India’s policymakers need to ensure that labourers, and milk and newspaper delivery workers, do not have to sacrifice food just to keep a roof over their heads.
In the latest budget, the FDI limit was increased to 100 percent, but most foreign companies are not buying such large stakes in the Indian insurance sector.
New Delhi: India’s air defence systems intercepted and destroyed 1,000 drones and missiles launched by Pakistan on 9 May during Op Sindoor, Prime Minister...
As Narendra Modi becomes India’s second-longest consecutively serving Prime Minister, we look at how he compares with Indira Gandhi across four key dimensions.
In light of these arguments, efforts were made over the years to liberalise the farm market. In 2003, the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government sought to dilute the APMR Act’s provisions by introducing a new Model Act, which allowed market yards to be set up by other entities, including the private sector and farmer cooperatives. Vajpayee’s successor as Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, sought to introduce foreign investment in retail, hoping thereby to increase competition in the farm market.
The whole oped is about the above few sentences.
‘Liberalising’ means private and farmer cooperatives, and that will give farmers better price because there is “increased competition”.
There is no data to back up this claim. But even the premise is so flawed how can this guy be taken seriously. Increased competition almost always leads to lower prices.
1. Till now all our political parties have implemented policies which are beneficial for a small percentage of big, influential farmers. BJP leaders are no exception to this rule. 2. In the past, the State and Central governments in power wished to implement and they have actually implemented populist schemes for securing votes of small & marginal farmers. These schemes are of little benefit for the millions of small & marginal farmers for which they are meant. 3. As per 2013 report of National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), which is a government organisation, the number of agricultural households in rural India during the agricultural year July 2012- June 2013 was 90.2 million. Further, about 69 percent of the agricultural households possessed land less than one hectare during same agricultural year. Instead of taking steps to increase farm productivity and farmers’ income, politicians indulge in implementation of wasteful schemes like loan waivers. 4. I think our Central & State governments’ first priority should be to implement programmes which will result in substantial increase in income of a majority of our rural households. When small farmers face difficulties on account of natural disasters like drought or untimely rain and need financial support it is our Central & State governments’ responsibility to provide it. But loan waiver is only short term solution. Incidentally, I also wish to say that City citizens have a lot of empathy for millions of small & marginal farmers. City citizens will gladly pay a special tax/surcharge on income tax if proceeds of this tax go to needy farmers’ bank accounts.
In light of these arguments, efforts were made over the years to liberalise the farm market. In 2003, the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government sought to dilute the APMR Act’s provisions by introducing a new Model Act, which allowed market yards to be set up by other entities, including the private sector and farmer cooperatives. Vajpayee’s successor as Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, sought to introduce foreign investment in retail, hoping thereby to increase competition in the farm market.
The whole oped is about the above few sentences.
‘Liberalising’ means private and farmer cooperatives, and that will give farmers better price because there is “increased competition”.
There is no data to back up this claim. But even the premise is so flawed how can this guy be taken seriously. Increased competition almost always leads to lower prices.
1. Till now all our political parties have implemented policies which are beneficial for a small percentage of big, influential farmers. BJP leaders are no exception to this rule. 2. In the past, the State and Central governments in power wished to implement and they have actually implemented populist schemes for securing votes of small & marginal farmers. These schemes are of little benefit for the millions of small & marginal farmers for which they are meant. 3. As per 2013 report of National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), which is a government organisation, the number of agricultural households in rural India during the agricultural year July 2012- June 2013 was 90.2 million. Further, about 69 percent of the agricultural households possessed land less than one hectare during same agricultural year. Instead of taking steps to increase farm productivity and farmers’ income, politicians indulge in implementation of wasteful schemes like loan waivers. 4. I think our Central & State governments’ first priority should be to implement programmes which will result in substantial increase in income of a majority of our rural households. When small farmers face difficulties on account of natural disasters like drought or untimely rain and need financial support it is our Central & State governments’ responsibility to provide it. But loan waiver is only short term solution. Incidentally, I also wish to say that City citizens have a lot of empathy for millions of small & marginal farmers. City citizens will gladly pay a special tax/surcharge on income tax if proceeds of this tax go to needy farmers’ bank accounts.
शरद जोशी प्रणित स्वतंत्र भारत पार्टी के महाराष्ट्र अध्यक्ष के रूप में मैं आपके विचारों की पुरजोर प्रशंसा करता हूँ.
दिनेश शर्मा
९१३०३२७६६४