…And I Don’t Want Amartya Sen As My Economist

A highly coveted, life-changing object often becomes a weapon in the hands of people who decide the winner. Swedes / Europeans have used the Nobel as that for a while now. They cannot do anything about the sciences but give them to deserving people because the winner has to show tangible achievements. There is no subjectivity to it. However, Nobels in peace, literature and Economics (even an objective subject like that and I will try to explain) have been awarded based on the Swedish / European hatred / liking. These awards clearly expose the European prejudices. I will cite some examples from just the last few years.

The Europeans were very angry with George Bush. So anyone who stood opposed to this man was rewarded amply. Al Gore (who almost beat him in 2000) and Obama were awarded the Peace prize. One could make a case for Al Gore environmental crusade but Obama? They got angry with Iran and Shirin Abadi was awarded the Peace Nobel. They got angry with the Muslims after 9/11 and VS Naipaul was immediately awarded the Literature Nobel for his outspoken views on Muslims. They got self righteous about the Chinese and Liu Xiabo was the beneficiary. They got really angry with Bush’s free market policies and the leftist Economist Paul Krugman was rewarded the Economics Nobel. Now the late 1990s were times of prosperity for the west marked by the internet boom symbolizing an unmitigated greed. They had to find an extreme leftist whose policies stood in the face of prosperity. Amartya Sen was the beneficiary. These people denied Gandhi a Nobel Peace prize out of sheer racial prejudice. The winners due to the European bias are also men and women of great accomplishments but with this in mind, do the Nobels really carry the same weight?

I do not know much about Economics. What I know of Sen’s policies is what I have read in publications not beholden to leftist causes. What I do know is that he is a big proponent of Congress’ mega welfare schemes that no one knows how to pay for. An article in Firstpost.com, Arvind Subramanian who is an Economist of repute is quoted. One of the things he says is as follows:


Three, the rights-based approach also “undervalues opportunity costs”. Subramanian gives the example of the right to education (RTE) - an enormously expensive exercise with doubtful payoffs. It would have been far cheaper and more effective to focus on ensuring teachers turned up for work - thus improving student learning. The RTE is an extravagance the country could have done without, when cheaper and more focused solutions were possible. The UPA never weighed the costs of what could have been done with the money spent - hence incurring a huge opportunity cost.

I may not know money but I do know one thing. If a theory is applied and the results are a disaster then the theory must be lacking in some way or the other. If Congress is following Amartya Sen’s policies and the economy is a disaster where only redefinition of poverty is a cure for poverty then Sen’s policies must be deficient. Now Amratya Sen is using his celebrity (Thank You Nobel Committee) for speaking out against Narendra Modi betraying the pedestrian leftist attitudes of the leftist Bengali Bhadralok. He like all other leftist Bengalis can continue to vote for the Communists or Mamta Bannerjee but they must remember one thing. They can say whatever they like (Free country and all) but every one of them represents only one vote. He is free to vote against Narendra Modi. He does not want Bhai Narendra as his PM but has he stopped in asking an extremely important and potentially an ego busting question? Does Narendra Modi want him as his Economist?

The results of Congress’ and thus Sen’s economic policies are there for all to see. Montek Ahluwalia and Manmohan Singh are redefining poverty to reduce the number of poor. Ghareeb hatao not ghareebi seems to be their mantra. They refuse to answer a simple question. If the number of poor has gone down so much then what is the need of this back breaking food bill. If the food bill is that badly needed then what can one make of their claim for the declining number of poor?

We know what Modi can do. His accomplishments are there for all to see. Only the liberals and the pseudo-secular brigade cannot see Modi’s accomplishments. In fact even this man says that Modi does not deserve his vote because he has not done anything to make the minorities safe. Sen clearly is of the opinion that minority safety (statistically speaking they are much safer and prosperous in Gujarat than in other “secular bastions”) is the biggest problem facing India and that trumps governance and performance.

Yeah. Sen may not want Modi as his PM. I am quite sure that a performer like Narendra Modi does not want this charlatan as his Economics advisor. I sure don’t.

The first post article can be read at: http://www.firstpost.com/economy/food-bill-amartya-sens-charlatan-economics-debunked-again-944451.html