Ever wondered why 20% of the time expended produces 80% of the results,
This disproportion theory of 20-80% is popularly known as the Pareto principle which was first propounded by Vilfredo Pareto(1848-1923). He observed that 20% of the people of Italy who formed the upper strata of the societal hierarchy nearly owned about 80% of the wealth. The concept of such disproportion in the society was thus put forward by Pareto. The exact value of 20 and 80% are not necessarily true or significant every time. But, the thread of truth attached with such disporportion distribution of wealth is something that can't be overlooked.
And the same stands true for what we can observe in Arunachal Pradesh. Only the politicians, their relatives, bureaucrats, engineers and few elite contractual players etc reaps the benefits of the funds that were supposedly meant for the overall development. So, its the wealthy 20% arunachali population that owns the 80% of the wealth. Now, if we further ponder upon how the fund-flow system in Arunachal assumes figure... then one might have to oblige with the fact that... there is more than 80% probability that these 20% of the people representing the wealthy arunachalis is somehow spun around in the same network that remains exclusively theirs.
Now, what does other 80% of the Arunachali people do... people who represents the middle and lower section of the SEC ( socio economic classificatory groups )?
A good question... and the answer is - 80% of the whole arunachal population competes amongst eachother for the scarce and limited 20% of the fund. This 80% of the population represents the people who are frustrated for this un-equitable distribution of wealth which by no exception is a handiwork of an economic system that works only for the sustainment of its existence rather than existing for people who needs the most.
This vicious cycle of 80-20% in wealth distribution is multiplicative in nature, which makes it imperative for the people in the border of this distinctive groups of 80-20 to find a way into the upper 20. And for this to happen they have no other option but to get into the nexus of this cyclic proportionate distribution of wealth.
Going by definition of any economic community run by a government that is being elected by the overall population the following points would have been achievable:
- the 20% of the people who work for the 80% of the people would have been responsible for distribution of 80% of the wealth to atleast 80% of the people.
- The reversed implication of Pareto principle would have been observed.
But, the subtle truth of asking for an Utopian kind of society in present context is too much to ask for. Again, a reedemable and a healthy proportion much in favor of society at large isn't an impossible feat to achieve. An conscientious effort to bring in this slow but imminently desired change in the 80-20% has to be brought forth.
Days of reckoning the same wouldn't be far if we believe that onus lies on each one of us.
A society of new economic order can wait!