How India's growth will outpace China's - The Economist

[Brotherhood]

Dont worry, China is about to have Nobel Prize winner, the first in 110 years.

China could get its first Nobel laureate

China could get its first Nobel laureate

CAPTAIN, you are reported again for "Off-Topic" trolling, enjoy it while it last. You keep trolling, i will keep reporting until MOD take appropriate action.

 

[peaceful]

Dont worry, China is about to have Nobel Prize winner, the first in 110 years.

China could get its first Nobel laureate

China could get its first Nobel laureate

peace prize?

half of those prizes were awarded to the puppets of the west.

 

[peaceful]

no sane person,party or gov. does that peaceful.Stastics will show u that female literacy rate is increasing[54% was 10 yeas a go].No one is denying the fact that we still have a long way to go.
I would highly appreciate it if you are more constructive in your criticism,nevertheless i take pride in the fact that u value us enough to merit a prejudice.

increasing?

mind you, the life expectancy of your citizens is only about 65, they don't have much time waiting for such "increasing".

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

increasing?

mind you, the life expectancy of your citizens is only about 65, they don't have much time waiting for such "increasing".

Why are you laughing about that?

Wei shen me hao xiao?

 

[twocents]

@twocents,

Decoy worked well.

I hate division, but it appears sometimes its necessity.

I am afraid I do not quite understand what you mean by that. However, I do have a few observations to make in regard to Web discussions in China with respect to Sino-India and Sino-Pakistan relations. First of all, these issues are not discussed extensively by Chinese netizens as the Chinese media generally does not devote too much coverage to events on the subcontinent.
Second of all, when these issues do get discussed Chinese posters express a very high regard for Pakistan. As far as I can tell, the most cited reason is that the Pakistani people and government are trustworthy. With regard to India, Chinese posters tend to treat it in a light-hearted manner, neither overly hostile nor enthusiastic. I certainly do not sense the same kind of enthusiasm at Chinese forums as it does here. As is the case everywhere those of us who bother to voice our personal views on a particular web forum are a self-selecting sample of the population. In other words, we may or may not represent the population. My fellow Chinese members are certainly entitled to their opinions, as I am to mine or you to yous. I merely would like to caution against extrapolating what is expressed at PDF to a wider Chinese population.

 

[aristocrat]

increasing?

mind you, the life expectancy of your citizens is only about 65, they don't have much time waiting for such "increasing".
peaceful is offline Report Post Reply With Quote

yes increasing,just like our economic growth rate.
Ahhh yes evry1 here in india reaches 65 and just drops dead.
btw get your facts right,female life expentancy in india is 76-77[cia world fact book 2009 estimate]

 

[huzihaidao12]

;-)

I wouldn't take quite such a view. In fact, I don't.

Without any doubt, 100% literacy is an excellent thing. We only have to look at Kerala to see the impact on every single parameter or social index. But there is a scope for tolerance of less than perfect performance at this stage of the economy, when we are still dependent largely on agriculture, with some amount of extractive mining, an even lesser amount of manufacture, and a services sector perched on top.

A point that we have to remember is that India's is still very much a rain-fed agricultural system. Meaning that multiple crops throughout the year are not possible; instead one or two crops provide most of the output. At harvest time, there is a severe peak in the numbers of hands required. This means that in the old system, thousands of migrant labourers went to the granary districts, helped with the harvest, and went back with enough to tide over most or all of the remaining. Now, as agricultural progress increases inexorably, the peak harvest-time need for hands is becoming more and more local. In other words, there will be hands to spare as the improvement of agricultural technique continues.

A last point: this does not create a criminal lumpen-proletariat automatically. One must also bear in mind that the utilisation of people is different in different parts of India. In the south, for instance, there is a perpetual shortage of technicians and skilled workmen, with the Gulf rush showing no end and the cities within continuing to expand. The result is that workmen have been flooding in from all quarters to participate in the building boom.

There is a healthy and flourishing criminal sector, but this has less to do with the failure to achieve 100% literacy than has been suggested, more to do with the attraction of quick wealth and local prestige that is displayed blatantly every hour of the day.



This is a puzzling passage. The contents are so mistaken, so wrong.

