Barry O'Brien is an epic and pompous bore, but two people that share his last name have given more to quizzing than most Calcuttans. My guess is that the questions that make you doubt your 'Xaverian-ness,' largely due to the man's inability to comprehend that time is not static and his utter lack of humour, are compiled by Bartholomew (I don't really know if that's his name, but I think it suits his massive 'jawler-tanki' frame), and the ones that leave you feeling you've learnt something more about a place you cherish are by Neil.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090122/jsp/calcutta/story_104264522.jsp
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Malnutrition in India
Someone famously said that in India for whatever is true, the opposite is also true. However, in certain cases, truths simply don't have opposites. Every once in a while, I learn something about the people of the nation that leaves me convinced that the popular mainstream narrative about India's 'success' leaves much to be desired. The country has grown at at least 7% or more for almost all of the past decade, and that is approximately the amount of time that it takes an economy to double at that growth rate.
Yet, according to World Bank estimates, 456 million Indians (42% of the total Indian population) now live under the global poverty line of $1.25 per day (PPP). The Planning Commission puts the figure at 27.5% (2005), an improvement from 36% (1994) a decade earlier.
This means that the collective income of 27% of India i.e. 300 million people (about the population of the U.S.) in 2005 was less than $137 billion (PPP). In the years between 2000 and 2004 alone, the economy expanded by $1228 billion. Hence, if these 300 million people had started with $137 billion in 2000, and had received 1/9 (11 %) of the $1228 billion increase in income, then their collective income could have doubled!
Even those who are aware of these figures, and have grown up in pockets of relative economic stability surrounded by urban poverty (like myself), the face of abject rural poverty is one they have only seen in films, read in books, or caught fleeting glimpses of in real life. If Bangalore is the flagship of India's 'success,' then the body, hearts, and souls in this New York Times Slideshow, are certainly emblematic of the nation's collective 'failure.'
Attached below is a graph of the rate of poverty alleviation in India over the past 30 years as calculated by the Ministry of Statistics and Program Implementation. And here is the link to the NYTimes article that accompanied the slideshow.
Yet, according to World Bank estimates, 456 million Indians (42% of the total Indian population) now live under the global poverty line of $1.25 per day (PPP). The Planning Commission puts the figure at 27.5% (2005), an improvement from 36% (1994) a decade earlier.
This means that the collective income of 27% of India i.e. 300 million people (about the population of the U.S.) in 2005 was less than $137 billion (PPP). In the years between 2000 and 2004 alone, the economy expanded by $1228 billion. Hence, if these 300 million people had started with $137 billion in 2000, and had received 1/9 (11 %) of the $1228 billion increase in income, then their collective income could have doubled!
Even those who are aware of these figures, and have grown up in pockets of relative economic stability surrounded by urban poverty (like myself), the face of abject rural poverty is one they have only seen in films, read in books, or caught fleeting glimpses of in real life. If Bangalore is the flagship of India's 'success,' then the body, hearts, and souls in this New York Times Slideshow, are certainly emblematic of the nation's collective 'failure.'
Attached below is a graph of the rate of poverty alleviation in India over the past 30 years as calculated by the Ministry of Statistics and Program Implementation. And here is the link to the NYTimes article that accompanied the slideshow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
