Poorer individuals usually attempt to benefit from the public good without contributing to its provision. This is encouraged by the state policies which are vote bank driven, and state rarely plans any program or scheme which empowers the farmer. Free electricity sheme in Andhrapradesh, distribution of colour Television sets in Tamil nadu never empowers any section of the society inturn leads to under-production (inefficient production) of the public good. I had attended many NSS camps roaming 100 and odd villages vaccinating animals and distributing medicines to the farmers, NSS camp will be success only when it is conducted for free and without taking a single penny, other wise the turn out will be very low. Even the well off people are habituated to take the benefit from the public good without much contribution. This can be changed only by framing developmental activities which are more participatory should be in a way, contribute to the system and reap the benefits.
M.Amarender reddy
(28004)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Dear Amar,
I would personally; disagree with you on your comment that the poorer individuals usually attempt to benefit from the public good without contributing to its provision. I would like to say that the state extends support to such issues not just because of the vote bank consideration, but because it is a part of the duties of the government as a welfare state.
In fact, the bare minimum amount of support extended by the state in the form of free medical facility, subsidised feed, good AI facility at affordable cost, etc. can be considered as an investment by the state. I prefer to call it an investment by the state because all these tend to increase the average productivity of animals of the state, and thereby result in increased production and thus keep the prices of livestock products under control.
In fact thinking on this line, I even dare to say that the government is indirectly subsidising the items consumed by the rich city dwellers by providing subsidy to the poor farmer.
There is something called Justice that you and I would find it difficult to deliver or even to agree because we are the privileged ones who are regularly and very systematically exploiting our less privileged brothers and sisters by using our short sighted, lopsided rules.
I call it so because the very same rules that assure equal rights to all its citizens have caused a pathetic situation where the farmer who produced the food to feed all of us is starving at the end of the day - in some unknown area.
I seriously doubt why these people are not protesting against the injustice showered on them by the society and the state.
At last, I would also like to add that it is not fair to term the small amount of money spent for the poor as ”subsidy” and the large sums of money spend to subsidise the rich as an “Incentive”.
Cijo K. Joseph (28010)
Dear Amar,
I am not saying that your observations are wrong but there is need for the further analysis especially when we are talking about the rural context, my argument is
India adopt the definition of the Below Poverty Line(BPL) as Rs. 12 per day per person. When all the present government policies are adopted as per the international funding agencies like world bank, than why the definition of “less than $1” for abject poverty of world bank is not adopted? Even government is regularly reducing the caloric requirement from 2400 calories/ day (in 1971 by planning commission) to 1800 calories/ day (in 60th round NSS in 2004) to bring the figures of the numbers of BPL families in reducing trend and the writer has put forward the fact that if 2400 calories/day norm is followed than 70% rural population is below poverty line in 2004 against the official claim of 20%.
Under such condition of abject poverty, when thousands of farmers are committing suicide due to heavy debt conditions and hunger (most of the cases are from Andhra Pradesh itself). Can we expect from the farmers that they will come and pay for the medicine for the animals, when they themselves do not have food to eat?
I agree with Cijo that the free distribution of medicine and subsidised feed is an investment. I believe this will help the farmers to come out of abject poverty condition.
Akshay Kumar Gupta
(28003)
It is the responsibility of the state to provide the basic amenities for the survival of its citizens. To make citizens capable enough to attain their basic needs providing education and creation of employment is necessary.
If the state is unable to fullfill this responsibility, it tries to cater to the needs for the survival by providing facilities like PDS,free of cost A.I.facilities so that the minimum require for the survival is met or some income generation is done.It should not be taken as free distribution for some gain by the Government,rather it is the the responsibity of every person in the society to see that none of his fellow citizen dies due to hunger.
If some people are misusing these facitilies or are taking undue advantage it is the responsibility of the fellow citizen to prevent them from doing so rather than accusing the Government for its failure to check its misuse.
Dear Amar,
The nature of poor section you are talking towards government policies may be related to human psycholgy towards free goods.But we give less value to such free goods.Free distribution of medicines, electricity, will not help much untill a sense of responsibity is created among the users.Many state government has introduced a minimum charge in their public hospitals.This also makes government help more sustainble. The success of NSS camp you may be mesuring in terms of animals attended the camp but in terms of real improvemnet of production such distribution would not help much.However such policies my help government to gain immidiate popularity.
Post a Comment