For
making welfare schemes for the poor, an imaginary poverty line
is drawn distinguishing the categories which need state's assistance.
Counting the poor and identifying the poor was done as per the
slogan,"garibi hatao" or remove poverty was promised by
contesting parties. And back in 1974 ways were devised to draw
the imaginary poverty line. Today the focus is to respond to the
needs of the "aum admi" or the common man. But this common man has to
be identified first. When the yardstick of "28 rupees per day income"
is used, the number of people who fall below this line is very few. That
is that the number of below poverty people identified by the state is low and
providing food subsidy for them would be easy. It was said that this yardstick was
devised by the data on the state of economy in 2004-05 and when this was told
to the public it was 2011.By then cost of living had increased considerably.
And in 2011,this number was inadequate in defining the present poverty level.Now
the line of 32 Rupees per day for urban areas and 28 Rupees per day for rural
areas is the new adjusted figure. Even this is too too low to define the poor.
Now it
is understood that the imaginary line is not a good tool to look at poverty.Other perspectives can be investigated. Consumption patterns, malnourished children, health of the
individuals, clean drinking water, whether their children go to
school, whether they live under proper roofs(pukka roof or
thatch),whether they are the desperately poor or the vulnerable category and
so on. How to make people afford food, shelter should be the angle of investigation rather than how to provide for the poor.There always will be some poor classes, but development of all should not be stalled.
As per
committees made to enumerate the poor, only 30% of the population are really really poor,
but additional 16% above them are given subsidy of free food along with
them.After this 30% more people who need subsidy are also under public
distribution scheme.That is 76% of the population will need food subsidy. Only
24% of the population are well-off enough not to need state's help.
If the
state spends on food on such a huge part of the population, then how will have funds to allocate to spend on health,on research, on education, on development
of infrastructures, on defence expenditures and on payment to the state's
workers?