Butchers of Sopore and Birmingham

Nine years of calm before icy storm

Kashmir turns crimson with blood of Pandits

AN UN-ISLAMIC KIDNAPPING AND CHAOS IN THE VALLEY

The illusion of azaadi and Kashmir’s historic deception

How Pak's terror policy evolved in Kashmir

Birth of social media jihadists, death of Article-370

Operation Sindoor: When Indian missiles rained on Pak terror parade

<div class='ite_mg_banner ads__container'><div class='it_mg_bnrBox'><div class='ite_bnr_cont'><div class='ite_cont_dtl'> <h4>Get <span class='bold_text'>37%</span> off on an annual Print +Digital subscription of India Today Magazine</h4><a href='https://subscriptions.intoday.in/indiatoday?utm_source=top-web-banner ' class='ite_subscribe_btn origin_conscent_url' target='_blank'>SUBSCRIBE</a></div></div></div></div>

US Election coverage

India

World

NewsMo

Fact Check

Programmes

Match Schedule

Teams

Player Stats

LIVE SCORES

Compassion and passion don't necessarily make for good policy. As the cliched quote goes: When one is under 25, one thinks with one's heart; when one is over 25, one thinks with one's brain. Independent India's policymaking is over 65. It shouldn't make the same mistakes it made in, say, 1972, when it just touched 25. Two influential economists, Amartya Sen and Jean Dreze, have produced a new book titled An Uncertain Glory. There is no dispute on facts. India doesn't do well on social indicators (say human development), in absolute as well as relative (comparisons with other countries) terms. Problems arise when one ventures into policymaking and tries to correct this. "Inclusive growth" is now a buzzword and very few take a contrarian view. The Government will provide employment (MGNREGS). The Government will provide food (rice, wheat, coarse grains) through FSB. Some state governments will provide idlis, fish and chicken. "Provide" is interpreted as subsidised supply, irrespective of whether one has been able to identify BPL. Most people seem to think inclusion and entitlement are an extremely good idea and contrarians are a vanishing breed. However, these ideas of state provisioning and state intervention aren't new.<br><br><div class="itg-mosimage"><div class="itgimage"><amp-img  src="https://akm-img-a-in.tosshub.com/sites/media2/indiatoday/images/stories/2013July/upfront_350_071913111356.jpg" alt = "LiberalPicture used for representationisation" height="425" width="650" class="" layout="responsive"></amp-img></div></div>Hark back to mid-1960s to late-1970s. Did this lead to three lost development decades for India? Let's take human development. In general, variables associated with social sectors (health, education) are defined as human development, or deprivation. In particular, UNDP computes an HDI (human development index) based on PPP (purchasing power parity) per capita income, education (literacy rate, gross enrolment ratio) and health (life expectancy). This exercise started in 1990. Back in 1960s, there was no HDI. Cross-country data on human development were inadequate. PPP notions didn't exist. So let's take something like standard per capita income, using official exchange rates. In 1960, India's per capita income was $73 and Thailand's was $92. In 2012, Thailand's was $5,678 and India's was $1,492. Thailand is no aberration. In 1960, India compared favourably to all countries in East Asia, South Korea and Singapore included. Today, we aren't in that middle income league. The precise term "inclusion" may not have been used in 1960s and 1970s. Specific statutes may be a trifle different. But the conceptual and ideological slant is identical, particularly since 2004. In 1991, as finance minister, Manmohan Singh quoted Victor Hugo (in a minor mistranslation) to the effect that liberalisation is an idea whose time has come.