A torture to the mass...

The saddening economic outcomes to centrally conducted injustice.

Before commencing another pro, I would like to put light on many of the misconceptions, rumours, and opinions originating on the farmer's protest:

- The farmers are politically fuelled. Before unravelling this opinion, I would like to ask you a question, what mass action in this subcontinent's history is not politically fuelled. Politics is the bloodline of India. The farmers too being a part of India have that same blood flowing through them. They have political parties and personnel that depend on them, as the farmers are the bread earners of not just their families but also the whole nation. Their jobs are in the primary sector of an economy, without whom more than 40% of the businesses can render obsolete. Due to their high importance in the economy's functioning, it is natural for any industry with such prowess to have political backing.

- It is improper for the farmers to shut down roads and highways, or take any aggressive action. Today a peace treaty did not resolve the Uri attack, but another retaliation did (and the whole nation stood up with their heads held high), similarly, today the farmers are not sitting to settle an agreement on the removal of the MSP with the SC; they are out on the streets for justice, they are out on the streets for their rights, most importantly they are out on the streets for their lives. India is a nation of aggressive retaliation, from Subhash Chandra Bose to Bhagat Singh to today's farmers. At the end of the day without any force applied on the pedals, a boat does not row.

- Only Haryana and Punjabi farmers are protesting, that means they have an ulterior motive. It is factually correct that the farmers who have been protesting come from the North of this great country. However, the reason behind this is not due to a political or any diabolical scheme; it is a simple result of the requirement of the MSP in their regions. South-India is a haven for farmers due to the understanding between the producer (farmers) and the consumers (XYZ buyers). Here the MSP is not as important as it is for the North Indian communities as bargaining and informal price reduction is a trend present more in Punjab and Haryana than it is in the South.

- The farmers have all the luxury in the world, pizza makers, heaters, etc. Yes, that is also right. Even if they are farmers, that does not mean that they need to conform to protests' stereotypical nature. A long-running protest fuelled by people who have made money will obviously see a lifestyle justified by the community's earnings. It is not improper to show that they have the facilities, but a bold tactic to showcase their power in front of the unopposed Centre.

It is saddening to understand the extremism certain stereotypical individuals follow and expect others to do so too. A farmer who has been working to make ends meet, somehow cannot come on the street to battle his livelihood without an entire nation criticising the people whose very hard-work puts food on their plate.

From an economic stand-point anyhow these are the market outcomes of the three bills passed by the Centre:

1. Deregulatory methods will allow privatisation of the industry; which holds excellent potential for the agricultural sector as seen in the nation's telecom industry.

2. The agricultural industry will become more formal and could be monitored better, benefitting future governmental ventures.

3. The central government is stringently reducing the funds the state governments would generate through interstate dealing of crops. This can be a nightmare for the economy's future, which requires heavy governmental incentives, loans, subsidies, and expenditure to grow out of the pandemic's recession.

4. The producers have been demoralised and de-incentivised from production as their selling prices have been reduced.

5. The market's overall price level will come down, as the cost of production will drop due to the reduced buying price of agricultural raw material.

6. Consumers will tend to benefit as they will be presented with decreased prices.

The market outcomes in terms of GDP is difficult to interpret. However, presumably, the farmers will lose this marathon due to unlimited time in the Centre's hands and limited resources in the farmer's. They will then return to their lives and live under inflationary pressure. The prices of the goods they consume will eventually go up due to global raw material scarcity, while the price of their produced items will go down.

The farmers if the MSP not re-established will fall in a bottomless pit, waiting to be saved by a policy with a rope that long and durable, so that they can be pulled out of the BJP dug grave. BJP's actions in the PM's second tenure have gone from subtly assisting the private firms to unofficially naming entire industries under them. Today the reason for these three bills is not an outcome of some fairy dust. It is PM Modi wants to expand the power of India's largest businesses into the pantry and crop industry. They have dropped the MSP to benefit a farmer and allow large companies to bargain, reduce the price, and sell obnoxiously low priced goods to budgetary restrained consumers.

I support the intervention's privatisation side. Privatisation needs to take place to instigate orderly growth and development. However, taking from the poor and giving money to the wealthy businesses is the complete opposite of what an economically growing country should attempt to do unless it wants to create scope for future political ventures by widening the gap between the rich and the poor.

Conclusively, there are some goods to the policy, like the privatisation and the reduced prices for the consumers. Still, most of the bills' laws are very bad not just for the farmers, but for the future of the Indian economy and its economic development and equality prospects.

Time will tell whether the SC folds or the farmers return empty-handed.