The transition from a manufacturing and product based economy, which primarily produces tangible goods, to an economy which is extensively 'knowledge-oriented' and dominated by information goods has been dramatic. The key drivers for the transition have been the globalization and the emergence of 'self-acting' transnational finance capital. Under the current system of economic organization, Information has seen increasingly being monopolised, sold and manipulated through restrictive legal regime with a single motive of furthering the profit for transnational corporations. The monopoly rights on the information acts as the key reason behind the ability of the Information technology companies to amass huge wealth and unreasonable profit. These companies are being evaluated in the 'speculative' market rather than based on the real assets helps them to project a highly inflated valuation in the stock market compared to traditional brick and mortar companies. Such speculative evolution and transactions with a disconnect from the real asset and economy leads to the formation of a parallel virtual economy which is vulnerable to the high instabilities and bubble formations.
Please watch the video below for a full presentation on the 'Political Economy of Information Industry'.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Friday, March 25, 2011
Kill the farmers only at our peril!
The sericulture farmers Swami and his wife Vasantha did not kill themselves. We killed them! It is the utmost callousness and the continuing indifference of the Government towards our farmers that made the poor farmer couple from Mandya in Karnataka State loses their precious lives! It is the eagerness of our neo-liberalist ruling ‘robbers’ to surrender our economy at the feet of the western profit mongers that made the three innocent children orphan at such a tender age! We should be ashamed for what happened on the midnight of March 5th, 2011! We are responsible for the untimely death of those two members of the very community that toil day in and day out to ensure we are fed three times a day!
Swami and his family engaged in the sericulture farming, as many other rural poor farmers, taking bank loans. Their own sweat was the only capital they had to initiate the only means of lively hood that majority of our rural populace know about. It was their hope for a better living that came crashing when the finance minister proposed a drastic reduction in the import customs duty on the raw silk and silk products from 30% to a mere 5% in his budget speech. The cocoon price plummeted by almost 1/3rd and along the way it crushed the lives of helpless small-time farmers like Swami! Faced with the grim reality that their crops now wont even enable them to replay the loan, leave alone getting any returns, they expressed their frustration and anger the only way they knew, by giving away their lives.
The blame for the pathetic condition of our farmers should squarely be put on none other than the Government itself. The amount of harm that is being inflicted on every single walk of life in the country , because of the disastrous economic policies aimed at gifting away each and every sector in the country to the western developed market forces for their unlimited profiteering, is beyond imagination. While USA and other developed economies have time and again proved that they will not think twice when it comes to protecting their economies when their own interests are in danger, our own policy makers feel no inhibitions when it comes to opening up our national treasures to these very same forces for looting. Our elitists are rather more than happy to facilitate and collaborate in this massive ‘robbery’ at the very expense of the majority of our toiling masses.
Prevailing concerns regarding the domestic agricultural sector obviously doesn’t confine to the sericulture alone. Farmers and agriculture laborers engaged in each and every crop have been finding the going difficult in the face of the global trade controlled and manipulated by multinational conglomerates coupled with the antagonist attitude of the Government. Government has been doing nothing to protect the domestic agriculture. On the contrary, our ruling elite have been very eager to allow producers from the west to enter the lucrative Indian market. For example, more than 60% of the silk was being produced in Karnataka alone. However, this is rapidly diminishing in the last few years. As cheaper Chinese silk flood the market, the Indian farmers are being driven out of the market and are being forced to move to other crops or migrate to urban areas in search of casual labor. Without fixing a minimum price for their produce, farmers will be left to the mercies of the market fluctuations and deliberate price manipulations by the transnational corporate and the domestic middlemen. Small-time farmers taking the investment risk will be ultimately ruined and will be forced to give up the farming activities all together.
India is the second largest producer of raw silk after China and the biggest consumer of raw silk and silk fabrics. Silk production in countries like Japan, South Korea, Russia etc are steadily declining because of cost of labor as well as specific climatic restrictions that would allow only 2 cocoons a year. India, because of the tropical climate conditions, thus has a distinct advantage of practicing sericulture all through the year, yielding a stream of 4-6 crops annually. In India, sericulture is practiced as a tradition and is a small-scale rural industry that suits rural based farmers and provides income and employment to the rural poor. The benefit-cost ratio in sericulture is highest among comparable agriculture crops, if managed properly. Around 5 million farmers depend on sericulture for their livelihood directly while lives of another 2million depend on it indirectly. Currently the domestic demand is nearly 25000 MT and domestic production is around 18500 MT. The deficit in requirement is met by importing largely from China. It is highly feared that the proposed move to reduce the import duty would help China establish its monopoly in the Indian market and Indian sericulture farming may soon face extinction.
While USA and Europe demand abolition of subsidies in the agriculture in India and other developing and third world countries, they themselves have no inhibition in continuing to protect their agriculture through lavish subsidies and other government funded incentives and raising barriers for imports in one or the other pretext from the third world countries. It must be still fresh in our memories how USA banned the import of raw bananas from the European Union and how the Europe had to resort to fiery fighting in the WTO forum against the ban. It was with an absurd excuse of ‘easily vulnerable to fire’ that the US government imposed ban on the import of Indian silk garments to protect their textile industry. Many African countries have been demanding for years the abolition of agriculture subsidies in Europe and America. It is common knowledge that the free trade in agriculture produces benefits the western economies the most. Dumping such subsidy funded surplus crops in countries like India, sold even at below production cost, destroy the growth of domestic agriculture. UK government spends around 6 billion pound a year on agriculture, forestry and fisheries as direct subsidies. The European Union allocates 31% of its budget to agricultural support under CAP (common agriculture policy) and was set at about 44billion euro in 2010. Continuing protectionist policy of western government to protect their own backyard is no secret at all. Ban on outsourcing in the IT industry by the US government has only been the latest in this long list. Case of cotton is another glaring example. Cotton has been in fact a symbol of inequalities of global agriculture trade. Example of cotton shows clearly how agriculture subsidies by the western countries destroy farmers in the developing countries. Western subsidies have been skewing production levels and prices undermining the income of cotton farmers in developing and third world countries. US subsidies have led to reduction in world cotton prices which have cost countries in Africa millions of dollars in their export earnings. Beginning in the late 70s, USA has been using the VER (voluntary export restraints) to impose import restrictions in many industries. Textile and Steel industries have been the biggest beneficiaries apart from the Oil industry which has always shielded itself from the competition by invoking national security clause.
