Who are World's Top 10 Largest Creditor Nations?

[Shotgunner51]

It estimated that while the government budget deficit in 2016 was "moderate" at around three percent of gross domestic product (GDP), the debt burden would rise toward 40 percent of GDP by 2018 and 45 percent by the end of the decade.

Supplement:

Above are Moody's forecast on China's public debt, even if true, are still way below many other nations these days, and way below 60% warning limit used by many institutions like EU.

Anyway let's check reality, national debt means debt owed by central government (or federal government in some nations e.g. US), at end of 2016 China national debt-to-GDP ratio is only 16.135%, far below most nations, the same measure in US has soared over 100%, so Moody's downgrades China sovereign rating? Moreover, China national debt is almost owned entirely by Chinese investors, only 1% is owned by foreign creditors, not to mention China is a net creditor nation aka owning far more external assets than owing external liabilities.

Sources:

• China central government debt (national debt; 国债) at end 2016, RMB 12,006.675 billion. In which RMB 11,881.124 billion held by domestic creditors, RMB 125.551 billion held by foreign creditors.
• GDP for the year 2016, RMB 74,412.7 billion
• http://yss.mof.gov.cn/2017zyys/201703/t20170324_2565727.html

 

[randomradio]

These are Moody's forecast on China's public debt, even if true, these are way below other nations, or 60% warning limit used by many institutions like EU.

Anyway let's check reality, national debt means debt owed by central government (or federal government in some nations e.g. US), at end of 2016 China national debt-to-GDP ratio is only 16.135%, far below most nations, the same measure for US has soared over 100%, so Moody's downgrades China sovereign rating? Moreover, national debt is almost owned entirely by Chinese creditors, only 1% is owned by foreign creditors.

Sources:

• China central government debt (national debt; 国债) at end 2016, RMB 12,006.675 billion. In which RMB 11,881.124 billion held by domestic creditors, RMB 125.551 billion held by foreign creditors.
• GDP for the year 2016, RMB 74,412.7 billion
  
• http://www.cfen.com.cn/sjpd/czzx/201703/t20170331_2572738.html

Moody's is particular about corporate debt, not national debt. Their rationale is even if debt is held by the corporate sector, they are still mostly SoE and will have to be saved by the government through bailout packages which the govt will have to finance.

Moody's is threatening another downgrade if the SoE debt situation is not remedied.
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...owngrade-if-debt-bubble-not-fixed-says-moodys

So I think the expectation is some people in the west want to see some correction happening in China.

 

[Shotgunner51]

Moody's is particular about corporate debt, not national debt. Their rationale is even if debt is held by the corporate sector, they are still mostly SoE and will have to be saved by the government through bailout packages which the govt will have to finance.

Yes, the public sector (aka government) of China is very well managed fiscally, Moody's being from US would be shameless to attack this (but seems they did made some wild forecast about 2018 or 2020, see that?). Now let's look at the private sector. Domestic Credit To Private Sector vs GDP at end 2015, China 152.6%, US 189%. So if China is a problem, is US an even bigger problem?
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/FS.AST.PRVT.GD.ZS?year_high_desc=true

Now let's dissect the private sector. It is corporate-heavy in China (Chinese household shuns borrowing, it's a cultural factor), while in US is household-heavy. If Moody's sees corporate a problem in China, do they see household debt a far more widespread problem in US? Especially when US has very low Gross Domestic Savings Rate (in fact China is among world's highest in savings)? Remember source of subprime crisis in 2008, and widespread foreclosure? Please read the link below "May 17, 2:48 PM EDT; US household debts reach record high, topping pre-recession peak, New York Fed says; By CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER, AP Economics Writer"
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDS.TOTL.ZS?year_high_desc=true
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HOUSEHOLD_DEBT?SITE=OKPON&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

So I think the expectation is some people in the west want to see some correction happening in China.

China used to have expectation to see some correction in US fiscal discipline. Moreover, US did vow to it, but well now everyone know, they lied. Anyway I don't see how a spending-driven debtor lecturing a production-savings-oriented creditor, let alone "rating", do you?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-usa-geithner-school-idUSTRE64O16220100525
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/01/geithner-reassures-china-fiscal-house-order.html

 

[randomradio]

Yes, the public sector (aka government) of China is very well managed fiscally, Moody's would be shameless to talk about this (but seems they did made 2018 forecast, or 2020). Now let's look at the private sector. Domestic Credit To Private Sector vs GDP at end 2015, China 152.6%, US 189%. If China is a problem, does Moody's sees the more indebted US private sector a even bigger problem?
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/FS.AST.PRVT.GD.ZS?year_high_desc=true

Who are in the private sector? It is corporate-heavy in China (Chinese household shuns borrowing, it's a cultural factor), while in US is household-heavy. If Moody's sees corporate a problem in China, do they see household debt a far more widespread problem in US? Especially when US has far lower Gross Domestic Savings Rate than China? Remember source of subprime crisis in 2008? Please read the link below "May 17, 2:48 PM EDT; US household debts reach record high, topping pre-recession peak, New York Fed says; By CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER, AP Economics Writer"
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDS.TOTL.ZS?year_high_desc=true
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HOUSEHOLD_DEBT?SITE=OKPON&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

There's no point comparing the two this way.

Both private debt and household debt doesn't affect the sovereign rating for the US.

In China that's not the case. The CCP is liable to protect their SoEs. The entire SoE debt situation in China is dependent on the fact that the Chinese govt will write off the loans and recapitalize the banks at its own cost in order to prevent the SoEs from defaulting or going bankrupt. That's why it affects sovereign rating.

For example, China's SoEs are not making enough profits. This affects their ability to pay off their debt based on their own financials.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2017-01/26/content_28062676.htm

In India, SoEs are highly profitable.
http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatime...s-across-the-world-in-terms-of-profitability/

So if China wants to prevent another downgrade by Moody's, the growth in debt of the SoEs has to be a lot slower, based on what Moody's thinks is right. What's also important to consider is the fact that China has been transferring its public debt to the SoEs to make the public debt look small.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...ina-total-soe-debt-rises-1-trillion-one-month

I think Moody's wants China to reverse that with a debt-equity swap at the very least.

In India's case, even though SoE debt is higher than public debt, similar to China, they want public debt to decrease to below 60% from the current 68% for a ratings upgrade. India's situation is quite the opposite.

China used to have expectation to see some correction in US fiscal discipline. Moreover, US did vow to it, but well now everyone know, they lied. Anyway I don't see how a spending-driven debtor lecturing a production-savings-oriented creditor, let alone "rating", do you?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-usa-geithner-school-idUSTRE64O16220100525
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/01/geithner-reassures-china-fiscal-house-order.html

The Americans can print their way out of debt anytime they want.

 

[Shotgunner51]

Both private debt and household debt doesn't affect the sovereign rating for the US.

General Motor, AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac ... US government is "liable" to protect corporations/banks. The only difference is that these are not even state-owned corporations, they are privately owned.

The entire SoE debt situation in China is dependent on the fact that the Chinese govt will write off the loans and recapitalize the banks at its own cost in order to prevent the SoEs from defaulting or going bankrupt. That's why it affects sovereign rating.
For example, China's SoEs are not making enough profits. This affects their ability to pay off their debt based on their own financials.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2017-01/26/content_28062676.htm

Who says SOE are about profit maximization? They own monopolistic assets (invaluable intangible rights, critical physical assets) and carry civil functions, in many market segments (e.g. power grid or other critical infrastructure) they don't need to compete at all. Good news that SOE are capable of making some but not huge profits after paying all costs including financial costs to banks, cos that's exactly what they are supposed to do. SOE own invaluable intangible rights and gigantic amount of physical assets, they can deleverage if they chose to.

