Privatization in India

Privatization is very necessary for Indias welfare because main points are here that India public sector i.e. Govt. Corporations has lot of problems like bureaucracy , red tapism , corruptions , not good implementation of plans , lot of ignorance about work. These are some of basic problems of public sectors and in privates we experienced good quality services, product, customer satisfaction and good for social welfare and it is also good for globalization and shinning of India. Public sectors cannot participate in country's shining. Govt. can only make some policies for better work but again the same problem of implementation of policies. On the other hand private sector makes full effort to implement the policies. So privatization is only way by which a country can succeed. You can take the examples of America and Japan these are the countries where private market prevails and these are the most developed countries of the world also when Soviet Union tried that public sectors. Criteria they did not succeed in that process so they also have to make the changes in the market and made it private sectors. Market that they r progressing at good pace. So in my opinion privatization is the best way for success. Privatization will help in the economical development of the country. But private firms are generally self-centered. They don't seek their interest in the interest of all. They think only in the interest of their own company. More often they possess a selfish approach. Only the economical development should not be considered. It's not the only dimension. There are many other issues which are generally not taken care by private firms like environmental protection, farmer's interests, poor men's interests and many more. So complete privatization is not desirable. There should be a balance between the public sector and private industries. Private firms are generally self-centered and they dont care for the interest of the public. But the government can make such rules and regulations for these firms so that they are checked from indulging into malpractices. Moreover these firms cannot totally be self-centered. They do need employees to work for them; this in turn would increase employment opportunities. Privatization would also mean end of governments monopoly, which ensures market competition wherein the consumers benefit the most.

We have in front of us the privatization of telecom industry and the decline in tariff due to competition. As far as interests of farmers are concerned the government can intervene and ensure that they get their dues. Privatization every option has its pros and cons y not we attempt for a midway we take good points of privatization and try to remove off the bad point of PSU just imagine how much synergistic effect this will have when the Immense power of government machinery and the financial and knowledge input of private sector with an aim to surge ahead will have on the growth of people and country. It is necessary to remove poverty, illiteracy from country and not the poor and illiterate from country. The Growth rate of 9% is just a computed value by a human being and not real face of status of population in our country, so just going by saying we have 9% growth is just trying to make one happy and run from reality. http://www.boddunan.com/articles/miscellaneous/51-general-reference/12801-privatization-inindia.html

India's Liberalization Era

The Government of India started the economic liberalization policy in 1991. Even though the power at the center has changed hands, the pace of the reforms has never slackened till date. Before 1991, changes within the industrial sector in the country were modest to say the least. The sector accounted for just one-fifth of the total economic activity within the country. The sectoral structure of the industry has changed, albeit gradually. Most of the industrial sector was dominated by a select band of family-based conglomerates that had been dominant historically. Post 1991, a major restructuring has taken place with the emergence of more technologically advanced segments among industrial companies. Nowadays, more small and medium scale enterprises contribute significantly to the economy.

By the mid-90s, the private capital had surpassed the public capital. The management system had shifted from the traditional family based system to a system of qualified and professional managers. One of the most significant effects of the liberalization era has been the emergence of a strong, affluent and buoyant middle class with significant purchasing powers and this has been the engine that has driven the economy since. Another major benefit of the liberalization era has been the shift in the pattern of exports from traditional items like clothes, tea and spices to

automobiles, steel, IT etc. The made in India brand, which did not evoke any sort of loyalty has now become a brand name by itself and is now known all over the world for its quality. Also, the reforms have transformed the education sector with a huge talent pool of qualified professionals now available, waiting to conquer the world with their domain knowledge.

India, after all these years of economic reforms, is at the crossroads. While one road leads India to economic prosperity and glory, the other road leads it to social inequality. Presently, as India is one of the fastest growing economies in the world, the social aspects have been ridden roughshod by the economic benefits. What has been conveniently forgotten or suppressed till date have been the disparities, mainly the socio-economical issues. This has led to growing discontent among the population and it has gathered momentum since the reforms began 15 years ago. It will very soon reach a critical point wherein the very purpose for which the reforms were started, will start to lose their significance rapidly and throw the country back into the license raj and unionist era.

The chasm between the rich and the poor has increased so vastly that the rich are just getting richer and the poor are just getting poorer. The real benefits of the economic reforms have rarely percolated to the lowest strata of society. Just to illustrate the same with an example, most of the states today vie with one another to grab a project of any significance, be it chemical, auto or even IT. In doing so, the benefits they are offering, right from free land to tax sops are being given on a platter. But the benefits or savings that a company gains from this does not affect the lower strata of management, but remains in the hands of the top management, thus depriving the former of the economic benefits. Also, most of the labor laws in the country are outdated and have not kept pace with economic reforms. Thus, the exploitation of the working class becomes much easier. A classic example is the BPO industry in our country. While most of them work in the nights, the pressure each employee faces to deliver results and the working conditions are appalling, to say the least.

The agricultural sector has also seen this disproportionate growth, as it is a field that has been left high and dry in the pursuit of agricultural reforms. The sector has been opened up to the multinationals, without having evolved a comprehensive cover for our farmers, most of who are poor and own very little land of their own. A case in point is the spate of farmer suicides that our country has witnessed in the past few years. The developed countries, which clamour for openended policies, have, in fact, some of the fiercest protection policies when it comes to their agricultural sector.

Small scale industries (SSIs), the heart and soul of many towns and villages, have been virtually ignored. More than half of them have closed down in the last few years in the face of intense competition from multi nationals who have unmatched financial and political muscle.

