| ashu |
Posted
on 15-Oct-00 05:21 PM
Dear Murali,
I appreciate your comments and criticisms.
In a spirit of no-holds-barred kura-kani,
here is my response.
>Hi Ashu:
> Biswo is a winner
OK. This kura-kani, though heated at times,
was NEVER about winning or losing. It was
about being clear and articulate about
one's views in a logically consistent
manner.
If you insist on viewing it in terms of winning or losing, then, that's your
opinion which need not be shared by
others.
>because [Biswo] said there are so many problems
> with safa tempos
Sure, any industry has a lot of problems.
So, what's new? The sky need not fall down
on any industry just because someone
catalogs a list of problems.
For the purpose of kura-kani here, issues
of speed, overweight, foreign experiment
and cable snarling were brought up.
Now, those issues may be BIG, BIG concerns for Biswo Poudel.
And that's fine.
But those concerns are NOT, let me repeat, NOT shared by those in Kathmandu involved
in or closely/ critically observing the Safa Tempo industry. Put another way, what is
big deal to Biswo is NOT so big to others
in the field.
Given this, all things being equal, Biswo's concerns, though heartfelt, are simply not credible to me.
>and it will
>not be an elixir to solve a problem of air
>pollution in
> Nepal
Tell me, and you keep on getting hung up on this point, WHO has ever said here that "safa tempo will be an elixir to solve a problem
of air pollution in Nepal"?
Not me.
Certainly NOT me.
So, please don't try to force your perceived
conclusion on me.
Safa Tempo is JUST an option for public transport in Nepal. That's all. If it
doesn't spew out black, curling fumes,
well, so much the better!!
Now, is Safa Tempo a commecially viable option? Well, we don't know yet.
What we do know is this: That people have invested millions of rupees in the industry. Assuming those investors are rational, well, they must have seen something that non-investors have not seen.
So, in the meantime, ACCEPTING that
the industry, like any, has its own set of problems, why not give those investors a benefit of doubt?
>It is the efficient economic
>policy that
> dictates what should be done
Economics is all about incentives. Rest is commentary.
In Nepal, I see people behaving rationally all the time in the sense that they modify their behaviours -- either positively or negatively -- to respond to overt or covert incentives.
Our economic policies end up in disasters precisely because they are often GRANDLY PRESCRIPTIVE in the mode of "yesto hoonoo parcha; oosto hoono pacha", and are rarely
based on incentives that would induce desirable behaviours on the part of the
people.
>and it is the technical knowledge which can
>be
> used to solve the problem of
>air pollution in KTM.
Well, I'm not so sure about this.
You know damn well that Kathmandu has
plenty of economists and environmental engineers.
Assuming 'efficient economic policies" and "technical knowledge" were enough in and of themselves, how come that, to cite one example, the problem of proper disposal of daily solid urban waste has remained an insoluble one for this many years?
Apparently, in PUBLIC life, there are competing interests that clamor for PUBLIC attention, and economics and technology can only go so far -- either for short- or long-term solutions.
This is why so-called smart techocrats have failed and will fail miserably in Nepal.
> Ashu said despite all the problems
>it may be a viable short run solution
>forever
> deteriorating air quality
>problem in KTM.
No.
I did not say this.
Let me make this very clear: An equation that goes something like: "A Safa Tempo equals cleaner air therefore we must support
Safa Tempo at all costs" has NEVER been my slogan at all.
My attitude is: If people have invested
millions of their own rupees in this competitive segment of public transport, what's the incentive driving (pun intended)
them?
Look, I don't believe for a second that
these investors are noble-minded environmentalists who are out to clean
up Kathmandu's air, though they may
certainly make such claims.
They are certainly out to make money.
And there's NOTHING WRONg with their
trying to make money as long as they
are all legal about it.
>As for me it is the long run
>solution
> that we should focus on not
>the short run one. A myopic idea is the
>worst one
> than no idea at all. "
Again, I NEVER said that Safa Tempo were
"short term" thing. Why do you keep on attributing words and ideas to me that I
did not utter?
I think you've already made up your mind
as to I must be some liberal,
environmental do-gooder with ties to Safa Tempo business-wallahs . . . well, if so, then your impressions are mistaken.
That aside, I do NOT believe in long-term
solutions for anything in Nepal.
Why?
Because, as Keynes famous said, in the long run, we are all dead anyway.
But seriously though, what do you mean by long-run? How long is long?
I ask you these questions in all sincerity because, as you well know, Nepal has had quite many experiences on making "long term national plans/solutions" since the 50s.
And we are today, 40-odd years later knowing fully well that our best-laid long-term
plans and solutions on anything have not really amounted to much.
Given this history, one has every right to
be suspicious of another call for a "long term solution" on anything in Nepal.
>The fact that the safa tampos may be a short
>run solution, does not mean it is going to
>be the solution for degrading and as such
>pathetic air and water qualities in KTM
>valley.
Well, I never said that Safa tempo were/are
panacea for KTM's air quality.
I'll respond to the rest of your posting tomorrow. I think I'll go to sleep now.
oohi
ashu
|
