Lost your password?

‘A theory which explained everything else in the whole universe but which made it impossible to believe that our thinking was valid, would be utterly out of court. For that theory would itself have been reached by thinking, and if thinking is not valid that theory would, of course, be itself demolished. It would have destroyed its own credentials. It would be an argument which proved no argument was sound”a proof that there are no such thing as proofs”which is nonsense.’

~ C. S. Lewis, Miracles (1947, revised in 1960), p. 22

 

Something is fishy, I say. You will not deny that most of the expert articles on ‘poverty in India’ are an exercise in showing off one’s knowledge of which commission has come up with what numbers of the poor population – and what methodology was used by which commission to arrive at the numbers it arrived at. This exercise also serves the purpose of keeping us”the apparently better-off half of the population”hooked on to the numbers game. And so hypnotized (and outraged) we become by the sheer outrageousness of these numbers that it dawns ever so slightly that the concern ought to be elsewhere – that hundreds of millions of India’s citizens live below the absolutely latest poverty line of Rs 29 per day per person in urban areas and Rs 22 per day per person in rural areas.

 


 

How does it matter if 2546.7 lakh (fictitious number) people are below this line or 3546.8 lakh (as per the latest press release issued by the Planning Commission of India)? And just so that the farce is complete, some of our experts engage in a raging debate regarding the poverty-defining amount. Should Rs 29 not be Rs 30? By making it one rupee short of Rs 30, the government is trying to play a mental game”after all, don’t marketers say Rs 499 instead of Rs 500?  

 

Next, isn’t it worth asking if the poverty line adequately factors in the high inflation India has been experiencing in recent years. That Rs 29 and Rs 22 are not enough to live on raises a fair question and can make some of us suspicious. If I am being able to spend Rs 30 or even Rs 35 per day, I am not poor, right? Or, is it the all-important line between horrible poverty and tolerable poverty?

 

(Here, if you will excuse me, I did a time-pass exercise: Assuming that one lives until his 60th year and the spending capability remains constant at Rs 29/day, he would have lived all 21,900 days of his life on Rs 635,100, an amount not enough for a holiday in Europe or to buy a premium sedan.)

 

By the way, the Rs 29 and the Rs 22 are expected to take care of mainly the food requirements of a person. In this scheme of things, a toilet is a luxury. As our Drinking Water and Sanitation Minister Jairam Ramesh said it, India is the world’s capital for open defecation. It follows.

 

As described by the Suresh Tendulkar Committee report, ‘Fundamentally, the concept of poverty is associated with socially perceived deprivation with respect to basic human needs… These basic human needs are usually listed in the material dimension as the need to be adequately nourished, the need to be decently clothed, the need to be reasonably sheltered, the need to escape avoidable diseases, the need to be (at least) minimally educated and the need to be mobile for purposes of social interaction and participation in economic activity.’

 

 

 

With reference to this, the poverty line would appear to be a bad joke, to put it mildly.

 

Anyway, without trapping you further in the numbers maze, let me just ask of us this simple question: where have the staggering hundreds of millions of dollars disappeared? Of course, one is here referring to the millions that were, to begin with, meant to ameliorate the condition of the poor poor. And the poor in India easily make up about a half of the total population. So, indeed, therefore, of course, the question: where is the money going?

 

In 2011, the World Bank did say that India spent more on programmes for the poor than most developing countries, but that it had failed to eradicate poverty because of widespread corruption and faulty government administration. For the record, India spent 2 per cent of its gross domestic product, or $28.6 billion, in 2010 on social programmes to alleviate and prevent poverty.

 

So, where is the scam this time?

 

It helps the government that its strategy for poverty alleviation is essentially two-fold”and suitably vague. Firstly, it claims to provide greater opportunity for the poor to participate in the growth process by focusing on specific sectors. Secondly, poverty alleviation and social sector programmes have been strengthened and restructured with special programmes for the weaker sections of society.

 

Note the use of ‘opportunity’ and ‘participate in the growth process’. The most hardened of minds would be hard-pressed to unlock the hidden meaning behind these and their practical translation.

 

Truth be told, and logic be applied, if all these authentic-sounding yojanas were actually doing what they were supposed to do, there would be at least a marginal decrease in the numbers of the poor. If foodgrains were reaching all at the furthermost margins of subsistence, and if healthcare, sanitation and education services were delivered effectively by governments, a marginal decrease in the numbers of the poor would be accompanied by improvements in the quality of living.

 

In the larger context, when the numbers itself are rendered somewhat irrelevant by the sheer scale of the problem and also due to the systemic rot that stands between the promised state support and the poor, the focus has to be only on the delivery mechanisms. If governments had been keeping their word and the state machinery was sincere, there is no reason why the poor would have had to continue being at the receiving end of a wretched debate centred on numbers. If they had a voice, they would say, ‘to hell with numbers.’

 

Comic from: http://apnaplan.com