Poverty in India

By Alan Saldanha

This year's Nobel Prize for Economics was awarded to the Indian-American and French-American husband-and-wife team of MIT economists for their work in the study of global poverty and its alleviation. Abhijit Banerjee, one of the winners, spoke with the press and humbled himself by suggesting that his findings nonetheless are not to be taken as a panacea for global poverty. In 2006, Bangladeshi economist Muhammad Yunus and the Grameen Bank were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for their work on microfinance and micro-credit in Bangladesh. This fizzled out as it proved to be relatively unsuitable. Microfinance was subsequently claimed to have bred “loan sharks” in India and Mexico.

Banerjee was asked his opinion of the Indian economy which has impressed most of us in the last decade. He predicted a tailspin despite registering an impressive GDP growth of 6 percent during the current year. That is the difference between a Nobel Prize winner and a layperson like me. I sometimes argue that the GDP growth of 6 percent is higher than most Western economies, whereas an economist might opine that there are cracks and a fault line.

The problem relates to the lack of demand from the poorest of the poor farmers who have been ravaged by the notoriously unpredictable monsoon season. According to him, it might be a good suggestion to disburse 2,000 rupees per head three times to that segment which is 20 percent of the rural population. That should generate demand and stimulate the economy. Abhijit is a professional. His viewpoint is seemingly devoid of prejudice. His wife Esther Dufflo who jointly won the Nobel Prize is a worldwide authority on aid to poor nations. But even her achievements have not been heralded by a biased Ministry in India.

The ruling party, eager to tout the achievements of Prime Minister Modi, was quick to brush aside Abhijit's predictions as leftist and biased. Proud Bengali that he is, Abhijit expressed his slight hurt and came back to point out that what appears to have exacerbated the economy was the demonetization of the Indian currency. He knows as most Indians do that Indians are adept in manipulating that system and hardly 5 percent were really affected by this measure.

The world seems to have become a leaking fountain pen of countries eager to follow Trump's example and his “America first” credo. India is not far behind. Modi gets on well with Trump. They held hands and swung them with abandon while ushering Trump into a recent public gathering in Houston. Small gestures like these take on a new dimension. Modi has a questionable record when dealing with minorities. He still bears the marks of the Gujarat riots.

What is even more troubling is the re-emergence of sycophancy and apple polishing. India's ruling party quickly distanced itself from Abhijit's predictions. They run contrary to the claims that there is an unending promise of better days to come by the Modi regime. We are witnessing the labeling of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren of the Democrats in the U.S. as “socialist” and “the left.” But one would have to display ignorant gall to label a Nobel Laureate as a “leftist.”

What made matters even worse was when someone in the Indian government suggested that whenever an Indian marries a foreigner (a white woman) he is better positioned to be the beneficiary of an international award. That is untrue. It is also the blatant rambling of an opinionated pro-government supporter who knows that “sucking up” will improve his overall prospects.

Alan Saldanha (

daywatchnewspaper@gmail.com

) is publisher of Daywatch newspaper in Surrey, British Columbia