<br><br>However defined, liberalisation means competition, choice and efficiency and reliance on markets (with appropriate regulation) and there is no conflict with government financial subsidies for the poor, but every conflict with monopoly government supply. Liberalisation has gone for a toss and we are back to a state interventionist mode, an idea whose time should have gone. Better still, it is an idea whose time should never have come, not even in 1960s. Good wine may improve with age, but bad wine turns into vinegar. That there is near-universal support for intervention is irrelevant. Did we make a mistake in 1960s and 1970s? That's a simple lawyer's yes/no answer. If the answer is yes, as it should be, go back and read what economists and influential non-economists wrote and said then. Read tomes like Economic Survey (in vogue since 1970). There was universal support for silly policies, evidence of nothing more than collective stupidity. What's wrong with intervention? First, there is inefficiency and inefficiency impedes growth. Second, government pre-empts resources that can be used by private sector. Third, government messes up markets and price signals there. Fourth, there is no guarantee public expenditure will be efficient. Had public expenditure been efficient, at 65-plus, India wouldn't have been poor and Sen and Dreze would have had to think of something else to write a book about.<br><br>More in the same vein can be added. But the bottomline is lower growth and lower income all round. That's what the so-called Nehruvian model (read muddle) gave us. With a smaller cake, there was less to redistribute and we redistributed poverty, not wealth. HDRs show us correlation between per capita income and indicators on education/health. Since 1991, India has crept up on HDI and moved up from low to medium human development. This doesn't mean there aren't warts, especially in backward regions. But choking off the growth process gets us nowhere. The problem is near-universal support for entitlements and subsidies, not just from beneficiaries but also political parties. Who doesn't like freebies? Once introduced, freebies and doles are difficult to roll back. It takes years. The incoming government in 2014 (regardless of political composition) will find it difficult to challenge the inclusion paradigm, even if it wishes to do so. Opportunity costs of resources that could have been spent elsewhere and opportunity costs of lost growth are not immediately visible. The 1960s/1970s policy was a tragedy. That since 2004 is a farce.<br><i><br>- Bibek Debroy is a professor at the Centre for Policy Research, Delhi</i><div id="tab-link-wrapper-plugin"><div class="authors__container"><div class="authors__by"><div class="authlable">Published By: </div><div class="authdetaisl">AtMigration </div></div><div class="published__on"><div class="authlable">Published On: </div><div class="authdetaisl">Nov 30, 1999 00:00 IST</div></div></div><div class="sendros">--- ENDS ---</div></div>

