Indian should divide larger states for better governance and development!
Synopsis:
For: Number of Indian states is even larger than few countries. Going by this notion, where on the one hand, we have a fleet of ministers/administrators to run a country like Australia, Singapore, Malaysia and so on and so forth, then on the other we have only handful of them to run a state like UP or AP which is at par with above mentioned countries wrt to size, population and demographics. Moreover, having smaller state will enable proper usage of funds and deployment of recourses. It would allow proper representation of people (by increasing the number of MPs) in the parliament, as still we have very high people is to their MPs ratio.
Against: More state would call for more fixed resources viz. police force, stations, parliaments, courts and other state functionaries. This would further give an avenue to administrator to redirect the funds to their personal accounts. More state means more funds allocation and more leakage. What can be done is to have joint CMs and virtually divide bigger states in zones for better administration rather than creating newer states with altogether new sets of infrastructure.
Outlook: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?263228; http://www.bombaychamber.com/uploads/ANALYTIQUE%20Jan-Mar%202010.pdf
Additional readings: http://anand-bala.blogspot.com/2009/12/telanga-conundrum-divide-divide-again.html; http://toostep.com/insight/does-small-states-means-better-governance
Central chronicle: http://www.centralchronicle.com/viewnews.asp?articleID=23327
Business Standard: http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/dec/16/andhra-crisis-are-smaller-states-better-governed-a-debate.htm
Business Today: http://businesstoday.intoday.in/index.php?issueid=20&id=13667&option=com_content&task=viewInclusive growth is more of a populist agenda!
Synopsis:
For: The concept of Inclusive growth has never been debate properly, especially in the power corridors. Politicians have always used the idea of inclusive growth for their own benefit. This gets more evident from the fact that the target audience of the plans made under Inclusive growth is a huge potential vote bank for politicians. Thus, always inclusive growth becomes more of election propaganda and campaign rather than a development initiative.
Against: The improvement in social structure is quite vivid – all thanks to plans made under inclusive growth. It due to these plans that today rural youth/population can experience a tint of technology and better life. Development plans like NREGA, NRHM, RTE…. has brought a new wave of development in our country.
Politicians should be asked to work for free!
Synopsis:
For: Politics is more of a voluntary act. With the amount of media attention and under-table money a politician earns, he need not be given any salary. Salary makes the whole idea of politics too corrupt and erases away the essence of leadership and statesmanship. With benefits and perks (directly and indirectly) a politicians earns, salaries becomes irrelevant.
Against: With debate going around to encourage technocrats/professions and young graduate to opt for politics as a career, a handsome pay package would make it attractive. Today, politics is seen as a long term professional career (with courses in planning & administration catching up) and not as a social service. Across the world politicians are treated as professionals and youngsters view this as career-option that would fetch them financial security too! Absence of money/salary may discourage potential leaders from not-so-well-off families from entering this field.
GPM- globalpovertymultiple.com [how much is a politicians getting compared to the BPL in the country]
Economist: http://www.economist.com/node/16525240; http://the-economist.com/node/16525240; http://www.economist.com/node/16335792;
India today: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/110059/India/hiked-salary-makes-politics-a-viable-career-option.html
Additional readings: http://fazeer.wordpress.com/2008/08/22/the-quality-of-politicians/
Economic impact of Global warming is more of a hoax:
Synopsis:
For: The whole hype around global warming is actually a mirage and has been created to mint money through pumping money in research organization. Secondly, developed countries in the veil of global warming are fortifying their foothold in geo-strategic location.
Against: Numerous countries (especially African countries and other island countries including peninsulas) are on verge of disappearance due to global warming. Occupation linked to sea and coasts are experiencing a tough-time – trying to economically carry out itself. A large amount of population is all set to get affected which in turn would decrease/impact the productivity. Moreover, seasonal changes (lack of water, increase in temperature and so on) are largely impacting economy directly and indirectly – especially in third world countries.
Reports: http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf
Exonn Mobile scandal: http://environment.about.com/b/2007/02/02/exxonmobil-offers-scientists-cash-to-attack-major-new-global-warming-study.htm
The Global warming Hoax: http://globalwarminghoax.wordpress.com/
Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/2007/08/13/the-truth-about-denial.html; http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/lab-notes/2009/01/21/global-warming-goes-south.html; August 2007 Cover story;
Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301305.html
The economic times: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/features/Is-global-warming-a-hoax/articleshow/5513907.cms
Rollingstone: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/12697/64918
Books: The Economics of Global Warming by William R. Cline
Global aid for development is a chimera - it brings no substantial change
Synopsis:
Against: Global aid has helped various countries in refurbishment of their tainted social infrastructure. Case being of India and sub-continent and Africa. Monetary aid and development assistance not only helps a country in technological leap-frogging but also introduces them to globally practiced modus operandi. It’s because of Global aid that many African and Asian countries (including countries that are frequently hit by natural disaster) get change to stand back on their feet.
For: Most of the time these global aids find its way into middlemen and administrator coffers. Moreover, countries/institutions design and craft the contracts in a manner that allows the host countries an entry into the helping country’s market and political system (eg: US to Pak/afghan).
B&E: http://www.businessandeconomy.org/28122006/storyd.asp?sid=890&pageno=1; http://www.businessandeconomy.org/02102008/storyd.asp?sid=3701&pageno=1; http://businessandeconomy.org/08032007/storyd.asp?sid=1336&pageno=1;
TSI: http://www.thesundayindian.com/18042010/storyd.asp?sid=8759&pageno=1; http://www.thesundayindian.com/01112009/storyd.asp?sid=7812&pageno=1; http://www.iipmthinktank.com/asp/undercover.asp?s_id=9454&pageno=1
Dedicated website: http://www.realityofaid.org/
No comments:
Post a Comment