Views vary considerably on this issue.
Proponents of liberalization say that the process is moving too slowly and it is impeding innovation and wealth creation in India: The government is protecting and keeping afloat unprofitable companies just for political gains. The bureaucratic rules, procedures, and approvals cause extreme discouragement at best and wealth destruction at worst. Investors stay away from Inida for many reasons: government intervention, as in the case of Enron, imposition of high import tariffs, imposition of arbitrary and changing rules, such as limits on foreign investments, and a lack of continuity in the liberalization philosophy and speed. All this discourages local and foreign investments that India so desperately needs.
The opponents of liberalization make just the opposite case: Liberalization has displaced Indian workers and created wealth and income disparity between the rich and poor. Economic growth at any cost, or at least at heavy human cost, is not the compassionate Indian way. Foreign investors want to come to India to draw blood as opposed to help India and Indians prosper. All this rapid industrialization is causing extreme environmental problems. They claim that "swadeshi" (self-reliance) is the way to go.
What do you think?
|
