Eat full roti, work for 100 days and vote. This is the new mantra, the so called young leader has coined. So called young leader because I thought 15 - 35 is young given the country age of our countrymen as well as the social scenario.
I know what I am going to tell will make me look insensitive and be termed blasphemous. That I do not think of the starving, the incapable, the don't haves. I must say here that I would rather have people eating the food our farmers produce than have in rotting in the FCI godowns, run over by rodents.
However, what will a person do the rest of the days ? The food bill, if it comes into effect will ensure that people do not go hungry. Again, this is dependent on the quality of food grains. Many a time, stinking food grains land up in the fair price shop only to be thrown away after it lands at home. However, the Food Bill is good in one way - maybe we can make compulsory education really compulsory. No parent can say that they can't send their children to school because they need an extra hand. Also, we can ensure that child labour is totally routed out. If this happens, then yes it makes sense. Otherwise, the bill becomes another way for whoever wants to become rich the easy way, to do so.
I however am wondering about the other side. A human being is driven to work by the need to provide for one's family. It is also a sense of honour, of dignity and pride. Are we killing it ? There is a sizable population who are unable to work due to health and other reasons. For them, the Food Bill is a must. However, for the rest, how is this going to affect their lifestyle ? I am not a sociologist or a psychologist who understand what motivates the people of India. However, an average Indian is happy if he has the means to three meals a day and can provide a decent living for his family. That is what motivates him. And that is what keeps his health up. If you say that the food bill ensures food, and hence the person can concentrate on providing other amenities for his/her family, then the question is, where are the jobs ?
So, looking at the health angle, is this a right step. Also, when money comes to the bank, will it be used to provide food for the family ? If you have one drunkard in the family, then where will this money go is no one's guess. Even today, many of us know families that do earn a decent living but are stuck in the rut because one member in the family is a drunkard or a spendthrift. So, how does this help the family ?
So, question is, can this be done differently ? Can I ensure work for a person who is a beneficiary of this scheme ? Accountability is what you may call it, but I call it, keep him healthy, body and mind. Pay him his daily wages - thus, making it a double bonus. That way, there is food for the body and the mind.
Note : I am also against the subsidy for cooking gas - there must be a cutoff. People who earn beyond a particular amount should not be granted subsidy. Subsidize for those who need, for those whose life it will make a difference. Use the money better - provide security, provide good roads, clean drinking water, better environment, more parks, better public amenities, drainage systems, ....... don't subsidize the wealthy. It does not make sense. Make those who have feel responsible to the society around them. So, make the Aadhar card common, but suit your policy based on the type of people who are being served.
Again, this may be again called insensitive and irrelevant.
Note : The above is not meant to hurt anybody. All of the opinion is mine and mine alone.