India should not copy China's model

[Kloitra]

I am in Waterloo University but my home is in Mississauga.

Lucky you, atleast you would understand the announcements in public transports!

It is not so bad atleast in Montreal. Too many English speakers, and even locals get the English.

Depends on university and the medium of the student which he/she studied. If you had your education in Hindi then it may become problematic in future so most of the higher education is done in English.

I had English medium while few friends of mine who had studied in Hindi medium pre-graduate level has some difficulty at first. But its not that difficult to overcome this problem, at least from what I saw.

This is what I dislike. Every country emphasize on their own language. Even for scientific research. While we have no opportunities for that.

Though I now it is more realistic. We understand other parts of the world better, and have better collaboration etc with them. Also, English can act as a common language throughout the country, which Hindi cannot.

 

[Kamal_Jamal]

China’s model has taken hundreds of millions out of poverty, created an economic powerhouse, increased the quality of living, reinstalled Chinese pride, created a space program which will be number 1 in the future, creating military powerhouse, respect for Chinese has increased greatly, future R&D hub and so many other aspects.

India should be happy if it can even achieve 10% of what China has with its model

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

India should come up with her own model.

Unlike China India has vast arable land, need increased attention to agrarian sector.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Private capital should be allowed to enter all sectors on a fair basis.

We have totally underdeveloped financial markets, major financial reform is needed.

We need to allow local governments to issue municipal bonds to raise revenue so that they don't steal land from people and sell them to raise revenue to carry out infrastructure projects, welfare programs, etc.

We need more market forces to allocate resources efficiently, not some guy in the government thinking he knows exactly what the economy needs.
The market will figure that out.

Without major reforms soon, our economy is in big trouble. Our economy is very big now and it's more complex, the government training wheels should be removed and let the economy run on its own wheels.

that's ridiculously wrong. private capital flows to where the return is greatest. that's good. except its not. the return is greatest on copying, polluting industries like shoes and textiles. you know why African countries can't develop? Because they let the capital go where ever it wants, and then there's no companies that are willing to take on the risk of real research and development. What do you mean they're producing jack? OK, state grid is losing 0.6% per year. But it doesn't have to. It produces free electricity to 600,000 poor people and has one of the lowest loss rates in the world. It can be profitable overnight. Pull the plug on the poor. But is that good?

See, the private capital model works great in sectors with low startup costs and low risks like internet. It does not work for sectors with extremely high RD barriers and extremely high risks. How the hell can a young company compete in say... petrochemicals with established companies that have been at it for 100 years? You can't. Its simply not possible.

Also private capital tends to fragment markets instead of vertically integrate them. That's bad because it'll mean relying on outside suppliers.

Universities can only do so much. Companies MUST sponsor RD. But why would they if you don't own them? You can't tell private companies what to do. You have to offer subsidies and incentives... and the total cost is just going to be higher, since you must offer subsidies and incentives to *ALL* participating companies, but only one product will be used. its *CHEAPER* to simply own the company outright and direct the company to do research.

See, the things we are proud of like high speed rail, satellite systems, etc? None of those would exist in your system. Basically, everything we are proud of we owe to government (including Huawei. They got their start with Datang spinoffs). You know the toxic food, toxic milk, toothpaste poison, etc? The things that we are deeply ashamed of? ALL PRIVATE CORPORATION MADE. I'm totally unimpressed by things most private companies, especially in core industrial areas, have come up with.

 

[sweetgrape]

The way india choose is indian problem, all depend on you!
every model need develop, even china model, we also face big problem, it is not model problem, it is your problem, just choose the one match with your real situation. that's all!
And, I don't know, why OP seems believe the article completely, china don't believe any single article completely, even it is writen by chinese.
And did indian think that why after 60 years from independence, you are far behind china? you despise seconde industry, think china do the wrong thing, could you tell me why argriculture is first industry, then second, then service industry is the third?
India is a capitalist country, but the state led company have special status in your country, otherwise in china, very funny thing.
When you deny china model, tell me what will you choose to perform in your country? insist on your model, or combine them all. you are to big, don't just believe a small country like australia, and your sistuation are so different with his, I never think they really know your situation, because they live in their country, they can't feel it, that't all!

 

[Anonymous user]

You are greatly underplaying the role of govt. Infact, it is probably the single most influential factor affecting the economy. .

I am not downplaying the fact governments are important in influencing industries, but rather I am pointing out that it is untrue that Chinese economies can only flourish with government support which is what some posters appear to be saying. Chinese companies in ASEAN didn’t just crop up from nowhere and dominate entire industries. And these companies were started by the original forefathers that came from China.

