JVP blames Govt. for farmers` plight

  • 24 May 2006 12:38:40 GMT

    Sorry people voted us for screaming not to do something. JVP is already fullfilling their mandate.

    Why takeover ? You want them to work ??? what for ??? Whats the reward ?????

  • 25 May 2006 02:02:22 GMT

    What MP Dissanayake says is the truth.I don`t know why you are reluctant to accept it.If the govt. really wants to serve the people and address to their excisting grievances,it should never hand over the purchasing of the harvest to a businessman in the district.This is a clear example of the blatant hypocrisy of the SL government and it reflects its inability to handle this age old problem of the SL farmers.The truth does not change just because it is pointed out by the JVP whether you like it or not.

  • 25 May 2006 05:36:00 GMT

    [this is an inherent problem of `Talking people ` who is governed only by a fantasy.When they had power they never took any initiatives to form a national policy in agriculture,now talking loudly.`

    Dogs bark Caravan goes`]

  • 25 May 2006 05:54:05 GMT

    What is this age old problem?

    Is there any problem at all?

    Even those who know the basics of economics know that the price of a certain product is decided purely by demand and supply. When the demand is low and the supply is high obviously the prices go down. That is the market economics.

    Given the economic conditions of Sri Lanka, the market price of rice might be about Rs. 9 or 10.

    However, purely for political reasons and for nothing else, the government had promised to buy rice at a much higher price. The additional amount is paid by the treasury, because government cannot sell rice at the prices it buy.

    The treasury is not a bottomless well. The money in the treasury is the money of the people. What spend as a rice subsidy here (to gain political mileage) is the money which would have been otherwise used for development work.

    If JVP wants government to give rice subsidies to farmers, first it should point out how that money for that is earned. Otherwise there is no point ranting.

    If they want to save farmers they should instruct farmers to grow more economical crops rather than rice or create additional job opportunities. Subsidies like these cannot go for ever. Those are only ?chanda gundu?

    But of course we cannot expect eighth grade drop outs to know even the abcs of economics. They think one can UNPLUG the economies and solve all the problems under the sun.

    Typical Tissamaharama idiots!

  • 25 May 2006 06:32:12 GMT

    This is what one of my friends said approximately 3.5 hours ago.

    [I should not have wasted so much time on a useless political party who have scored only 5.8% votes in the last election.

    Have you seen I have stopped talking about JHU after the local govt. pools? In future JVP too will not matter much. No matter how they will shout, they will not be able to make any significant influence on the policy. So why waste my time on a very weak force?]



  • 25 May 2006 06:54:12 GMT

    JVP always want to be heard

    Let us help them

    Between 1988 and 1992 they are responsible for the death of about 140,000 Sri Lankans All but one were Sinhalese

    In 1971 they JVP was responsible for the deaths of over 80,000 Sri Lankans - Races not known

    See I am also helping their name to be listed in the New papers Papers.

  • 25 May 2006 07:33:15 GMT

    `Demand and supply determines the price of paddy and rice in Sri Lanka` qualifies for an `Aarthika Vihilu` column.

    These `Vihilu` usually originates in the minds of those who study for foreign accounting exams, and blindly apply Adam Smith`s `invisible hand` to local paddy/rice market.

    They are not aware of the `invisible hand` of the paddy/rice cartel, simply because it is not taught in the CIMA class!

  • 25 May 2006 07:54:39 GMT

    [`Demand and supply determines the price of paddy and rice in Sri Lanka` qualifies for an `Aarthika Vihilu` column. ]

    Very true. Of course, these theories are not taught at Grade 8. So for people who left the school at that level they are vihilu.

  • 25 May 2006 08:03:57 GMT




    [Bailanomics is a new branch in Economics. (Baila + Economics; the term is self explanatory)] The theories presented under this sub discipline will explain scores of predicaments faced by the traditional and outdated economists for centuries, if not millennia. Some Bailanomic theoreticians feel these principles are so strong that they will even eventually make the traditional economics a dead art and will force Adam Smith to rewrite the `Wealth of Nations`.

    The need for a separate sub discipline of this nature is evident. It has been felt for a long time that the discipline of economics was completely dominated by the ideas of people like Adam Smith, John Maynard Keynes, Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein. (It has been pointed out to Professors Lalkantha and Weerawansa that Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein were not actually economists. This minor error will be corrected at the next version.) Needless to say, all these people were nothing but para-suddas. These suddas, having no exposure to our own way of thinking, have failed to see the true governing principles of economics from an indigenous or deshi perspective. The local indigenous thinking has been completely absent in the thinking of these para-suddas and as a result economics has become a tool, which is frequently being used by the rich to exploit poor, the rich nations to exploit poor nations, suddas to exploit the rest of us and so on and so forth.

    The discipline of Bailanomics is completely free from the prejudices of the para suddas. It looks at the economy from a true deshi perspective and explains phenomena, which were no longer explained by the traditional so-called economics theory.

    Bailanomics has given birth to many important concepts. Unfortunately, many of them have not been and cannot be directly translated. Some of the concepts that were based on Bailanomics include Jaathika Arthikaya, Thulana Arthikaya, Mishra Arthikaya and Chaminda Chinthana. The last concept comes as a published volume now being used as the de facto guide by all Bailanomics practitioners.

    Professors Lanlkantha, A.P. (A-pura MMV) and Weerawansa, A.P. (Tissa MV), claim no credit as the fathers of Bailanomics, though their contribution to the growth of this discipline is by no means insignificant.

    Let us now look at some of the key principles of Bailanomics.

  • 25 May 2006 08:08:41 GMT

    Continued..... Extracts from the book on Bailanomics...

    Bailanomics Principle # 1 (Also known as Weerawansa?s electric-plug theory of international trade) : The frequent price fluctuations in the domestic markets can be eliminated by isolating such markets from the world market.

    This theory explains how the consumers in any given domestic market can be protected from the price fluctuations of the commodities in the international market, by the complete isolation of such domestic markets from the international market.

    Some malicious critics have questioned about the feasibility of isolating the domestic markets from the international market in this manner. Prof. Weerawansa has explained how it can be done, using his now famous electric-plug analogy. He said the domestic markets are ?plugged? to the world market, in a way not very different from an electrical equipment (like a television set or a hairdryer) is plugged to the electrical power system, and the isolation is made possible by ?plugging? out the connection.

    Prof. Weerawansa has presented this theory after carefully examining the changes in the crude oil prices in the world market for the last few decades.

    Prof. Weerawansa observed that the drastic rises in the oil prices have been always a result of a political event that happened outside the domestic market, i.e. outside Sri Lanka. For instance, the Yom Kippur war (whatever it is), the Iranian revolution, Iran / Iraq war and First Gulf war are events all taken place outside the country. These were the key reasons for the rise in the oil prices. Therefore, Prof. Weerawansa decided that it is neither logical nor fair for the consumers in the domestic market pay higher prices for the commodities, because of the events they have no control of.

    Prof. Weerwansa also suggested to the Sandhanaya government that this theory should be tested after the April 2004 victory. However, this has never materialised because saboteurs from the main opposition party prevented it. Otherwise we would have brought petrol for Rs. 20 a litre by now.

    (If anyone is interesting reading the entire thing please put a mail to naleendra@yahoo.co.uk)