Subsidies, however, are far more dangerous than conventional critics suggest. For, the usual gripes ignore the larger economic burden of subsidies, which is to highly distort prices and costs, offer needless protection and prevent an efficient market in products/services. Were all the subsidies and benefits given through industry ostensibly to make things available to the public cheap, to be phased out, even scrapped, not only would it not lead to a price hike but, by allowing a proper market, would even bring prices down over time. Even the genuinely needy would have a better life in the long term. Take fertiliser subsidies, accounting for over Rs 8,000 crore in the 1996-97 Budget spend, going explicitly to industry towards retention price for indigenous urea (based on a 12 per cent return to producers), import of urea, and concessional sale of decontrolled phosphatic and potassic fertilisers. The last, hiked to a massive Rs 2,224 crore this year, is a highly inefficient mechanism allowing states to virtually control the price to farmers.