<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Another failed development policy in the works?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thinkchangeindia.org/2009/03/16/another-failed-development-policy-in-the-works/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thinkchangeindia.org/2009/03/16/another-failed-development-policy-in-the-works/</link>
	<description>Tracking Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation in India</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 09:13:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Badhri</title>
		<link>http://www.thinkchangeindia.org/2009/03/16/another-failed-development-policy-in-the-works/comment-page-1/#comment-3811</link>
		<dc:creator>Badhri</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:21:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thinkchangeindia.wordpress.com/?p=2224#comment-3811</guid>
		<description>I think the quality of the WB report can be judged only after reading the report. For now, to defend our existing position (taking opportunities to villages), we can argue the following way.

The report seems to suggest that despite &quot;best&quot; attempts to stop migration into cities, people move into cities. What convinced WB that such attempts were &quot;best&quot;. Further, may be there are so many slum-dwellers because there aren&#039;t as many opportunities as was thought.

To say that creating opportunities in villages as &quot;tantamount to fighting prosperity&quot; is just an attempt to stall a new rural development idea and maintain status quo.

Furher specifically blaming NREGA seems to be poor reasoning too. The largest independent assessment of NREGA, by the Hindu Frontline, calls the scheme as very useful inspite of the corruption and other drawbacks..

http://www.flonnet.com/fl2601/index.htm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the quality of the WB report can be judged only after reading the report. For now, to defend our existing position (taking opportunities to villages), we can argue the following way.</p>
<p>The report seems to suggest that despite &#8220;best&#8221; attempts to stop migration into cities, people move into cities. What convinced WB that such attempts were &#8220;best&#8221;. Further, may be there are so many slum-dwellers because there aren&#8217;t as many opportunities as was thought.</p>
<p>To say that creating opportunities in villages as &#8220;tantamount to fighting prosperity&#8221; is just an attempt to stall a new rural development idea and maintain status quo.</p>
<p>Furher specifically blaming NREGA seems to be poor reasoning too. The largest independent assessment of NREGA, by the Hindu Frontline, calls the scheme as very useful inspite of the corruption and other drawbacks..</p>
<p><a href="http://www.flonnet.com/fl2601/index.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.flonnet.com/fl2601/index.htm</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
