I can't help but feel that rsj's solution misses a number of problems that neet was trying to fix.
It's not about one nation one x, except superficially.
1, the variation in admission procedures was much higher than could be tolerated, so that there was no minimum standard or uniform understanding of merit
2, paper leaks were happening in some states already
3, the law demands that even private medical colleges be not for profit. For better or worse. In that situation, the idea of capitation fees was abhorrent.
---
Arguably neet has had benefits as well as a huge downside
1, the high stakes examination means that coaching has become even more of an industry than it used to be
2, the fact of a single medical/nursing exam has meant an improvement in the quality of nursing students, as it includes a number who just missed out on medicine
3, neet selects for skills that aren't necessary to be a doctor
4, neet takes away the options for states or college to use their selection criteria as a way to select a particular kind of student. Eg CMC Vellore chose those who could reason and who were deemed socially b
Wrt Mobility Agreements, the Indians would indeed become a guest, for let's say 10 years.
What does the potential impact look like?
1. They approach their stay as merely a temporary one. The sole focus would be to earn more and save more. So that it can be spent once they're back in the country. Rather than "living", it would become more like an "earning mission", given how the Indian sensibilities work.
When these people come back, and I'd assume this is a large number, the large amount of money that they bring in (especially considering they'd have been earning in USD or Euros), wouldn't that drive up inflation artificially? Also, wouldn't this disapore give rise to a new class of high asset worth individuals who have massive lobbying power? (I mean, the China experiment isn't really all that much about human rights and democracy, is it?)
2. Even the companies or brands that they join will treat them only as a disposable resource. They know there is little long term future to be expected from such workers. They'd be rarely preferred in management positions. Would stories like Satya Nadella and Sundar Pichai be a reality anymore?
3. Really just a forward consequence of (1) and (2), would it also not hinder Indian entreprenuers in foreign countries? Think Vinod Khosla and Gupta brothers in Africa.
Naah, mobility agreements are on top of existing arrangements. The country of emigration will have a much small citizenship/PR track in parallel. We are talking about an additional arrangement that can increase the number of Indians who can work safely by an order of magnitude (say by 10x at least), that too across the income spectrum.
You mentioned that the govt/ state should not make exit barriers as a citizen of his/ her free will is emigrating. This suggestion of a 10-year window will also create a quasi-barrier which the state should not do. While other country citizens can easily change their citizenship, and assimilate in the new society, this labour agreement will deter Indians from going to Western countries and change their citizenship. Rather, I would suggest making things conducive for these people to come back to India or easy to maintain their roots in India while they are outside. FTAs done well will eventually encourage people to stay back in our country due to increased opportunities here.
In terms of repatriation of money, either case (change of citizen vs 10-year contract) is same.
And its too minor an issue for a govt policy to be set up. Don't you think so?
no Anoop, I don't think so. I think it can have a major impact. We are talking about a 10x or 100x jump in the number of people who will be able to go work outside India if and only if there are such rotational labour mobility agreements. Else we will continue to be in the current situation where other countries will pick and choose a small number of immigrants because they are sceptical of making them citizens.
Remember that existing arrangements of citizenship/PR track will continue in parallel.
I fully share the concern about the artificial scarcity created for medical seats in the country (when there is such a huge demand for medical education).
The same applied to engineering. However, I believe that the expansion of engineering education through private institutes (though not perfect) has a better track record than medical education.
The regulations to set up medical colleges (as mentioned in your article) seem to be the root cause. Why can't those regulations be eased? There must be something/someone/somebody resisting the change. Who? And why? I can guess the culprits. But even if the guess is true, why those culprits have the upper hand?
And more importantly, why the same set of culprits could not prevent the proliferation of engineering colleges, but could successfully stall the medical colleges?
Re: neet and neeti
I can't help but feel that rsj's solution misses a number of problems that neet was trying to fix.
It's not about one nation one x, except superficially.
