If an industrialist can sell his products anywhere in India and the world, why should a farmer not be allowed to do so?
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Land is an emotional subject with a farmer in India because it is his only means of income.
My view is make Indian manufacturing competitive, and if it is competitive, it can serve customers or consumers anywhere.
There is no good reason for our cattle producers to have such limited market access. Our beef is the best in the world, and we need to be allowed to reach global markets.
I see no reason for giving the capital employed in agriculture greater protection than the capital vested in other branches of trade, manufacture, or commerce.
There is one rule for the industrialist and that is: Make the best quality of goods possible at the lowest cost possible, paying the highest wages possible.
I said that if I were an industrialist or entrepreneur, I would invest in agriculture-based enterprises, for there is so much that can be done in manufacturing, in food preservation.
I produce for a low price and I sell it on my own to 80 countries.
Merchants have no country. The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains.
It may be assumed as a fixed truth that the prosperity and riches of the farmer must depend on the prosperity and good national regulation of trade.
I said the export benefit should go to all the farmers in the country through the mills spread across the country, in states like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal. Now what happens? This benefit goes to those mills or export houses in Mumbai. Or in Chennai or in Bangalore.