State Bailout Argument -Kingfisher case:
It is laughable that ,some free market protagonist aggressively pushing the argument of state intervention by bailing out of kingfisher airlines with financial package,like USA bailing out Banks,financial institutes and auto industry,the corporate can reap the profits and enrich themselves,but instead of bearing the losses on its own,it expect the state to intervene and bail them out at the cost of tax payer money,It sounds ridiculous to push such theory,even if,Kingfisher services were good,similar demands were also made during Satyam scandal.
How many India Inc. contributing to the concept of social responsibility or cooperating with state responsibilities, ,ironically, it never bothered to donate their profits for social causes,contrastingly,they go for expansion mode,specially ,when they are reaping profits.
Nationalization Vs Bailing Out ;
Nationalization means reverse privatization ,state taking over the ownership and assets of private enterprises ,free market protagonist demanding financial support to Kingfisher ,but not nationalization, state should bear their losses,make it profit-making enterprises with out ownership control.its demeaning to bailout private airlines ,when state- controlled Air India,itself facing myriad problems with out any pro-active intervention of the government.
Nationalisation - a success story ;
In year 1969,14 largest banks were nationalised by then Prime Minster late Mrs.Indira Gandhi through bill "Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) "which was passed by Indian parliament, and it received the presidential approval on 9 August 1969,the said move was hailed by late Lok Nayak Jaya Prakash Narayan,the nationalised bank played crucial role in Indian Economy through credit delivery, only after liberalisation policy of Late P.V Narsimha Rao in early 1990,private banks [UTI,HDFC,ICICI ]came into picture.
Bailing out means opening Pandora Box;
Any decision to bailout loss making private sector airlines bound to open Pandora box with similar demands from other sectors,such bailout at the cost of tax payer money is mockery of socialism,which is basic structure of the constitution.The common people are aware ,India still a socialist economy,still the word 'socialism' still exists in the preamble,the nationalisation is better option than bailout .
Double Standards of corporate India;
The corporate giants in the recent Confederation of Indian Industry conclave was highly critical of UPA-II deadlock over liberalisation policy,warned that any slowing down will hurt investment climate and on the other hand,some free market policy experts are pushing the argument of bailout loss- making private sector unit.This is some thing,which is beyond the comprehension of common man.
State Intervention in the Crucial sectors :
There is growing demand in India for nationalisation of precious natural resources or national wealth like mining for proper and optimum utilization for national building.
The protogonist for Occupy Wall Street advocates the policy of state intervention in crucial sectors to do justice to the commoners ,who are at receiving end in the world economic crises.
The world is witnessing crucial changes due to "World Economic Crises",there is a visible change in the people's perceptions and beliefs,due to various factors like debt crises and rising unemployment in the world.
The people are preferring job security than corporate's heavy pay package,the government job looks attractive career option,when compared to un-secured or unpredictable private sector jobs.
The concept of reverse -privatsation looks attractive option and only viable alternative at this juncture.
References:
4 comments:
Good points. Should you be interested in actually DOING something about this, consider joining FTI (http://freedomteam.in/). Also do check my blog http://sabhlokcity.com/ where I discuss similar issues.
The government should remain hands-off from business. Only deal with safety etc.
S
@Sanjeev Sabhlok, Thanks for your kind words,sure I will join you.
Ravi I agree with you. In no way Kingfisher or any other private company be given any bailout package. It's simple because all private companies are started with profit motive and when you want to earn profit you need to be prepared for loss too. We have adopted the policy of Liberalization in 1991 under which private companies are given complete freedom to manage their business. However, they should also be ready to face consequences invited by their own wrong policies and mismanagement. In fact, I am not even in the favor of helping those government companies which incur losses because of its own clumsy policies and procedures. Only those companies be helped who lose money while indulging in the genuine effort of public welfare. Because we can’t cover inefficiency under the carpet of welfare.
Vijay Malya is himself responsible for such condition of Kingfisher and hence he should pay for his sins. Why should common men pay for his criminally extravagant life style?
Here I remembered a case which appeared few months ago in Supreme Court in which a girl wanted to marry a gangster. Naturally her parents opposed their marriage and filed a complaint against this man, after which he was arrested by police. The girl appealed in S.C that his boy friend should be set free and be allowed to marry her. In this case S.C said we know that this girl is going on wrong path. She will ruin her life if she married to this man but still we allow them to marry because both are adult and they have freedom to take wrong decisions for their life. Freedom can’t only be to take right decision, otherwise there is no freedom. Being an adult girl is free to ruin her life but then she should be ready face the consequences of her marriage, as freedom and responsibility go hand in hand.
@Bhavin Sangoi Thanks for thoughtful comments&good example of girl's marriage with gangster case ,we all get doubt whether corporates are ruling India?
Post a Comment