In the historical process of national development, all of the today’s developed economies have resorted to one or the other form of protectionism to protect their domestic economy. Now that their economies have developed, they switch to preaching of “free trade” to get free access to the unlimited resources and markets of the developing countries should fool none. Sooner the developing countries realize it, the better. If not, the vast majority of the population of these countries will have no option but to raise their voice collectively to make their rulers listen. If a country can not protect its farmers, it has no right to hope for a secure tomorrow.
- Suresh Kodoor
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Streets are the cradles of social changes!
Should all the public meetings conducted by the roadsides be banned? Should the political parties be denied the most effective means of reaching out to the people by denying them the access to the place where the mass is most likely to be found? The Supreme Court seems is suggesting so!
On a judgment dismissing the review petition filed by the Kerala state government, the Apex Court has upheld the verdict passed on June 24, 2010 by the Kerala High Court imposing statewide ban on public meetings by the roadsides. The Court also further made an observation wondering why the government had to even approach the Apex Court to reverse the judgment of the lower court when the High Court verdict only strengthened the government’s hands!
Earlier, the Kerala High Court gave the judgment in response to a petition filed by an individual who contented that public meetings caused inconvenience near the railway station area in the Aluva town. However, the High Court had issued a blanket statewide prohibitory order on conducting public meetings and rallies by roadside and suggested that the order was being given to ensure free flow of traffic on public roads and to ensure the safety of the traveling public.
Before coming to the issue of the ban, let us spare a thought or two on the apex court’s observation wondering why in the first place state government has to approach the court when the high court’s order was in fact giving the government more power. This remark has long-term repercussion and should worry anyone concerned with the democracy and citizen’s rights. Is the court trying to suggest that government should be happy with anything that give it more power over its own people? Should the government be happy with any laws that allow it to impose its will over its people? The order implies and legitimizes the fact that the government and its people have to be in the opposite camps! Though the ruling machinery is by and large anti people, the said character is not something that should be welcomed or condoned, but is something that to be treated as an aberration. By very definition, the government in a democracy should be ‘for the people’ and thus it should be more interested to empower the people and not itself. Court’s opining that the government should automatically accept any laws that empower its hands at the expense of people’s rights is worrying to say the least.
It is suggested that public meetings be held at designated places like conference halls, play grounds etc without disturbing the traffic and the people on the public roads by conducting meetings on the roadside. On the surface this may sound like a simple, straightforward, win-win formula for everyone involved. However, once we go a little deeper into the realities on the ground, it will become clear that this issue is not something that should be dealt so simplistically. To start with, there are not enough facilities suitable for holding public meetings in the state of Kerala. Street and corner meetings have been thus an integral part of the political, social and religious activities in the state for long. It had been a continuing practice since decades to hold festivals, processions, political and other public meetings, religious discourses etc by the roadside. This is however only a part of the problem. The crux of the issue is in fact much more fundamental and far reaching. The bigger concern about the ruling is that it is taking away from the hands of progressive forces the most fundamental means of instilling social changes through educating, organizing and orchestrating public upraising against the wrongness in the system.
Reaching out to the masses has never been easy for social reformists and political activists. Mass don’t flock to them. They rather have to reach out to the people, run campaigns and dialogues and raise the consciousness of the people in the process. This exchange happens on the streets. It is this coming together of the people that results in the emergence of the ultimate driving force behind social changes. Any move to close down this very avenue would only be at the risk of cutting down the most critical lifeline of a healthy democracy. It would be a grave ignorance to expect people to always voluntarily gather in the air-conditioned conference halls and designated meeting grounds to get educated and inspired. As the saying goes, if Mohammed doesn’t come to the Mountain, the Mountain has to go to Mohammed! The activists go to the people, not the other way around.
We are living in a time where people, especially the large majority belonging to the middle class, are increasingly becoming self-centric and inward drawn! Added to this, every vested interest having any stake in keeping the status quo in the society spare no effort to keep people away from coming together. The sermon of the era is never to look beyond one’s own affairs. More the people turn their heads away from public issues, the better! Everybody has only one goal in this age of globalization; to win at any cost, even if it is at the expense of the rest. Competition, not the cooperation, is the mantra of the present. Efforts are to destroy even the smallest signs of revolt and resistance. Scheme is to keep people away from any places that can potentially groom resistance and forces of change. Thus, many of the once most active meeting places like libraries, clubs, street corners and community places are slowly disappearing. People are kept out of the street, not by force but by carefully designed market tactics, tying them within the trivialities of life and luring them with the temptations of soap operas, entertainment and reality shows within the comfort of their homes. It is to this mass the activists need to converse. It is this mass who need be turned into soldiers of the army fighting for change. A population passive and slaved to the existing system will be the biggest threat to our democracy. We need a responsive and responsible population to safeguard our democracy. We need them on the streets. Let us not destroy the very cradles of social changes.
Suresh Kodoor
On a judgment dismissing the review petition filed by the Kerala state government, the Apex Court has upheld the verdict passed on June 24, 2010 by the Kerala High Court imposing statewide ban on public meetings by the roadsides. The Court also further made an observation wondering why the government had to even approach the Apex Court to reverse the judgment of the lower court when the High Court verdict only strengthened the government’s hands!
Earlier, the Kerala High Court gave the judgment in response to a petition filed by an individual who contented that public meetings caused inconvenience near the railway station area in the Aluva town. However, the High Court had issued a blanket statewide prohibitory order on conducting public meetings and rallies by roadside and suggested that the order was being given to ensure free flow of traffic on public roads and to ensure the safety of the traveling public.
