Phool Na Loon to Kiya Karoon?

great article betraying, God forbid, a passion for pakistan and its many people, some of whom don`t have very much. an ironic also is that they can`t even understand these very words we, the sentimental educated, say in their defense. all the more reason that their rights and selves be defended from cruel ignorance perpetrated by feeble-minded myopics.

something i`d like to comment on (after all that rambling). ms. shah wrote, in the first paragraph:

``That’s what rich people usually think when they have to give anything to some one less than them. A favor as it were, with no reward other than the hereafter for the believers in God.``

It may be that the rich do think so and act so. But the religious sentiment cannot be outlawed when it comes to sharing. That we all share, and give selflessly, is a responsibility that we`re entrusted with. The favor we`re doing is to ourselves.

And the dignity of the recipient must always be foremost in our minds when giving. acts of generosity are made cheap when admitted. silence adds to the beauty and dignity (which are not two different things) of the act.

thank you all who read so far. assalamualaikum.

RE SHAHEEN

Bauhat khoob, bauhat khoob.

``Safaid Baniaa``

Qarz de kar Ghareeb Mulkon Ko
Cheeen Laita Hai Ruh-e-Azaadi

Aaj Zair-e- Aitab hai Us Ke
Har Bada Shehar, Har Haseen Waadi

Mudaaton Sur Utha ke Chal Na Saka
Us Ke Khaate main Jis ka Naam Aya

Saaf Daman Bacha Giya Hum Se
Jab Bhi Mushkil Koi Muqaam Aya

Bahr-e-Hind Aaj teri Maujain Bhi
Us Ki TooPon Ke Saye Main Khamosh

Koi Toofan Kiyon Nahin Uth-Ta
Kiya Hua Aaj tera Josh-o-Kharosh

Thanks, Saima, for your kind words of encouragement. It is indeed deja vu all over again, having been gone for almost over a
month from Chowk :)-

RE: Moe Chaudry

Thank you for your involved consistently interesting feedback and comments. I think all of it makes Chowk a better place for all of us.

Thanks for your warm welcome, BG & Lurker! It is nice to be back roaming the alleys of the chowk :)-

Welcome back Moe!

RE: BG to Saima ``... Saima, you really said it: ``how easy it is to forget the meek when the System works for you ....``

Free Market Theory of ``Have-Nots`` Versus Comparative Advantage Theory of ``Haves``

Scented lives that drift along:
from birth a sugared, rosy path;
pandered to and money spent,
with no thought of an aftermath.

Children brought up like this can see:
nothing of the agony
of hapless souls who cannot boast
of riches beyond their parent`s scope.

Selfishly they pick plums:
dangling from life`s fruitful trees;
they merely leave the emptied skins
to their peers who despise the loss.

They will not be asked to share
the richer pickings offered once;
the spoiled ones quickly seize the
chance and simply scoff the lot.

Small wonder then:
the poor ones will revolt
against the greedy ones;
and demand with violent threat,
their rightful share of fruit they
need to get.

``Haves`` and ``Have-Nots`` ...
They both sound as dirty words!
That We ``have`` to:
make guns and bombs,
kill each other,
use spies,
have peace talks,
share prizes of peace.

Perhaps We should
make calm, eh?
How to do it?

It is so easy ...
Just stop it!
Change industrial resources:
Make everybody articles,
Food, shelter and garments,
Develop farming tools,
and industrial productivity.

Did you say ``have not`` expenses?
Pleeeeazzzzzzze ...
Compare to weapons!