There is a huge, worrying surplus of food. The Supreme Court has gone to the extent of censuring the government for allowing this to build up, and has asked that part of this should be given away to the poorest sections of the population.

Perhaps you are not aware that the problem in India is lack of a mechanism to distribute free food from the surpluses to the numbers who need them. There is a tremendous problem of hunger, which slows us down; you have been very accurate in that. Unfortunately, the reasons are purely organisational, not inherent; they can be fixed once someone in charge, the Prime Minister perhaps, puts his mind to it.



Since I deal with Japan, or rather, was dealing actively with Japan till about two years ago, let me also point out to you that Japan has suffered a dramatic hollowing-out, and there was then a 15% to 20% shortage of engineers and trained technicians, which had already begun to affect the economy. Already many Japanese firms have transferred some significant part of their operations to other countries, where there is no such dramatic shortage of personnel.

To complete consideration of this point, Japan is unable to import labour, the way the Germans once invited Gaestarbiter, because of cultural reasons. I would rather not dwell on the specifics of those.

Of course, that too is not incurable, but we are talking here of transient phenomena, of a transient situation which will be corrected in due course.

On the other hand, your prediction of China's economy moving towards the 'high-end', mainly in the direction of technological value addition, seems to be precise and accurate. This is inevitable; once the low-hanging fruit are gathered, China's economy will no doubt cope with her increasing onset of demographic stability by moving up-market. The day will come when China imports basic manufactured goods from other economies, perhaps India, typically labelled Chinese brand names, such as Lenovo or Huawei.

This, incidentally, in case CardSharp is listening somewhere, is also the reason why, in spite of China so very probably proving to be the dominant force in the world from 2050 onwards, if not earlier (my private guess is as early as 2025), there is likely to be interdependence, not counter-dependence, between your country and other large economies nearby. The China that we see today may actually represent the grand climax, and this may be the widest, most glorious extent it will reach in history.

However, it is unlikely to do so at the cost of other economies.

One last point, which I am unable to deal with: what exactly is a rational democracy? Is there a corresponding irrational democracy? Can we apply the adjective 'rational' in this context?

Regards,

1, low literacy rates have a greater impact, in addition to some of the work, although no obvious manifestations, but it has an important role in the progress of the whole society, the state is a social organization, personal interaction is fundamental. Literacy rate represents the population quality, which is the implicit power the country forward. I do not have specific data to assess, but you underestimated his significance.

2, India's agriculture has many problems.

Continued high population growth, agricultural production through the "green revolution" have a big development, but the last decade has stalled.

Too dependent on climate, but there is not enough agricultural water conditions.

Have a good policy of agricultural subsidies, but there is no effective implementation. Big landlords, bureaucrats, local governments have a lot of interest, however, the comments of farmers really need, but did not get. Not only in the areas that need to subsidize food, and even in some affluent areas of food, those officials, landowners, local governments have the means to profit. The actual food subsidy policy has been distorted. Not without, but there is no way to do it.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Dear JS,

First, let me thank you for 'saving my face'; I am happy that with your reply, you have shown that you have a point to make and are making it logically and reasonably. We may disagree, but it is not an abusive and personal disagreement, which is after all the most that one can hope for.

What is irrational democracy?

Here are two stories excerpted from WSJ to serve as an example. The complete story is Indian Road Hits Unexpected Bump - WSJ.com

Good point.

I happen to disagree.

Vedanta was completely in the wrong. It had no permission to build there, it violated numerous regulations and laws, and it depended on the importance of the project to defend its indefensible position as breaker of laws.

It is clear that the needs of development and the needs of preserving the environment and preservation of ethnic minorities are contradictory. No resolution is possible. The only possibility which is sane and constructive is to proceed step at a time, and come to an administrative decision which will optimise (not maximise) the utility of the decision for the country and its citizens.

Here the Ministry - and the Minister - for the Environment had the role of a brake on runaway development. Ignoring its lawful position and ignoring the laws of the land will lead to chaos, because a liberal democracy runs on the application of the rule of law. Once this is removed, there is no further justification for the state. This is completely alien to the system and the philosophy of an erstwhile Communist regime governed by Marxian philosophy (ignoring the radical changes of the last thirty years).

There is naturally a difference in perspective in your view and in the Indian government's, as well as in the perspective of the affected tribe.

