Rich diet for the poor is often a weapon of exclusion. Uniformly served with apparent equity, it can be of no help to the poor as they can’t afford or can’t get access as it militates against their diminished position.
Development Economics literature says, contrary to general belief, much more can be spent on the poor depending on what kind of primacy is given to military spending, vanity projects and spending which camouflage exclusive benefits to the rich. Finally, consistently high economic growth – which is equitable – does matter; The dream of ‘global power status,’ ’regional hegemon,’ ‘blue water navy’ are distractions, not the real priorities for a country which is primarily poor, growing ever so slowly, where the distribution is egregious.
If we had any doubt about the country’s divergent course, the pandemic has settled it with 40 percent below poverty line; if $3.8 per capita purchasing power parity is taken, it will be upward of 70 percent. There are not many jobs on the horizon and increasingly profits take a larger share of the earnings at the cost of wages. The middle class has at least lost out 5 percent and is wary of consumption.
The principal drawback of our reform has been the removal of supply constraints at the neglect of demand creation. When jobs are not being created in the industry to enable transition from agriculture to industry, stagnating demand is understandable.
-30-
Copyright©Madras Courier, All Rights Reserved. You may share using our article tools. Please don't cut articles from madrascourier.com and redistribute by email, post to the web, mobile phone or social media.Please send in your feed back and comments to [email protected]
