Discussion on Farmers issues in India

[maniac]

9 minutes ago, Clarke said:

 

Quite literally Yes! Unless Saddam style raiding of neighborhood or the Die Hard 3 style bank loot was a short term option, which is where things can and will go wrong, so yea I agree there :)

 

I'm someone who's admired both Rao & MMS, sometimes on this forum, but any leftie lover comes out and sings the congi tune about liberalization blah blah I just have to show the reality. If anyone cares about India one bit, they need to think and know about the lost years and decades rather than feel proud of acting at the very last moment. In a way its a criticism of anyone remotely involved in economic policy in those times including the Ram janmabhoomi wali BJP and other opposition : what took you so long ?

 

Fair enough. Yes problem has been with the looters like Gandhi family and it’s minions. Congress did produce or I would like to believe still have decent statesmen and policy makers just biding their time like LB and PVN did.

[Yoda-esque]

Fair enough. Yes problem has been with the looters like Gandhi family and it’s minions. Congress did produce or I would like to believe still have decent statesmen and policy makers just biding their time like LB and PVN did.

Even if they did,I doubt they can get to where they were unless they truly believe in dharmic traditions and beliefs

[ravishingravi]

7 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

 

So, you have no issues with the bill. "What if" scenarios are endless. Lets be specific. 

 

1) What middleman does is nothing to do with the bill ? We are talking about increasing farmer's income. He hold the produce and it is his to sell directly. Not every farmer procures loans from middlemen. And middlemen can continue to work as money lenders if they wish.

 

2) Well it is for the farmer to figure out whether he wants bigger access or not. No pun intended, but just because I have dont have scale or ambition doesn't everyone shouldn't have it. He has the opportunity. Now its up to him. Status quo will continue if he wishes. 

 

3) Essential commodities act put specific restriction on crops that have to be produced and markets they can be sold at. This has been loosened. 

 

4) Cite a specific clause in the bill which takes away MSP.  Then cite specific clause on MSP that existed in previous bill. Then we can talk

 

So, let me surmise. This bill doesn't change status quo for those who wish to maintain it. This bill only offers opportunity for change for those who want it. APMC and Mandi still remains and continue to get hefty funding from govt ( 1 lakh crore increase in budget ). MSP highest in India's history in 2020.

 

So, I think to make your case you have to point out specific harm from the bill.. Key word being specific clause and specific impact and then we know what your concerns are.

 

Just to highlight again folks. Its not just about rich priveleged farmers in Punjab. Its about all farmers ( other 90 % ).

I would earnest like to understand this. What is it that farmers were doing earlier that they cannot do going forward ? 
 

In Punjab. Rest of the states are sane and will adapt. 

[coffee_rules]

Twada reform reform

Sadda reform bekaar

[Khota]

13 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

 

So, you have no issues with the bill. "What if" scenarios are endless. Lets be specific. 

 

1) What middleman does is nothing to do with the bill ? We are talking about increasing farmer's income. He hold the produce and it is his to sell directly. Not every farmer procures loans from middlemen. And middlemen can continue to work as money lenders if they wish.

 

2) Well it is for the farmer to figure out whether he wants bigger access or not. No pun intended, but just because I have dont have scale or ambition doesn't everyone shouldn't have it. He has the opportunity. Now its up to him. Status quo will continue if he wishes. 

 

3) Essential commodities act put specific restriction on crops that have to be produced and markets they can be sold at. This has been loosened. 

 

4) Cite a specific clause in the bill which takes away MSP.  Then cite specific clause on MSP that existed in previous bill. Then we can talk

 

So, let me surmise. This bill doesn't change status quo for those who wish to maintain it. This bill only offers opportunity for change for those who want it. APMC and Mandi still remains and continue to get hefty funding from govt ( 1 lakh crore increase in budget ). MSP highest in India's history in 2020.

 

So, I think to make your case you have to point out specific harm from the bill.. Key word being specific clause and specific impact and then we know what your concerns are.

 

Just to highlight again folks. Its not just about rich priveleged farmers in Punjab. Its about all farmers ( other 90 % ).

(1)You are replacing a small middleman with a bigger entity. Outcome will be worse.

 

(2) I am pretty sure farmer wants more access but he does not have the mean to go anywwhere. These things are good on paper but real life is a beetch.

 

(3) If true that is a good idea. Sometimes it is better to pay not to produce also.

 

(4) MSP was never gauranteed. Now they have said they will honor it but lot of damage has been done.

