophy", "ideology", "welfare", "pro-poor" are all
terms associated with JNU brand economists. Don't you know, those who
support free market economy are selfish people who derive sadistic pleasure
from the misery of the poor. What is more, rich capitalists like Bill Gates
or Rupert Murdoch shoo away those who approach them for charity and USA
never helps nations in crisis!
> This years Noble Prize for Economics has gone to a THINKER who says
> unfettered markets are NOT good.
There is an interview in SUNDAY (before the Nobel was awarded) in which he
says that india has not liberalized enough.
This is a posting to India_Policy Discussion list: firstname.lastname@example.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives: http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/