英语论文网

than the sum total of its proposals and has to be contextualised. It also needs to be appreciated that at any given point of time, notwithstanding the political urges, rhetoric and commitments, the script of an annual Budget is hardly capable of overhauling or designed to overhaul the existing structures, processes and outcomes beyond a limited extent, except when a shock therapy syndrome is generated. Clearly the global crisis of Western origin and primary effects has not been able to generate the shock mentality of the 1991 variety. In any case, a repeat of such a syndrome would have caused a blow against the deregulated marketisation processes. More particularly in the absence of powerful political mobilisation, based on pressures emanating from either the inner compulsions or external impositions backed by some intellectual articulation for some alternative policy designs, the criticisms of this kind, juxtaposing one kind of fundamentalism with that of another kind, remain sterile. This is because little effort is mounted to try to strengthen alternative countervailing economic agencies (and not simply abstract ideas) to spearhead alternative politics for alternative policies in order to take over the space various asocial and anti-social cocooned economic agencies may be made to vacate.

 

None of the above attempts are even remotely perceptible to deny the prevalence of a hardcore of by now openly demonstrated pro-corporate thrust and practically operative influences in the Indian policy arena. In fact, such features date back, may be in somewhat muted versions, even to the pre-liberalisation era. But much to the chagrin of the neo-liberals, even to this day what we have in India is an incomplete implementation of the so-called reforms agenda in some crucial respects. That the present Budget has not been able to please the big capital by announcing transfer of public assets, even though camouflaged as people's ownership, or reduce the tax burden on the corporates (in effect lower than what appears in law, even without tax planning and evasion) or that by making a hefty increase of about three times the present level in government borrowing, there are fears of crowding out the corporates from making a draft on household savings and may have disturbed them by seemingly big-ticket social spending are no genuine grounds for judging the character and impact of the Budget. These are parts of the psychological warfare indulged in by big business to scare the growth-seeking policy pundits. The divergence between the policy agenda articulated in the Economic Survey of the past two years and the actual policy course charted by the Budgets, including the current one, may well be taken to indicate how unlikely and non-feasible is their implementation even in the foreseeable future. Of course the FM too must have found the so-called professional advice impractical and non-feasible, if not much else. Nonetheless the wide publicity given to it by the media and in the context of the absence of any Left counter-pressure and agenda this time has pushed the corporate and stock market speculators' expectations sky-high. It is in this context probably that the Budget papers drop hints to assure the industry lobbies that the Budget is not the only occasion and forum and that by means of an ongoing and participatory exercise the concerns of the industry can al本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。