On a parting note, what are essential for India are economic reforms with a social face. The economic policies and their subsequent reforms must be accompanied by suitable clauses to benefit the economically weaker sections. Various schemes must be thoroughly scrutinized and efforts must be made to see that the rewards must reach everyone. Then India will not only be economically prosperous, but will also forge ahead towards its goal of world dominance. http://www.chillibreeze.com/articles/India-liberalization.asp

History of Globalization
The historical origins of globalization are the subject of on-going debate. Though some scholars situate the origins of globalization in the modern era, others regard it as a phenomenon with a long history. Perhaps the most extreme proponent of a deep historical origin for globalization was Andre Gunder Frank, an economist associated with dependency theory. Frank argued that a form of globalization has been in existence since the rise of trade links between Sumer and the Indus Valley Civilization in the third millennium B.C.[1] Critics of this idea point out that it rests upon an overly-broad definition of globalization. {googleads right} Others have perceived an early form of globalization in the trade links between the Roman Empire, the Parthian empire, and the Han Dynasty. The increasing articulation of commercial links between these powers inspired the development of the Silk Road, which started in western China, reached the boundaries of the Parthian empire, and continued onwards towards Rome. The Islamic Golden Age was also an important early stage of globalization, when Muslim traders and explorers established a sustained economy across the Old World resulting in a globalization of crops, trade, knowledge and technology. Globally significant crops such as sugar and cotton became widely cultivated across the Muslim world in this period, while the necessity of learning Arabic and completing the Hajj created a cosmopolitan culture. The advent of the Mongol Empire, though destabilizing to the commercial centers of the Middle East and China, greatly facilitated travel along the Silk Road. This permitted travelers and missionaries such as Marco Polo to journey successfully (and profitably) from one end of Eurasia to the other. The so-called Pax Mongolica of the twelfth century had several other notable globalizing effects. It witnessed the creation of the first international postal service, as

well as the rapid transmission of epidemic diseases such as bubonic plague across the newlyunified regions of Central Asia. [2] These pre-modern phases of global or hemispheric exchange are sometimes known as archaic globalization. {googleads left} Up to the time of the voyages of discovery, however, even the largest systems of international exchange were limited to the Old World. The sixteenth century represented a qualitative change in the patterns of globalization because it was the first period in which the New World began to engage in substantial cultural, material and biologic exchange with Africa and Eurasia. This phase is sometimes known as proto-globalization. It was characterized by the rise of maritime European empires, particularly the Portuguese Empire, the Spanish Empire, and later the British Empire and Dutch Empire. It can be said to have begun shortly before the turn of the 16th century, when the two Kingdoms of the Iberian Peninsula - the Kingdom of Portugal and the Kingdom of Castile, began to send exploratory voyages to the Americas and around the Horn of Africa. These new sea routes permitted sustained contact and trade between all of the world's inhabited regions for the first time. Global integration continued through the expansion of European trade in the 16th and 17th centuries, when the Portuguese and Spanish Empires colonized the Americas, followed eventually by France and England. Globalization has had a tremendous impact on cultures, particularly indigenous cultures, around the world. In the 15th century, Portugal's Company of Guinea was one of the first chartered commercial companies established by Europeans in other continent during the Age of Discovery, whose task was to deal with the spices and to fix the prices of the goods. In the 17th century, globalization became a business phenomenon when the British East India Company (founded in 1600), which is often described as the first multinational corporation, was established, as well as the Dutch East India Company (founded in 1602) and the Portuguese East India Company (founded in 1628). Because of the large investment and financing needs and the high risks involved with international trade, the British East India Company became the first company in the world to share risk and enable joint ownership of companies through the issuance of shares of stock: an important driver for globalization. The 19th century witnessed the advent of globalization in something approaching its modern form. Industrialization permitted the cheap production of household items using economies of scale, while rapid population growth created sustained demand for commodities and manufactures. Globalization in this period was decisively shaped by nineteenth-century imperialism. After the Opium Wars and the completion of the British conquest of India, the vast populations of these regions became ready consumers of European exports. Meanwhile, the conquest of new parts of the globe, notably sub-Saharan Africa, by the European powers yielded valuable natural resources such as rubber, diamonds and coal and helped fuel trade and investment between the European imperial powers, their colonies, and the United States.

It was in this period that areas of sub-Saharan Africa and the Pacific islands were incorporated into the world system. The first phase of "modern globalization" began to break down at the beginning of the 20th century with the First World War, according to John Maynard Keynes[3], {googleads left} The inhabitant of London could order by telephone, sipping his morning tea, the various products of the whole earth, and reasonably expect their early delivery upon his doorstep. Militarism and imperialism of racial and cultural rivalries were little more than the amusements of his daily newspaper. What an extraordinary episode in the economic progress of man was that age which came to an end in August 1914. The novelist VM Yeates criticized the financial forces of globalisation as a factor in creating World War I.[4] The final death knell for this phase of globalization came during the gold standard crisis and Great Depression in the late 1920s and early 1930s. Globalization in the middle decades of the twentieth century was largely driven by the global expansion of multinational corporations based in the United States and the worldwide export of American culture through the new media of film, television and recorded music. In late 2000s, much of the industrialized world entered into a deep recession.[5] Some analysts say the world is going through a period of deglobalization after years of increasing economic integration.[6][7] Up to 45% of global wealth had been destroyed by the global financial crisis in little less than a year and a half.[8] http://www.economicgeography.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=94:history-ofglobalization&catid=98:inf&Itemid=85