The general elections in India, due shortly, may not throw up a clear winner.

This could mean weeks or even months of political uncertainty as parties negotiate for power.

Of the past six prime ministers, only three could complete their term.

In this context, the idea for a fixed term for parliament or the government may be floated again.

Indeed, the Chief Election Commissioner recently suggested a fixed term of five years for the government to cope with the increased frequency of elections, which hinders governance.

One reason for such suggestions is that frequent elections are seen as wasteful.

A candidate in a large state is allowed to spend around 2.5 million rupees (US $50,000) to contest for the lower house of parliament in a large state.

The money actually spent by candidates has been reported to be up to five times more.

An average of ten candidates contest the elections for every Lok Sabha seat – giving us an idea of the expenditure involved.

In fact, a survey conducted by the Centre for Media Studies estimates the total amount that will be spent in these general elections at $2 billion, excluding the expenditure in the assembly polls to Andhra Pradesh, Sikkim and Orissa.

Is all this expenditure a waste?

In these recessionary times, elections with such a massive estimated expenditure can prove a blessing for the poor.

It is the poor who vote in droves and man the electoral machinery of most parties. So the elections are also going to result in a transfer of wealth to them.

Since they are more likely to spend any additional income than the rich, the election expenditure will also mean a stimulus package that punches above its weight.

Recession or not, elections for the poor, however frequent they may be, are a source of power as well some money.

Is it elitist to worry about the frequency of elections and look upon them as a necessary evil before one gets on with the more important business of governance and policymaking?

“To define is to limit,” wrote T.S. Eliot.

Indeed sometimes, to limit things, they just may have been defined in a particular manner.

This struck home when I saw a communication by the World Bank on poverty estimates.

The World Bank produced an update of poverty numbers for the developing world based on an international price survey conducted in 2005.

The latest figures put the percentage of India’s people living below $1.25-a-day poverty line at 42 percent in 2005. This was an improvement on the 60 percent figure in 1981.

On the other hand, the government’s Economic Survey 2007-08 claims a poverty ratio of 22 percent for the country.

There is a huge difference between the two figures. According to the World Bank figure nearly half of India is defined as poor.

This rankles and also gets my attention a bit more than the previous figure. Perhaps it is the same for you.

So whose poor is really poor?

More importantly which figure is the one we want to believe? Which figure do we think conforms to our self image as a nation with the third-fastest growing economy, even after the global recession?

Here is a pop quiz.

How many items of clothing and footwear did you buy over the last one year?

Even if you are no Imelda Marcos, the chances are that the question has stumped you. Do you really keep track of these purchases?

Well, apparently the Planning Commission depends upon people doing so and being able to remember them when approached by the National Sample Survey Organisation for working out the poverty estimates.

This may or may not detract from the accuracy of the findings but it is nevertheless a thought.

Maybe the poor, or at least those who are classified as such, do remember for they have hardly purchased anything.

The Times of India reported last year on an affidavit filed by the Ministry for Health and Family Welfare before the Supreme Court which claims that if a person earns 455 rupees a month in an urban area then she is above the poverty line and hence not classified as poor. That’s 15.67 rupees in daily earnings.

Often, once consensus has been built on a particular fact, it is difficult to move arguments and policies that have been woven around it.

The subtleties and the arcane methodologies that may temper any statistician’s faith in his own figures never enter the popular realm.

The statistics are generated for and by the middle classes, the poor rarely get to see them or use them to enliven their lives even through an argument over a cup of tea.

It is the middle classes who manufacture and consume these statistics that should be more circumspect.

It should be noted that the World Bank estimate of poverty at 24 percent, based on the dollar-a-day poverty line as opposed to $1.25-a-day, is more in tune with the Economic Survey.

Shouldn’t we in tandem with the growing stature of our economy choose a more generous definition of poverty especially for the purpose of public discourse?

Or do we want to continue indulging and deluding ourselves with the same sort of creative accounting as the Satyam promoters did and meet our come-uppance one day?

Would someone please remind folks that it’s Friday and we all deserve a relaxing weekend? I for one will be doing my usual Saturday morning Yoga. But it’s nasty out there - the contagion has spread, and panic is now the correct adjective.

The overnight Dow crash hit Asia hard - the Sensex is down at least 9 percent and looks like it’s headed for a holiday south of 10,000, the rupee has hit an all time low and in Japan the Nikkei tumbled another 10 percent. Looks like that decision to let Lehman go bust set off the mother of all chain reactions…and Indian markets may be headed back to 2006 levels.

Here’s our resident technical analyst Phil Smith:

…As the chart shows the SENSEX has broken through some very strong and very important support points in the past couple of weeks. These are clearly showed on the chart with the support at 11,900 to 12,500 being broken effortlessly. The next major support levels for this market now stand at around 9,700 as marked and coincides with the old support levels reached back in 2006 when the market staged its dramatic correction then. Currently all the technical indicators are bearish as they have been since the middle of September

Once again, all eyes are on Washington, where on Saturday President Bush (remember him?) will meet finance ministers from the world’s wealthiest countries. The IMF will be there too with emergency funds available.

But is this the time for traditional remedies? A coordinated rate cut by central banks on Monday feels like ancient history. So what’s next? The U.S. government is talking about taking large stakes in banks to ensure liquidity (meaning free marketeer President Bush may preside over the largest nationalisation of banks in history!)

And that’s what it may take, because every other kind of faith seems to have been tossed aside - banks are simply refusing to lend. Here in India, Chidambaram is still calling for calm - insisting the fundamentals are strong.

But can you expect Indian investors to lie in Shavasan while the rest of the world takes billions out of the markets? Your views are welcome, and please, try to have a good weekend.