Rajasthan State government introduced the labour reforms in 2014 wrt +
Seen a lot of people aver the following, "but where are the jobs?" in response to someone asserting the need to incentivize the movement of our people from agriculture to industry.
Well, here's one major part of the big answer: Labour reforms.
Thread👇
Rajasthan State government introduced the labour reforms in 2014 wrt +
1. India has a major problem of dwarf firms i.e. firms that remain small despite being old and are not able to employ more than 10-20 workers.
2. The number of factories establishing with more than 100 workers were growing on an average of 3.65%, +
3. The most important point: the average number of workers per factory in Rajasthan increased at the+
Here are some interesting figures from the Economic survey highlighting the significant improvement in the situation of Rajasthan as compared to the rest of India. (They really need to work on aesthetics)
Excessive and absurd labour regulations have been one of the biggest reasons for our inability to grow a thriving manufacturing sector with a large labour+
https://t.co/J8oA2goRLr
The fourth paper titled "Labour pains: Status check on reforms in employment protection legislation" has been co-authored by me, a fellow intern and the Director of Research at CCS.
— Sargoon (@SargoonK) November 11, 2020
The paper seeks to capture the cross-state variation in labour laws for 12 different states+ https://t.co/6VDqI1aLrw
More from Society
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