Your example of terracotta warriors: west, be it Germany, US or whatever country had no such mass manufacturing in the past. Yet they rapidly industrialized. Now their population and economy doesnt support cheap manufacturing, that is all.
Humans are adaptable. Their abilities are more affected by contemporary needs/conditions, than any historical experience. If the need be, they would learn to do things they haven`t in the past. The pharaohs wanted big tombs, so Egyptians built them. It doesnt reflect on present constructional/architectural prudence of Egypt. No more do they involve themselves in building big, bulky buildings. .

Take it easy and also take a step back, ultimately all cultures have something from historical times that mould them to what they are today. For example India is known to be free spirited and in tune with their imaginative side, hence the Taj Mahal was created as a token of love. Chinese societies on the other hand are more pragmatic and create things with a intent hence the Great Wall of China. If you read up on ancient weapons in China mass manufacturing was already in use before the Europeans even mastered proper metallurgy, no country has managed to master mass manufacture of a scale that China has today and there is a reason for that. Also that’s why counterfeits come up so easy because its second nature to them. (If you are keen on knowing more there is a good book called Gunpowder by Clive Ponting which details ancient mass manufacture of weapons in China, I bought at a bookstore in India of all places)

About govt policies, no matter how hard-worker some is, without proper environment or under adverse conditions, their effort can be brought to a naught. Chinese govt helps setting up industries. Try opening even a small plant in India, you will find how much you have to struggle against the authorities for even basics like an electric connection.
Compare the number and size of SEZ in India and China. Compare the facilities provided. Compare the hindrance or help respective govt provides.

Chinese govt's greatest or rather most easily visible help - controlling the currency. Think what will happen if dollar falls vs yuan, it would happen without govt control. But apparently you take all the help govt provides for granted. May be because you are unaware of countries where it doesn't.

Since ancient times East Asian societies have authoritarian governments from Emperors and dynasties that dictate almost all factors of daily life, this is true for example Korea, China, Japan etc East Asians are used to having governments control most facets of their life, yes we have restricted freedom but we have predictability and stability which is innate in our culture. (I.e Singapore)

We don’t take our government help for granted but rather in an East Asian society it is expected that they perform and perform well. And that is why most people are unaware that the CPC is actually afraid of the people toppling them if they were not to perform.

Another example about culture differences is an extract below
In a press statement yesterday, Mr Lee Kuan Yew – who is one of the Republic’s founding fathers – recounted how his team set out to eradicate corruption in Singapore.

He said: “We strengthened the laws against corruption, gave CPIB officers more powers of interrogation and to seize documents. We introduced a fundamental change in the law on burden of proof that if a man possesses more assets than his known income, he is presumed to be corrupt and he must account for his assets beyond what he earns.”

He added: “We have succeeded in keeping Singapore clean and corruption free. This requires strong political will, constant vigilance and relentless efforts by CPIB to follow up every complaint and every clue of wrong doing.”

Would you say what Mr Lee has done in Singapore will work in your societies given the differences in our cultures? Personally I don't think so, hence I don't go around talking up Singapore's success because every country has their own challenges.

India needs to find another way to run her governance; her people are more free spirited as compared to East Asian people which for better or worse is not compatible with our form of governance.

 

[Nan Yang]

Chinese model can't be used for India. Only thing we can do is inculcate few aspects of Chinese model into our existing system and optimize it according to our way of governance, policy making and execution of plan.

The adaptation and selective induction in existing plan which essentially means an evolutionary economic model is what India needs according to its present goals and future aims. India is not in state of changing entire system or gradually shift to Chinese model entirely. The economic and social conditions are way different in both the countries and this makes the major difference and reason against using Chinese model.

They are blaming India's attempt at emulation of Chinese model. Chinese model itself is successful so no point in commenting on it. If it was not good, India would not have tried to copy it. The blame is on India's attempt and not on Chinese policy.

Washington consensus is a one system fit all.

Beijing consensus is each country to find its own way based on its own culture, history and local characteristics.

 

[eddieInUK]

If India can find another one, thats gonna be a good news for other developing countries.

 

[Speeder 2]

IN 2006, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh heaped considerable praise on the so-called Beijing Consensus approach to economic development, arguing India could learn much from China in terms of reinventing, rebuilding and rediscovering itself.

With the Chinese economy now stumbling, Julia Gillard is desperately hoping India can take up some of the slack, declaring that her goal is to double bilateral trade between Australia and India to $40 billion by 2015. For that to occur, India needs to reject the Chinese approach and look instead to its vibrant private sector to lead the country into the future.

Like China, India has an economy that is too big to ignore. With two-thirds of the population still in rural areas, it has a faster rate of urbanisation than China at 2.5 per cent a year. With a population that is set to exceed China's within the next two decades, and an age demographic that means it will remain a young country well into the middle of this century, it has an economy that has been expanding at about 7 per cent a year since the early 1990s.