Before coming to the issue of the ban, let us spare a thought or two on the apex court’s observation wondering why in the first place state government has to approach the court when the high court’s order was in fact giving the government more power. This remark has long-term repercussion and should worry anyone concerned with the democracy and citizen’s rights. Is the court trying to suggest that government should be happy with anything that give it more power over its own people? Should the government be happy with any laws that allow it to impose its will over its people? The order implies and legitimizes the fact that the government and its people have to be in the opposite camps! Though the ruling machinery is by and large anti people, the said character is not something that should be welcomed or condoned, but is something that to be treated as an aberration. By very definition, the government in a democracy should be ‘for the people’ and thus it should be more interested to empower the people and not itself. Court’s opining that the government should automatically accept any laws that empower its hands at the expense of people’s rights is worrying to say the least.
It is suggested that public meetings be held at designated places like conference halls, play grounds etc without disturbing the traffic and the people on the public roads by conducting meetings on the roadside. On the surface this may sound like a simple, straightforward, win-win formula for everyone involved. However, once we go a little deeper into the realities on the ground, it will become clear that this issue is not something that should be dealt so simplistically. To start with, there are not enough facilities suitable for holding public meetings in the state of Kerala. Street and corner meetings have been thus an integral part of the political, social and religious activities in the state for long. It had been a continuing practice since decades to hold festivals, processions, political and other public meetings, religious discourses etc by the roadside. This is however only a part of the problem. The crux of the issue is in fact much more fundamental and far reaching. The bigger concern about the ruling is that it is taking away from the hands of progressive forces the most fundamental means of instilling social changes through educating, organizing and orchestrating public upraising against the wrongness in the system.
Reaching out to the masses has never been easy for social reformists and political activists. Mass don’t flock to them. They rather have to reach out to the people, run campaigns and dialogues and raise the consciousness of the people in the process. This exchange happens on the streets. It is this coming together of the people that results in the emergence of the ultimate driving force behind social changes. Any move to close down this very avenue would only be at the risk of cutting down the most critical lifeline of a healthy democracy. It would be a grave ignorance to expect people to always voluntarily gather in the air-conditioned conference halls and designated meeting grounds to get educated and inspired. As the saying goes, if Mohammed doesn’t come to the Mountain, the Mountain has to go to Mohammed! The activists go to the people, not the other way around.
We are living in a time where people, especially the large majority belonging to the middle class, are increasingly becoming self-centric and inward drawn! Added to this, every vested interest having any stake in keeping the status quo in the society spare no effort to keep people away from coming together. The sermon of the era is never to look beyond one’s own affairs. More the people turn their heads away from public issues, the better! Everybody has only one goal in this age of globalization; to win at any cost, even if it is at the expense of the rest. Competition, not the cooperation, is the mantra of the present. Efforts are to destroy even the smallest signs of revolt and resistance. Scheme is to keep people away from any places that can potentially groom resistance and forces of change. Thus, many of the once most active meeting places like libraries, clubs, street corners and community places are slowly disappearing. People are kept out of the street, not by force but by carefully designed market tactics, tying them within the trivialities of life and luring them with the temptations of soap operas, entertainment and reality shows within the comfort of their homes. It is to this mass the activists need to converse. It is this mass who need be turned into soldiers of the army fighting for change. A population passive and slaved to the existing system will be the biggest threat to our democracy. We need a responsive and responsible population to safeguard our democracy. We need them on the streets. Let us not destroy the very cradles of social changes.
Suresh Kodoor
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Suicide rate is on the rise among IT Professionals!
Suicides among farmers have been among news for long. Another group is now fast catching up! The new addition to this worrying list is the IT professionals. It may be ironical that the two groups represent the opposite ends of the economic spectrum though! The later one however has hardly attracted enough social attention yet. Seems it is time some concerted efforts is put to understand the dynamics behind the increasing numbers among the IT workers who take to the extreme step. Appropriate action plans need to be drawn up to instill awareness among the group and provide them support in the times of despair! There is an urgent need to intervene to arrest this alarmingly increasing trend in the most coveted professional stream of the modern times in India.
Many times these suicides are brushed aside as personal problems. The motivation varying from extra marital affairs, broken relations, health issues, acute depression to career related disappointments. Most of these triggers are dumped as personal problems, suggesting they are ‘not related to work/company’ in any manner. However, the role of work related factors that give rise to such personal issues leading to desperate situations in one’s life are often over looked. The fact that a 14-16 hrs work schedule with often it further spilling over to home is a sure shot recipe for disaster in family relations is often ignored. According to WHO, depression is the No 1 occupational disease of the 21st century! And, depression is one of the key triggers in most of the suicide incidents.
One of the statistics brought to light by a study by NIMHANS Bangalore is very disturbing. It says one in every 20 IT professionals contemplate suicide! That is certainly an alarming number and is a loud cry for help. The study also suggests that 27.6% of IT professionals in India are addicted to narcotic drugs. Lot of people takes solace in drugs and alcohol as stress reliever to escape from the high pressures of the work. Another equally worrying observation is that 36% of IT professionals in Bangalore show signs of psychiatric disorder. A survey conducted among around 500 IT/ITeS employees in Bangalore by ‘IT and ITeS Employee Center’ (ITEC), a welfare and support forum for IT/ITeS employees, suggested that almost 70% of the respondents reported sufferings from work related high stress and job insecurity fears.
According to the National Crime Records Bureau statistics, a suicide is committed every five minutes. And seven times more that number in fact attempts to take their lives. And, the most depressing fact is that more suicide occurs between the ages 18-45, ie in the most productive age group of the society.
As per the study, 85% of people under stress tend to have strained relations with family and friends. 71% people under stress refrain from social activities. 50% of people under stress say they are not able to pursue leisure activities or hobbies. 35% people suffering from social anxiety disorder say they avoid intimacy with partners.