 

My personal thoghts. Reforms are needed as agriculture in long run cannot employ that many people. They need to industrialize the country to show alternate path. farmers on the other hand need to strike a deal with Modi. They should also ask for strengthening the anti-trust laws to avoid exploitation.

 

[Khota]

14 hours ago, Clarke said:

 

 

 

I wasn't debating BJP khote da puttar, if you have to wait for 44 years of failed economic policy and then decide to do something about your failures only after the mother ship of socialism USSR collapsed, then its not visionary; its waking up from a very long self induced coma. Getting rid of those shackles was a bare minimum even a 12th pass graduate would have decided to do, doesn't require vision or genius. What was the other option on the table when we ran out of money, looting the Bank of England or US Federal Reserve ? Kidnapping Sean Connery level celebs for ransom ? What took these guys so freakin long to smell the coffee ?

 

This is not saying MMS or Rao were bad or even incompetent, rather the overall ecosystem was so effed up that doing the most fundamental thing decades late is somehow seen as genius or visionary. 

 

PS: what's the latest idea to grow faster than Vietnam, throw more money at farmers 

 

Kutti de puttar neither was I doing that.

Indian economy has not risen atthe rate which chinese has. They have tripled the income of their citizens. So there is lot of work that needs to be done.

[Khota]

8 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

I would earnest like to understand this. What is it that farmers were doing earlier that they cannot do going forward ? 
 

In Punjab. Rest of the states are sane and will adapt. 

I would truly like to understand one good that this bill is doing. Just one.

[Khota]

8 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

Twada reform reform

Sadda reform bekaar

I wish they did not politiscize it. Farmers have real problems and politics will hurt their cause.

[PunterLog]

Wife killer Shashi supported farm laws 10 years ago.

 

Now that his party is in opposition, he's trying to create chaos.

 

 

[coffee_rules]

17 minutes ago, Khota said:

I wish they did not politiscize it. Farmers have real problems and politics will hurt their cause.

You said they didn’t debate in parliament to pass these laws, , here’s the debate today.,do you know how many commissions and debates have been set up in the last 20 years? It is high time somebody took action. 

Edited February 6, 2021 by coffee_rules

[Khota]

15 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

You said they didn’t debate in parliament to pass these laws, , here’s the debate today.,do you know how many commissions and debates have been set up in the last 20 years? It is high time somebody took action. 

These set of laws were rushed during COVID times. 

[coffee_rules]

2 hours ago, Khota said:

These set of laws were rushed during COVID times. 

This was posted earlier

 

[Clarke]

3 hours ago, Khota said:

Kutti de puttar neither was I doing that.

Indian economy has not risen atthe rate which chinese has. They have tripled the income of their citizens. So there is lot of work that needs to be done.

That's very Gandhian of u. U must be really fond-ling for ur nieces.

[ravishingravi]

4 hours ago, Khota said:

(1)You are replacing a small middleman with a bigger entity. Outcome will be worse.

 

(2) I am pretty sure farmer wants more access but he does not have the mean to go anywwhere. These things are good on paper but real life is a beetch.

 

(3) If true that is a good idea. Sometimes it is better to pay not to produce also.

 

(4) MSP was never gauranteed. Now they have said they will honor it but lot of damage has been done.

 

My personal thoghts. Reforms are needed as agriculture in long run cannot employ that many people. They need to industrialize the country to show alternate path. farmers on the other hand need to strike a deal with Modi. They should also ask for strengthening the anti-trust laws to avoid exploitation.

 

1) So, the new bill stops the existing middlemen. Can you quote the clause ? APMC and Mandi still operate. 
 

2) So for those who don’t want to go anywhere they can continue selling under existing model. What’s the fear ? 
 

3) MSP is not going away. So, it’s a done deal. 
 

I genuinely think you have good intentions for India and farmers. But I am sorry to say. I don’t see what farmers were doing in the past which they cannot do in the future.  I did not see one tangible example of how they will be worse off. I certainly didn’t see you mentioning any specific clause from farm bill. 

[ravishingravi]

This is how it should be communicated to dimwits. Keep it plain and simple. Yes or no. 
 

 

[Khota]

4 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

1) So, the new bill stops the existing middlemen. Can you quote the clause ? APMC and Mandi still operate. 
 

2) So for those who don’t want to go anywhere they can continue selling under existing model. What’s the fear ? 
 

3) MSP is not going away. So, it’s a done deal. 
 

I genuinely think you have good intentions for India and farmers. But I am sorry to say. I don’t see what farmers were doing in the past which they cannot do in the future.  I did not see one tangible example of how they will be worse off. I certainly didn’t see you mentioning any specific clause from farm bill. 

