What's new

Is the India growth story over?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The last 10 years show an average growth rate of 8% a year.

I would think this is reasonable for the future. Not 6% like the Economist now says.

That is exactly the point, the last ten years showed an above average sustained growth rate, because of that period of "global boom" up until the Credit Crunch.

The point is that if you remove those three years from the charts, then the Indian economy no longer shows a truly "upward trajectory" towards sustained double-digit growth, but rather a long-term average of around 5-6%.

They only considered China to have truly sustained double-digit growth, after we pulled it off for several decades in a row (and many still don't believe it today). Now for India, they are going to only use three years as a benchmark?
 
.
indian growth story is not over, infact it cant be over until the end of this century. india still has 700 more consumers to join the middle class. only an idiot can say this story is over. it is definitely in problems right now though. i dont ppl on pdf have enough sense to talk on economic issues.
 
.
no its not. indian economy faces all the problems like all the economies of the world. and we gill get over it.

"Get over it" ?

Easier said than done !!!

u know the more poor u have the faster growth u can have????poverty doesnt stop growth..

Oh really ? According to your logic then the African continent should be prosperous economically , right ?

Yeah whatever floats your boat.

Just pointing out the TRUTH !!!

Just close this thread already...soon people will be chanting "Hungry India, Poor India".:shout:

Something to hide and don't want others to talk about it ?
 
.
That is exactly the point, the last ten years showed an above average sustained growth rate, because of that period of "global boom" up until the Credit Crunch.

The point is that if you remove those three years from the charts, then the Indian economy no longer shows a truly "upward trajectory" towards sustained double-digit growth, but rather a long-term average of around 5-6%.

They only considered China to have truly sustained double-digit growth, after we pulled it off for several decades in a row (and many still don't believe it). Now for India, they are going to only use three years as a benchmark?
We have to get the best out of what we have. We don't have governmental structures like yours. In ours, one person can stall billions of dollars of investment. Point is inspite of having poverty and education our prime focus, we have maintained to grow just about fine.

I had a chance to talk to person who was part of Planning Commission of India...One thing he said that primary education is our primary focus then follows higher education....India is still struggling from its backwardness and that's why you don't see constant sustainable growth every year.

Something to hide and don't want others to talk about it ?
Better come up with better arguements, facts, like UK Bangla, CD...then ranting same thing over and over again....bring something new to the discussion table.....
 
.
"Get over it" ?

Easier said than done !!!



Oh really ? According to your logic then the African continent should be prosperous economically , right ?

india has always faced problems in economic development. i dont think india is any trouble.

read my post again poorer countries have high growth rates not a prosperous economy. poorer countries have more space to grow unlike already developed economies. i guess ur tiny brain cant understand this topic.
 
. .
india has always faced problems in economic development. i dont think india is any trouble.

read my post again poorer countries have high growth rates not a prosperous economy. poorer countries have more space to grow unlike already developed economies. i guess ur tiny brain cant understand this topic.

Have you heard of the following ?

'Law of Diminishing Marginal Returns'

A law of economics stating that, as the number of new employees increases, the marginal product of an additional employee will at some point be less than the marginal product of the previous employee.
 
.
Oh really ? According to your logic then the African continent should be prosperous economically , right ?

Well Pakistani posters here are quick to point out that India has more poor than Africa, so yeah they should be prosperous than us.
 
.
india growth for next year expected about 5%

pak growth close to 5%

so india/pak next year will grow almost the same

Did I not hear that Pakistan will have to cut 10% from its GDP because of some past double counting of numbers?
 
.
"Get over it" ?

Easier said than done !!!



Oh really ? According to your logic then the African continent should be prosperous economically , right ?



Just pointing out the TRUTH !!!