IT/ITeS jobs, while offering a better standard of living, is taking its toll on mental and physical health as well as on the social and family relationship aspects. Work overload resulting in spill over of workload at home, guilt over being less attentive to family, career related issues and dissatisfaction all adds up taking severe toll on one’s overall health and wellness. Many people reports feelings like frustration, being overwhelmed, anxiety, other health problems like headache, backaches, hypertension, insomnia etc.
While every job may have its own stress and related problems, IT jobs pose different problems compared to the traditional jobs and are quite different from the typical secured employment that Indian middle class is accustomed to. The jobs are mostly contractual with less job security (even for so called ‘permanent’ employees, the jobs are very much tied to the project inflows and thus always at the risk of losing based on the global swings in the business and economic environment). Thus the professionals are stressed from both job pressure as well as the job insecurity. Jobs in IT are most coveted in India. Every middle class family wants their children to succeed with a high-flying career in the IT field. Increased burden of these high expectations comes with its own added stress. Social pressures and expectation from the family force people to continue in the IT field even if many would like to switch to a less demanding field
Employees in ITeS profession work in shifts ranging anywhere from 12 to 16 hrs a day. Much work in night shifts and their partners will also be working in the IT field working in day shift. With many BPO companies, it being 6 day a week, hardly the couple meets each other. This severely affects the harmony at home and strain family relations. High competition at work place, high rate of employee turn over, less involvement in corporate decision making, lack of career progression are all some of the factors these individuals face with.
Work environment, nature of work, performance assessment methods, high competition, job compartmentalization all have made IT professionals highly individualistic. IT jobs are not of the nature where large number of workers needs to continuously support each other or closely dependent on each other. People sitting in the very adjacent cubes physically for 12-14 hrs daily are still highly isolated as individuals. Job time span with a single company becoming as low as 1-2 years for most people, rarely close friendships are cultivated. With very superfluous relations being created among the peers and team members, it is no surprise that at the time of distress the person see no one to turn to for emotional support. It is here that an industry-wide welfare and support forum and togetherness of IT employees can contribute a lot.
Recently a friend called for help to find a new job. He works as a manager in a BPO company in Chennai and his shift starts at evening 5pm. He works for US shift as the company caters to US customers. His shift often extends to morning 8 or 9 and he has a 6-day week. His wife works in another IT company. ‘They hardly meet each other’ would be an over simplified description of the situation! He suffer from health problems, stress, sleep disorders and to top it all, an about to collapse married life! His cry for help is certainly not an isolated one in the industry!
Many times these suicides are brushed aside as personal problems. The motivation varying from extra marital affairs, broken relations, health issues, acute depression to career related disappointments. Most of these triggers are dumped as personal problems, suggesting they are ‘not related to work/company’ in any manner. However, the role of work related factors that give rise to such personal issues leading to desperate situations in one’s life are often over looked. The fact that a 14-16 hrs work schedule with often it further spilling over to home is a sure shot recipe for disaster in family relations is often ignored. According to WHO, depression is the No 1 occupational disease of the 21st century! And, depression is one of the key triggers in most of the suicide incidents.
One of the statistics brought to light by a study by NIMHANS Bangalore is very disturbing. It says one in every 20 IT professionals contemplate suicide! That is certainly an alarming number and is a loud cry for help. The study also suggests that 27.6% of IT professionals in India are addicted to narcotic drugs. Lot of people takes solace in drugs and alcohol as stress reliever to escape from the high pressures of the work. Another equally worrying observation is that 36% of IT professionals in Bangalore show signs of psychiatric disorder. A survey conducted among around 500 IT/ITeS employees in Bangalore by ‘IT and ITeS Employee Center’ (ITEC), a welfare and support forum for IT/ITeS employees, suggested that almost 70% of the respondents reported sufferings from work related high stress and job insecurity fears.
According to the National Crime Records Bureau statistics, a suicide is committed every five minutes. And seven times more that number in fact attempts to take their lives. And, the most depressing fact is that more suicide occurs between the ages 18-45, ie in the most productive age group of the society.
As per the study, 85% of people under stress tend to have strained relations with family and friends. 71% people under stress refrain from social activities. 50% of people under stress say they are not able to pursue leisure activities or hobbies. 35% people suffering from social anxiety disorder say they avoid intimacy with partners.
IT/ITeS jobs, while offering a better standard of living, is taking its toll on mental and physical health as well as on the social and family relationship aspects. Work overload resulting in spill over of workload at home, guilt over being less attentive to family, career related issues and dissatisfaction all adds up taking severe toll on one’s overall health and wellness. Many people reports feelings like frustration, being overwhelmed, anxiety, other health problems like headache, backaches, hypertension, insomnia etc.
While every job may have its own stress and related problems, IT jobs pose different problems compared to the traditional jobs and are quite different from the typical secured employment that Indian middle class is accustomed to. The jobs are mostly contractual with less job security (even for so called ‘permanent’ employees, the jobs are very much tied to the project inflows and thus always at the risk of losing based on the global swings in the business and economic environment). Thus the professionals are stressed from both job pressure as well as the job insecurity. Jobs in IT are most coveted in India. Every middle class family wants their children to succeed with a high-flying career in the IT field. Increased burden of these high expectations comes with its own added stress. Social pressures and expectation from the family force people to continue in the IT field even if many would like to switch to a less demanding field
Employees in ITeS profession work in shifts ranging anywhere from 12 to 16 hrs a day. Much work in night shifts and their partners will also be working in the IT field working in day shift. With many BPO companies, it being 6 day a week, hardly the couple meets each other. This severely affects the harmony at home and strain family relations. High competition at work place, high rate of employee turn over, less involvement in corporate decision making, lack of career progression are all some of the factors these individuals face with.