(1)They are replacing the middle man (good intention but not realistic from farmers point of view as those arthyias float them loans and do other  multiple things) and replacing them with big corporations. They understand the outcome will not be good. That is why they need Anti-Trust laws to go with it to limit the power of big businesses.

 

(2) And you genuinely believe that but farmers don't. If that is the case you are correct but farmers need convincing.

 

(3) Currently correct but initially they were not sure.

 

Once again these farmers need to come to the table and strike a deal with few clauses they need to amend. No need to take all or nothing position.

 

Government also needs to admit that this is an organic struggle and outsiders are not inciting Indians.

 

My difference of opinion with you is the role a government has to play in a sector like this. Farmers need support. They are poor but at the same time this cannot go on for ever. This is a slow process and these farmers need to be shown an alternative path. They know how to work harder than PSU/IAS etc and they will be successful in whatever they do. I have dealt with Indians living in villages and cities. These vilage dwellers are genuinely good people who need hope.

[Khota]

5 hours ago, Clarke said:

That's very Gandhian of u. U must be really fond-ling for ur nieces.

I know tit for tat is not good but it was long overdue. Let us move on.

[coffee_rules]

1 hour ago, Khota said:

(1)They are replacing the middle man (good intention but not realistic from farmers point of view as those arthyias float them loans and do other  multiple things) and replacing them with big corporations. They understand the outcome will not be good. That is why they need Anti-Trust laws to go with it to limit the power of big businesses.

Which clause says middlemen will be taken out? Which ones says they will be replaced by corporations? Which clause even remotely mentions big corporation? 
 

1 hour ago, Khota said:

 

(2) And you genuinely believe that but farmers don't. If that is the case you are correct but farmers need convincing.

 

That’s what the negotiations were, but Takait wanted only repealing. It is like peeling an onion. You response for this will be that the farmers don’t trust the government anymore

1 hour ago, Khota said:

(3) Currently correct but initially they were not sure.

 

Once again these farmers need to come to the table and strike a deal with few clauses they need to amend. No need to take all or nothing position.

 

Government also needs to admit that this is an organic struggle and outsiders are not inciting Indians.

Govt did not do any such thing, was at the table, but it was only after K flags started showing up, they warned the farmers of outside influences. 

1 hour ago, Khota said:

 

My difference of opinion with you is the role a government has to play in a sector like this. Farmers need support. They are poor but at the same time this cannot go on for ever. This is a slow process and these farmers need to be shown an alternative path. They know how to work harder than PSU/IAS etc and they will be successful in whatever they do. I have dealt with Indians living in villages and cities. These vilage dwellers are genuinely good people who need hope.

Read the history of agriculture reforms in the last 25 years, nothing was happening in coalition governments. Ab to majority mila, still political influences are making reforms a dream to achieve. First of all, you should believe that Govt and  all parties (in their manifestos) had good intentions for farmers, and not fear them with evil bogeymen and Ambani adani take over of their lands

[9zaesm]

1 hour ago, coffee_rules said:

Which clause says middlemen will be taken out? Which ones says they will be replaced by corporations? Which clause even remotely mentions big corporation? 
 

That’s what the negotiations were, but Takait wanted only repealing. It is like peeling an onion. You response for this will be that the farmers don’t trust the government anymore

Govt did not do any such thing, was at the table, but it was only after K flags started showing up, they warned the farmers of outside influences. 

Read the history of agriculture reforms in the last 25 years, nothing was happening in coalition governments. Ab to majority mila, still political influences are making reforms a dream to achieve. First of all, you should believe that Govt and  all parties (in their manifestos) had good intentions for farmers, and not fear them with evil bogeymen and Ambani adani take over of their lands

 

Exactly ! Follow the timeline in manner things happen ! And you have all the answers. 
 

Does he really doesn’t know . Measures were taken due to violence on 26th ? Did those image sink in ? Who is responsible if during protest a policeman or group of cops fire weapon ? The government . 
who should be responsible if violence occurs from protestors ? The leaders of the protest . 
 

playing with the timeline of events and pushing it on social media feeds will get your attention . They are not the ones to convince . The only thing it does is tarnish the image of India.Is that the reason of the protest . Has the government not tried to listen to demands and propose solutions. You just don’t want to accept reality and sticking to only one option repeal laws is not realistic . 
 

 

[Yoda-esque]

Heard the chakka jam was very successful rofl

 

Maybe some people here are getting an idea of the actual support they have in india