Bhagirath Baria

My photo
The Author of this blog has keen interest in understanding Economics and its implications on the Individual and the Economy as a whole. Has been writing articles and analysis of issues that may skip general observation, but exert deep influence on people's lives and their decisions. Discussions and Debates related to conventional as well as non-conventional Economics is done here. The author of this blog doesn't classify himself to any particular School of thought in Economics. He is tilted toward Mainstream Economics, though has keen interest in a few Heterodox schools too. Wishing all the readers a truly enriching experience.

Visitors

Licensed under Creative Commons

Creative Commons License
Rath & Economics by Bhagirath Baria is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.5 India License.
Based on a work at www.rathandeconomics.blogspot.com.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at www.facebook.com/bhagirath.baria.

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Commodities, Production & Poverty- Part 1

Commodities. How essential and omnipresent this phenomenon is. It embodies a sort of magical character, phantom-like as Marx would say. A key difference between human species and other animals is that of possession of commodities. Before we embark upon a brief journey about this phenomenon, lets look at the its meaning:

Commodity: 

A Good or Service that has a use-value(utility) for users and an exchange-value(price) on market. Food, House, Cars, Pens, Fan, Tubelight, Petrol, Diesel, Bed, Spoon, Mobiles, Laptops, Facebook, Google, you name it! How fascinating this is. We humans are surrounded by a plethora of commodities. It is the prime objective phenomenon that differentiates us from other animal species.

Human Kingdom vs. Animal Kingdom:

Homo sapiens produce, distribute, exchange and consume commodities(both Goods and Services) on a large scale, not matched by any other organic species. Our lives are 'defined' by the commodities we use. A basic difference between a poor and a rich is the differences in the 'possession and utilization of commodities', isn't it? A rich family would be characterized by qualitatively and quantitatively better consumption as compared to a poor household. Suppose if all had the same houses, cars, &c, i.e. exactly same amenities. there wouldn't be any differentiation in rich and poor.

Of course, some of the readers might argue that its the amount of 'money' owned that makes this difference. I shall have two arguments against this proposition:

1. Money, in itself is not the end- though its a debatable issue in today's commodity fetish society. Its the amount of 'purchasing power' that money commands is what makes it an end; thus in the end the amount of commodities it can purchase.

2. Even if money were an end in itself- again, today this might be so in many cases, still money too is a commodity.  Thus money as an end, is after all a commodity as an end.

Why commodities are essential to human existence?

Commodities give shape to human life. They define our method of survival(even in Darwinian sense). They also smoothen  our organic processes. We wouldn't go in detail of this role of commodities, but briefly putting it, these add to the enrichment and easing of our day-to-day processes; Eg. Sleeping, Eating, Working, Travelling, Communicating, Thinking and so many more. Thus, commodities are very essential for leading a better life- both materially and immaterially. 

Economics and Commodities:

Marx begins in his magnum opus Capital-Volume 1:

"The wealth of those societies in which the capitalist mode of production prevails, presents itself as ―an immense accumulation of commodities, its unit being a single commodity. Our investigation must therefore begin with the analysis of a commodity."(1)

An a priori assertion, though a valuable one. He's one of the few Economists who give a completely fresh way of looking at the society and economy around us. Here, we can understand that accumulation of commodities is an essential feature of a capitalist society. Indeed it is. The prime aim of majority of population is gathering(or in market terms- earning) money, it being a commodity or commodity-buying power. The constant consumption of commodities is what keeps the flow of Economy going. 

A simple model of Economy: The PEDEC model

Production > Exchange > Distribution > Exchange > Consumption   
{PEDEC model}

Two stages are of prime importance. One- Consumption and Two- Production. Production is the source of Consumption and Consumption is the reason for Production.