SOE are fine, so are the banks. Because China is a low consumption high savings country, banks are flooded by deposits, in fact bank LTD ratio at end 2016 was only 70.1%, where's the problem? In plain language, it's the ultra-high Chinese household savings that are financing SOE investment mostly in infrastructure, either indirectly through bank credits or directly through bond/equity instruments.

Sources:

• By 30 Dec 2016, bank deposits balance at ¥150.59 trillion (YOY increase ¥14.88 trillion!), credits balance at ¥106.6 trillion (YOY increase ¥12.65 trillion), credit-deposit ratio (or loan-to-deposit ratio, LTD) at end 2016 was 70.1%.
• http://finance.sina.com.cn/roll/2017-01-20/doc-ifxzunxf1558065.shtml

The Americans can print their way out of debt anytime they want.

It's exactly the opposite, they can print their way out of deficit but not out of debt, in fact gets even deeper into debt with printing.

So if China wants to prevent another downgrade by Moody's

The decision has had no impact on Chinese equities nor currency, so in my opinion:

"Moody's? We don't need no stinkin' Moody's!"
Brendan Ahern, chief investment officer of KraneShares, sent out a fun note to his list-serve subscribers on Thursday about credit outlook. A spin on Blazing Saddles.

"Who cares? Not the Chinese. And not most of the close China watchers, barring those perennial bears looking for the credit bubble to burst since around 2010."
Kenneth Rapoza, Contributor-Forbes​

 

[randomradio]

General Motor, AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac ... check again. US government is liable to protect corporations/banks, but these are not state-owned, but privately owned corporations.

It's a choice the American govt makes when they want to protect something, but it in no way means they are liable for it. They can happily show the finger to these companies as well.

Even in India, the govt will come to the rescue if giants like Tata are at risk of bankruptcy. But if small parts of Tata are at risk, the govt wouldn't bother. But China doesn't have this flexibility.

Who says SOE are about profit maximization? They own monopolistic assets (invaluable intangible rights, critical physical assets) and carry civil functions, in many market segments (e.g. power grid or other critical infrastructure) they don't need to compete at all. Good news that SOE are capable of making some but not huge profits after paying all costs including financial costs to banks, cos that's exactly what they are supposed to do. SOE own invaluable intangible rights and gigantic amount of physical assets, they can deleverage if they chose to.

In India, these SoEs compete with private industry. Out of the top 10 industries by revenue in India, there are only 5 SoEs in the list. And that's because 4 of the 5 SoEs are oil companies, which don't have a particularly great future in the long run.

The Chinese SoEs are so big that only the govt can bail them out. If you can't make profits, then you can't pay debt. Plus, if they can't make profits, who will they deleverage to, only the govt. No sane private company will buy a loss making company without a majority stake, and they can't afford it anyway.

SOE are fine, so are the banks. Because China is a low consumption high savings country, banks are flooded by deposits, in fact LTD ratio at end 2016 was only 70.1%, where's the problem? In plain language, it's the ultra-high Chinese household savings that are financing SOE investment mostly in infrastructure, either indirectly through banks or directly through bond/equity instruments.

Yeah, that's right. But Moody's attacked the trend, not the current status.

We can get into a long discussion about this, so instead I will keep it simple. China saves because of the growth in disposable income every year. This growth in salary will eventually slow down because the economy is not growing fast enough anymore. When growth slows down, the cost of goods and services will slowly increase, only compounded by an aging population. With decrease in salary hikes and increase in living costs, the savings will also reduce because people will have to start tapping into their savings.

So the long term trends are not in favour of relying on savings.

If you want to continue financing debt, the best bet is OBOR. But it is fraught with complications and uncertainty which China has little control over.

It's exactly the opposite, they can print their way out of deficit but not out of debt, in fact gets even deeper into debt with printing.

No, the point is they won't default no matter how much debt they take. They even have a law saying they are not allowed to default.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/pascal...-a-debt-crisis-not-now-not-ever/#7c214a862a86

The decision has had no impact on Chinese equities nor currency, so in my opinion:

"Moody's? We don't need no stinkin' Moody's!"
Brendan Ahern, chief investment officer of KraneShares, sent out a fun note to his list-serve subscribers on Thursday about credit outlook. A spin on Blazing Saddles.

"Who cares? Not the Chinese. And not most of the close China watchers, barring those perennial bears looking for the credit bubble to burst since around 2010."
Kenneth Rapoza, Contributor-Forbes​

No, this decision has no major impact. Even in India, we want a ratings upgrade in order to internationalize the INR.

Other than that, even with a BBB-, we are attracting more investment than a lot of other countries with higher rating. And the economy itself is chugging along nicely as well.

This mainly affects only short term borrowings. It's nice to get cheaper interest, but it's paid off quickly anyway.

 

[Götterdämmerung]

Yes, the public sector (aka government) of China is very well managed fiscally, Moody's being from US would be shameless to attack this (but seems they did made some wild forecast about 2018 or 2020, see that?). Now let's look at the private sector. Domestic Credit To Private Sector vs GDP at end 2015, China 152.6%, US 189%. So if China is a problem, is US an even bigger problem?
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/FS.AST.PRVT.GD.ZS?year_high_desc=true

Now let's dissect the private sector. It is corporate-heavy in China (Chinese household shuns borrowing, it's a cultural factor), while in US is household-heavy. If Moody's sees corporate a problem in China, do they see household debt a far more widespread problem in US? Especially when US has very low Gross Domestic Savings Rate (in fact China is among world's highest in savings)? Remember source of subprime crisis in 2008, and widespread foreclosure? Please read the link below "May 17, 2:48 PM EDT; US household debts reach record high, topping pre-recession peak, New York Fed says; By CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER, AP Economics Writer"
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDS.TOTL.ZS?year_high_desc=true
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HOUSEHOLD_DEBT?SITE=OKPON&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

China used to have expectation to see some correction in US fiscal discipline. Moreover, US did vow to it, but well now everyone know, they lied. Anyway I don't see how a spending-driven debtor lecturing a production-savings-oriented creditor, let alone "rating", do you?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-usa-geithner-school-idUSTRE64O16220100525
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/01/geithner-reassures-china-fiscal-house-order.html

Why are you even wasting your time arguing with a some people who, according to this Indian, lack reasoning. You could as well talk to a wall.

 

[randomradio]

Why are you even wasting your time arguing with a some people who, according to this Indian, lack reasoning. You could as well talk to a wall.

He's doing good work if he's sucking up to the Chinese, especially that comment about fragmenting India. It proves he doesn't have a clue about how the economy works in India. "People invest their money and pull their money out because they are making a loss", but Sensex has tripled in just 7 years.

About gold.
http://www.livemint.com/Money/ohScI...ted-in-H2-on-GST-says-World-Gold-Council.html
India gold demand up 15%, global demand dips 18% in Q1 2017: World Gold Council

He's basically all fart.

Yeah, and he's caught suckers like you in it. But it appears you do have severe comprehension problems because he never said Indians lack reasoning. And the video is from 3 years ago. Haha. All this talk of short term medium term, was he talking about a few weeks's time period.

 

[Han Patriot]

All these click bait articles with selective news are only for people who are not well-wishers of India.



Indigenization will take time, but it's evident where India is heading right now.

