Open Forum
New Delhi,
26 January 2017
Rich-Poor Divide
WILL DISPARITY BE CORRECTED?
By Dhurjati Mukherjee
Recently
a report by New World Wealth found that India, with total individual wealth of $5600
billion, was ranked 7th ahead
of Canada ($4700), Australia ($4500) and Italy ($ 4400) which occupied the 8th,
9th and 10th slots respectively. The US is
obviously the wealthiest in the world in terms of individual wealth ($48,900
billion) while China stood second and Japan third with total individual wealth
of 17,400 billion and $A 15,1000 billion respectively. Though the ranking of India as one of
the top wealthiest countries in the world may be attributed to its large
population, it is indeed distressing to note that a very small per cent –
around 5 to 6 per cent – control around 80 per cent of the above wealth.
Another
report found that India’s
100 richest people have more money than two-thirds of the population put
together. Wealth X, the global leader in providing
intelligence on wealth, found the top five business houses accounted for 47.5
per cent ($85.5 billion) of the total $ 180 billion held by 103 Indian
billionaires in 2014. To put it in simple terms, India’s richest one per cent
owns more than 58 per cent of its total wealth of $3.1 trillion, higher than
the global average of 50 per cent, as per a just released study titled ‘An Economy
for the 99 per cent’ by Oxfam.
Moreover, the study found that just 57 billionaires now have same wealth ($216
billion) as that of the bottom 70 per cent of the population.
However,
comparing this with other parameters presents a very negative scenario. India is ranked
a lowly 97th among
just 118 developing countries for which the Global Hunger
Index (GHI) was calculated
this year. India’s
neighbours like Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and China are all above our country.
Moreover, the World Economic Forum recently ranked India 60th among 79 developing nations on
inclusive growth.
The
2016 GHI data from India
was derived from the fact that an estimated 15 per cent of the population (215
million) has been found to be undernourished. The latest report of the National Nutrition Monitoring Bureau (NNMB) found that
even though the Indian economy has been growing steadily in the post-reform
years, more and more people in rural India were eating less and less over the
same period. In fact, the majority of the rural populace has been consuming
fewer nutrients than are required to stay healthy.
The
reason for rural India eating less protein or calcium when availability is not
a constraint may be attributed to the growing number of landless
agricultural labourers. The NNMB found that over the last four decades, the
proportion of landless people in the countryside has grown from 30 to 40 per
cent and the proportion of people, who were owners and cultivators, have gone
down to almost half. Thus 35 per cent of rural men were found undernourished
and 42 per cent of children underweight.
The
GHI data has shown that the share of under 5 children who were ‘wasted’ is
about 15 per cent while the share of children who are ‘stunted’ is a staggering
29 per cent. This reflects widespread and chronic lack of balanced food. Is it
not a shame that a nation that talks of becoming a super power cannot look
after its children?
These
reports are quite indicative of the fact that the country faces staggering
inequality which has been widening steadily. Successive governments have not
cared to analyze these data and understand the reasons for this neglect of a
significant portion of our population. Only during the past few years we hear
frequent usage of the word ‘inclusive’ growth but the above statistics make one
wonder that the political class is befooling the people.
As
is well known, all development is geared for the rich and the middle class and
their interests are carefully looked into so that these sections get the
maximum privileges. That the system is geared to help the rich and the powerful
is demonstrated by a recent finding of the Supreme Court that 57 debtors owe Rs
85,000 crores to banks. While revealing these figures, the bench of former CJI Thakur
rightly questioned the RBI why the names of these defaulters should not be made
public?
The
entire system with the politician-bureaucratic nexus works for the rich and
powerful corporate houses which are incidentally the financers of political
parties. The reason for the growing black money is also attributed to this
nexus which controls and dictates the corridors of power. There cannot be any
political will to change the system as the political class aided by the
urban-oriented bureaucracy has no interest in drawing a comprehensive plan of
action regarding reducing this inequality.
It
is surprising that a Government which boasts of being the largest democracy of
the world with Mahatma Gandhi as the ‘Father of the Nation’ has thought it fit
to neglect, over the years, around 40 per cent of the rural population which lives
in squalor and poverty. While there are thousands of crores being spent for
modernising airports, starting bullet trains, undertaking ‘smart cities, the
expenditure for transforming the vast rural areas of the country is sadly meagre.
The
urban bias in Indian planning has been a phenomenon manifest over the years, The
reason being the slow development of the countryside. Lack of social
infrastructure for such a huge population residing in the villages and not
allowing them access to the benefits of development has been continuing for decades
together in spite of the passage of the 74th and 75th Constitutional Amendment Bills. Famous
economist Prof. Michael Lipton formerly with University
of Sussex, rightly pointed out about
two decades back that in India
the rural poor were subsidising the urban middle class.
Even
after the panchayats were recognised as centres for grass-root development,
statistics reveal that either adequate resources were not made available to
them or they failed to carry out the necessary rural transformation. But
experts believe it was the former reason behind the present rural distress. Add
to this is the wanton corruption prevalent in these areas.
For
inclusive growth and sustainable development to really take place, a change in
strategy along with necessary political will and sincerity is required. This
change is easily talked about but very difficult to implement in the present
set up. The panchyats are still not involved in the planning process and have
to implement whatever they are directed from the top. The top down approach has
to change and involvement of the people at the grass-root level has to be
ensured.
This
would obviously be considered a sustainable and inclusive approach with the
majority benefitting from development. A synthesis of economics and ethics is
what can be called a truly Gandhian socio-economic decentralised order whose
relevance is not only of our times but of all times and not just in India but in all countries of the Third World. Gandhiji’s emphasis on bottom-up approach
cannot be ignored by the leaders who swear in his name but do not care to
adhere to his dictum.
The possibility of witnessing any change in narrowing
the rich-poor and urban-rural divide appears quite remote in the years ahead but
a genuine attempt needs to be made. India’s stature will not improve if
the balance is not rectified and the agony of the rural poor will continue to
haunt us. ---INFA
(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)
|