Thus, we find an interconnected, contradictory but unitary relation between these two processes of Economy. It becomes crucial then, to point out that modern economics is mainly 'Consumption-focused' economic theory. Not just that. We as consumers are hardly concerned about the Production side of the commodity under our scrutiny. What matters is its objective appearance, its use-value and its exchange value.
Production and Economics:

Having said that, Production is still a very important process that needs to be emphasized for a better understanding about the Economy around us. One may call it capitalistic, socialistic, mixed, based on whatever one's ideological standpoint. But, production side of the coin remains equally crucial to focus. Modern Economics is the culmination of years of combustion and application of many competing ideas. Still, the excess focus on Consumption process of the Economy is debatable. 

Production: Two major components:  

We may thus define Production as the expenditure of human labour on natural resources and other raw materials to transform them into consumable commodities. Note that Capital Goods such as Machinary, Equipments, etc. are all the product of human labour. We consider them here as non-natural resources of production. Natural Resources are the Primary source of all the production that occurs. 

Then comes Human labour, that transforms the natural resources into the commodities we use as consumers. Here, we may include the Entrepreneurs who perform specific important functions in the economy(2){more on 'Entrepreneur' in future posts}. Hence, every commodity is a product of many different sorts of labour(3){more on types of labour in future posts}. The pencil that comes in our hand, is but a product of numerous labourers and the expenditure of their labour. The breakfast on our tables is a product of so many labourers. Its fascinating how wonderful the Production process can be if we can just rewind the many economic activities behind any given commodity. Human labour hence is the Secondary source of all production that occurs.

GDP- A mass of numerous commodities:

GDP- Gross Domestic Product, is today the most essential indicator of Economic growth of an Economy. Globally, policy-making is extremely sensitive to GDP growth rate and its trend. Recent RBI's monetary tightening vs. economic growth(4) phenomenon was an important indicator of the importance of GDP and its effects on the growth of a nation.

Let us try to understand GDP's importance from the above discussion we had. GDP, as said above is a mammoth mass of numerous commodities(both Goods and Services) which indicate the available wealth of a nation. This wealth, then has to percolate through the entire economic spectrum of a nation. This shall result  in, argue Macroeconomists, upliftment of the poor section of the society.

If we look at this statement, a crucial fact emerges. A poor is one who has very less or no access to commodities, as simple as this! Lack of commodities and access to them is poverty. The scale of this 'lack of access' may change as per the nation, need, economy, &c. But the fact remains that Poverty removal means enhanced availability of Commodities. Once enough commodities are available to a poor household, they are uplifted from the poverty trap. This availability may be in the form of increased money availability, but as argued above in the beginning, money is but a commodity. 

Hence, the key reason on GDP growth lies in the fact that more the commodities, more its availability, subsequently more access to them for the deprived. Again, access to commodities is an issue that cannot be solved by merely having increased GDP growth. This requires sufficient measures to facilitate percolation of increased wealth to the "Bottom of the pyramid" to quote C.K. Prahald(5). Also, an active and a major involvement of the Private sector is needed. This is possible if rural India is seen as a huge and potential market opportunity, both by the Private and Public sector.

Conclusion

Commodities. How essential and omnipresent this phenomenon is indeed. It provides a fresh new way of looking at Capitalism. They surround us everywhere, that is what differentiates human species from other animal species. Excessive focus on Consumption process in modern economics must give some more space to Production process too. Commodities are not merely the products of the magic of markets, but a product of numerous diversified labourer and representative of expended human labour- including that of the Entrepreneurs.
GDP is a huge mass of commodities of numerous kinds that satisfy human needs. High importance of this measure of economic growth lies in the fact that it can enable enhanced access to commodities for the poor and deprived. Poverty is merely the absence of sufficient commodities to consume. This sufficiency is based on many variables and differ as per the country in question. Both public and private sector must look at Rural India, as brought out by the late C.K. Prahlad in his book "Bottom of the Pyramid", as a huge, untapped market opportunity.


References and Notes:

1. Capital, Volume 1, Karl Marx, 1890, Chapter 1, Section 1, Paragraph 1.

2. Entrepreneurs are Labourers after all. Labour here is used in terms of expenditure of human labour power. In Economics, Labour and Entrepreneurs are two different Factors of Production.