The views of the Wall Street Journal are so far slanted in favour of the earth-wrecking activities of unfettered big business that it is difficult to take it seriously any longer. We already know its anti-environmental anti-green position, and we know that this is a position which is totally oriented to the supremacy of the existing economic hierarchy, and totally opposed to rising economies.

The story tells vividly how an irrational or rambunctious democracy looks like and what result it will yield: a project tremendously important to the country of India was blocked by a 8000-person tribe.

And a damn good thing too. Allow me at a later date or on some other occasion to address the distortion of the left movement in India due to the corrupting influence of big business.

And the article continues...

Please be sure that in writing what I do, there is no support for the people who rioted and burned down government buildings, or private property, or caused physical harm to people.

However, here too, we are talking about a predatory government that had appropriated huge tracts of land with little or no compensation earlier for projects of no economic value. These appropriations were at artificially low prices, and were used for developments at great value-added prices, which yielded a rich dividend for those able to reach them. That hint should be enough.

In this connection, you need to also understand the role of the protected electorate in the development of scheduled castes and tribes, and the implications of the growth of the power of those sections. The discussion could be massive. I am prepared however to share all the relevant facts with you whenever - and wherever - you find it convenient (subject, at all times to my increasingly brief access to the Internet).

In both cases, the elected leaders failed to educate the constituents with broader interest of their nation in their mind, to mediate among interest groups to reach a compromise. Instead, in the first case the ministry immediately stopped Vedanta, and Vedanta “punished” the local people in return. In the second case, “dozens of politicians from other political parties have shown up in Jikarpur to personally pledge support to the farmers' cause”, perhaps not really for the farmer’s interest but for their own political interest. Both ended up in lose-lose results.

As you can see for yourself, Vedanta's 'punishment' was merely an ill-disguised attempt to put pressure on the concerned ministry to let it have its way. That is no reason to give in. For that matter, that is no reason to give in to the demands of those rioting. Law and order has to be maintained. The loss lies in there, not in the loss of a project that never was.

IMHO, if it is indeed in the interest of the nation, government activities similar to “Condemnation via eminent domain” Eminent domain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia should be adopted legally and forcefully.

Perhaps, this being an obscure matter in an obscure province of an obscure land, you may not have had an opportunity to scrutinise the details.

The land was acquired under eminent domain. You will have noted from the same article that you cited that there is scope for dispute regarding just compensation. You will note from the article in WSJ that the compensation was double closer to the city, half of that in the other direction, but close to another city. This is what set off the protests, which again, as a breach of law, I deplore.

However, there are earlier precedents, from the state of West Bengal, where the Communist government sought to take over fertile agricultural land for the flagship Tata Nano project, and failed utterly. At that time, the proposition was made, and is becoming increasingly influential, though not yet reflected in statute, that eminent domain should be exercised for public purposes for administration by public bodies alone, and that permissions given to the private sector should be actualised by the private sector by dealing direct with the owners of property, rather than use government fiat to do so. It has been found that the owners of property gain many times through this procedure, in those cases that the new philosophy has been applied.

India functions under the rule of law, in this case, Common Law, as in the case of all those countries which the Wiki article cites, all followers of Common Law. Again, your point is correct in that the elected government did not seek accommodation or understanding. This is due to specific social and ethnic reasons. I could dwell on that at length if you have the patience for it, but will ensure that you are interested before proceeding further.

In short, these are mistaken examples, in that they represent a legitimate difference of views between what constitutes the public good and what does not. You are aware of course that in the two cases you have mentioned, under our federal system, the government at the centre, Government of India, was politically different from the government in Orissa, the Vedanta case, or the government in Uttar Pradesh, the Jaypee case. It is not without significance that both these companies are also known as among the greatest environmental wreckers in the country.

Thank you for your excellent arguments. I await your response to continue.

 

[Joe Shearer]

1, low literacy rates have a greater impact, in addition to some of the work, although no obvious manifestations, but it has an important role in the progress of the whole society, the state is a social organization, personal interaction is fundamental. Literacy rate represents the population quality, which is the implicit power the country forward. I do not have specific data to assess, but you underestimated his significance.

2, India's agriculture has many problems.

Continued high population growth, agricultural production through the "green revolution" have a big development, but the last decade has stalled.