Work environment, nature of work, performance assessment methods, high competition, job compartmentalization all have made IT professionals highly individualistic. IT jobs are not of the nature where large number of workers needs to continuously support each other or closely dependent on each other. People sitting in the very adjacent cubes physically for 12-14 hrs daily are still highly isolated as individuals. Job time span with a single company becoming as low as 1-2 years for most people, rarely close friendships are cultivated. With very superfluous relations being created among the peers and team members, it is no surprise that at the time of distress the person see no one to turn to for emotional support. It is here that an industry-wide welfare and support forum and togetherness of IT employees can contribute a lot.
Recently a friend called for help to find a new job. He works as a manager in a BPO company in Chennai and his shift starts at evening 5pm. He works for US shift as the company caters to US customers. His shift often extends to morning 8 or 9 and he has a 6-day week. His wife works in another IT company. ‘They hardly meet each other’ would be an over simplified description of the situation! He suffer from health problems, stress, sleep disorders and to top it all, an about to collapse married life! His cry for help is certainly not an isolated one in the industry!
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Ban on Outsourcing once again exposes the Free Market apostle!
Recent pronouncement by the Ohio State Governor Mr.Ted Strickland ordering a ban on outsourcing government projects to companies outside the US and subsequent announcements by the US President that tax breaks should go only to companies that create jobs in the US and not overseas have raised concerns among the IT fraternity and have invited strong reactions from the Indian IT companies as well as from some quarters in the Indian government. These steps followed similar restricting actions earlier like increasing the visa fee for H1 and L1 Visas has added to the concerns of the Indian IT industry. The fact that the US government might have been forced by their own local compulsions like a faltering economy, high unemployment levels along with other political factors has not been a source of solace for the IT industry barons in India.
Indian IT industry has grown considerably over the last two decades and has become a significant contributor to the national GDP with 5.5% coming from the IT and ITeS sectors. 2 million people are directly employed by the $70 billion IT sector with another 7-8 million being employed indirectly. UK and US continue to be the major market for the Indian IT Companies with 61% of the revenue coming from the US, 18% from the UK and the rest from other European countries. Thus, outsourcing is the lifeline for the majority of our IT Companies and hence they are naturally in the forefront of the ongoing outcry against the ban imposed on the outsourcing. The NASSCOM head has been very prompt in pointing out that the IT companies were always been supportive of free trade and open market policies (it is another matter that in many instances these policies have been detrimental to our own economic and national interests). The Indian IT Company’s representative body had no hesitation in calling the action as ‘discriminatory’ trade barrier. However, besides the perspective from a narrow business interest of the Indian IT Companies, the issue of outsourcing needs wider examination from a broader perspective to evolve the appropriate response towards the ban imposed.
One of the triggers for the Ohio Governor’s order was the public outcry following a revelation about a call center services for a federally funded program being outsourced to El Salvador. The program, which was funded by the US government's $780 billion stimulus package (The package released by the US federal govt to help their economy recover from recession and to bail out banks, create employment, boost consumer spending etc), was to provide tax rebate to consumers who purchase energy efficient appliances. Ohio State contracted the project to a Texas based company Perago Inc. This company then outsourced the call center connected with this program to El Salvador. This was in fact discovered by a citizen (not the state) and caused a public outcry against the impropriety of siphoning out the public money, targeted for stimulating local economy and create jobs, by corporate to make profit for themselves. So, the irony was that a program which was designed to generate jobs and stimulate economy locally ended up creating jobs in El Salvador instead of Ohio because of the greed of the contracting company to increase their profit. A program designed to help people out of recession by pumping tax payer's money was ironically taking the jobs away! The situation naturally prompted the state government to act to remedy the situation. Will it be appropriate to condemn this decision of Ohio state government?
‘Outsourcing ban’ per se thus is not something that needs to be objected. Should we be asking US to encourage outsourcing? Should we be arguing that US should uphold India’s interest above own interest? Should we be aligning with the US corporate who in their greed to farther their huge level of profits outsource work to each and every corner of the world wherever cheap labor is available, completely ignoring the local people’s interest and growing unemployment? Answer to all these questions should be in the negative. We should respect Ohio State’s right to ban outsourcing to protect local employment and US government’s decision to withdraw any tax concessions to the companies who take job elsewhere in pursuit of higher profit via cheaper labor. However, it should be pointed out in the same vein that the US is preaching the whole world to abstain from these very protectionist actions that they are currently indulging in to protect their jobs and economy. The current ban brings out this contradiction all the more glaringly once again to the utmost discomfort of the free market apostles!
It is important for us not to miss the fact that the ban is clearly another example of the double standard that the US time and again pursues in the matters of ‘free market’ and ‘free trade’. As numerous other incidents and instances have repeatedly demonstrated, US’s preach on free market lasts only as long as it suits their interests and whenever it doesn’t, they have no inhibitions to employ trade restrictions and protectionism to safeguard it. It is very ironical that while the US President on one side argues for protecting US jobs and economy by banning the outsourcing, in the same breath, he demands India to open up the market for the American farm products imports. While he is loud and clear to stress on US’s right in protecting employment in the US, he turns a blind eye when it comes to appreciating India’s right to act in the interest of her farmers. Wish the Indian policymakers can see through the scheme and learn from it instead of blindly jumping on the globalization bandwagon and surrendering the nation’s interest to the global corporate in the name of ‘liberalization’.
The irony once again is highlighted by the fact that the US is a member of GPA (Agreement on Government Procurement), which is an agreement under WTO for setting fair rules for public purchases. The fact that the US while advocating such an agreement to other countries is violating the very spirit of it by relying on such protectionist measures helps only to expose once again the double talk they indulge in. US wants India to open up every conceivable markets, including insurance, banking, retail, media, services, nuclear etc but doesn’t want to open up own backyard for the Indian IT Companies speak volumes of the hollowness of US’s preaching on the free market and free trade. Apostle of free market has to turn to the methods of government intervention to control the market forces once again demonstrates the failure of open market policies to work for the welfare of the people. Current ban on outsourcing should make all the developing nations to open their eyes to the dangers of unilaterally submitting their national interest to the forces of the west lured by the hollow promises of globalization and free market capitalism! .