Wishing your rival to implode is never a realistic strategy in any competition. Those are from Indian sources telling you the situation of real India, not some feel good Modi worshiping article. Modi is not God OK, stop worshiping everything you fancy. All the best to India indigenizing, but the reality remains, you are just a raw materials provider for China.

You didn't get it.

Here:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...on-modi-adviser-says/articleshow/58865573.cms
"If we create a lot of good jobs, we can raise the growth rate to 8, 9, 10 percent," Panagariya said. There was a "skepticism and fear" -- which he described as "robophobia" -- that automation would take away jobs. These fears, he said, were "grossly exaggerated" and meant India’s potential remained underestimated.



That's the power of the Indian consumer. We have a huge trade deficit because we need electronics that we don't produce ourselves.

LOL, no worries, all is good and dandy. Automation is just hype. The Japanese, Germans and Chinese are so stupid. Funny how these 3 coincidently happen to be the top exporters in the world.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hal-sirkin/robots-workers-countries_b_9992960.html

Again, many of your private companies are new. They have no real global experience.

For example, TATA is 150 years old. Birla Group is 160 years old. They have a global presence. That's why they are competing with international companies quite comfortably without any govt support.

No, no, LENOVO, HUAWEI, HAIER, all have no global experience at all. Funny how they are not competing well with Chinese manufacturers in India despite having the 'insurmountable' tariffs in place. The same super duper Indian companies also happen to be the ones importing Chinese products. RELIANCE buys Chinese metros and telecom equipment, TATA buys Chinese equipment. To do business in India, you need to cooperate with these top 10-15 Indian elite families who control the entire Indian economy, Chinese companies had figured out this long ago. Your very same patriotic capitalist companies are the very ones who are supporting Chinese imports. =)

We have Indian companies competing with Amazon. We will always have Indian companies competing with one major foreign company or the other quite comfortably. Whereas, Chinese private companies require govt support and exclusive market access in order to survive.

I guess you have never heard of ALIBABA or DIDI. Maybe you can check out their market capitalization.

An economy with a very low percapita income has multiple $10B to $100B industries. Where do you think these companies will be by 2030?

They will be importing more competitively priced Chinese products created using efficient automated processes and then selling them to the Indian masses thereby ensuring their dominance as monopolistic Indian companies in India. Their only goal is profit after all! =). The very same multi-billion Indian elite companies are monopolized by that same 10-15 families, and it will never change. No difference from the Taiwanese and Hong Kong corporate families.

Age does not automatically imply competitiveness, after all Google, Microsoft were all relatively new companies. DJI the multi-billion drone maker is not even 10 years old. These companies are young and nimble and innovative.

India is fairly well insulated from automation regardless.

It is far easier for people in the services industry to upskill than those in manufacturing. And upskilling can happen really fast, like in a matter of a few weeks to a few months.

Insulate yourself all you can, the world does not revolve around India. You mean you can up-skill a call center guy and teach him machine operations in a couple of weeks? Sometimes, I am really amazed by the Indian mind and now I can understand why the population can invest in a cellphone and not a shit hole.

You are showing your inferiority complex in this post.

How exactly am I showing inferiority complex, it's sarcasm since you don't seem to understand the importance of having a balanced economy both in services and industry. Once India is 99% services based, it will be a SUPAPOWA 2012.

China's economy is still quite some ways to mature into a service economy. If you can't make that transition with good growth, then you will get stuck. India is not in this position at all. We have been growing real fast even without major investment.

There is nothing technological complicated in providing BPO and software outsourcing, countries like Philippines are relatively good at it too. You require English, cheap engineers and the coolie contractor, WIPRO TCS, etc. You can see the structure of Indian ITES exports, 80% US and UK.

The difference lies with language skills. Indians have a larger English speaking population and an industry started in the 70s when China was still in the midst of cultural revolution. What you don't realize is the 2nd largest software exporter in the world is China. Another thing you don't realize is the domestic IT services market in China is bigger than your exports combined.

That's the reason why I show you the CIA data, our population employed in the services industry is even larger than India, they are primarily serving the domestic market due to language requirements.

In fact this is the first time since independence that there is a plan made by the government for high growth. That alone should tell you all you need to know.

India will grow really fast regardless of how many new jobs are created. And when one section of the economy grows, it automatically pulls the other sections along with it. That's how growth has been in India.

Indians had been talking and planning for as long as I can remember. Yawn.....good luck and see you when you get there. Btw, please remember to create jobs for your less fortunate illiterate farmers who happen to be 50% of the work force.

Dude, we are already half way through 2017.

Yeah, then use average exchange rate from May 2016 to May 2017, you will get the figure I quoted.

This is why I said CIA has not considered the 5 months that have already passed.

Genius, read my post again. It is impossible to grow 16% in 5 months even converted by a 0.5% difference in exchange rate. I am wasting my time explaining math to you.

Greenfield FDI is greater in India.

Yah, so much 'greenfield' factories coming in from Mauritius. You do know these are essentially, black money roundtripping back to India right?
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...urce-of-fdi-in-india/articleshow/56072522.cms

Nope. The US is attracting similar volumes even as an established player.

China is more than half the size of the US economy but attracting 4 times less FDI than the US.

China
GDP: $11T
FDI: $118B

US
GDP: $18T
FDI: $420+B

Whats wrong? US had always been attracting the majority of FDIs, they are the largest market in the world. China alone invests 50 billion in US. Dollars are printed there my friend. FDI does not correlate to economic size. Countries like Japan and Korea developed largely without huge infusion of FDI. Remember I explain to you that China outward and inward FDI is almost the same now. The country is growing despite of that.

India on the other hand is attracting FDI because of market opportunities, people are trying to sell to you, not making you into a hub to sell to others. Get it?

Incorrect. Modi is cleaning up what the UPA did. In fact, UPA's figures look rosy because of the BJP govt from 1998 to 2004. Most of the growth that UPA achieved was because of the previous BJP govt which created 55 million jobs in just 5 years of their rule and that trickled down into UPA's rule. After 2009, it all went down the drain because UPA did not introduce any reforms or create new jobs. People in India know this already. Why else do you think they are losing so badly everywhere?

And no, the people are not angry or anything. They have alternate sources of income. Rural unemployment is less than 4%. Get your CCP to withdraw all your cash overnight, let's see what happens then.

I had always been fascinated by why there were no uprisings despite all the poverty and starvation. I was wrong afterall.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/maoist...e-neoliberalism-fuels-social-uprising/5362276

Interesting times ahead for India. I see a time bomb ticking. Nothing fuels a revolution more than an empty stomach.

Moody's is particular about corporate debt, not national debt. Their rationale is even if debt is held by the corporate sector, they are still mostly SoE and will have to be saved by the government through bailout packages which the govt will have to finance.

Moody's is threatening another downgrade if the SoE debt situation is not remedied.
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...owngrade-if-debt-bubble-not-fixed-says-moodys

So I think the expectation is some people in the west want to see some correction happening in China.

The very same people the Indian establishment are deriding and here you are explaining their logic for a downgrade. You obviously don't understand the debt structure in China.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/china-credit-rating-downgrade-moodys/1/962388.html

 

[Han Patriot]

It's a choice the American govt makes when they want to protect something, but it in no way means they are liable for it. They can happily show the finger to these companies as well.

Even in India, the govt will come to the rescue if giants like Tata are at risk of bankruptcy. But if small parts of Tata are at risk, the govt wouldn't bother. But China doesn't have this flexibility.