Too dependent on climate, but there is not enough agricultural water conditions.

Have a good policy of agricultural subsidies, but there is no effective implementation. Big landlords, bureaucrats, local governments have a lot of interest, however, the comments of farmers really need, but did not get. Not only in the areas that need to subsidize food, and even in some affluent areas of food, those officials, landowners, local governments have the means to profit. The actual food subsidy policy has been distorted. Not without, but there is no way to do it.

Very interesting. Let us see in detail.

I am about to be kicked off the Internet, and will only be able to respond about two hours later.

Regards,

 

[KS]

In my honest opinion and no offence intend towards the very thoughtful and intelligent Indian members here. India has under-performed with respect to its potential.

There are so many inefficiency in the system that when India gets ride of them, they would have sky rocketing growth and the same problems that China had in the late 90's.An Economy growing too fast

I have to agree with the underlined part.

There is simply too much drag on our growth in the form of corrupt politicians and red-tape govt babus.

One negative aspect of parliamentary democracy among many positive points.

Is this a handiwork of indian lobby in CPC? Hope they get exposed before inflicting much damage to China's national security.

Lmao.

@Chinese dragon,Card Sharp,Siegecrossbow - you guys remind me of another Chinese member we had months ago - lhuang.

 

[somebozo]

well who exactly gives Sh1t to nobel and his peace prize??? it can be awarded even to dumbos like sharon and obama!

CHina should invade another country if it really wants to win a nobel prize..japan sounds like a good target here..how about adding some terroist to the mix along with anti-chinese teachings "propoganda" to give invasion some legitimate cover?

 

[!!craft!!]

well who exactly gives Sh1t to nobel and his peace prize??? it can be awarded even to dumbos like sharon and obama!

CHina should invade another country if it really wants to win a nobel prize..japan sounds like a good target here..how about adding some terroist to the mix along with anti-chinese teachings "propoganda" to give invasion some legitimate cover?

 

[Joe Shearer]

In my honest opinion and no offence intend towards the very thoughtful and intelligent Indian members here. India has under-performed with respect to its potential.

There are so many inefficiency in the system that when India gets ride of them, they would have sky rocketing growth and the same problems that China had in the late 90's.An Economy growing too fast

I have to agree with the underlined part.

There is simply too much drag on our growth in the form of corrupt politicians and red-tape govt babus.

One negative aspect of parliamentary democracy among many positive points.

I beg to disagree with friend CardSharp and with you, in part.


India has certainly underperformed, and the reasons for that have been analysed to death. In short, it was due to an autarkic economic system, controlled and managed centrally through licenses and permits. With the opening up of the economy, first by Manmohan Singh when he was the Finance Minister for Narasimha Rao, and then by a succession of differently-motivated and differently-skilled Finance Ministers, largely from the Congress, ironically a party that I hate, has removed some major impediments. About 35% to 40% of the work is done.

But on the other hand, this kept us out of the clutches of IMF conditionality packages, and stopped us from becoming a South American client state of the Dumbarton Oaks institutions. Even today, our firm and (by and large) independent-minded central bank does a very good job of managing the economy. It is not responsible for inflationary pressures due to a chronic current deficit and the government's resort to printing more money.

I would say that this underperformance brought benefits along with the costs.

It stopped the creation of slave towns in the form of free trade zones. The laws of the land apply everywhere, even in those zones. This is particularly true of the labour laws, which, while they need overhaul and drastic reform, need not - should not lose their teeth.

It stopped the creation of monster projects oriented to 'development' of a kind, of the Three Gorges kind. Our own example is the Narmada project, of course.

It stopped the flood of investment in idiotic and irrelevant areas such as retail, where frankly we really, really don't need one more mall, we really don't need to introduce Walmart to the country.

I could go on but some very healthy filtering has happened, there is a good mix of indigenous and overseas talent and technology, and I feel comforted and safe that we never had a Greenspan clone here.

If, when we open up the economy further, and de-regulate it further, we do not find painfree jobs, we really haven't done much, have we? I would certainly like China's growth, but without the savage measures that sometimes made that growth possible. In a democracy, such methods are not possible, and should not even be discussed.

