[Simplistic Comment on Economic Approaches] I am against subsidies. It is a fact that subsidies mar economic efficiency. Moreover, these subsidies allow us to free ride upon others resources without any positive economic achievement. Verily, subsidy is a form of rent-seeking. The inept and megalomaniac bureaucracy thrives upon such alongwith statesman. Sasti Roti, Metro, Laptop scheme, Benazir Income Support programme have hardly yielded quantifiable benefits. The opportunity cost of such subsidized schemes have always been on higher side. All these programmes have short-lived policy life span, and often end-up leading to un-intended consequences. It is agreed that Austrians have not yet been able to make it to the curriculum that government failures always thrive upon bail-outs, subsidies and financial grants. Subjectively, they are pinned upon redressal of any economic imbalance within market through intervention, but they start imbibe and siphon off such pumping of resources that the imbalance go much awry. However, as a teacher one need to explain the other approach too. Since, mostly textbooks are written by Keynesians, so students hardly have an understanding of catallactics. Ask from students as well as teachers what Cattalaxy stands for? They are blank. I have objections upon free-falling market redressals through price-mechanism without any inducement. I have feel that same will result into market failure as one has seen government failure on almost similar context. Since, debate is all around ethical consequences of economic transactions. Market may invisibly favour some, but with certain arrangement through a concerted manipulation. Manipulation by statesman, bureaucracy or stakeholder shall remain mainstay of economic exploitation. Yes, it will remain. Ethical paradoxes tend to exist at all times. - Zarmeena Hassan Baloch
Posted on: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 14:58:21 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015