Indian Economics

I went through two full days of excellent talks, debates etc in ThinkEdu16 with lot of so called experts and when I was asked to sum up in two to three sentences I said this. It showed two sets of people with two distinct features:-

1. One articulating ideas for excellence, enhancement, and empowerment with measured relevant words.

2. Other masturbating ideology with words like secular and identity innuendos through analogies of mother, religion, paranoid presumption of saffronisation and so on.

Similarly whenever we talk about economics of lately there are two categories:-

1. One group trying to fix faults like most members of the present team of ministers.

2. Other trying to find fault with everyone in that team and fix them in the media trials and anchor room debates.

Whenever we talk about economics many seem to miss the context, here Indian economy.

In general economics, and in particular Indian economics cannot be defined in very simple terms as it is very complex with multiple factors each playing its role leaving its impact.

Economic growth or prosperity indicators in India are not share market indexes.

 Indian economy fortunately is neither share market driven nor share market centric.

I say fortunately because mark my words, and watch the fun of massive share market collapse globally and of course marginally in India too.

But it may not impact Indian economy that badly, on the contrary this gives a great  opportunity to sound economists who view globally various aspects of economics, who can think originally and who work out honestly to define measures to further enhance Indian economic structure and also help other nations too to manage the crisis.

In political economy what matters in the long run is not much about who does what and who gets the credit for what but what gets delivered to posterity.

For example if Indian has not become another Ethiopia economically the credit must go to a person whom his own party wanted to disown, Shri .P.V.Narasimha Rao. In U.K  it is Margaret Thatcher , in U.S.A it is Ronald Reagan.

They were not isolated individual army which stopped a tide, or redirected a course or created a tsunami but had clarity of thought and understanding and took firm decisions based on conviction for the good of the nation and created a conducive atmosphere in terms of policies, procedures and processes that prevented decay and instead promoted development.

Fortunately India at this crucial juncture in world economic down trend has a sane leader with a sound vision with a superb team and a saintly dedication to deliver something valuable to the nation.

While Modi is going about bringing about systematic and methodical changes for better functioning and delivering positive results in the structures of operation of various areas of governance, it is really unfortunate that he cannot do that or has not been able to do that with parliament and constitution which also need tinkering if greater good of the nation’s prosperity in the long run is involved.

In the trail of discussion I came across someone suggesting more experts- don’t we have or do you think that the government has not engaged many?

Our problem itself is because as a nation we have:-

   1. More experts than victims or issues;

   2. More critics than performers;

   3. More media trials than all courts put together;

   4. More awards than deserving people;

   5. More political parties than number of constituencies;

   6. More NGOs working for poor than the number of actual poor people;

   7. More departments than number of bureaucrats;

   8. More criminals than police force;

   9. More companies than products manufactured;

   10. More news Channels [nuisance channels] than news items;

  Real Swatch Bharath needs to weed out some of these.