It feels so bad to see Mr. Amartya Sen and Mr. Jagdish Bhagwati exchanging such verbose attributes at each other since last many days. While both of them are pioneers of fundamental macro-economic principles, the root of the quarrel is quite superficial, if looked at by an onlooker of average intelligence and reasonable mindset. One of them argues that growth is a priority over the PDS (Public Distribution System), while the other defends that demographic prosperity through systemic centralized efforts are to be undertaken first and growth will follow as a natural consequence!
Both perspectives look correct, don't they? In fact, in economics, there is nothing right or wrong. It's always only a perspective of an individual based on his own perceptions. Then, why is there an audacious urge to prove oneself correct and the other wrong? Why can't they both be right at the same time?
Both Mr. Sen and Mr. Bhagwati are outstanding achievers and do command full respect for their theories, of course based on deep research and empirical supporting data. These prominent economists have been quite liberal while bench-marking their theories with obscure statistics, but when pragmatism prevails over, it will be evident that the riposte is being put by each of them only for the sake of it over the issues put forward by each other. They are indeed defending the classic models for inclusive growth, but while doing so in their own customized ways, they themselves have not been 'inclusive' towards valid points of each other. This is where exactly a common follower of economy like me gets confused, as his rationale behind understanding the theories gets contravened when the other contrary preponderance takes over.
What frustrates more is when I read some tabloids comparing this fight with the great (farcically used) NaMo-Rahul fight. I mean, come on, we are talking about two scholars here! One is nobel laureate and the other is equivalent in every way, if not superior. These two are academicians, not bloody politicians. Tomorrow I won't be surprised if some shameless reporter goes even further and compares it with SRK-Salman fight! God save India from such a journalism...
Both perspectives look correct, don't they? In fact, in economics, there is nothing right or wrong. It's always only a perspective of an individual based on his own perceptions. Then, why is there an audacious urge to prove oneself correct and the other wrong? Why can't they both be right at the same time?
Both Mr. Sen and Mr. Bhagwati are outstanding achievers and do command full respect for their theories, of course based on deep research and empirical supporting data. These prominent economists have been quite liberal while bench-marking their theories with obscure statistics, but when pragmatism prevails over, it will be evident that the riposte is being put by each of them only for the sake of it over the issues put forward by each other. They are indeed defending the classic models for inclusive growth, but while doing so in their own customized ways, they themselves have not been 'inclusive' towards valid points of each other. This is where exactly a common follower of economy like me gets confused, as his rationale behind understanding the theories gets contravened when the other contrary preponderance takes over.
What frustrates more is when I read some tabloids comparing this fight with the great (farcically used) NaMo-Rahul fight. I mean, come on, we are talking about two scholars here! One is nobel laureate and the other is equivalent in every way, if not superior. These two are academicians, not bloody politicians. Tomorrow I won't be surprised if some shameless reporter goes even further and compares it with SRK-Salman fight! God save India from such a journalism...
Good work...keep it up...:)
ReplyDeleteThanks dude..sab aap ki kripa hai :)
ReplyDeleteNikhlya Ek kaam kar ki
ReplyDelete