Discussion on the state of the economy in India has always been bitter and this story has now acquired a real aspect and tone. For over a week, the Central Government and the State Governments have been touting and weaving the responsibility of compensation and compensation for the loss.

The Chief Minister of Chhattisgarh claimed that since April 1, the states have not been given any money by the Central Government. The Center introduced a legal opinion on its behalf, stating that it was not obligated to pay compensation amidst propaganda of cooperative federalism. The Deputy Chief Minister of Bihar, where the BJP is in the ruling coalition, said it was the 'moral duty' of the Center.

When the issue came up at the 41st meeting of the GST Council, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman introduced the concept of divine factor. Highlighting the state of the economy, he said that 'this year we are facing an extraordinary situation. We are facing an act of God which can result in a contraction of the economy. '

Shortly thereafter, he was trolled within and outside the party, citing the provision of an escape from the prevailing responsibility in the insurance industry. Subramanian Swamy asked if the recession of the last eight quarters was divine action, while the West Bengal Finance Minister simply said 'God save this government.'

Unlike rhetoric, this concept is problematic on many levels - starting from believing the invisible all-power, it equally demands acceptance of divine grace. Most importantly, the origin of the virus that has spread the epidemic is not yet clear.

The question is whether its origin is a unique phenomenon of nature or whether it has been prepared in a laboratory in China or elsewhere, but no answer has been found so far. Axiomatic evidence impedes scientific inquiry and confuses the correlation of work-cause theory — a gradual contraction in the economy is the result of government-imposed lockdowns.

According to the Central Government's own admission, the Center owes more than Rs 1.5 lakh crore for the first four months of this financial year and may have to pay more than Rs 3 lakh crore for the entire year.

There is no dispute about the importance of resources for the states. Each square kilometer of India (unless it is administered by the Center) is under the administration of the states. The total government spending figures make it clear- In 2019, the total expenditure of the Center was Rs 24.4 lakh crore, while the expenditure of the states was Rs 35.5 lakh crore.

State governments are at the forefront of the war against the epidemic, which is important for the preservation and development of the economy. More than two million posts (in Health, Police, and Education Department) are lying vacant throughout the country, which is important for maintaining governance.

States have been tasked to provide Anganwadi workers and drinking water as directed in the New Education Policy, 2020, in addition to community health centers and paramedics. The structural conditions of governance demand policy for efficient resource management.

The finance ministry is reluctant to spend from its chest or borrow against its balance sheet. It has suggested that states can bridge this shortfall by taking loans from the market or taking a part of it through special facilities available by the Reserve Bank of India. Needless to say, the proposed solution is insufficient. This suggestion asks states to borrow from the market as if the center believes that the state is Jalebi's economics.

At all times the central government is expected to be the elder of the family and that is it. The first line of the Preamble to the Constitution states that India is a union of states and the debates of the Constituent Assembly have established hierarchies and shared responsibilities. Poorly described and debated has made the road ahead very difficult. The structure of governance demands partnership, not subordination - not just words, but also karma.

The flow of funds usually comes from the coffers of the central government. The borrowing costs for the center are lower than in the states. What is the logic of adding high-interest costs to the cost of governance? Originally, there is an effort to keep the central deficit and borrowings low. But no matter how much pretense, this reality does not hide. Whether it is lending center or state governments, it will be visible in public debt figures. The reality is that India went into lockdown for eight quarters of the recession.

The need for funds for the recapitalization of banks, payment of dues, and increasing social subsidies will force the Center to knock on the door of loans and losses. The Center has some options for this. The government may transfer a portion of the public sector undertakings and the Life Insurance Corporation of India to a sovereign fund, the Bharat Investment Corporation.

The underlying value can be given to funding funds, pension funds, and HNIs to issue bonds, and this can be done with the phased strategic sale of entities. Self-reliant India demands innovation in increasing resources. Why are the temples of modern India not knocked as a basic mantra to overcome divine wrath?