Why doesn't China have this flexibility? China will not let a huge SOE fail, but if certain parts are inefficient, it will be restructured. And it has already been done numerous times. Not sure about India having enough money to bail out TATA since you are already bailing out Air India, BSNL and many more. More accurately put, India is bailing out their inefficient SOE through subsidies rather than an out right bail out when they go bust. .

In India, these SoEs compete with private industry. Out of the top 10 industries by revenue in India, there are only 5 SoEs in the list. And that's because 4 of the 5 SoEs are oil companies, which don't have a particularly great future in the long run.

Are you implying Indian SOEs are even more competitive than Chinese SOEs? LOL.

The Chinese SoEs are so big that only the govt can bail them out. If you can't make profits, then you can't pay debt. Plus, if they can't make profits, who will they deleverage to, only the govt. No sane private company will buy a loss making company without a majority stake, and they can't afford it anyway.

True, that's why they need to make a profit. You need to understand SOEs in China are profit driven too.

Last year, total SOE profits stood at 2.32 trillion yuan ($338 billion), the Ministry of Finance said in a statement.

338 BIL$ is more than your Indian budget btw.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2017-01/26/content_28062676.htm

Yeah, that's right. But Moody's attacked the trend, not the current status.

We can get into a long discussion about this, so instead I will keep it simple. China saves because of the growth in disposable income every year. This growth in salary will eventually slow down because the economy is not growing fast enough anymore. When growth slows down, the cost of goods and services will slowly increase, only compounded by an aging population. With decrease in salary hikes and increase in living costs, the savings will also reduce because people will have to start tapping into their savings.

They can attack whatever trend they want, the fact remains, US economy is even more indebted but the difference lies in their ability to print dollars. This problem is faced by all around the world, that's why you need to remain competitive. You are assuming India will keep on growing, this is not a given trend, shit can happen and it has happened to India before. Remember the demographic time bomb I told you before? You need growth just to check the unemployment. tick tock tick tock

You are starting from a low base, that's why growth can happen relatively easy, imagine someone starving one minute and the next minute he has a plate of rice. That's India's case. For China, it's like we are having chicken chow mein and the next level of growth is wagyu beef with brandy.

So the long term trends are not in favour of relying on savings.

If you want to continue financing debt, the best bet is OBOR. But it is fraught with complications and uncertainty which China has little control over.

You still don't understand debt. China can always print RMB bhai. As long as the inflation is checked, the economi expansion is checked, supply creates it's own demand. However this is only true if you are a production surplus country like China, if you do that in India, you get inflation. The point is China does not depend on international debt unlike India.

No, the point is they won't default no matter how much debt they take. They even have a law saying they are not allowed to default.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/pascal...-a-debt-crisis-not-now-not-ever/#7c214a862a86

There is no point defaulting when you can print dollarssssssssssss. Don't be so naive.

No, this decision has no major impact. Even in India, we want a ratings upgrade in order to internationalize the INR.

Other than that, even with a BBB-, we are attracting more investment than a lot of other countries with higher rating. And the economy itself is chugging along nicely as well.

This mainly affects only short term borrowings. It's nice to get cheaper interest, but it's paid off quickly anyway.

Internationalize INR? after your demonetization debacle, people are already phobic about rupees. I lost 300$ from the worthless rupees I kept after my last trip. Now nobody is willing to hold rupees out of India. India is not a creditor nation, you need to access international funds to grow, and that requires you to borrow based on these ratings determined by Moodys and co.

The freaking reason you are not bankrupt is because of FDI inflows, else you can't even finance your imports.

 

[randomradio]

Wishing your rival to implode is never a realistic strategy in any competition. Those are from Indian sources telling you the situation of real India, not some feel good Modi worshiping article. Modi is not God OK, stop worshiping everything you fancy. All the best to India indigenizing, but the reality remains, you are just a raw materials provider for China.

All I see is inferiority complex.

LOL, no worries, all is good and dandy. Automation is just hype. The Japanese, Germans and Chinese are so stupid. Funny how these 3 coincidently happen to be the top exporters in the world.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hal-sirkin/robots-workers-countries_b_9992960.html

Yes, it shouldn't affect India in the overall scheme of things.

No, no, LENOVO, HUAWEI, HAIER, all have no global experience at all. Funny how they are not competing well with Chinese manufacturers in India despite having the 'insurmountable' tariffs in place. The same super duper Indian companies also happen to be the ones importing Chinese products. RELIANCE buys Chinese metros and telecom equipment, TATA buys Chinese equipment. To do business in India, you need to cooperate with these top 10-15 Indian elite families who control the entire Indian economy, Chinese companies had figured out this long ago. Your very same patriotic capitalist companies are the very ones who are supporting Chinese imports. =)

I guess you have never heard of ALIBABA or DIDI. Maybe you can check out their market capitalization.

They all got rich first in a protected market, then they are competing. That isn't competing.

They will be importing more competitively priced Chinese products created using efficient automated processes and then selling them to the Indian masses thereby ensuring their dominance as monopolistic Indian companies in India. Their only goal is profit after all! =).

No, it won't work for quite sometime. As I said, automation has sunk costs which needs to be made up first. While at the same time competing with cheaper labour that's readily available.

The Chinese have more to fear from these large business houses than Indians do because that's where these large conglomerates will focus on, the export market.

The very same multi-billion Indian elite companies are monopolized by that same 10-15 families, and it will never change. No difference from the Taiwanese and Hong Kong corporate families.

BS as usual.
http://www.livemint.com/Companies/PbdzOUOXCC5M2pVKlRQOaJ/How-many-billionaires-are-self-made.html
Data shows that 63% of India’s billionaires are self made, and their wealth accounts for about 49% of the total wealth of billionaires in the country

Monopoly by business families is a threat to China, not India. In India, the political system is so chaotic and the judicial system so strong that all the rich and upcoming rich are in the same soup. In China, you join CCP and you will dominate the market, while also killing competition.

In the US also, the democratic system with a strong judiciary ensures the rise of new self-made billionaires every year, the same as in India.

Age does not automatically imply competitiveness, after all Google, Microsoft were all relatively new companies. DJI the multi-billion drone maker is not even 10 years old. These companies are young and nimble and innovative.

They are software companies, not hardware.

Insulate yourself all you can, the world does not revolve around India. You mean you can up-skill a call center guy and teach him machine operations in a couple of weeks? Sometimes, I am really amazed by the Indian mind and now I can understand why the population can invest in a cellphone and not a shit hole.

Yeah, many of the call center employees are engineers. Most of them have a minimum of bachelor degrees in other fields as well.

How exactly am I showing inferiority complex, it's sarcasm since you don't seem to understand the importance of having a balanced economy both in services and industry. Once India is 99% services based, it will be a SUPAPOWA 2012.

India's services sector is growing in double digits. 3/4ths of India's growth has come from the service sector.

No, you don't really need to have this balance. None of the advanced economies have this balance that you speak of. In the US, the service sector is 80% of the GDP. The fears of a middle income trap doesn't exist for India because of India's strength in the service sector.

There is nothing technological complicated in providing BPO and software outsourcing, countries like Philippines are relatively good at it too. You require English, cheap engineers and the coolie contractor, WIPRO TCS, etc. You can see the structure of Indian ITES exports, 80% US and UK.

Much better than cheap sweatshops where you don't need an education at all.

Read this article.
http://www.business-standard.com/ar...t-breaks-cultural-barrier-117031700763_1.html

If all we know is English, I wonder why the Japanese are tapping into India then.

What you don't realize is the 2nd largest software exporter in the world is China.

BS. China's IT service exports are not even half of India's.