up-front

UP Front

Compassion and passion don't necessarily make for good policy. As the cliched quote goes: When one is under 25, one thinks with one's heart; when one is over 25, one thinks with one's brain. Independent India's policymaking is over 65. It shouldn't make the same mistakes it made in, say, 1972, when it just touched 25. Two influential economists, Amartya Sen and Jean Dreze, have produced a new book titled An Uncertain Glory. There is no dispute on facts. India doesn't do well on social indicators (say human development), in absolute as well as relative (comparisons with other countries) terms. Problems arise when one ventures into policymaking and tries to correct this. "Inclusive growth" is now a buzzword and very few take a contrarian view. The Government will provide employment (MGNREGS). The Government will provide food (rice, wheat, coarse grains) through FSB. Some state governments will provide idlis, fish and chicken. "Provide" is interpreted as subsidised supply, irrespective of whether one has been able to identify BPL. Most people seem to think inclusion and entitlement are an extremely good idea and contrarians are a vanishing breed. However, these ideas of state provisioning and state intervention aren't new.<br><br><div class="itg-mosimage"><div class="itgimage"><img  title="LiberalPicture used for representationisation"  class="" alt="LiberalPicture used for representationisation" src="https://akm-img-a-in.tosshub.com/sites/media2/indiatoday/images/stories/2013July/upfront_350_071913111356.jpg" loading="lazy" /></div></div>Hark back to mid-1960s to late-1970s. Did this lead to three lost development decades for India? Let's take human development. In general, variables associated with social sectors (health, education) are defined as human development, or deprivation. In particular, UNDP computes an HDI (human development index) based on PPP (purchasing power parity) per capita income, education (literacy rate, gross enrolment ratio) and health (life expectancy). This exercise started in 1990. Back in 1960s, there was no HDI. Cross-country data on human development were inadequate. PPP notions didn't exist. So let's take something like standard per capita income, using official exchange rates. In 1960, India's per capita income was $73 and Thailand's was $92. In 2012, Thailand's was $5,678 and India's was $1,492. Thailand is no aberration. In 1960, India compared favourably to all countries in East Asia, South Korea and Singapore included. Today, we aren't in that middle income league. The precise term "inclusion" may not have been used in 1960s and 1970s. Specific statutes may be a trifle different. But the conceptual and ideological slant is identical, particularly since 2004. In 1991, as finance minister, Manmohan Singh quoted Victor Hugo (in a minor mistranslation) to the effect that liberalisation is an idea whose time has come.<br><br>However defined, liberalisation means competition, choice and efficiency and reliance on markets (with appropriate regulation) and there is no conflict with government financial subsidies for the poor, but every conflict with monopoly government supply. Liberalisation has gone for a toss and we are back to a state interventionist mode, an idea whose time should have gone. Better still, it is an idea whose time should never have come, not even in 1960s. Good wine may improve with age, but bad wine turns into vinegar. That there is near-universal support for intervention is irrelevant. Did we make a mistake in 1960s and 1970s? That's a simple lawyer's yes/no answer. If the answer is yes, as it should be, go back and read what economists and influential non-economists wrote and said then. Read tomes like Economic Survey (in vogue since 1970). There was universal support for silly policies, evidence of nothing more than collective stupidity. What's wrong with intervention? First, there is inefficiency and inefficiency impedes growth. Second, government pre-empts resources that can be used by private sector. Third, government messes up markets and price signals there. Fourth, there is no guarantee public expenditure will be efficient. Had public expenditure been efficient, at 65-plus, India wouldn't have been poor and Sen and Dreze would have had to think of something else to write a book about.<br><br>More in the same vein can be added. But the bottomline is lower growth and lower income all round. That's what the so-called Nehruvian model (read muddle) gave us. With a smaller cake, there was less to redistribute and we redistributed poverty, not wealth. HDRs show us correlation between per capita income and indicators on education/health. Since 1991, India has crept up on HDI and moved up from low to medium human development. This doesn't mean there aren't warts, especially in backward regions. But choking off the growth process gets us nowhere. The problem is near-universal support for entitlements and subsidies, not just from beneficiaries but also political parties. Who doesn't like freebies? Once introduced, freebies and doles are difficult to roll back. It takes years. The incoming government in 2014 (regardless of political composition) will find it difficult to challenge the inclusion paradigm, even if it wishes to do so. Opportunity costs of resources that could have been spent elsewhere and opportunity costs of lost growth are not immediately visible. The 1960s/1970s policy was a tragedy. That since 2004 is a farce.<br><i><br>- Bibek Debroy is a professor at the Centre for Policy Research, Delhi</i><div id="tab-link-wrapper-plugin"><div class="authors__container"><div class="authors__by"><div class="authlable">Published By: </div><div class="authdetaisl">AtMigration </div></div><div class="published__on"><div class="authlable">Published On: </div><div class="authdetaisl">Nov 30, 1999 00:00 IST</div></div></div><div class="sendros">--- ENDS ---</div></div>

Most people seem to think inclusion and entitlement are an extremely 
good idea and contrarians are a vanishing breed. However, these ideas of
 state provisioning and state intervention aren't new.<br />

India Today

Most people seem to think inclusion and entitlement are an extremely good idea and contrarians are a vanishing breed. However, these ideas of state provisioning and state intervention aren't new.

The Entitlement Raj - India Today

Will the incoming government be able to challenge the freebies' culture?

The Entitlement Raj

Footage from Cox's Bazar captured the night-time flight of India's advanced Agni missile during a test from Odisha. The launch under Mission Divyastra underscored India's progress in MIRV capability and strategic deterrence.

Agni trial

Watch: Fiery trail of India’s Agni missile spotted from Bangladesh beach

West Bengal Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari said his first Cabinet had decided to transfer border fencing land to the BSF within 45 days. The move fulfils a key BJP poll promise and came alongside approvals for pending central schemes in the state.