With regard to the remark of Kartic Sri, corrupt politicians and red-tape govt babus are emphatically not a concomitant of parliamentary democracy as such.

Regards,

 

[challenger]

I am afraid I do not quite understand what you mean by that. However, I do have a few observations to make in regard to Web discussions in China with respect to Sino-India and Sino-Pakistan relations. First of all, these issues are not discussed extensively by Chinese netizens as the Chinese media generally does not devote too much coverage to events on the subcontinent.
Second of all, when these issues do get discussed Chinese posters express a very high regard for Pakistan. As far as I can tell, the most cited reason is that the Pakistani people and government are trustworthy. With regard to India, Chinese posters tend to treat it in a light-hearted manner, neither overly hostile nor enthusiastic. I certainly do not sense the same kind of enthusiasm at Chinese forums as it does here. As is the case everywhere those of us who bother to voice our personal views on a particular web forum are a self-selecting sample of the population. In other words, we may or may not represent the population. My fellow Chinese members are certainly entitled to their opinions, as I am to mine or you to yous. I merely would like to caution against extrapolating what is expressed at PDF to a wider Chinese population.

First of all, I am not here to promote democracy and demonize CPC policies.

But you need to listen to me. Let me be very practical.

This forum is top to bottom political. I am visiting this forum because I am interested in politics. I am paying internet charges for that from my own pocket. Neither the Chinese govt nor any Chinese member nor the management of this forum is paying the charges on my behalf. I don't expect that too.

While it is true and no body is apolitical, it is also true that there are certain websites which emphasize little on political affairs. This forum is different from QQ or Yahoo chat or MSN chat in that respect. When you join the forum and start giving opinions, its expected before-handed that you will make political statements, be it correct or incorrect. Right?

Even if a Chinese member agrees with a Pakistani member in some issues, we assume that the agreement is political. Thats what is expected in a defence forum. Defense itself is also a political matter, its not only about technology.

I also visit Mixi, whenever I interact with a Japanese, I try to convince him that China is not Japan's enemy, neither is Japan. My effort is political. Some get angry, some agree and some show indifference. I know, I can't make everyone agree with me. But still I try.

Now, you said: "Chinese media generally does not devote too much coverage to events on the subcontinent."

Suppose you have a residence somewhere. You have your wife, kids, I mean a family in which you are the decision maker or head. Your neighbor is hostile to you, you know that. Will it be right to keep your family unaware of the hostility that you neighbor possess towards you and your family, just because you are the one who can decide actions?

Just close your eyes for a while, take a deep breath and think over it.

Is it right to keep the masses in darkness? Is it right to keep the people unaware of the developments in the neighborhood? Is it right to keep the nation unaware of some country which has racist hostility towards the nation?

Again, I am not promoting democracy. Just if you believe in ethics, you answer me. Will not you give your house wife the right to criticize you? Will you not give your kids the right to assert their aspirations? Or do you think that your wife and kids have no say in your everyday actions? Do you think they must accept and obey whatever you decide for them?

China is a nation. The nation has a govt. The govt has commitment to the nation, the nation has the right to observe whether the govt is fulfilling the commitment to it. This is how it runs. Anyone who criticizes any govt move is not necessarily anti China. Whether the substance of his criticism is in the interests of the nation or not is what that matters.

Is not it possible that a Chinese person who shouts, "I hate communism", standing right in the Tienanmen square can also shout, "But I am ready to die for China"? Does his hatred towards communism make him less patriotic or unpatriotic or un-Chinese?

Or is patriotism= communism in China?

What is the official title of China? Is it People's Republic of China or Communist Republic of China? What is the official title of the army? Is it People's Liberation Army or Communist Liberation Army?

Chinese society is not communist, its socialist. CPC is there and has contributed a lot to China and will continue to do so. No doubt about that. But CPC must be able to accept criticism from the nation, because it is the CPC which is supposed to serve the nation, it is not the nation that should serve the CPC. Leaders and bureaucrats are public servants, they get salaries because they serve the public.

At the same time, the leadership must have a vision, which I believe the CPC has. Hope my belief does not turn to be false.

 

[SEAL]

If China start trade from Gawadar port it will increase Chinese growth rate by 2.5% and annually saving of $20 Billion and Pakistan can also make $4-5 Billion in terms of transit fee.
$$