In fact China is a net importer of services. India has a trade surplus when it comes to services. Our superiority in services is recognized even by the Japanese.

Another thing you don't realize is the domestic IT services market in China is bigger than your exports combined.

Irrelevant to India. It's merely the size of China's market, nothing else.

That's the reason why I show you the CIA data, our population employed in the services industry is even larger than India, they are primarily serving the domestic market due to language requirements.

Yes, but then again, irrelevant to India.

Indians had been talking and planning for as long as I can remember. Yawn.....good luck and see you when you get there. Btw, please remember to create jobs for your less fortunate illiterate farmers who happen to be 50% of the work force.

What do you mean? It's the exact opposite. Indians have not been talking and planning, that's why it's yet to make a mark in merchandise exports.

This is the first time that we are actually talking and planning.

Genius, read my post again. It is impossible to grow 16% in 5 months even converted by a 0.5% difference in exchange rate. I am wasting my time explaining math to you.

You are using the wrong numbers. Just give it time, you will see for yourself.

India's economy will comfortably cross $2.5T this year, Dec.

Yah, so much 'greenfield' factories coming in from Mauritius. You do know these are essentially, black money roundtripping back to India right?
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...urce-of-fdi-in-india/articleshow/56072522.cms

You must be the genius considering we would have been doing that since long ago if that was the case. FDI picked up recently.

Whats wrong? US had always been attracting the majority of FDIs, they are the largest market in the world. China alone invests 50 billion in US. Dollars are printed there my friend. FDI does not correlate to economic size. Countries like Japan and Korea developed largely without huge infusion of FDI. Remember I explain to you that China outward and inward FDI is almost the same now. The country is growing despite of that.

Dude, a still developing country is no longer attracting as much FDI as in the past.

India on the other hand is attracting FDI because of market opportunities, people are trying to sell to you, not making you into a hub to sell to others. Get it?

Yes, that's the objective of MII. The idea is to make stuff in India to sell to Indians, at best dominate neighbouring markets. The idea is to kill imports, not merely increase exports. We can think of exports much later for merchandise.

We have superiority in services, with a trade surplus, so that's where we are focusing on.

I had always been fascinated by why there were no uprisings despite all the poverty and starvation. I was wrong afterall.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/maoist...e-neoliberalism-fuels-social-uprising/5362276

Interesting times ahead for India. I see a time bomb ticking. Nothing fuels a revolution more than an empty stomach.

This is all you have? Silly articles?

The very same people the Indian establishment are deriding and here you are explaining their logic for a downgrade. You obviously don't understand the debt structure in China.

It is you who doesn't understand the reasons for both.

India is deriding the ratings agencies due to some other reason while China's was downgraded due to some other reason.

Why doesn't China have this flexibility? China will not let a huge SOE fail, but if certain parts are inefficient, it will be restructured. And it has already been done numerous times. Not sure about India having enough money to bail out TATA since you are already bailing out Air India, BSNL and many more. More accurately put, India is bailing out their inefficient SOE through subsidies rather than an out right bail out when they go bust. .




Are you implying Indian SOEs are even more competitive than Chinese SOEs? LOL.


True, that's why they need to make a profit. You need to understand SOEs in China are profit driven too.



338 BIL$ is more than your Indian budget btw.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2017-01/26/content_28062676.htm



They can attack whatever trend they want, the fact remains, US economy is even more indebted but the difference lies in their ability to print dollars. This problem is faced by all around the world, that's why you need to remain competitive. You are assuming India will keep on growing, this is not a given trend, shit can happen and it has happened to India before. Remember the demographic time bomb I told you before? You need growth just to check the unemployment. tick tock tick tock

You are starting from a low base, that's why growth can happen relatively easy, imagine someone starving one minute and the next minute he has a plate of rice. That's India's case. For China, it's like we are having chicken chow mein and the next level of growth is wagyu beef with brandy.


You still don't understand debt. China can always print RMB bhai. As long as the inflation is checked, the economi expansion is checked, supply creates it's own demand. However this is only true if you are a production surplus country like China, if you do that in India, you get inflation. The point is China does not depend on international debt unlike India.



There is no point defaulting when you can print dollarssssssssssss. Don't be so naive.

When you compare two economies, you use percentages, not absolute figures.

Internationalize INR? after your demonetization debacle, people are already phobic about rupees. I lost 300$ from the worthless rupees I kept after my last trip. Now nobody is willing to hold rupees out of India. India is not a creditor nation, you need to access international funds to grow, and that requires you to borrow based on these ratings determined by Moodys and co.

Demonetization was a really good success. Cash circulation is lower by 3-4T INR and inflation is below 4% and is set to reduce even more, a huge improvement considering BJP inherited double digit inflation. Banks were recapitalized using existing money, by a huge amount in fact.

The freaking reason you are not bankrupt is because of FDI inflows, else you can't even finance your imports.

 

[Han Patriot]

All I see is inferiority complex.

http://www.livemint.com/Money/JYalq...ndias-youth-not-in-employment-shows-OECD.html

Over 30% of youth aged 15-29 in India are not in employment, education or training (NEETs). This is more than double the OECD average and almost three times that of China.

That's like the situation in Arab countries before the Arab Spring uprising, young unemployed and angry. That's why you see those rape cases skyrocketing. When they see a female working in a call center, robbing off their jobs, it pissed them off.

They all got rich first in a protected market, then they are competing. That isn't competing.

Does it market how we got there? Now they are competing with the world. Where is India except for services outsourcing and maybe cheap generics?

No, it won't work for quite sometime. As I said, automation has sunk costs which needs to be made up first. While at the same time competing with cheaper labour that's readily available.

The Chinese have more to fear from these large business houses than Indians do because that's where these large conglomerates will focus on, the export market.

It won't work? The global market for robotics and automation is a few hundred thousand robots a year, worth almost 100 billion $. Well if you insist Indians have nothing to fear without providing me any substantial facts, then I rest my case. What is there to fear? You move on and face the competition, you automate your processes and remain relevant. That is exactly what China is doing, we are the worlds largest robotics and automation market. You seem to think India is safe living in a little cocooned shell.

https://qz.com/922742/china-is-rapi...-will-one-day-manufacture-everything-you-buy/

China is already the world’s largest producer of industrial robots, supplying about 27% of the global market since 2015, according to the International Federation of Robotics (IFR). It’s also the largest buyer of robots.

BS as usual.
http://www.livemint.com/Companies/PbdzOUOXCC5M2pVKlRQOaJ/How-many-billionaires-are-self-made.html
Data shows that 63% of India’s billionaires are self made, and their wealth accounts for about 49% of the total wealth of billionaires in the country

Monopoly by business families is a threat to China, not India. In India, the political system is so chaotic and the judicial system so strong that all the rich and upcoming rich are in the same soup. In China, you join CCP and you will dominate the market, while also killing competition.

These billionaires came from well connected rich families, they were already millionaires before becoming billionaires. Tell me one slumdog in the billionaire league.

Contrast that to Chinese billionaires, all were non-existent 20 years ago,Ma Yun is the best example, he was a jobless English teacher for gods sake. He is the real self made billionaire. Wang Tao of DJI was a freaking engineering nerd from a farming family.

I know there is corruption in China, but can you tell me which family business is dominating which particular industry in China? All I know is strategic industries like power, telecoms, etc are all dominated by SOEs, and that too for the precise reason of ensuring no private domination and monopoly of strategic industries.

In India, the crony capitalism is chronic, working in tandem with a chaotic democracy. Your democracy is controlled by family dynasties, who in turn work with the business dynasties, their cronies.