1, the variation in admission procedures was much higher than could be tolerated, so that there was no minimum standard or uniform understanding of merit
2, paper leaks were happening in some states already
3, the law demands that even private medical colleges be not for profit. For better or worse. In that situation, the idea of capitation fees was abhorrent.
---
Arguably neet has had benefits as well as a huge downside
1, the high stakes examination means that coaching has become even more of an industry than it used to be
2, the fact of a single medical/nursing exam has meant an improvement in the quality of nursing students, as it includes a number who just missed out on medicine
3, neet selects for skills that aren't necessary to be a doctor
4, neet takes away the options for states or college to use their selection criteria as a way to select a particular kind of student. Eg CMC Vellore chose those who could reason and who were deemed socially b
Wrt Mobility Agreements, the Indians would indeed become a guest, for let's say 10 years.
What does the potential impact look like?
1. They approach their stay as merely a temporary one. The sole focus would be to earn more and save more. So that it can be spent once they're back in the country. Rather than "living", it would become more like an "earning mission", given how the Indian sensibilities work.
When these people come back, and I'd assume this is a large number, the large amount of money that they bring in (especially considering they'd have been earning in USD or Euros), wouldn't that drive up inflation artificially? Also, wouldn't this disapore give rise to a new class of high asset worth individuals who have massive lobbying power? (I mean, the China experiment isn't really all that much about human rights and democracy, is it?)
2. Even the companies or brands that they join will treat them only as a disposable resource. They know there is little long term future to be expected from such workers. They'd be rarely preferred in management positions. Would stories like Satya Nadella and Sundar Pichai be a reality anymore?
3. Really just a forward consequence of (1) and (2), would it also not hinder Indian entreprenuers in foreign countries? Think Vinod Khosla and Gupta brothers in Africa.
Naah, mobility agreements are on top of existing arrangements. The country of emigration will have a much small citizenship/PR track in parallel. We are talking about an additional arrangement that can increase the number of Indians who can work safely by an order of magnitude (say by 10x at least), that too across the income spectrum.
This is regarding the issue of Labour mobility.
You mentioned that the govt/ state should not make exit barriers as a citizen of his/ her free will is emigrating. This suggestion of a 10-year window will also create a quasi-barrier which the state should not do. While other country citizens can easily change their citizenship, and assimilate in the new society, this labour agreement will deter Indians from going to Western countries and change their citizenship. Rather, I would suggest making things conducive for these people to come back to India or easy to maintain their roots in India while they are outside. FTAs done well will eventually encourage people to stay back in our country due to increased opportunities here.
In terms of repatriation of money, either case (change of citizen vs 10-year contract) is same.
And its too minor an issue for a govt policy to be set up. Don't you think so?
no Anoop, I don't think so. I think it can have a major impact. We are talking about a 10x or 100x jump in the number of people who will be able to go work outside India if and only if there are such rotational labour mobility agreements. Else we will continue to be in the current situation where other countries will pick and choose a small number of immigrants because they are sceptical of making them citizens.
Remember that existing arrangements of citizenship/PR track will continue in parallel.
Thank you for your reply. I will think about this more.
I fully share the concern about the artificial scarcity created for medical seats in the country (when there is such a huge demand for medical education).
The same applied to engineering. However, I believe that the expansion of engineering education through private institutes (though not perfect) has a better track record than medical education.
Yeah, engineering education solved that problem. How many times have you heard of people going to Kazakhstan or some such country to do engineering? https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/voices/indias-doctor-deficit-lets-not-use-band-aids-for-bullet-wounds/
The regulations to set up medical colleges (as mentioned in your article) seem to be the root cause. Why can't those regulations be eased? There must be something/someone/somebody resisting the change. Who? And why? I can guess the culprits. But even if the guess is true, why those culprits have the upper hand?
And more importantly, why the same set of culprits could not prevent the proliferation of engineering colleges, but could successfully stall the medical colleges?