THE “Trickle Down” theory has now become a thing of the past. It has only led to the process of making the rich richer and the poor poorer. Even the World Bank is worried about the co-existence of global abundance and poverty. In this backdrop, the WB is expressing its concern over rising inequalities in respect to fundamental asset distribution (of land) and control over resources like water. But, they come up with a pro-MNC solution of taking control of all fundamental assets in the world, including land, water and forest, instead of redistributing them to the needy. Their idea is to take control of all the land, water and forests so as to better serve the interests of markets and monopoly powers.

Global powers are worried because markets may not find buyers if there is no substantial increase in purchasing power of rural people all over the world. Allround growth as the panacea for all ills of society has networked. Rather, they have resulted only in rising inequalities. The capitalist crisis today is the crisis of abundance, crisis of low purchasing power of the people. There are studies, which suggest that countries that have concentration of land in the hands of a few have developed extreme inequalities. Initial inequalities are further perpetuated by the globalisation process. These wide inequalities and low purchasing power of the vast majority have turned into a hurdle for expansion and functional markets. Precisely because of this reason, global powers are also concerned. And their proposed solution? Further corporatisation, further marketisation and further liberalisation, of course.

Land ownership is critical to the development of societies. Enhancing the ability of 70% people living in the countryside to produce, consume and sell food in markets is a big developmental myth. The neo-liberal policies rule out increased public investment that will raise the productivity of small lands and in turn the income of small peasants and rural poor. Rather, they propose a route that puts market and profits at the commanding heights. In this backdrop, the World Bank is shedding crocodile tears. And, there are theoreticians who find the World Bank to be more progressive than WTO. Trade is hard economics, which would not shed crocodile tears.

Recycling of Food Grains

THE government has many welfare programmes in place, in­cluding Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana (SGRY). The scheme was earlier known as ‘Food For Work Programme’. Under this scheme, the government is to generate employment in rural areas by carrying out infrastructural or developmental works so as to employ the vast army of unemployed rural population. Whether the rural population has benefited out of this scheme or not, contractors and middlemen are the most benefited lot. The scheme is abused to the hilt through a nexus of local officials, local elite and sections of politicians. For instance, in Andhra Pradesh, contractors take up the project from the government and employ machines on large scale. Even where the people are employed, the contractors make double profit by selling the food coupons meant for workers to traders. This process is popularly known as ‘recycling’. The workers employed in the project were supposed to be given food coupons, in exchange of which food grains are to be collected from concerned outlets. The “recycling” was apparently carried out in the following manner: Rice from FCI godown was sent to the state government, from there to PDS outlets (Rs. 5.65 a kg), from there to contractors, who would then sell it to traders at the rate of Rs. 7.50 a kg. The rice then moved to the mill owners, who finally sold it back to the FCI as locally grown produce at the rate of Rs.9.50 a kg. Unlike in states like Punjab or UP, the grains are not directly purchased from producers by FCI rather from mill owners.