This means a rapidly growing India will need even more of our coal. It will need huge quantities of food for its growing population. As a consumption-driven economy with a more sophisticated services sector than China, English-speaking India should welcome Australian services expertise. And to top it off, it is surrounded by weak or small states, meaning India will need to look further afield for meaningful economic partners during the next few decades.

In theory, this all bodes well for an advanced, resource-rich and agriculturally strong economy such as Australia. But there is no such thing as inevitability when it comes to continued economic growth and reform. A telling signal of how a country is really faring is what private entrepreneurs are doing with their capital. In the latest figures available (2010-11), outward investment from India more than doubled, while inward investment plunged. If India is well on its way to becoming an Asian economic superpower, the $US20 billion net outflow from an economy that desperately needs investment does not make sense.

A closer reading of why Indian and foreign entrepreneurs are investing abroad rather than in Asia's second fastest growing economy is troubling. India is in a weaker structural position now than it was several years ago. An entrenched socialism, combined with widespread admiration for the Chinese approach, has meant the re-emergence of Indian economic statism, the conviction that the government needs to take the lead in steering economic development into the future.

Take the present Indian five-year plan (2007-12). In line with the Chinese approach and as Derek Scissors from the Heritage Foundation puts it, "state-led infrastructure is the centrepiece of economic policy and growth strategy". Of the $US500 billion spent on infrastructure development across this period, only 17 per cent came from the private sector and almost all of that came from telecommunications firms.

For the next five year plan (2012-17), the government has set the target of $US1 trillion in infrastructure spending, with half to come from the private sector. No one in the Indian private sector believes this is an achievable goal.

Why are domestic and international private investors so reluctant to commit? One problem is that regulatory conditions and tendering processes are biased against private firms, while cheap loans generally are offered only to state-owned firms. In proposed public-private partnerships, the government's attitude is skewed towards socialising profits and privatising losses. Partly from a legacy emphasising the co-operative and collective ownership and exploitation of land, little progress has been made on an effective land title registration system. This means it is unclear who owns various pieces of land and investors cannot be sure that their infrastructure projects will be granted legal sanction.

Moreover, because the state still dominates - or else limits foreign firms from participating in key industries such as banking, insurance, agriculture, mining and minerals, energy, retail and transport - extremely inefficient and protected state-owned firms allocate and receive far too much capital while delivering far too few products and services at too great a cost. The impact on the agricultural sector is particularly troubling since some indicators suggest productivity in this sector has declined, a worrying trend for a country with a large and growing population to feed.

This means that the economic model, like China's, grows increasingly addicted to throwing more and more money at poorly performing state-owned firms to guarantee growth.

One consequence of heavy reliance on cheap money (in addition to subsidies, tax breaks and protective tariffs) offered to undeserving firms to drive growth is a government debt-to-gross domestic product ratio of 50 per cent - large for a developing country with a small tax base, and one that spends little on welfare - meaning interest payments absorb more than one-fifth of the annual budget. Another is that the money supply is growing three times faster than GDP, contributing significantly to 7 per cent to 8 per cent annual inflation in the past few years. As in China, the state-led mobilisation of resources is preferred over an emphasis on efficiency and productivity.

India's problem is not its democratic past but its socialist legacy. Across the past two decades, India can boast the rise of world-class private sector firms in areas such as telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, vertically integrated manufacturing and bio-technology, which occurred despite government policy.

The most vibrant economic sectors are dominated by domestic private firms that can compete with the best in the world on equal terms. If Australia is hoping an Indian economic miracle can match or surpass the Chinese one, then New Delhi needs to move on from its history and look beyond Beijing for inspiration.

John Lee is Michael Hintze fellow and adjunct associate professor at the Centre for International Security Studies, University of Sydney, and a non-resident senior scholar at the Hudson Institute, Washington, DC.

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

why put this piece here instead of the thread under The Stupid and the Funny allover the world? Literally I rofl for about 5 mins after reading it! HA HA HA…

just take a few examples here:

Like China, India has an economy that is too big to ignore.

No no, it’s unlike China. Indian nominal GDP is even less than Spain with a tiny population. The only thing of India is too big to ignore is its unfettered population, most of them young but functionally illiterate and growing explosively...

… it has an economy that has been expanding at about 7 per cent a year since the early 1990s…

Yeah, either using creative maths or straight out of online India Myth Dictionary along with "45% of NASA scientists are Indians", etc…

…because if the claim were true, India’s nominal GDP would have been somewhere close to that of Germany by now.

For that to occur, India needs to reject the Chinese approach…”India should not copy China’s model”

“reject”? Wait a sec here . it’s hilarious as if India got a “choice” here. But really?

The real question should be CAN India copy China’s model if it chooses so?

