|
|
|
|
Articles: TP Features | | '%yU TU brUTas#`!?%' | |
|
| Prof. Krishna Rao,
It seems that you read books and look at the world only to endorse your age old view point. Instead, you can use that knowledge to update yourself so that your views suit to the comtemporary world. I wish to elaborate two points here in response to your eassy.
Capitalizations and SEZs are really to help the needy poor who can not survive with agriculture. They are likely to provide lot of small scale employment for normal livelihood. And supermarkets such as Whalmarts, E-marts, Carreyfours, Homevers etc. should also come. They provide quality goods for the above middle class and high class society, and employment for the below middle class and poor. Besides, they indirectly help farmers to obtain more yields in agriculture. This is all part of globalization and development. Our country should move forwards in joining the rest of the world. This is what perhaps Jyothi Basu kept in mind when he comments. Please try to understand instead of passing on comments.
Secondly, women empowerment is the basic formula for success in any developed country. Unfortunately, women are still mostly dependents in India. That is the reason why we are lagging behind. The 25 paise interest scheme is one which provides much scope for empowering the rural women. I dont know the motives and intentions of Dr. Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy in starting this scheme. But, I believe this scheme is going to be the best among all such schemes not only in AP but in India, and he will be largely remembered out of this scheme only. It is likely to bring lot of changes in the rural economy and particularly in the mindset of rural women. I am sorry why you could not visualise such a possibility and merely cite that scheme as an election gimmick though it was started much much before the elections.
Posted by: Mr. Raja At: 3, Feb 2008 1:55:58 PM IST
Prof. Krishnarao is apparently more communistic than communists themselves. National interest should be the criterian of any public leader.
The Professor didn't like Jyothi Basu stating the reality. Mr. Professor, is it owing to globalization that 70% of countryside agrarians and 30% of below poverty level people are affected or because of inherent Indian economy? What happened during the 60 years of freedom of the country and democratic rule at the center and in the states. Indian democracy honourably allowed even communists to rule the states. The Lok Sabha speaker is a CPM. You think that globalization is an unfortunate development in the democracy. Being a professor, you should do research into the Indian problems. Instead, like a street politician you simply pass remarks. China has developed because of thoroughly implementing capitalism. They did that after miserably failing in implementing communism.
Forget about China. What are basic problems of Indian economy. Subdivision and fragmentation of landholdings. The inheritance laws are such that landholdings are subdivided. That is the main reason for countryside problems. It is not globalization as you imagine. Do research to solve this problem or bring pressure on the government to create conditions of full employment instead of distributing one or half-an-acre of poramboke land which will not solve problems of unemployment and underemployment in the countryside. Common sense suggestss that diversion of people from agriculture to industries should be done while encouraging people to consolidate their landholdings.
Posted by: Mr. Patram Bhargava At: 3, Feb 2008 2:52:03 AM IST
| |
|
|
 |
| Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
| Advertisements |
|
