Indian Development in the shadow of the 2014 Elections

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/what-development-for-whom/article5979241.ece

Currently in India there is a heated election for prime minister.  On one hand is the BJP's candidate Narendra Modi the Chief Minister of Gujarat and on the other is the Congress Party's Candidate Rahul Gandhi.  The Congress party that has been in power for more time has come to be seen as incompetent, corrupt, weak and focused on vote bank politics.  The BJP has come to be seen as less corrupt and far more competent but also more polarizing especially amongst minorities particularly Muslims.  A central topic in this debate is development particularly because of Modi's  track record of economic growth in Gujrat.  However, in this article the author points out how the debate on development lacks depth.  He lists various aspects that have not been included in the debate like participation of local groups, inclusive policies and how development is viewed.  The author claims because of this election cycles highly polarizing campaigns the divisions in India's societies along caste, gender and religion  are coming to head.  And all these divisions in society will translate to ultimately failed development policy because how can there be inclusive policies and enhanced participation of marginalized groups when people in these highly segmented groups see the government through such strongly held and divisive opinions.  This article is so relevant to me because of the political and cultural climate into which I will enter when I go to Mumbai for my PE.  It has also reminded me to take into consideration how inclusive and participatory my own PE is when approaching people along these divisions.

Are We Really Helping the Poor?

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2013/12/anti-poverty-programmes?zid=301&ah=e8eb01e57f7c9b43a3c864613973b57f

There has constantly been debates on whether or not anti-poverty programmes are actually helping the poor. The article, “Are We Helping the Poor?” published in 2013 goes into detail on the main debates people have over assistance programmes which prove how poverty statistics have been wrong for several years. It is shared that “[S]tatistics using the official poverty measure do not provide an accurate picture of poverty or the role of government policies in combating poverty,” by Columbia University researchers Christopher Wimer and Liana Fox. There is proof that these government assistance programmes reduce poverty by about 40% since 2010 based on the US Census Bureau. However, this is solely based on studies conducted but where is this information coming from? And how come there hasn’t been visible improvement on the poverty struggles of millions of the poor living in the United States?

Based on the Columbia University Research there has been a decline in child poverty and amongst those in deep poverty but where is the proof of this and how was this study/research conducted? The reason I chose this article was because it made me question the reliability of the research published. Mr. Drum (an impressive figure) stands within my same thoughts. He states that ‘While poverty among the elderly has fallen impressively since 1967 (around the time Medicare was introduced), the percentage of poor Americans aged 18-64 hasn't budged much. The figure dipped from 1967 to 1979, but today is right back where it was 35 years ago, at 15%.” The poverty problem hasn’t improved. Government assisted programs, in my opinion, do help families support but these families are stereotyped for it and these programmes do not get these families out of poverty, its only a way of helping maintain the home under certain circumstances.

Mr. Alhert also believes that this study is flawed and argues that “Welfare benefits will dampen some recipients' drive to seek employment, whether they are technically impoverished or not,” because welfare programs can give more financial help than actually having a job. The anti-poverty problem is a continuous cycle. There are those that believe that these programs do help, and I believe this too. However, certain programs can only help a family so much and do not allow them to get out of poverty without having more resources of getting a proper job in order to maintain a household. Some of those impoverished cannot get a job because they do receive more financial help by not having one which allows them to take care of their children and do much more during the day. However, this is going to be the same routine for them. They have no other opportunities for a brighter and more secure future. So this leads me back to the question of whether or not we are helping the poor with government anti- poverty programs which include social welfare and others. The research conducted by Columbia University states that it has but in all honesty, I feel that it has only left the poor in a deeper poverty trap than they were before. The research does not take into consideration other factors that affect poverty rates in the United States. There should be a system that deliberately tries to increase the amount of those impoverished seeking employment in order to live above the poverty line in the United States.

Obamacare vs. Affordable Care Act - Jimmy Kimmel Live

Being a fan of the Jimmy Kimmel Live show, I saw this clip last year, where they sent out a camera crew to Hollywood Boulevard to conduct an experiment on the community's opinion on Obamacare and the Affordable Care Act. As Jimmy mentioned in the clip, Obamacare and the Affordable Care Act are the exact same thing. The purpose of the experiment was to determine how informed the public is on the subject of the Affordable Care Act. This video was my inspiration for the idea of our group project.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx2scvIFGjE

The video is very funny and entertaining. It also indicates that the general public is not very informed about the Affordable Care Act at all, despite their strong opinions. We can see in the video that a large majority of the people stated that they agree more with the Affordable Care Act and that it is the "better" option. One man even said that it is "more American."

It is very interesting to see what their responses are when asked about why they disagree with Obamacare.

-"there's a lot of holes in it"
-"to force people to pay something and doctors to make something, limiting their ability to do their job, that's kind of anti-American"
-"I just don't agree with the whole Obamacare policy thing that's going on"
-"I don't like anything that has to be forced for everybody to buy"
-One womyn was asked if she thinks Obamacare will lead to gun prohibition, she responded, "yes."

I think that when the general public is not informed about certain topics, they lean towards a certain side based on the names of the topics; whichever name that sounds "more" right and interesting. Even though this can possibly be an issue of naming of the health care program, it does not hide the fact that the general public does not know that they are the same. How can a program that is developed to serve Americans be "anti-American?" Or, is the name "Obamacare" what actually sounds "anti-American" to him? I actually found it quite funny that the womyn responded "yes" to the question about Obamacare leading to gun prohibition. What could be a potential relationship that she saw between the two? I cannot see the relationship yet and actually think that it was just a random question to test her. Another thing that stood out to me was the fact that this video was taken at the Hollywood Boulevard in Los Angeles. Generally speaking, I would assume that these members of the public are from a pretty well off background, since Hollywood Boulevard is an affluent part of LA. It is also a tourist attraction; in order to be a tourist and travel, one must also have the financial capabilities to do so. This brings up the question that, if the middle and upper middle income class do not know about the Affordable Care Act, how much does the lower middle class knows? Have they heard of the Affordable Care Act? Do they know what it offers and what their options are?