India government and Indian IT Companies have valuable lessons as take away from these developments. Indian IT sector has been overly relying on the US and European markets for too long. For example, 98.2% of Infosys revenue comes from outside with US accounting for 62.6%, Europe 26.8 and rest of the world 8.8%. The domestic share lay at a paltry 1.8%! Apart from diversifying the market to other parts of the world, it is also critical that the Indian IT Companies start increasingly looking to cater to the domestic market more seriously instead of continuing to heavily rely on outsourced projects from outside. May be time to start another self-reliance movement, this time for indigenous software?
Suresh Kodoor
Indian IT industry has grown considerably over the last two decades and has become a significant contributor to the national GDP with 5.5% coming from the IT and ITeS sectors. 2 million people are directly employed by the $70 billion IT sector with another 7-8 million being employed indirectly. UK and US continue to be the major market for the Indian IT Companies with 61% of the revenue coming from the US, 18% from the UK and the rest from other European countries. Thus, outsourcing is the lifeline for the majority of our IT Companies and hence they are naturally in the forefront of the ongoing outcry against the ban imposed on the outsourcing. The NASSCOM head has been very prompt in pointing out that the IT companies were always been supportive of free trade and open market policies (it is another matter that in many instances these policies have been detrimental to our own economic and national interests). The Indian IT Company’s representative body had no hesitation in calling the action as ‘discriminatory’ trade barrier. However, besides the perspective from a narrow business interest of the Indian IT Companies, the issue of outsourcing needs wider examination from a broader perspective to evolve the appropriate response towards the ban imposed.
One of the triggers for the Ohio Governor’s order was the public outcry following a revelation about a call center services for a federally funded program being outsourced to El Salvador. The program, which was funded by the US government's $780 billion stimulus package (The package released by the US federal govt to help their economy recover from recession and to bail out banks, create employment, boost consumer spending etc), was to provide tax rebate to consumers who purchase energy efficient appliances. Ohio State contracted the project to a Texas based company Perago Inc. This company then outsourced the call center connected with this program to El Salvador. This was in fact discovered by a citizen (not the state) and caused a public outcry against the impropriety of siphoning out the public money, targeted for stimulating local economy and create jobs, by corporate to make profit for themselves. So, the irony was that a program which was designed to generate jobs and stimulate economy locally ended up creating jobs in El Salvador instead of Ohio because of the greed of the contracting company to increase their profit. A program designed to help people out of recession by pumping tax payer's money was ironically taking the jobs away! The situation naturally prompted the state government to act to remedy the situation. Will it be appropriate to condemn this decision of Ohio state government?
‘Outsourcing ban’ per se thus is not something that needs to be objected. Should we be asking US to encourage outsourcing? Should we be arguing that US should uphold India’s interest above own interest? Should we be aligning with the US corporate who in their greed to farther their huge level of profits outsource work to each and every corner of the world wherever cheap labor is available, completely ignoring the local people’s interest and growing unemployment? Answer to all these questions should be in the negative. We should respect Ohio State’s right to ban outsourcing to protect local employment and US government’s decision to withdraw any tax concessions to the companies who take job elsewhere in pursuit of higher profit via cheaper labor. However, it should be pointed out in the same vein that the US is preaching the whole world to abstain from these very protectionist actions that they are currently indulging in to protect their jobs and economy. The current ban brings out this contradiction all the more glaringly once again to the utmost discomfort of the free market apostles!
It is important for us not to miss the fact that the ban is clearly another example of the double standard that the US time and again pursues in the matters of ‘free market’ and ‘free trade’. As numerous other incidents and instances have repeatedly demonstrated, US’s preach on free market lasts only as long as it suits their interests and whenever it doesn’t, they have no inhibitions to employ trade restrictions and protectionism to safeguard it. It is very ironical that while the US President on one side argues for protecting US jobs and economy by banning the outsourcing, in the same breath, he demands India to open up the market for the American farm products imports. While he is loud and clear to stress on US’s right in protecting employment in the US, he turns a blind eye when it comes to appreciating India’s right to act in the interest of her farmers. Wish the Indian policymakers can see through the scheme and learn from it instead of blindly jumping on the globalization bandwagon and surrendering the nation’s interest to the global corporate in the name of ‘liberalization’.
The irony once again is highlighted by the fact that the US is a member of GPA (Agreement on Government Procurement), which is an agreement under WTO for setting fair rules for public purchases. The fact that the US while advocating such an agreement to other countries is violating the very spirit of it by relying on such protectionist measures helps only to expose once again the double talk they indulge in. US wants India to open up every conceivable markets, including insurance, banking, retail, media, services, nuclear etc but doesn’t want to open up own backyard for the Indian IT Companies speak volumes of the hollowness of US’s preaching on the free market and free trade. Apostle of free market has to turn to the methods of government intervention to control the market forces once again demonstrates the failure of open market policies to work for the welfare of the people. Current ban on outsourcing should make all the developing nations to open their eyes to the dangers of unilaterally submitting their national interest to the forces of the west lured by the hollow promises of globalization and free market capitalism! .
India government and Indian IT Companies have valuable lessons as take away from these developments. Indian IT sector has been overly relying on the US and European markets for too long. For example, 98.2% of Infosys revenue comes from outside with US accounting for 62.6%, Europe 26.8 and rest of the world 8.8%. The domestic share lay at a paltry 1.8%! Apart from diversifying the market to other parts of the world, it is also critical that the Indian IT Companies start increasingly looking to cater to the domestic market more seriously instead of continuing to heavily rely on outsourced projects from outside. May be time to start another self-reliance movement, this time for indigenous software?
