etcetera

Prosperity hazards (?)

I was going to include this topic in my previous post. But I thought, the issue is worth starting a new topic. It had occured to me when I read 'The World is Flat' and resurfaced when I watched Rang de Basanti.

In this movie, the British filmmaker Sou comes to India to film a documentary on the memoirs of her grandfather during the Raj. She comes to India, without any support, to film just a documentary. It is common for Westeners to devote their life to just a documentary or book or any research for that matter. Can you imagine an Indian travelling, say all the way to Africa, just for a documentary? There may be instances, but chances are very few.

So why is it that Indians are reluctant to divert from the tried and tested path of becoming engineers and doctors? Friedman mentions in 'The World is Flat' that the number of people in US, pesuing Engineering or science related field is diminishing. Youngsters in US prefer to do some off-beat stuff like film or something. As per Friedman this is going to cause the downfall of US, as it is the technology which drives the nation.

When a nation is developing, like India, most of the opportunities are available only for well-educated. The chances of making careers in any other field like films or say environmental research are less. So people tend to choose the well established path. But with prosperity, there are chances of making careers in other fields as the prosperity enables high income even for the lowest tiers of the society. This means one can work in the field of his or her choise, which in most of the cases is some 'soft' profession rather than the hardships of technolgical or any such job. But Friedman argues this precisely is the reason of outsourcing and small growth rates. How true is that? As India and China are developing they are producing large number of engineers as compared to US. But how long will it continue?

In the last decade, with the Globalization, even Indians are venturing different career paths like films, event management, etc. Previously, student with good percentage in tenth would definitely choose science. But the scenes have changed. Those with good marks also go to Arts and Commerce. The boundaries relating marks with streams are blurring. Can this we take as a positive sign showing the prosperity of India? Will it lead to stagnation of economy as Friedman argues? Something to ponder about.

posted by ninad @ 4:43 pm