In the entire human modern history only 2 other countries did what China has done: the UK in the 19th century, and the US in the 20th, all being the “world factory”. Due to the population size limitation, even Germany and Japan couldn’t do it at their heights.

You need the combi of

1) average > = 100 IQ massive population who are literate, fast learners, hardworking with high discipline and ready to move up along the value chain constantly
2) cheap and vast natural resources
3) massive and modern (comparablely at a time) nation-wide infrastructure, and
4) direct and ample access to some of the best, and certainly the most widespread, technologies, knowhow and practices in almost ALL industries,

to pull that out.

Which one India has?


Well, let alone copying a Mig-21, India can not copy making a workload of T-sheets right and on time, copy China?

For the next five year plan (2012-17), the government has set the target of $US1 trillion in infrastructure spending, with half to come from the private sector…. No one in the Indian private sector believes this is an achievable goal.

So, the point is ? isn’t it a bullsh!t?

Just like as if I say that “oke, I planned this morning to spend $US 2 billion on my shoes in the next 3 years”….yeah right.

India's problem is not its democratic past but its socialist legacy. Across the past two decades, India can boast the rise of world-class private sector firms in areas such as telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, vertically integrated manufacturing and bio-technology, which occurred despite government policy.

WTF?

Indian world-class private sector on telecommunications?

I thought Indian telecallcentre was the crown jewel of world IT industry…since when it belongs to telecommunications ?

India telcos would have been at 2G at the moment if not for Huawei and TCL. world-class my #$%^@.

Then we have

pharmaceuticals

WTF?

If Indian pharmaceuticals were anywhere close to world class, then I must have been the most celebrated writer in the world, ever, because with 10 mins I can produce all the Nobel literature Prize papers myself only using a printer.

Now here comes a rare gem:

vertically integrated manufacturing and bio-technology,

Oh my, what dafuck is that??

anything related to the river Ganges I hope?

The guy who wrote this goes nuts!

if so, then Nigeria must have the world-class vertically, horizontally and diametrically integrated space-age biometric-tech and production facilities! (AKA nationwide free-range wild chicken hunting, slaughtering and air-dry industry)

The most vibrant economic sectors are dominated by domestic private firms that can compete with the best in the world on equal terms…

…………… it lost me here, again, I'll just leave it to the monkey God…

 

[IndoCarib]

why put this piece here instead of the thread under The Stupid and the Funny allover the world? Literally I rofl for about 5 mins after reading it! HA HA HA…

just take a few examples here:



No no, it’s unlike China. Indian nominal GDP is even less than Spain with a tiny population. The only thing of India is too big to ignore is its unfettered population, most of them young but functionally illiterate and growing explosively...



Yeah, either using creative maths or straight out of online India Myth Dictionary along with "45% of NASA scientists are Indians", etc…

…because if the claim were true, India’s nominal GDP would have been somewhere close to that of Germany by now.



“reject”? Wait a sec here . it’s hilarious as if India got a “choice” here. But really?

The real question should be CAN India copy China’s model if it chooses so?

In the entire human modern history only 2 other countries did what China has done: the UK in the 19th century, and the US in the 20th, all being the “world factory”. Due to the population size limitation, even Germany and Japan couldn’t do it at their heights.

You need the combi of

1) average > = 100 IQ massive population who are literate, fast learners, hardworking with high discipline and ready to move up along the value chain constantly
2) cheap and vast natural resources
3) massive and modern (comparablely at a time) nation-wide infrastructure, and
4) direct and ample access to some of the best, and certainly the most widespread, technologies, knowhow and practices in almost ALL industries,

to pull that out.

Which one India has?


Well, let alone copying a Mig-21, India can not copy making a workload of T-sheets right and on time, copy China?



So, the point is ? isn’t it a bullsh!t?

Just like as if I say that “oke, I planned this morning to spend $US 2 billion on my shoes in the next 3 years”….yeah right.




WTF?

Indian world-class private sector on telecommunications?

I thought Indian telecallcentre was the crown jewel of world IT industry…since when it belongs to telecommunications ?

India telcos would have been at 2G at the moment if not for Huawei and TCL. world-class my #$%^@.

Then we have



WTF?

If Indian pharmaceuticals were anywhere close to world class, then I must have been the most celebrated writer in the world, ever, because with 10 mins I can produce all the Nobel literature Prize papers myself only using a printer.

Now here comes a rare gem:



Oh my, what dafuck is that??

anything related to the river Ganges I hope?

The guy who wrote this goes nuts!

if so, then Nigeria must have the world-class vertically, horizontally and diametrically integrated space-age biometric-tech and production facilities! (AKA nationwide free-range wild chicken hunting, slaughtering and air-dry industry)




…………… it lost me here, again, I'll just leave it to the monkey God…

We all knew you are A MENTAL CASE