Suresh Kodoor
On the issue of the US ban on Outsourcing
The upcoming visit by the President of USA to India next week provides an opportunity to all the progressive minded individuals and groups to express their strong protest and condemnation at the imperialistic, undemocratic and anti-people policies pursued by the USA all over the world. Some of the key issues that could be highlighted as part of the protest campaign include US’s insistence and pressure on India to get India’s markets open up in the areas of retail, banking, services, education and others, US’s continuing pressure on developing nations to allow US conglomerates to relentlessly exploit and loot their economies, continuing embargo on Cuba irrespective of overwhelming condemnation from all parts of the worlds, Atrocities on the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, Nuclear liability bill, so on and so forth.
However, it is felt that protest against ‘Ban on Outsourcing’ not be part of this list. ‘Outsourcing ban’ per se is not something that should be objected but at the same time it should be used as a campaigning issue to expose as yet another example of the double standard of US in the matters of ‘free market’ and ‘free trade’.
Following points be considered while formulating a reaction to the issue of ‘outsourcing ban’.
* Should we be asking US to encourage outsourcing? Should we be arguing for asking US to uphold India’s interest above own interest? Should we be aligning with the US corporate who in their greed to farther their huge level of profit outsource work to each and every corner of the world wherever cheap labor is available, completely ignoring the local people’s interest and growing unemployment?
* Background on Ohio state passing the bill on Outsourcing: One of the triggers for the bill was the revelation about a call center services for a federally funded program being outsourced to El Salvador. The program, which was funded by the US government's $780 billion stimulus package (The package released by the US federal govt to help their economy recover from recession and to bail out banks, create employment, boost consumer spending etc), was to provide tax rebate to consumers who purchase energy efficient appliances. Ohio state contracted the project to a Texas based company Perago Inc. This company then outsourced the call center connected with this program to El Salvador. This was in fact discovered by a citizen (not the state) and caused a public outcry against the impropriety of siphoning out the public money targeted to stimulated local economy and create jobs by corporate to make profit for themselves. So, the irony was that a program which was designed to generate jobs and stimulate economy locally ended up creating jobs in EL Salvador instead of Ohio because of the greed of the contracting company to increase their profit. A program designed to help people out of recession by pumping tax payer's money was ironically taking the jobs away! The situation naturally prompted the state govt to act to remedy the situation. Will it be appropriate to condemn this decision of Ohio state government? The point is, banning the outsourcing per se is not a wrong thing. However the double standard of the USA, who force every other country to act against such protectionism and open up their market, as once again demonstrated by this act which is against their own ‘free market’ preaching is to be exposed.
* The irony once again is highlighted by the fact that the USA is a member of GPA (Agreement on Government Procurement), which is an agreement under WTO for setting fair rules for public purchases. Only a few countries are member of this agreement and India is not one. As per this agreement a member nation cannot discriminate countries in cases of public purchases. The point is, US who advocate such an agreement to other countries itself relying on such protectionism only expose their real intend. ie loot other market while protecting their backyard whenever it find it necessary. This is what need to be exposed in this context.
* So, our contention in this is that when US protects their interest by imposing restrictions and intervening in the market, US should agree that the developing countries also are equally within their rights to impose such restrictions to protect their economy and safeguard their people's interest. US making hue and cry in the name of free trade and free market in those instances when developing countries try to protect their economy is hypocritical, selfish and double standard. This double talk and deed is what should be exposed.
* A system that boast of 'free market' and 'free capitalism' engaging in such protectionism should be viewed as a public admission of ineffectiveness and inability of 'capitalism' and 'free market' to protect people's interest. It is the public demonstration of the fact that government intervention is very much necessary in the market and economy to ensure the welfare of the society and large section of the people. This is against the very tenants of free capitalism and a falling back to some of the ways of 'welfare economics'. Thus actions such as 'Outsourcing Ban' coming from the apostle of free market should be used as the biggest campaigning tool to expose the hollowness of 'free market' claims. This should be used to strengthen our campaign against Dr.Manmohan Singh government’s shameless submission to the demands of US in opening up markets and signing up trade agreements that is blatantly favorable to the interests of the US and against our own economic and people’s interests.
* Suppose Indian IT companies choose to bring in IT workers from say Nepal or other third world countries (they will be able to get workers at a fraction of the cost being paid to Indian IT workers then), what would be our stand? Or say if Indian IT Companies choose to outsource all the work to Bangladesh, Thailand, Srilanka or other such countries leaving Indian IT workers jobless, what would be out stand? Or if Indian diamond industry outsources the whole diamond cutting jobs to outside, what should be our stand? What is 'right' for us cannot be 'wrong' for others!
* We stand against the irresponsible import of agricultural products and other goods, which will put the life of our farmers in difficulties (our protect against importing rubber, edible oil, sugar etc a case in point or our objections on India entering ASEAN or similar treaties and for that matter many of the agreements under WTO itself). This stand is from the realization that developing nations need to rely on protectionism to safeguard their economy. Any nation might have to turn to such practices to safe guard their economy. Again our contention is that US should respect this rights of all the sovereign countries instead of trying to impose their hegemony and force market world over to open up to allow their looting. The present issue of outsourcing ban should be used to once again highlight this fact. Arent we time and again stressing on the need to restrict foreign investment only to those fields which are absolutely necessary (that too based on conditions that are favorable to us) and to be very judicious in allowing foreign investments? Then how can we argue that US should export their jobs outside in spite of so many people going jobless there?
* Finally, the ban on outsourcing is only for federal jobs, which is only an insignificant part of actual outsourcing work. So, in practice, this is not really going to make any impact. US senate passed a similar bill banning outsourcing in the year 2004 as well. However hardly it was enforced or been effective.
However, it is felt that protest against ‘Ban on Outsourcing’ not be part of this list. ‘Outsourcing ban’ per se is not something that should be objected but at the same time it should be used as a campaigning issue to expose as yet another example of the double standard of US in the matters of ‘free market’ and ‘free trade’.
Following points be considered while formulating a reaction to the issue of ‘outsourcing ban’.