In all, 16 of today’s top 20 business groups are products of the post-independence economic growth. They now account for two-third of the combined assets and nearly 70 per cent of the combined revenues of the top 20 in FY16.

http://www.rediff.com/money/report/...business-groups-are-family-owned/20160818.htm

In the US also, the democratic system with a strong judiciary ensures the rise of new self-made billionaires every year, the same as in India.

You are living in lalaland comparing US to India. The only common thing is the word democracy. Yours is a corrupted incompetent democracy, whereas the US is a less corrupted but functioning democracy.

They are software companies, not hardware.

DJI is software? What about Xiaomi? All new 'hardware' companies worth billions. SF express? Logistic company worth billions. Intel was only founded in the 70s. Qualcomm, again founded in the 80s. If age was a measure of success, TATA would have been the next Intel.

Yeah, many of the call center employees are engineers. Most of them have a minimum of bachelor degrees in other fields as well.

You can't seem to understand the difference between vocational training and a degree.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/education/story/vocational-education-engineering/1/721469.html

Recent studies show that barely 7 per cent of the approximate 1.5 million Indian engineers released into the job market every year are employable. The glaring problems giving rise to this issue is the lack of proper skills in the graduating engineers.

Traditionally, our education system doesn't pay much importance to skill-building, but only paper degrees," states Bharwani. "In order to ensure employable education, skill enhancement must take place very early in the education of the students."

Vocational education is a skill-centric job-based education which prepares a person for a particular trade or craft in a certain industry.

You expect these geniuses with no vocational training to operate machines in weeks. Jai hind!

India's services sector is growing in double digits. 3/4ths of India's growth has come from the service sector.

No, you don't really need to have this balance. None of the advanced economies have this balance that you speak of. In the US, the service sector is 80% of the GDP. The fears of a middle income trap doesn't exist for India because of India's strength in the service sector.

That's why they are known as advanced economies genius, India is not one, understand? You still have 50% farmers and x% of illiterates who need mass employment. Therefore, you need to balance it with both manufacturing and services. Get it genius? India does not need to fear middle income trap, India needs to fear low income trap, meaning you need to start educating your poor and starving brethren, before they figure out to start a revolution ala Arab Spring.

Much better than cheap sweatshops where you don't need an education at all.

If you define having a pay of 500-600 USD$ a month with a dormitory and canteen food as sweatshop, whereas an average high caste IT engineers earn 3.6 lakh a year(450$/month), so be it. But remember we need as many 'sweatshops' and high tech jobs we can get. If you don't want them, no worries bhai, give it to us. Btw, I wouldn't call a 99% literate China having no education, compare this with your other 25% illiterate Indians.

Read this article.
http://www.business-standard.com/ar...t-breaks-cultural-barrier-117031700763_1.html

If all we know is English, I wonder why the Japanese are tapping into India then.

You do know the largest Chinese IT export market is Japan right? There is a reason for it.

BS. China's IT service exports are not even half of India's.

In fact China is a net importer of services. India has a trade surplus when it comes to services. Our superiority in services is recognized even by the Japanese.

Where am I bullshiting, we do have a software export market of roughly 50bil usd$, you think software is just about outsourcing tech coolies? It includes embedded software and chip design. We are the second largest ITES exporter after India.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...ta-2017---research-and-markets-300458305.html

In addition, the export of the application software industry developed in stability. In 2016, the export of Chinese software industry reached USD 51.9 billion,

In 2016, the application software industry in China run well with revenue of CNY 4.9 trillion,

Do the math and calculate the size of the market, it's bigger than your whole exports combined.

The reason you have a surplus is because your domestic market is underdeveloped, you have no demand for more sophisticated services, therefore, you can only export your services.

Irrelevant to India. It's merely the size of China's market, nothing else.

Yes, but then again, irrelevant to India.

Merely the size? How can it be irrelevant when I am comparing the size of the Chinese IT market, thereby explaining to you the scale and sophistication of the Chinese market.

It is relevant to our argument, you are painting as if India is having a sophisticated services industry, the truth is India is having an acceptable quality low cost services industry dealing in English. That's is your advantage.

What do you mean? It's the exact opposite. Indians have not been talking and planning, that's why it's yet to make a mark in merchandise exports.

This is the first time that we are actually talking and planning.

Remember India Shining campaign? You have been talking and planning for decades. BJP was already planning to make India a manufacturing superpower back then to overtake China. See the world 'plan' and 'talk'.

You are using the wrong numbers. Just give it time, you will see for yourself.

India's economy will comfortably cross $2.5T this year, Dec.

How can I use wrong numbers when it comes from the CIA WORLD FACTBOOK. That's the most neutral source I can find.

You must be the genius considering we would have been doing that since long ago if that was the case. FDI picked up recently.

What is happening long ago is still happening today. Coincidently, Singapore and Mauritius are both the largest and second largest FDI source.

This will include blocking the Mauritius, Singapore and Cyprus channels used for re-routing of black money.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...-strike-on-pakistan-/articleshow/58724130.cms

Dude, a still developing country is no longer attracting as much FDI as in the past.

A developing country who happen to be the third largest creditor nation with 3 trillion USD$ in reserves. Does it matter? We don't really need FDI to grow unlike India who needs it for survival, we can finance things domestically. Since last year, we are only about net 1bil US$ FDI recipient.

Yes, that's the objective of MII. The idea is to make stuff in India to sell to Indians, at best dominate neighbouring markets. The idea is to kill imports, not merely increase exports. We can think of exports much later for merchandise.

We have superiority in services, with a trade surplus, so that's where we are focusing on.

Good stay superior with services, earn that money and buy Chinese OK, even MADE IN INDIA Chinese goods OK. Stay proud of your Make In India, high tech screw driver and sticker industry.

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/info-tech/smartphone-manufacturing/article9370945.ece

This is all you have? Silly articles?

Ignore it at your own peril.

It is you who doesn't understand the reasons for both.

India is deriding the ratings agencies due to some other reason while China's was downgraded due to some other reason.

India was downgraded because of a screwed up national financial condition and China was downgraded for supposedly high corporate debt. Come to think of it India had almost always been slightly above junk grade.

When you compare two economies, you use percentages, not absolute figures.

Genius, you have to look at the base for comparison. Ex: Nigeria can have a 50% profit ratio for a 10 000$ shoe factory. India is at dirt base, yet you start boasting about profitability.

Demonetization was a really good success. Cash circulation is lower by 3-4T INR and inflation is below 4% and is set to reduce even more, a huge improvement considering BJP inherited double digit inflation. Banks were recapitalized using existing money, by a huge amount in fact.

I mean how do you define success? You screw up millions and the final results? Black money is still there, bank managers help to convert them to clean new bills. What exactly did you achieve at the expense of the poor?Corruption is still there, incompetency is still there. Inflation drop not because of BJP genius, it was RR who did it and also thanks to a falling oil price.

I can't believe you can still laugh considering you need FDI to stay afloat. It's just an easy flick to screw up India.

http://www.cfo-india.in/article/201...rising-fdi-takes-care-current-account-deficit

 

[randomradio]

http://www.livemint.com/Money/JYalq...ndias-youth-not-in-employment-shows-OECD.html



That's like the situation in Arab countries before the Arab Spring uprising, young unemployed and angry. That's why you see those rape cases skyrocketing. When they see a female working in a call center, robbing off their jobs, it pissed them off.

Those people are working in the informal sector. A lot of these studies don't cover the informal sector, that's where 80-90% of the population is employed.