Saima, you really said it: ``how easy it is to forget the meek when the System works for you.``

I hear it all the time, in different ways, from those who have benefitted from the system: They are poor because they are lazy and/or stupid. They need to work harder. Why are they looking for handouts? Why should I have to pay taxes to support these dirty stupid lazy poor people to have more dirty stupid lazy children?

of course we never remember handouts given to the rich. all those loans never repaid in pakistan. the wall st bailout in dec 1994 after the mexico fiasco. the 1998 bailout of wall st (and i use it more generally than just the street in downtown manhattan) in asia. the ``austerity`` measures are always for the poor. yes there are those unfortunate lay-offs of bankers too, but the numbers of the poor are many many more. and, their lives are very austere to begin with; how much more austere can they get?

and what about the huge grants given by tax payers for defence research and defence spending in the US? and the preposterous amounts that poor countries spend on weapons of mass destruction? (incidentally, a related concern over the Asian economic collapse was the decease in defence spending and how it would affect US companies. Lets produce more guns and lets sell more, to everyone, so that there are more rwandas and more bosnias -- after all, it is a `free` world and they dont actually have to use the guns) who benefits from defence research and spending? is it the poor woman with 5 kids and no husband or is it GE?

and what about sweatshops who go in to third world countries and say no labor organizing and no labor laws? is that ``free market``?

Free market discipline is for the poor and the weak. Subsidies, welfare and molly-coddling is for the rich and the powerful.

As saima said, there is no equal trade between unequals. well said. and who wants to give up their privileges voluntarily, when they have the means to keep terms of trade favourable for their own benefit?

Re: Tauheed Ahmed

``What is a ``resource``? It has been proved amply, that the mother of all resources is between the two
ears of every human being. And Pakistan has 139 million such resources. Now if only we were to
get them working to potential ... ``

I entirely agree with you. This article, like a lot at Chowk is an attempt to do that.

Re: Syma Bilal

Thank you for your enlightening comments on freedom. The idea has been further developed. Another idea in the article was the fact that Free Market Theories are fed to the educated elite. Education is a term that has become synonymous with what has survived effectively in some parts of the World. And the Third World is convinced to accept that Free Market Economics is the prime solution to poverty. We forget/ignore and not notice that these work in a given social system with the right political organization. We have many times enforced Freer market theories on our industrial sectors. A recent example in Pakistan is the deregulation of the financial sector in 1991 to allow greater freedom of currency movements, better allocation of resources etc. This resulted in a big boom for the sector and brought Pakistan out as an ``emerging market`` for a while.

Yet, I cannot say that financial institutions have succeeded in providing credit to the poorer classes of the Economy for true emancipation of the poor worker class. The reasons are manifold. Some of the reasons are about credit risk but some revolve around the fact that the educated classes/sectors are completely out of touch with the problems/parameters of the poorer classes. ``Something smells rotten in the State of Denmark`` and it is the alienation of our class-conscious system.

A few years ago, an experimental Bank was set-up in Bangladesh, which had the objective of giving small loans to the female people of the rural areas to encourage self-employment. It was a successful experiment. The reasons were manifold. Most of the people working in the Bank were female people with background and a history of a successful struggle against poverty. (Sincerity/common goals?). Another reason was that they had a very simple mechanisms for approving/ disbursing loans and monitoring recovery.

Re Synic

Thank you for the thought provoking poem. I agree that goals of justice demand that rewards ought to be earned and deserved, which is fulfilled by the idea of the Free Market. Yet, the Free Market always specifies the TYPE of endeavor. This has also had some dysfunctional consequences in the US/Canada. Poor job security, sudden layoffs and unemployment have also been seen here. So far the solution has been to re-teach skills. In the West this has been easier perhaps because a basic skill set is already there. Imagine the plight of the Third World.

I wonder if some Chowkwalas could confirm that the truly effective age of the Free Market Mechanism was AFTER the US was almost completely literate. Can someone tell me the chronological order between the spread of literacy/education and improved standards of living?

Lastly, I maintain that nobody deserves poverty. We are dignified human beings who deserve respect from society and a chance. I feel it is short-sighted to try and prove that the Third World deserves its mess. A recent example of this thought is of a political leader quoted at Chowk who said that people who believe that life begins after death cannot be given economic solutions. Implicit in the idea is, ``you ought to believe like me to be effective.``