Suvendu Adhikari

BSF to get full control of border fencing in 45 days: Bengal CM at 1st Cabinet meet

A man climbed into a ceremonial 'deg' at Ajmer Sharif Dargah as devotees watched in panic. The incident briefly disrupted movement at the shrine and drew sharp reactions online.

dargah

Man jumps into massive cauldron inside Ajmer Sharif dargah, chaos follows

The BCCI announced the venue for the Indian Premier League 2026 final. No prizes for guessing, that the match was granted to the Narendra Modi Stadium in Ahmedabad, much to the dissatisfaction of many fans.

Narendra Modi Stadium

Why are all cricket finals going to Ahmedabad?

Krunal Pandya dismissed concerns over Virat Kohli's two-game run drought and backed him to hit back hard. Krunal said that there is no worry in the RCB camp about Kohli's form.

Virat Kohli, Krunal Pandya

Krunal excited about Kohli's slump? RCB star explains bizarre statement

Play Time!

PM Modi

Sensex

Vijay

Elections 2026

NEET

IPL 2026

CBSE 12th Result

Tamil Nadu

TVK leader C Joseph Vijay on Sunday took oath as the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu amid a sea of supporters, his friends and family, and several political leaders. Eight other TVK leaders were sworn in besides him, as ministers in the new government. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi also attended the ceremony. The TVK managed to secure the Governor's nod to form the government after the Congress, the CPI, the CPI(M), the VCK, and IUML extended their support to the Vijay-led party for a colaition government.

Vijay takes oath as Tamil Nadu's Chief Minister

Video: Vijay takes oath as Tamil Nadu CM amid loud cheers and chants

Newly sworn in Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay shared a headline-grabbing selfie moment with Congress leader Rahul Gandhi shortly after taking oath in Chennai, adding a viral political-pop culture touch to the historic ceremony.

Rahul Gandhi, Joseph VijayRahul Gandhi, Joseph Vijay

Watch: Vijay celebrates Tamil Nadu CM oath with Rahul Gandhi selfie moment

The political landscape of West Bengal witnesses a major transition as the newly appointed Chief Minister takes the oath of office and secrecy.

New West Bengal Chief Minister Takes Oath

Suvendu Adhikari takes oath as Bengal CM after BJP’s historic mandate in polls

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday hugged and honoured 98-year-old Makhanlal Sarkar, one of the earliest and senior most members of the BJP. The scene unfolded on the stage ahead of Suvendu Adhikari's swearing-in as West Bengal's Chief Minister in Kolkata. PM Modi also touched Sarkar's feet and presented a shawl to him as a mark of respect. In 1952, Sarkar was arrested in Kashmir while he was accompanying Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee as the latter was marching to hoist the tricolour there. BJP IT cell head Amit Malviya described the elderly party leader as "one of the earliest grassroots figures associated with the nationalist movement in post-Independence India."

Video: PM Modi hugs, touches feet of 98-year-old BJP veteran in Bengal

Yogi Adityanath on Saturday presented a saffron gamcha to Suvendu Adhikari, shortly after the latter took oath as the first BJP Chief Minister of West Bengal. The crowd also erupted into a loud cheer as the scene unfolded at the swearing-in ceremony in Kolkata. This was at least the second such instance in recent weeks when the duo's bonhomie was witnessed publicly. Earlier, during the election campaign in the state, a powerful scene was witnessed when Adhikari bowed down at the feet of the UP Chief Minister as a mark of respect.

Download App

Get 37% off on an annual Print +Digital subscription of India Today Magazine

Will the incoming government be able to challenge the freebies' culture?

Most people seem to think inclusion and entitlement are an extremely good idea and contrarians are a vanishing breed. However, these ideas of state provisioning and state intervention aren't new.

PUBLICATIONS

TELEVISION

EVENTS

RADIO

GAMING

USEFUL LINKS

PRINTING

WELFARE

DISTRIBUTION

SYNDICATIONS

WEBSITES

EDUCATION