Does it market how we got there? Now they are competing with the world. Where is India except for services outsourcing and maybe cheap generics?

It's a wrong assumption to compare India's exports with China's.

It won't work? The global market for robotics and automation is a few hundred thousand robots a year, worth almost 100 billion $. Well if you insist Indians have nothing to fear without providing me any substantial facts, then I rest my case. What is there to fear? You move on and face the competition, you automate your processes and remain relevant. That is exactly what China is doing, we are the worlds largest robotics and automation market. You seem to think India is safe living in a little cocooned shell.

https://qz.com/922742/china-is-rapi...-will-one-day-manufacture-everything-you-buy/

Three reasons:
1. Tariffs: Tariffs will continue protecting the Indian market, as it always has.

2. MII: New manufacturing policies make it easier to manufacture in India for Indians.

3. Whatever advantage China has with respect to automation, India has the same advantages.

It doesn't matter how many robots you employ, it won't affect the Indian market. Your goods will still be more expensive for Indians compared to MII goods.

These billionaires came from well connected rich families, they were already millionaires before becoming billionaires. Tell me one slumdog in the billionaire league.

Not correct. Many were working as corporate employees on salaries and have made smart investments.

Take this as an example:
Airtel:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunil_Mittal
A first generation entrepreneur, Sunil started his first business in April 1976[11] at the age of 18, with a capital investment of ₹20,000 (US$310) borrowed from his father. His first business was to make crankshafts for local bicycle manufacturers.

Flipkart founders:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sachin_Bansal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binny_Bansal
These two are competing with Amazon.

I know there is corruption in China, but can you tell me which family business is dominating which particular industry in China? All I know is strategic industries like power, telecoms, etc are all dominated by SOEs, and that too for the precise reason of ensuring no private domination and monopoly of strategic industries.

Give it time. In totalitarian govts, the potential for new startups growing big is very low.

In India, the crony capitalism is chronic, working in tandem with a chaotic democracy. Your democracy is controlled by family dynasties, who in turn work with the business dynasties, their cronies.

That doesn't explain the startup boom in India.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/10/india-startup-boom-in-charts/

Tech startups are in fact way ahead of China.

DJI is software? What about Xiaomi? All new 'hardware' companies worth billions. SF express? Logistic company worth billions. Intel was only founded in the 70s. Qualcomm, again founded in the 80s. If age was a measure of success, TATA would have been the next Intel.

I had quoted Microsoft and Google. DJI is too small to compare.

You can't seem to understand the difference between vocational training and a degree.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/education/story/vocational-education-engineering/1/721469.html

So you'd compare India's educated in the service industry to a shoemaker in China?

I wonder who's more threatened by automation.

That's why they are known as advanced economies genius, India is not one, understand? You still have 50% farmers and x% of illiterates who need mass employment. Therefore, you need to balance it with both manufacturing and services. Get it genius? India does not need to fear middle income trap, India needs to fear low income trap, meaning you need to start educating your poor and starving brethren, before they figure out to start a revolution ala Arab Spring.

You do know the largest Chinese IT export market is Japan right? There is a reason for it.

Yeah, and it will change.

Where am I bullshiting, we do have a software export market of roughly 50bil usd$, you think software is just about outsourcing tech coolies? It includes embedded software and chip design. We are the second largest ITES exporter after India.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...ta-2017---research-and-markets-300458305.html

This is what I said. That the Chinese exports are less than half of India's.

Yeah, coolie jobs in ITES is worse than sweatshops, keep telling yourself that.

The reason you have a surplus is because your domestic market is underdeveloped, you have no demand for more sophisticated services, therefore, you can only export your services.

Nope. The reason we have a surplus is because a huge chunk of our services industry is protected.

Merely the size? How can it be irrelevant when I am comparing the size of the Chinese IT market, thereby explaining to you the scale and sophistication of the Chinese market.

The scale of sophistication of the Chinese market is irrelevant. That's not translated to business outside for China. Example, only 5% of China's IT services is exported compared to over 70% for India.

It is relevant to our argument, you are painting as if India is having a sophisticated services industry, the truth is India is having an acceptable quality low cost services industry dealing in English. That's is your advantage.

Yes, India does have a very sophisticated service industry. We wouldn't have had something as complex and advanced as Aadhaar if it wasn't for that.

Aadhar is currently the biggest IoT project in the world.

Remember India Shining campaign? You have been talking and planning for decades. BJP was already planning to make India a manufacturing superpower back then to overtake China. See the world 'plan' and 'talk'.

BJP disappeared after 2004. No point talking about this if you don't know how elections work.

UPA was neither a planner nor a talker.

How can I use wrong numbers when it comes from the CIA WORLD FACTBOOK. That's the most neutral source I can find.

Why don't you check their INR figures then?

What is happening long ago is still happening today. Coincidently, Singapore and Mauritius are both the largest and second largest FDI source.

Meh, India's black money is not channeled through Singapore and Mauritius. There's the massive Hawala trade that goes through Dubai, that's where India's black money is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawala

Round tripping through tax havens is minuscule.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ld-not-to-affect-FDI/articleshow/52246888.cms

Black money itself rarely comes back to India.

A developing country who happen to be the third largest creditor nation with 3 trillion USD$ in reserves. Does it matter? We don't really need FDI to grow unlike India who needs it for survival, we can finance things domestically. Since last year, we are only about net 1bil US$ FDI recipient.

We don't need FDI either. Our remittances alone are two-three times our yearly deficit.

Ignore it at your own peril.

The Indian govt considers it a law and order problem.

India was downgraded because of a screwed up national financial condition and China was downgraded for supposedly high corporate debt. Come to think of it India had almost always been slightly above junk grade.

India wasn't downgraded.

Genius, you have to look at the base for comparison. Ex: Nigeria can have a 50% profit ratio for a 10 000$ shoe factory. India is at dirt base, yet you start boasting about profitability.

When it comes to absolute figures, you will compare India to China, but when it comes to percentages, you will compare India with Nigeria. Can you point me to Nigeria's space program?

I mean how do you define success? You screw up millions and the final results? Black money is still there, bank managers help to convert them to clean new bills. What exactly did you achieve at the expense of the poor?Corruption is still there, incompetency is still there. Inflation drop not because of BJP genius, it was RR who did it and also thanks to a falling oil price.

Falling oil prices increase inflation in India because of a greater currency supply, genius. In fact, falling oil prices is very dangerous for India. Falling oil prices increase inflation and decrease tax revenues.

I can't believe you can still laugh considering you need FDI to stay afloat. It's just an easy flick to screw up India.

http://www.cfo-india.in/article/201...rising-fdi-takes-care-current-account-deficit

India's remittances alone are bigger than FDI. Start talking about FDI after it crosses remittance figures. Even then trade deficit will only be smaller than remittances.

 

[Han Patriot]

Those people are working in the informal sector. A lot of these studies don't cover the informal sector, that's where 80-90% of the population is employed.

If it is informal, then how do you even quantified those unemployed? I just showed you information from your own Indian sources. In that case, you can also assume India is 100% employed. I have a feeling you guys now the problem you are facing but choose to live in denial.

It's a wrong assumption to compare India's exports with China's.

Why is it wrong? How much you export defines how competitive your products and companies are. You were arguing that China does not have global companies. I just proved to you otherwise.

Three reasons:
1. Tariffs: Tariffs will continue protecting the Indian market, as it always has.

