Inefficient...

Wed, 2007-09-26 10:46 — Ian Forber-Pratt

Today was an interesting day. I spent some time thinking and writing about the issues that Indians face: inefficiency of government, lack of education and shocking disparity between the rich and the poor.

Perhaps a symbolic question to pose is why are there lines on the streets when Indians clearly don’t follow them? The driving in Delhi is, in a word, insane. Delhi drivers simply do not follow the ‘lanes’ or often times the lights. However, they are clearly painted on the roads. Remnants of the structure of the British hang on. The road system is very obviously British. If you ask an Indian why things are the way they are they can often trace a contemporary problem to the 13th century when the Mughals implemented an edict that directly affects their lives today. A path from the 13th century to now is certainly sometimes hard to swallow. It seems unrealistic at times that Indians cling to their heritage in such a way that almost deifies the way things once were. It’s almost like a regression has happened since India gained its independence. Therefore, Indians spend their time romanticizing about the powerful world of yore that allows them to forget where they are while they walk down a dirty street with vendors sweeping their waste 4 inches to the right. How many people can you have sweeping things into the others’ piles and then waiting for it to be swept back? It’s almost a circular cycle of inefficient behavior.

Inefficiency is perhaps a way of life. Four people will often be doing the job of one, in order to all be employed. People are paid to open doors, greet you, take your clothes, show you clothes and sell you clothes: all in the same shop. Still yet, there are not enough jobs for the amount of human beings. We return then, to the issue of overpopulation. Can this problem also be traced back to the corruption of the government and its unavoidable imposition on every facet of peoples’ lives?

So what is inefficiency at its core? Is it cultural issue, a social issue or a bureaucratic issue? Synonyms of inefficiency are incompetence, inadequacy, wastefulness and disorganization. If these are the roots of society and the cause for the problems, are some of our ‘solutions’ simply band aids? When did India become inefficient? Did independence cause India to lose so much definition that they fell into chaotic disorganization?

In a class discussion today we talked about some of India’s main issues:
• Willing to change/ willing to deal
• Rural to urban
• Need vs. theft
• Fantasy for something better
• Minimal comfort
• Satisfied with very little
• No desire to make more $
• Many urban jobs
• Not enough urban jobs

The points seemed to be contradictory. I suspect that these conflicting points are the typicification of inefficiency. I wonder if this clinging to the past, British and Mughals is a lack of definition for the Indians. Their heritage is so speckled with traditions not of their own, that when forced to be their own entity, Indians are left reeling.

Ian Forber-Pratt's blog
Login to post comments

Comments

Fri, 2007-09-28 10:40 — Benjamin Melançon

Does inefficiency equal waste? And inequality as a root cause

I wouldn't necessarily equate inefficiency with waste.

The U.S. may do some things more efficiently than many other countries, but we are far and away the most wasteful.

All of our stuff – if you're in the United States or to a lesser extend any industrialized country, just look around you – may have been efficiently produced, transported thousands of miles, marketed, and sold, but hat doesn't make the waste any less monumental. (And you probably don't have four cars, a 10 acre lawn, and a private jet.)

Being efficient about being wasteful is nothing to brag about, as we in the U.S. guzzle all we can of the world's resources before this country, too, becomes an ex-empire. I'm not sure U.S. people will take the transition so well, though I have some hope.

I would point to horrible inequality (which in our global society cannot be fairly tagged as India's sole responsibility) as the root problem of a great part of the problems you describe.

The ultimate inefficiency is that there are a billion people with critical unmet needs, and many of the only jobs available are servicing the relatively few wealthy. It makes no sense, but it's not hard to see who benefits: people who can go into a shop and be serviced by five people with little financial difference to them because people will work for so little pay, and that's just the most surface example.

There isn't that much wealth to go around, so it isn't like India could solve poverty with higher taxes (as the U.S. could if our government weren't heartless)– effacing the giant divide between human needs and the opportunity to help others would require a radical restructuring of power in the society.

Even overpopulation: countless examples in recent history show that raising the standard of living decreases the rate of population growth dramatically. (One only has to look to Ireland and Italy.)

A political science professor of mine, Craig Thomas, said "arguing that people are incompetent is almost always wrong."

The corollary is to ask, "who benefits?"

For the maldistribution of wealth, the answer is obvious. To take an observation of yours that is less straightforward:

Stifling bureaucracy benefits those who have already made it, the big players. It's not a conspiracy per se, but the corporations with the most influence in government don't have any self-interest incentive in making it easier to get things done. I think that's why in the United States you can see taxes reduced to nothing for the biggest companies while regulations, or at least the formalities of regulations, often stay in place and increase.

People generally do the best they can in the circumstances they have. My interest is always in those trying to change the named and unnamed barriers on our lives – particularly from and for the vast majority of people that did not go to college, do not have a laptop, have none of the advantages of social status and resources with which I have been privileged – and seeing if there's anything I can do to help change society in ways that pushes these limitations outward toward freedom and justice.

I don't at all mean to question your wonderful insights about India, but to encourage you to frame them in a wider economic context.

Also, on culture, which I do not have and therefore do not understand, I still have one comment. I feel India has a remarkable history of peaceful progress. Do you agree, and do you see that continuing or being endangered as India begins to become a world power again?

You're the best, Ian.

~ ben

Wed, 2007-09-26 15:05 — Rissy