* Should we be asking US to encourage outsourcing? Should we be arguing for asking US to uphold India’s interest above own interest? Should we be aligning with the US corporate who in their greed to farther their huge level of profit outsource work to each and every corner of the world wherever cheap labor is available, completely ignoring the local people’s interest and growing unemployment?
* Background on Ohio state passing the bill on Outsourcing: One of the triggers for the bill was the revelation about a call center services for a federally funded program being outsourced to El Salvador. The program, which was funded by the US government's $780 billion stimulus package (The package released by the US federal govt to help their economy recover from recession and to bail out banks, create employment, boost consumer spending etc), was to provide tax rebate to consumers who purchase energy efficient appliances. Ohio state contracted the project to a Texas based company Perago Inc. This company then outsourced the call center connected with this program to El Salvador. This was in fact discovered by a citizen (not the state) and caused a public outcry against the impropriety of siphoning out the public money targeted to stimulated local economy and create jobs by corporate to make profit for themselves. So, the irony was that a program which was designed to generate jobs and stimulate economy locally ended up creating jobs in EL Salvador instead of Ohio because of the greed of the contracting company to increase their profit. A program designed to help people out of recession by pumping tax payer's money was ironically taking the jobs away! The situation naturally prompted the state govt to act to remedy the situation. Will it be appropriate to condemn this decision of Ohio state government? The point is, banning the outsourcing per se is not a wrong thing. However the double standard of the USA, who force every other country to act against such protectionism and open up their market, as once again demonstrated by this act which is against their own ‘free market’ preaching is to be exposed.
* The irony once again is highlighted by the fact that the USA is a member of GPA (Agreement on Government Procurement), which is an agreement under WTO for setting fair rules for public purchases. Only a few countries are member of this agreement and India is not one. As per this agreement a member nation cannot discriminate countries in cases of public purchases. The point is, US who advocate such an agreement to other countries itself relying on such protectionism only expose their real intend. ie loot other market while protecting their backyard whenever it find it necessary. This is what need to be exposed in this context.
* So, our contention in this is that when US protects their interest by imposing restrictions and intervening in the market, US should agree that the developing countries also are equally within their rights to impose such restrictions to protect their economy and safeguard their people's interest. US making hue and cry in the name of free trade and free market in those instances when developing countries try to protect their economy is hypocritical, selfish and double standard. This double talk and deed is what should be exposed.
* A system that boast of 'free market' and 'free capitalism' engaging in such protectionism should be viewed as a public admission of ineffectiveness and inability of 'capitalism' and 'free market' to protect people's interest. It is the public demonstration of the fact that government intervention is very much necessary in the market and economy to ensure the welfare of the society and large section of the people. This is against the very tenants of free capitalism and a falling back to some of the ways of 'welfare economics'. Thus actions such as 'Outsourcing Ban' coming from the apostle of free market should be used as the biggest campaigning tool to expose the hollowness of 'free market' claims. This should be used to strengthen our campaign against Dr.Manmohan Singh government’s shameless submission to the demands of US in opening up markets and signing up trade agreements that is blatantly favorable to the interests of the US and against our own economic and people’s interests.
* Suppose Indian IT companies choose to bring in IT workers from say Nepal or other third world countries (they will be able to get workers at a fraction of the cost being paid to Indian IT workers then), what would be our stand? Or say if Indian IT Companies choose to outsource all the work to Bangladesh, Thailand, Srilanka or other such countries leaving Indian IT workers jobless, what would be out stand? Or if Indian diamond industry outsources the whole diamond cutting jobs to outside, what should be our stand? What is 'right' for us cannot be 'wrong' for others!
* We stand against the irresponsible import of agricultural products and other goods, which will put the life of our farmers in difficulties (our protect against importing rubber, edible oil, sugar etc a case in point or our objections on India entering ASEAN or similar treaties and for that matter many of the agreements under WTO itself). This stand is from the realization that developing nations need to rely on protectionism to safeguard their economy. Any nation might have to turn to such practices to safe guard their economy. Again our contention is that US should respect this rights of all the sovereign countries instead of trying to impose their hegemony and force market world over to open up to allow their looting. The present issue of outsourcing ban should be used to once again highlight this fact. Arent we time and again stressing on the need to restrict foreign investment only to those fields which are absolutely necessary (that too based on conditions that are favorable to us) and to be very judicious in allowing foreign investments? Then how can we argue that US should export their jobs outside in spite of so many people going jobless there?
* Finally, the ban on outsourcing is only for federal jobs, which is only an insignificant part of actual outsourcing work. So, in practice, this is not really going to make any impact. US senate passed a similar bill banning outsourcing in the year 2004 as well. However hardly it was enforced or been effective.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Women reservation. Making it 50%!
Our parliament is struggling to pass a bill which, if passed, will guarantee that 33% of our representatives in the parliament would be women! Dont the women actually deserve 50% of the share? Many of the political parties are dead against providing 'reservation' to the women in parliament! Fate of the women reservation bill seems to be still in balance, though it has been passed by the Rajya Sabha.
It is most critical for the advancement of Indian Democracy that more and more women comes to the domain of politics and public life. India still continue to be a male dominated society. Oppression against women dates back to thousands of years! Women should get their share in all sphere of life, not through any 'reservation' or 'favour', but by right.
We should contemplate an alternative solution to make '50% women representation in parliament' a reality! We should reduce the number of total loksabha constituencies to half of what it is currently (there are 545 seats now) by joining every two adjacent constituencies into one. From each constituency, two members should be elected. One Male and one Female!
- SK
It is most critical for the advancement of Indian Democracy that more and more women comes to the domain of politics and public life. India still continue to be a male dominated society. Oppression against women dates back to thousands of years! Women should get their share in all sphere of life, not through any 'reservation' or 'favour', but by right.
We should contemplate an alternative solution to make '50% women representation in parliament' a reality! We should reduce the number of total loksabha constituencies to half of what it is currently (there are 545 seats now) by joining every two adjacent constituencies into one. From each constituency, two members should be elected. One Male and one Female!
- SK
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)