2. MII: New manufacturing policies make it easier to manufacture in India for Indians.

3. Whatever advantage China has with respect to automation, India has the same advantages.

It doesn't matter how many robots you employ, it won't affect the Indian market. Your goods will still be more expensive for Indians compared to MII goods.

Yes, as usual, live in that little cocoon of yours. Stick your head into the sand and pretend nothing is going to hurt you. How is India going to have Chinese advantage in automation which requires, hundreds of thousands of skilled operators, investment in machinery and robots, and also manufacturing base for those robots without first embracing the revolution? Our goods are already cheaper in Indian markets despite having higher cost workers and tariff, imagine how much more competitive they would become with superior automation?

Not correct. Many were working as corporate employees on salaries and have made smart investments.

Take this as an example:
Airtel:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunil_Mittal
A first generation entrepreneur, Sunil started his first business in April 1976[11] at the age of 18, with a capital investment of ₹20,000 (US$310) borrowed from his father. His first business was to make crankshafts for local bicycle manufacturers.

Flipkart founders:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sachin_Bansal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binny_Bansal
These two are competing with Amazon.

I asked you for slumdog billionaires, these are not slumdogs. One is from a political family and the other a upper middle class family. I just proved to you India is economically controlled by the few dozen corporate families working with a corrupted crony capitalist state. Please prove me wrong?

Give it time. In totalitarian govts, the potential for new startups growing big is very low.

China is a capitalistic, socialist, authoritarian government. We are not totalitarian, people are relatively free unless they want to overthrow the government.

That doesn't explain the startup boom in India.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/10/india-startup-boom-in-charts/

Tech startups are in fact way ahead of China.

What doesn't explain the startup boom? China also has a startup boom despite having a state dominated economy. So? Not sure how you define way ahead, China has larger successful startups compared to India.

I had quoted Microsoft and Google. DJI is too small to compare.

Our argument was about whether age defines success for companies, I gave you Google and Microsoft and you insist they were both software companies. Then I gave you Intel, qualcomm, Xiaomi, DJI, SF all relatively young multi-billion companies, some hardware, some software, some logistics. So age does not defined success, most private Chinese companies are less than 30 years old, created after the 1980s economic reform, they became global giants in 3 decades, imagine where would they be in another 20 years?

So you'd compare India's educated in the service industry to a shoemaker in China?

I wonder who's more threatened by automation.

No I would compare a skilled operator to an unskilled theoretical engineer. You don't seem to get the importance of vocational training with regards to industrial manufacturing prowess. You also don't seem to understand lower skilled Chinese workers are getting paid the same as your average IT engineers and these lower skilled workers are literate and can be up-skilled to operate more sophisticated systems. OTOH, India has 25% illiteracy and an unknown number of semi-literates. How are you going to provide jobs for them if not through manufacturing?

This is what I said. That the Chinese exports are less than half of India's.

Yeah, coolie jobs in ITES is worse than sweatshops, keep telling yourself that.

That's what I am also telling you, we are SECOND only to India despite you saying we don't have a services based economy which I proved to you otherwise. Imagine a non-English speaking workforce exporting half your ITES exports and also having a large ITES market bigger than all your exports combined. Ignorance is bliss!

Tech coolies are not worse than our 'sweatshops', but they are certainly paid not much better than them. LOL. The point is China and India need all the job we can find, not just low paid tech coolies. I want all jobs for Chinese, from the lower spectrum to the high. Understand? You need to create a million jobs a month just to keep your population employed, how many tech coolies can you employ? Also remember you have a 'demographic dividend' coming, LOL.

Nope. The reason we have a surplus is because a huge chunk of our services industry is protected.

Even if they are protected, the market is still minuscule compared to China which is an economy 5x larger and much more sophisticated. Your ITES industry is tuned to be tech coolies servicing primarily English speaking countries. Do you know how big is the call center industry in China, all speaking in Mandarin?

The scale of sophistication of the Chinese market is irrelevant. That's not translated to business outside for China. Example, only 5% of China's IT services is exported compared to over 70% for India.

And yet the 5% exported is half of your exports. How can it be irrelevant, we are concentrating on domestic consumption. Weren't you the one who keep on emphasizing that India is a domestic consumption based economy, then how does your largest industry not cater to your domestic market? Doesn't make sense isn't it?

 

[AndrewJin]

If it is informal, then how do you even quantified those unemployed? I just showed you information from your own Indian sources. In that case, you can also assume India is 100% employed. I have a feeling you guys now the problem you are facing but choose to live in denial.


Why is it wrong? How much you export defines how competitive your products and companies are. You were arguing that China does not have global companies. I just proved to you otherwise.



Yes, as usual, live in that little cocoon of yours. Stick your head into the sand and pretend nothing is going to hurt you. How is India going to have Chinese advantage in automation which requires, hundreds of thousands of skilled operators, investment in machinery and robots, and also manufacturing base for those robots without first embracing the revolution? Our goods are already cheaper in Indian markets despite having higher cost workers and tariff, imagine how much more competitive they would become with superior automation?


I asked you for slumdog billionaires, these are not slumdogs. One is from a political family and the other a upper middle class family. I just proved to you India is economically controlled by the few dozen corporate families working with a corrupted crony capitalist state. Please prove me wrong?



China is a capitalistic, socialist, authoritarian government. We are not totalitarian, people are relatively free unless they want to overthrow the government.



What doesn't explain the startup boom? China also has a startup boom despite having a state dominated economy. So? Not sure how you define way ahead, China has larger successful startups compared to India.


Our argument was about whether age defines success for companies, I gave you Google and Microsoft and you insist they were both software companies. Then I gave you Intel, qualcomm, Xiaomi, DJI, SF all relatively young multi-billion companies, some hardware, some software, some logistics. So age does not defined success, most private Chinese companies are less than 30 years old, created after the 1980s economic reform, they became global giants in 3 decades, imagine where would they be in another 20 years?




No I would compare a skilled operator to an unskilled theoretical engineer. You don't seem to get the importance of vocational training with regards to industrial manufacturing prowess. You also don't seem to understand lower skilled Chinese workers are getting paid the same as your average IT engineers and these lower skilled workers are literate and can be up-skilled to operate more sophisticated systems. OTOH, India has 25% illiteracy and an unknown number of semi-literates. How are you going to provide jobs for them if not through manufacturing?




That's what I am also telling you, we are SECOND only to India despite you saying we don't have a services based economy which I proved to you otherwise. Imagine a non-English speaking workforce exporting half your ITES exports and also having a large ITES market bigger than all your exports combined. Ignorance is bliss!

Tech coolies are not worse than our 'sweatshops', but they are certainly paid not much better than them. LOL. The point is China and India need all the job we can find, not just low paid tech coolies. I want all jobs for Chinese, from the lower spectrum to the high. Understand? You need to create a million jobs a month just to keep your population employed, how many tech coolies can you employ? Also remember you have a 'demographic dividend' coming, LOL.


Even if they are protected, the market is still minuscule compared to China which is an economy 5x larger and much more sophisticated. Your ITES industry is tuned to be tech coolies servicing primarily English speaking countries. Do you know how big is the call center industry in China, all speaking in Mandarin?



And yet the 5% exported is half of your exports. How can it be irrelevant, we are concentrating on domestic consumption. Weren't you the one who keep on emphasizing that India is a domestic consumption based economy, then how does your largest industry not cater to your domestic market? Doesn't make sense isn't it?

Indian economy is smaller than Western China. What is more interesting, India's economy growth is slower than Western China. China is still adding an entire Indian economy every 3-4 years.

Their best city is way worse than the capital of China's poorest province.