3. Here we refer to concrete labour in Marx's language. This means different types of labour such as weaving, tailoring, singing, &c.

4. Recently, headline inflation came down form +9% levels to below 7% figures. This succeeded a crucial debate nationally about the constraints RBI had over its tightening monetary stance. After more than 13 consecutive hikes in lending rate, RBI had to stop for two major reasons: A). GDP growth constraint and B). Waiting for the lag-effect of tightened policy to show results. Indeed, it has shown positive results, at least for now.

5. Bottom of the Pyramid is an excellent work by a Management Professor- Late Shri C.K. Prahlad. It brings out the hidden, untapped market opportunity in the Rural regions of India which represent a dynamic and a brand-conscious consumer segment. It busts many of the myths about Poor, their consumption habits and much more. Interested readers may purchase it here.

                                *******************************

Thursday, February 09, 2012

Are Fundamental rights absolute?

No, they're not. This post attempts to put some argument for the said case that Fundamental rights as per our Constitution, aren't absolute. We then shall proceed to see that it would be harmful to the society at large if that were the case. This post comes at a time when a lot of discussion is occurring on whether one can express whatever he/she desires to and this right to do so must be protected as a fundamental right. 

Liberty: A modern day obsession

Liberty(i), in modern times has become an obsession, an end that seems to be the only correct goal for the homo sapiens species. Yet, Liberty is not an isolated, all encompassing end for Societies. Equality and Fraternity too are very much crucial for establishing, sustaining and nurturing Liberty. Pro-Liberty dogmatics tend to press hard for it without realizing that the other two elements are equally, or even much more essential for an efficient, fair and most importantly a happy and prosperous society(ii). Liberty, Equality & Fraternity are the three crucial elements for a truly developed, prosperous & sustainable society.

Ensuring Liberty, is not a naturally managed, non-interventionist task. It needs active participation of varied Social institutions. Also, Liberty has to be ensured, it is not naturally available to people. Institutions have to exist that protect it. For Eg. Private property is one such example which needs Institutions such as courts that enforce it & the State that recognizes it. Today, we are far better-off than our forefathers. We can be at home and relax that the property purchased by us is ours and no one would come and snatch it away. Yes, many a times injustice occurs, but we're secured as we have courts and a Justice mechanism to redress and solve it.

Liberty- Origination 

Where does Liberty originate from in Indian context? By Liberty, we here mean 'Freedom'. It is important to appeal to an authority to answer this question:

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, on 4th November, 1948 said in the constituent assembly: "I am sorry to say that the whole of the criticism about fundamental rights is based upon a misconception. In the first place, the criticism in so far as it seeks to distinguish fundamental rights from non-fundamental rights is not sound. It is incorrect to say that fundamental rights are absolute while non-fundamental rights are not absolute.The real distinction between the two is that non-fundamental rights are created by agreement between parties while fundamental rights are the gift of the law. Because fundamental rights are the gift of the State it does not follow that the State cannot qualify them." 

Here, following important observations are to be made:

1. There are two types of rights that need to be focused on: a). Fundamental and b). non-fundamental

2. Non-fundamental rights are those that are created by coming together of parties in an agreement. Eg. Contracts, Private property, Purchase and Sales, etc.

3. Fundamental rights are a gift of the state. Now that's a metaphor. It means that the state(Government) ensures that these rights are available to every citizens. It thus protects these rights and ensures its enforcement when needed.

4. The state cannot qualify them, meaning change them(as per the interpretation by this blog) as the Supreme Court has time and again ruled that the basic structure of Indian Constitution i.e. its Preamble cannot be changed by any Authority under the State(iii). Thus the central spirit of even the Fundamental rights cannot be changed if change/affect the spirit of the Constitution(iv).

