India's Elections

Now that the elections are over in India, where the ruling Congress party came back with a thumping majority much contrary to the predictions of political pundits. So here's an interesting article in Indian express revealing statistic about the wealth of the recently elected members of parliament (MPs). Infact all MPs elected from my home state of Andhra topped the list with a combined wealth of 600 crore rupees (6 Billion rupees).

Now is that a statistic that one should be proud that India is getting rich and the rich bloc are getting into politics finally or to be ashamed that democracy is being hijacked by the rich while increasing even further gap by the rich and poor (nearly 15 per cent of the people living in abject poverty for eg in Andhra Pradesh). Ofcourse we also need to be reminded that declared wealth of politicians is only tip of the iceberg, the true wealth could be beyond our imagination.

No wonder when I spoke to my Dad in India on his opinion of the recent elections, he said one word "despicable". Ofcourse all is not gloom and doom.. there's a brighter side to these elections and change is occuring of course at a snail's pace.

This again from own home state of Andhra, where JP, the former buearucrat leader of the newly formed Loksatta (People's power) Party won against cash-rich traditional political parties and all odds, on ideal beliefs of rooting out corruption, and getting back to grass roots movement that once Gandhi led, through what JP calls "a second independence movement". It's one seat only that the party won, but it's a beginning.. and am sure we will only see it grow in to a formidable opponent in the years to come.

Gurgaon, what grows outside Delhi

What do we want to see emerge from this greatest crisis of capitalism in 70 years?

Excerpts from a recent article published in Guardian, UK by Timothy Garton Ash ...

"What do we want to see emerge from the greatest crisis of capitalism for 70 years? If I had to answer in a single phrase, I would say: new models for a sustainable social market economy. This requires us to change as well as our states.

Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England, has observed that today's big private banks are global in life but national in death. When it comes to the bailout, it's the national government most directly concerned that takes the lead. And that means us, national taxpayers, picking up the bill.

Yet all this talk of states and systems is only half the story. It was the conduct of individual human beings that led us into this mess, and it is the behaviour of individuals as well as the structuring of systems that has to change.

Bottom line :

"More than 30 years ago, Daniel Bell explored in his Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism the paradox that the dynamism of capitalism depends on individuals living by somewhat different values in their personal lives as producer and as consumer.

Extending Max Weber's famous argument about the protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism, he suggested that the production side depends on people harking to values such as hard work, punctuality, discipline and a readiness to accept deferred gratification.

The demand side, by contrast, depends on them being self-indulgent, expansive, pleasure-seeking and given to living in the now. Add to this the new constraint that the planet will not sustain more than 6 billion people enjoying constantly rising living standards achieved by the methods of production and consumption so far used. Complicate matters further by the moral argument that the world's rich have no right to deny the world's poor a materially better life, which would still be a fraction of the affluence we ourselves enjoy.

What you end up with is not just a systemic conundrum but also a personal challenge to every one of us. The challenge is to find a new balance in our double-lives as producers and consumers, at the same time consciously contributing to a larger set of new international balances between economy and environment, oversaving east and overspending west, rich north and poor south. That, too, is what I mean by a sustainable social market economy."

3.5M Kids Under 5 On Verge Of Going Hungry

Normally this headline would have been generally associated with a thrid-world country in Asia, Africa.. no big deal right, not exactly.. it is quite shocking to find that this is recent statistic for US.

The not-for-profit advocacy group Feeding America based its findings on 2005-2007 data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the Agriculture Department. The study, released Thursday, May 7, 2009 is the first to look at these numbers for children under the age of 5, according to the group.

The study also shows that in 11 states, more than 20 percent of children under 5 are at risk of going hungry. Louisiana has the highest rate, with just under a quarter of children at risk, followed by North Carolina, Ohio, Kentucky, Texas, New Mexico, Kansas, South Carolina, Tennessee, Idaho and Arkansas.

According to the Agriculture Department, 11 percent of households lacked enough food for an active, healthy life, before the economy worsened late last year.

The U.S. study coincides with a U.N. statement claiming, the number of hungry people in the world could soon hit a record 1 billion, despite a recent drop in food prices.

Deglobalization

Regulators in Britain have started asking U.S. banks selling bonds there to provide hundreds of pages of proof that the mighty U.S. government, which is backing the bonds, could actually repay them.

Tens of thousands of burned investors around the world complaining loudly that they were sold toxic bonds that were supposed to be safe. In street demonstrations from Hong Kong to Hamburg, protesters are demanding that their governments do something to get their money back.

Now there's a growing fear among economists, policymakers, and business groups that in the name of protecting their citizens from global financial institutions, governments could slow the flow of capital between countries—at a time when the world economy is already contracting. "We're looking at a period of, at best, a pause of globalization, and more likely a period of 'de-globalization,' "