100 cents or 55 cents or 64 cents
If only we were honest, to ensure sanity we should have stuck to 100 cents. Most of the socialist states, have tried to tweak the 100 cents barrier by re-defining their own benchmarks to a lesser number of 55 cents or another value.
Confused!!! I am referring to the definition of Poverty line. While the 100 cents itself isn't accurate, but it probably provides some consistency across the world.
But to ensure that the government in power boasts about the economic growth, most countries have come up with their own version of Poverty line.
With the divide between rich and poor increasing by the day, it was obvious that the poverty line had to be increased to ensure that people who are not reaping the benefits can actually get access to the welfare schemes. But instead countries like India, rather political parties like Congress have re-defined the poverty line to 64 cents, thereby trying to ensure that the welfare schemes are addressed only to the "Real Poor", but not 'Poor".
Now, with all the clamour surrounding this definition, finally India has decided to stick to the original definition of $1. Now, I am sure the ministers would have received a double whammy with the fact that dollar appreciate by almost 15% which would mean that technically the number of people below poverty line would have at-least increased by 5% which is a staggering 60 million people :O
Our country isn't doing justice to its own people by doing any of these kind of activities. Why doesn't the government accept the fact that there are so many poor.
Look at China! For a change China has become real about some of its problems. It has increased its BPL from 55 cents to $1. It has agreed that there are so many poor and that its welfare schemes should indeed address so many of its own folks.
By reducing the BPL from $1 to 64 cents, Mr. Home minister you may be bringing more Kishanji's to the fore and not address the core issue at all.
Let us be honest and agree that the reality is not the 64 cents and it is atleast $1. Let's face it!
Confused!!! I am referring to the definition of Poverty line. While the 100 cents itself isn't accurate, but it probably provides some consistency across the world.
But to ensure that the government in power boasts about the economic growth, most countries have come up with their own version of Poverty line.
With the divide between rich and poor increasing by the day, it was obvious that the poverty line had to be increased to ensure that people who are not reaping the benefits can actually get access to the welfare schemes. But instead countries like India, rather political parties like Congress have re-defined the poverty line to 64 cents, thereby trying to ensure that the welfare schemes are addressed only to the "Real Poor", but not 'Poor".
Now, with all the clamour surrounding this definition, finally India has decided to stick to the original definition of $1. Now, I am sure the ministers would have received a double whammy with the fact that dollar appreciate by almost 15% which would mean that technically the number of people below poverty line would have at-least increased by 5% which is a staggering 60 million people :O
Our country isn't doing justice to its own people by doing any of these kind of activities. Why doesn't the government accept the fact that there are so many poor.
Look at China! For a change China has become real about some of its problems. It has increased its BPL from 55 cents to $1. It has agreed that there are so many poor and that its welfare schemes should indeed address so many of its own folks.
By reducing the BPL from $1 to 64 cents, Mr. Home minister you may be bringing more Kishanji's to the fore and not address the core issue at all.
Let us be honest and agree that the reality is not the 64 cents and it is atleast $1. Let's face it!
Comments