Article 19, Clause 2 states: Nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1){refers to the freedom of speech and expression} shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.(v)

Hence, reasonable restrictions are to be put, on the freedom of speech and expression. This makes it clear that any expression that affects any of the above mentioned subjects, namely the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence; shall be prohibited/regulated/restricted.

The rationale behind this restriction:

India, as we know, is a vast, multicultural, multilingual, multiracial, multireligious and a very diversified society. It is very much possible that expression and speech  of a particular entity may affect the other entity in a manner, unacceptable to them. Thus, it becomes essential to prohibit any such activity.

Having said that, it also becomes essential to point out at the other side of the issue under discussion. It is very much possible and evident too that in the name of such entities, especially religion, caste, etc., unnecessary barriers to the freedom of expression and speech shall rise. It may take the form of bullying by fundamentalist groups, or pressure from some organizations claiming to represent a particular section of society, etc. These matters, though do occur, can be dealt with more amount of clarity in the law about what shall affect the above said factors due to which reasonable restrictions are required. Lack of clarity on which entities, to what extent must be allowed to exert restrictions based on the said factors(vi) is an area requiring immediate intellectual discussion among the Lawyers.

If Fundamental rights were absolute:

People in such a society and Polity would have to face serious consequences. It is well-known what happens when two or more communities do not respect each other. Communal riots aren't alien to India, are they? Due to reasonable restrictions, we as citizens are able to maintain harmony and peace. Indeed, disruptions occur, but are managed due to availability of such restrictions. Exempli Gratia- We don't go out and start abusing some community, religion or any entity especially in public, only because we feel that expression and speech is our freedom, do we? We apply restrictions on our actions and behaviour. Indeed, one may argue that these are Social norms and manners that we learn, but Law has a crucial role in shaping and more so strengthening our norms and behaviour. 

An 'absolute freedom' society would mean, expressions that, either may not have been made in a relative freedom(vii) society as currently in India or would have been prohibited/restricted/redressed under a relative freedom society. In such a situation, harmony would have prevailed. Since, in an absolute freedom society one can freely express whatever he/she desires to, non-state social entities(religious groups, communities, etc.) would exert control over the social behaviour(viii) of individuals. Its very well possible that there would be non-state regulating devices, wherein individuals may not be given sufficient rights and representation as is today under constitutional institutions. More on this topic in later posts.

Conclusion:

Freedom/Liberty is not an absolute concept. It is provided by the State, which derives its power from the people, thus ensuring certain fundamental rights to its citizens. These rights, as explained by Dr. Ambedkar, aren't absolute and possess reasonable restrictions. These restrictions, however offending, are important to maintain peace and harmony. The assumption that people shall respect each other even if Freedom were absolute is ill-founded. Restrictions on freedoms(which are minimal) help to tune individual behaviour in tandem with social harmony and tolerance. This means, in different nations, these restrictions vary. In a more tolerant or a largely homogenous society(Eg. nations where diversity in terms of religion, caste, etc. is less), restrictions would be less while more in a largely heterogenous society. Lastly, such restrictions have their flip side too. Unnecessary pressure may be exerted by various entities that may reduce Freedom of expression and speech to a large extent only to a paper-promise. This issue thus needs further clarity as per the law on the entities and sentiments that must be protected and which shall be considered as valid for reasonable restrictions. 

Reference and Notes:

(i)- The term Liberty has different connotations as explained here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty, the above article refers it as Freedom of expression as stated under article 19 of Indian constitution.

(ii)- By prosperity I mean both Quantitative and Qualitative wealth. 

(iii)- Authority here means: - As defined under Article 12 of Indian constitution.

(iv)- Spirit of the constitution here is referred to the Preamble

(v)- As given in our constitution; for a link see here:

(vi)- The said factors refer to: the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence, as given under Article 19, clause 2.

(vii)- Relative freedom society here means a society wherein Freedoms aren't absolute and have necessary restrictions. Indeed, these restrictions are minimal as evident in our constitution.

(viii)- Social behaviour here is referred to behaviour of individuals during social interactions/in Public.