Sen vs Bhagwati

At the outset I must confess that I am a layman and not an economist. I may not be right but my commonsense compels me to write what I feel, about these two world renown and celebrated economists.

Economics is a science that has many shades. Both can be right ( though Amartya Sen is left!). There can be as many views as there are experts. It is like the six blind men of Hindustan who were asked to describe an elephant!
Mr Jagdish Bhagwati is a respected economist and Mr Manmohan Singh perhaps followed his model of growth hoping that due to trickle effect the benefits would flow down to the poor.  This model of growth has always been followed in Gujarat , even before Modi took charge. This has been also been stated by Mr Advani. The State is rich in resources and also in entrepreneurial skills and traders who almost instinctively have the enterprise to grow in their respective businesses. Dhiru Ambani saw this, Adani followed, Sekhseria (Ambuja) and others all have thrived in this State's growth. Mr Bhagwati has presumed that being Jains, whose religion does practice charity, that automatically the poor would gain. Unfortunately, statistics do not show this improvement  in the condition of the poor. On most social sectors, Gujarat lags way behind other States.As one wag stated, in Modi's Gujarat, he has worked not for the 5 cr  Gujaratis but for the Gujaratis who have more than 5cr! It is now known that some of these big guns have used their wealth to build huge 23 story residences, and schools for the elite, &  hospitals for the rich which are operated as profit centres.
Mr Bhagwati's hypothesis  that with high growth, the State will have the funds to help the growth of the poor has not worked in practice.
But does it work that way? Dr Ram Guha, the historian, has made a comment that high growth has given high expectations for the under privileged . The rural masses wants have increased for appliances, food habits, mobiles etc etc which are based on what they see on the TVs by ads as well as sitcoms. Mr Amartya Sen perhaps feels that the growth should be inclusive and should flow upwards with basic schemes for education, health, electricity, roads etc parri passu. This is not just a "left" concept but one that needs to be understood when we have 65% percent of our population in our villages. At the same time, to finance these schemes the only resort is to get long term foreign investment in various sectors. Does appear dangerous but this is the policy advocated by Mr Modi as well but opposed by the BJP. It was the NDA manifesto that included the need for FDI even upto 100% in retail but now they oppose even their own policies. They do not realise that this negativism can pose a big problem if at all they come to power.. They have Modi's model of growth as advocated by Bhagwati but that doesnt meet the expectations of the poor. The present Govt however on the recommendations of the NAC with grass ground level workers like Aruna Roy, Mander, Dreze etc have suggested certain actions like RTI, RTE, Food Security Bill, direct transfer of benefits etc to hasten the benefits to the less fortunate. It is strange that while opposing most of the Govt welfare schmes in the Parliament, Mr rRnath Singh while in the US has said that they will continue with these schemes if they come to power. Ws this to assure the US that FDI will be needed from them? Is there some hypocrisy here?
One of the corollaries of high growth, wants grow and inflation is bound to follow. Today, the money in the rural markets has increased and demand has increased. At the time ofthe last election, Dr Pranoy Roy and Mr Shekar Gupta  who traveled along the length and breadth of the country found that the rural incomes had risen! Those companies who meet such a demand are making huge profits.Demand has increased but supply constraints due to poor infrastructure is bound to create inflation. Besides,  the heavy dependence on imports of goods whose prices are on the increase also contribute to inflation.
Everyone knows the cure but the fear that the private enterprise will take advantage of such a situation and not improve the lot of the poor, creates suspicion and fear to give  free access to opportunities. In such a situation the bureaucracy plays its negative role.

The way seems to be in between that of Mr Bhagwati or Mr Sen. Who is right - I leave it to you!