Arun Jaitley. Credit to: The Indian Express
India’s Finance Minister, Arun Jaitley, has commented on the nation’s most recent Economic Survey, tabled in Parliament on 31st January, 2017. He himself presented it, just before the day on which the Indian budget was presented, and its contents were discussed previously.
Universal basic income (UBI) has been gaining attention in India in the past few months, and the first Indian National Conference dedicated to UBI was held in March of this year. In his recent remarks, however, Jaitley expressed concern that UBI may not yet be feasible, due to “political limitations”. It’s unclear at the moment what might be causing this “political limitation”, although other leading Indian economists, such as Amartya Sen, have also expressed doubts about the implementation of UBI in India. In spite of this cautious declaration, Jaitley has also said, “I’m fully supportive of his idea (UBI) but realizing limitations of Indian politics”.
While some economists such as Sen and Jean Dreze have been skeptical about UBI as a possible social policy option for India, others such as Pranab Bardhan, Sudipto Mundle and Vijay Joshi have recently prescribed UBI for the country.
The Economic Survey, a document prepared by Chief Economic Advisor Arvind Subramanian and his team, holds that UBI is a powerful idea, although not ready for implementation. It also states that UBI can be “an alternative to a plethora of state subsidies for poverty alleviation”, and that it “would cost between 4% and 5% of GDP”. It also discusses some options to phase in a UBI in India. These key points about UBI in Economic Survey can be read in this short summary.
More information at:
Kate McFarland, “India: Government Economic Survey presents case for basic income”, Basic Income News, February 4th 2017
Austin Douillard, “India: First National Conference on Universal Basic Income”, Basic Income News, May 2nd 2017
Kate McFarland, “Amartya Sen: India not ready for a basic income”, Basic Income News, March 6th 2017
PTI, “Finance Ministry discussing bad bank, basic income proposals: Arun Jaitley”, The Indian Express, June 11th 2017
India is a growing economy. It doing very well in the field of Space Technology, IT etc.
The specialist Economists, Elite humanists and the ADVISORS of MODI GOVT , all thinking on the old lines, will never think about the sufferings and deaths of the poorest, women at childbirth, of newborns, of infants, of children, of seniors and landless labourers and marginal, small farmers due to poverty, hunger, starvation, undernourishment, malnutrition and insufficient cash/ money with the poorest even to access medication and healthcare facilities.
Instead of walking the beaten old track,
They should study and suggest to the Govt of India to generate additional revenues of Rs.9-10 lac Cr every year so that a minimum UBI @ Rs.500/- per month per person can be paid to 35 CRORE POOREST PEOPLE, that can reduce poverty, hunger starvation, undernourishment, malnutrition and related deaths mentioned above by atleast 70-80% just in 11-12 months, that has been proved by Pilot Project executed by SEWA BHARAT, UNICEF & GUY STANDING in 2011-13 in MP, just by giving cash/ bank transfer of Rs.400/- p.m.per person for 18-24 months.
Why proposal by ARTHAKRANTI, PUNE to replace all existing taxes except Import Duties and customs with BTT @2% on all credits/ receipts transanctions to generate additional Revenues of Rs.9 lac Cr. per year has not been studied and recommended bu these ELITE, ECONOMISTS,ECONOMIC ADVISORS. so far. THEY WILL DISCUSS GST, BANKS RECAPITALIZATION and Demonetisation that will neither generate additional Revenues nor give relief to any sections of society, specially the most vulnerable poorest of the country.
They have to remove their eye blinders and study and bring out something new and different so that India Govt can generate additional Revenues to put money in the pockets/ accounts of the vast majority to generate consumption, demand and production/ Manufacturing and more employment besides eradicating poverty.