Something to hide and don't want others to talk about it ?

hiafiss, let me know your comments on this article


Pakistan vs India: the widening gap – The Express Tribune

In 1947, Pakistan and India had roughly the same gross domestic product per capita, i.e. the average Pakistani was about as rich (or rather, as poor) as the average Indian. But with the end of British domination and the formation of a new country, this was an era of great ambition.
Alas, things did not work out as planned. Jinnah died a year into independence, a string of successive military defeats by India — including one which led to the loss of our Eastern half — and deep, corrosive political instability and corruption, plus an inability to even remotely deal with the deep structural problems the British never addressed (such as feudalism), have left Pakistan in a terrible fix. Our country is broken.
For the longest time, however, this hasn’t mattered becaus, as it was said to me many years ago, the most important thing is our national security. It’s true — perhaps after hundreds of years of foreign rule we have an excuse to be a little pathological about our security. But surely we should consider that no one in their right mind would want to annex Pakistan. Countries go to extreme lengths to keep our citizens out, the last thing they would seem to want to do is to invade us. Besides, what are they going to take?
Yet, our elite continues to trot out this argument time and time again, stuck in some sort of time-warp, a time when Pakistan could afford self-importance and lofty concerns about its safekeeping. The stark reality — that we have not only hit a brick wall but that we will continue to sink economically, socially, politically, and in practically every sphere of human activity — has been held off by the illusion of Pakistan’s need for protection.
I think I know what will get the attention of our elite. I accept that many people —perhaps the vast majority of our leaders — are only interested in self-enrichment. In Kenya, whenever a new government comes to power they use the refreshingly honest phrase ‘Now it’s our turn to eat’. But there surely must be some who are thinking of a Pakistan a few years from now, perhaps five, 10, or, even 20 years from now. And what will that Pakistan look like?
With some certainty one can predict that it will be a desperately poor country with a largely illiterate population. Its cities will continue to be overpopulated. A small minority will have access to drinking water and a working toilet. The country will continue to produce little art, possess little advanced technology, publish few books and perhaps will continue to have remotely flown toys police our backyards from the skies. It will have a reasonable sized military though, the ‘largest in the Muslim world’ perhaps.
This scenario isn’t going to be a wake-up call to action. But — and here’s the kicker — although Pakistan will continue to be as poor and as miserable a place as it is now, our neighbour India is becoming a dramatically different place altogether. Last year the average Indian made about $3,500 annually. The average Pakistani, $2,000. Ten years ago the disparity was reversed. Ten years from now the average Indian will be twice as rich as the average Pakistani and this gap is only going to widen in the decades and years to come.
India is racing toward economic and social advancement. Its population is becoming richer, more literate, more tech-savvy. And why is this happening? Because China’s awesome economic growth scares the living daylights out of India and this ensures that Indians are fixated by their economic growth in turn. Our former rival has put on running shoes and barely has enough time to check its rear view mirror to look at us, so focused is it on the Chinese panda.
Even though the Pakistan of the future will still be what it is now — and since our leaders can tolerate the present they will be perfectly willing to tolerate this future — what they and any proud, prickly and pathologically paranoid Pakistani might not be able to tolerate is turning up to a party to find out that your former neighbours who were once as poor and wretched as you now seem to have won the lottery. The sad fact is that unless we do something we will soon be alone in our misery and backwardness. Today’s India is not so much disinterested by Pakistan as it is embarrassed by its continued association with us.
 
. .
Here is a question, why don't people look at China's growth rate from 2004-2007 (boom years) and say that China's growth rate is going to hit 15% sustained or even 20%? Since it is clearly pointing upwards at that direction?

(And luckily they didn't, since that was obviously never going to be the case.)

That's the logic a lot of people use when they talk about India's economy, they look at the period 2004-2007 and then extrapolate based on those three years, to make the argument that India will soon reach sustained double-digit growth.

But how can you just take three boom years, and extrapolate from that? If you did that for China, you would arrive at some really ridiculous figures.
 
.
.
Lol at the Bhartis jumping up and down like fish out of it's water :lol:
 
.
Here is a question, why don't people look at China's growth rate from 2004-2007 (boom years) and say that China's growth rate is going to hit 15% sustained or even 20%? Since it is clearly pointing upwards at that direction?

(And luckily they didn't, since that was obviously never going to be the case.)

That's the logic a lot of people use when they talk about India's economy, they look at the period 2004-2007 and then extrapolate based on those three years, to make the argument that India will soon reach sustained double-digit growth.

But how can you just take three boom years, and extrapolate from that? If you did that for China, you would arrive at some really ridiculous figures.

let me ask u something else.

why is nobody here pointing out that China is in an equally big pool of $hit, despite all the indicators:

chinaimpending2.gif


for the details in chinese meltdown:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/184303-economist-bric-hits-wall-3.html#post3002905

TATA
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom