Freedom to private participation means freedom for poor by Chandra

The economicus of private sector role in economy is perhaps less understood by policy maker in India, of course few who are pioneer in that system. Where the competition premised the products are get touched door step even the customer not interested to buy, it approaches often as grain with hand in mouth, beside the good quality products get bite by affordable price discovery by both sellers and buyers. On the other hand the monopoly system which produces products and delivers on the road step but poor quality products example are many like government education system, road, power, water etc.

Here is a minister who is against of both and tells something else which is mixed but flowed to damage the economy than the individuals get freedom to accumulate wealth.

“The poor have not got poorer. But the rich have got infinitely richer”. For which we don’t have evidence to prove in either way. But commonly felt feeling is poor got benefited from economic reform and even biggest benefits from globalisation.

It at all the rich become richer it is their handwork and honest business of making every day margin of profits. Why government envoy? Instead it should deliver what is stipulated in the Constitution

“Income and wealth may be unequal but each vote is equal”. True, the former is historically reported every humanity because (s)he is unequal naturally but the later ‘each vote’ is later emergence of humanity which valued as welfare cost or currency to become rich. Every time the election come the vote value remain the same but few who give corrupt money is different but still the promise for each vote is the same. But the delivery of promise is quite unequal which is never a got value to each vote that were brought in the election examination. Where the politicians write wrong answers to each vote, no matter how the poor is ignorant about the candidate profile.

Do read the full article my recommendation is rather little grasp what the “Not bureaucratic development but participative development”