Friday, January 3, 2014

చరిత్రాత్మక అవకాశాన్ని సద్వినియోగం చేసుకోవటంలో మన్మోహన్ సింగ్ విఫలమయ్యారు: జేపీ


Posted by tnsatish at 5:24 PM
Labels: ,

3 comments:

  1. VinayJanuary 3, 2014 at 11:54 PM

    If Modi is given a clean chit by CBI which is under direct control of Central Govt, Judiciary System of the Country....how can PM call him mass murderer? By doing so, PM has indirectly accepted that those agencies are inefficient for whom his government is directly responsible/does not believe in Indian Judiciary or he is trying to malign Modi for political mileage. Either one of the above must be true.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousJanuary 4, 2014 at 5:05 PM

    Many traditional politicians and lazy thinkers in AP today are trying to encash the craze of Aam Admi Party (AAP) success in Delhi. CM Kiran Kumar is trying to benefit by emulating the AAP policy of free drinking water in Hyderabad. So, People who are aspiring for genuine new politics should observe cautiously every step and policy of every party before voting.

    Here is a read-worthy article on AAP’s free drinking water scheme in Delhi. Though the tone sounds a bit harsh, it is reasonably a good article for discussion for enabling people of India including those in Delhi understand facts. Lok Satta is the first party in India to promise safe drinking water to all in manifesto. The promise is one of the 50 guarantees the party gave to people in 2009 elections. At present also the party is working on drinking water problems all over the state. It is time that every Lok Sattaite should strive hard to raise more discussion on good politics and governance among people. ‘The best guarantee for India’s future is not simply a party’s or individual’s winning but its enlightened people’.

    These observations saying that Kejriwal’s water subsidy for Delhi is reverse Robin Hood—taking from the poor and giving to the rich, are from Surjit S Bhalla’s article published in The Financial Express on January 4, 2014…

    By announcing its two ostensibly pro-poor, pro-aam-aadmi policies concerning water and electricity, the AAP has made clear its economic vision for the country. Note that I am not crediting the AAP with its vision of a corruption-free economy and polity. That is a goal of everybody, including mothers for motherhood.

    One of the most intriguing features of the AAP’s policy on water (and electricity) is their pro-rich stance. How did this happen? One of the most stylised facts about development, incomes and poverty is that larger-family households are poorer. As the table shows, households with a family size greater than or equal to 5 members have average expenditure levels (NSSO 2011-12 data for Delhi households) only twice the poverty line. These households will pay for all the water consumed because their usage is higher on a per household basis. In contrast, those who need water less and can afford to pay more (with per capita expenditures almost four times the poverty line), will receive water free. The poor will pay R663 crore to the AAP’s water board; the rich will receive R333 crore from the AAP as subsidy. What Kejriwal and the AAP’s water policy illustrates is a perfect inversion of Robin Hood—something corrupt, in-the-name-of-the-poor Indian governments have attempted but not succeeded at so perfectly. I Phrased differently, can anyone formulate a more pro-rich policy?

    Some hints about the Kejriwal water policy can be obtained from his 2005 agitation. At that time, as many of us recall, Delhi was facing a serious water crisis caused by inefficient water management. One pilot recommendation was to privatise water management in two central areas of Delhi, representing only 12% of the customer base. It was also viewed anxiously by the central government as a test case for public-private-partnership in bringing water reforms, and infrastructure, to India. It met with considerable opposition from a new NGO wanting to make a splash—Kejriwal’s NGO called Parivartan. Kejriwal opposed the policy and succeeded. On his own exceptional calculation, he declared that the scheme was detrimental and would lead to an exponential increase in the price of water. The forecast has not come true but Kejriwal is now the CM of Delhi. Possibly, it is this early activist success that makes Kejriwal feel that he is an economic policy and water expert—but it still does not explain why he would recommend and implement a retrogressive and pro-rich water policy.

    The AAP needs to be complimented for making their philosophy and ideology so transparently transparent. Their slogans, attitude, demeanour, and policies are eerily and transparently close to that of the CPM.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Rama charyulu RachakondaJanuary 7, 2014 at 1:06 PM

    Even opposition parties also failed to rule the country for full term of the administration in the states.example. Karnataka,

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)