We
fret about small vendor encroachment in the cities of developing countries.
But, if we measure the public space occupied, for example, in New Delhi by the
cars of the rich, since they build their homes from [boundary] wall to [boundary]
wall, leaving no space for their cars within their own privately owned space,
this far outstrips the area occupied by the poor vendors – Kaushik Basu [1]
Prof. Kaushik Basu is no
bleeding-heart lefty, much less a card carrying communist. After all, he is the
chief economic advisor to the ministry of finance of the Government of India. I
read the above lines only a few days ago, though it was sitting there to be
read, when I bought the book, from July 2011 (I told you I am a slow reader).
Now refer to my blog post
[2] and you would see that I espouse a sentiment that is almost identical to
what the good professor had said. The date of that post is end December 2011,
after I had bought the book but it had lain unread (my claim; you are welcome
to dispute it). There was also another post of mine [3], in which I tried a
little light hearted take on the same issue. But, the message I sent out must
have been crystal clear – subsidies are garnered as much, if not more, by the
middle classes as by the rich. While Prof. Basu has referred specifically to
the rich, I had extended it to a rung lower on the ladder of class. By the way,
this post is dated end October 2011 and enjoys the same level of credibility as
the other post, as regards my claim that these thoughts came to me not through
Prof. Basu.
Indeed, I have posted in
similar vein much earlier, a photograph showing a car parked on the footpath
outside what appears to be an upper middleclass house in a different forum that
unfortunately denies access to me the blog post. Yet, I am able to post that
photograph below:
Notice
too that within the boundary walls two more cars are parked!
I am sure, if ever queried
on his usurping public space just as Prof. Basu had written, the owner of the
car would point to the cobbler on the footpath and justify his actions. Though
I cannot give the date of this photograph, I can tell you it must be much
before I bought Prof. Basu’s book under reference. Who occupies public spaces
for private use more – the rich, the middle class or the poor – is a matter of
abiding interest for me. I am glad that I have found a kindred soul of some
authority, Prof. Basu speaking in the exact same language. I am patting myself
on the back.
Let me hear from Prof. Basu
again, to complete this piece.
The
amount of subsidy that is given to the rich far outstrips what is given to the
poor – Kaushik Basu [1]
Amen to that.
Raghuram Ekambaram
References
1.
Beyond
the Invisible Hand, Kaushik Basu, Penguin Books, (ISBN
9780143415756)
14 comments:
The actions of rich gets sanctity by a salute from the traffic cop whereas the poor vendor pays through his nose
It's a rich man's world as it has always been.
And that's a very shallow world too. Go about wearing a very ordinary dress and people won't bother about you. Go wearing a western suit and you get what you want!
Go by public transport and they think you stink. Go by a car and you're a VIP!
Funny world, isn't it? That's why they sang long ago, "Money, money, money, It's so funny/ It's a rich man's world..."
Thanks Balu ... it is also the fact that many among the Anna Hazare crowd indulge in these appropriations of public space ... that is not corruption, of course because it is doe by the Team Anna followers!
RE
Matheikal, it has alwas been the rich man's world but it is becoming the world of the "wannabe rich" also!
RE
any encroachment in the public property is to be taxed . whether it is a cobbler or a rich land lord..
DS sir, that is great ... yet, one would ask whether that tax will be progressive and this is where the next battle lines will be drawn. By the way, some years ago the Delhi government mooted a nominal monthly charge for overnight parking of vehicles on road and it was opposed tooth and nail by home owners through Resident Welfare Associations!
When it comes to parting with money, the middle class takes the cake, because their aspirations are being effectively toned down.
RE
"The amount of subsidy that is given to the rich far outstrips what is given to the poor"
I am not sure if I should compare the amount itself or the ratio of subsidy to one's wealth.
I guess that is my middle-class thinking that allows me to crib. If I consider that ratio...then, the poor seems to get close to 100%, the rich gets something close to 0% but they are not really bothered about subsidies. But alas, the middle-class enjoys neither.
:)))))
Arjun,
It depends on what is your concern: is it equality amongst all the citizens, the outgo from the exchequer, or equity, in which people have the luxury ofdefining it to one's own convenience?
You also have to give some thought to what the subsidy does, to the individual and also the society as a whole. To the rich, the subsidy helps in balooning their wallets. To the poor, the subsidy at worst is for mere survival and at best it becomes the equivalent of Adam Smith's linen shirts ot foster self-dignity in social interactions.
Actually, if one parsed your statement, the subsidy to the poor in infinite, as they do not have any wealth. By the way, I read somewhere that someone mooted that people with wealth of more than Rs. 1,00,00,000 pay a tax. So, let us consider one tenth of that as roof-cum-floor divide.
RE
I agree with you. cannot add much to what you have already said.
As is the buzzword these days, the shift in policy is from 'welfare' to 'rights' based approach. The sense of entitlement cuts both ways, and it is always 'their' entitlement versus 'our' entitlement, the latter being perceived and marketed as more 'deserving'.
As Matheikal has commented, it has always been a rich man's world, so what exactly is new ~).
Pala,
It was very satisfying for me to read an economist who is not a leftist espousing attitudes similar to mine.
Thanks a lot.
RE
Hi Aditi,
I understand what you say. But, I believe that you jumped too fast from "rights" to "entitlements". The "rights" approach, as I understand, puts a floor to save people from a free fall, whereas the entitlement argument merely does a tit-for-tat - "you got that; therefore, I should get this".
The "this" is not merely compared to "that" but an equality is sought to be established, between a parked car and a cobbler plying his trade.
It is distinctly possible I am wrong on all counts. So be it, as it won't be the first time :)
And I like your smiley better than mine ~)
RE
hi Raghu, 'entitlement' translates to outcome of 'right' in Govt parlance...and no, it is not really tit for tat...say getting overtime allowance of X amount has become an 'entitlement' for categories of non-gazetted employees in Govt itself, irrespective of whether they work for that many extra hours (read do not).
That indeed is corruption, but one which will filter through any and all lokpal, Aditi ... Within the government, I accept your argument.
RE
Post a Comment