CSK Fan Posted December 4, 2011 Posted December 4, 2011 http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opinion/columnists/swaminathan-s-a-aiyar/FDI-in-retail-Aam-bania-is-more-powerful-than-the-aam-aadmi/articleshow/10977614.cms Last week, 50 million shopkeepers and traders staged a bandh against the government decision to allow 51% foreign investment in multi-brand retail chains. What this actually proved was the hollowness of the claim of small shopkeepers to be weak underlings representing the unorganized sector. The 50 million traders on strike exceeded India's entire organized labour (around 30 million). Shopkeepers simply cannot be called unorganized or poor. In my local market, shopkeepers say that even the smallest shops are worth a crore. Dominated by banias, small shopkeepers are notorious for cheating customers through adulteration and fiddled weighing scales. They are also notorious for evading sales tax and income tax. That's why the bania is widely despised (although it is wrong to tarnish all with the same brush). Yet we have the astonishing spectacle of several political parties and state governments supporting the crorepati bania against foreign retailers, whose alleged crime is that they will lower prices so drastically as to wipe out small shopkeepers. If indeed, foreign retailers will reduce prices dramatically--a highly exaggerated hope---this would be a fabulous blessing for the aam admi, struggling with inflation. So, politicians who oppose foreign retailers are promoting the aam bania against the aam aadmi. This is all phrased in socialist rhetoric, but amounts to backing rich traders against poor consumers. Why does this happen? Because politicians always woo vote banks and financiers. Baniasconstitute a highly organized vote bank (totaling 50 million in last week's bandh). They are also political financiers, and not of the BJP alone. That's why they are wooed even by supposed leftists. Traders and shopkeepers are highly organized in many countries , and so have political clout disproportionate to their numbers. During the US Great Depression, shopkeepers persuaded President Roosevelt to enact anti-competition rules called Resale Price Maintenance (RPM). RPM obliged manufacturers to set a minimum price for products, which could not legally be undercut by large chains with economies of scale. Several decades later, the US courts struck down RPM as anti-competitive . But it is testimony to US shopkeeper clout that RPM continued for so long, and is still sought to be reinstated through the backdoor in many states. Britain also had RPM for decades. This was abolished by the Conservative government in 1964, amidst furious protests from shopkeepers. Some analysts claim that the Conservatives lost the 1964 general election because of shopkeeper fury, though other analysts disagree. In sum, the bania shopkeeper is powerful in all democracies. He uses small-man rhetoric to advance his interests, but, far from being weak and unorganized, is actually highly organized, whereas the consumer is not. The bania constitutes a vote bank, which the ordinary consumer does not. The bania is an important political donor, which the aam admi is not. For all these reasons, the aam bania repeatedly triumphs over the aam admi. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pretty interesting view-point
Sachin=GOD Posted December 4, 2011 Posted December 4, 2011 50 million ? Where was the protest ? all around the country a large number of markets were closed in protest.
Recommended Posts