A Global Shift in Foreign Aid, Starting in India
- Thread starter santosh10
- Start date
santosh10
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,666
- Likes
- 177
Foreign cos pulling more money out of India
May 25 (Reuters) - Foreign direct investment, the sort of sticky long-term money India craves to fund its current account deficit and build up its infrastructure, may not be so stable after all.
According to a Nomura report, multinational companies have been pulling money out of India at an accelerating rate, moving $10.7 billion out of the country in 2011, up from $7.2 billion in 2010 and just $3.1 billion in 2009. :ranger:
Outward flows are bad news for a country that this week saw its rupee currency hit a new record low as investors worry about its hefty fiscal and current account shortfalls, slowing economic growth and policy gridlock.
Still, corporate funds continue to enter India even as existing investors exit. Inbound foreign direct investment surged 88 percent to a record $36.5 billion in the fiscal year that ended in March, according to official data.
"Global deleveraging may have forced companies to sell their Indian assets and repatriate funds to their home country," Nomura analysts wrote in the Friday note.
"At the same time, domestic push factors such as slowing potential growth, the high cost of doing business and regulatory uncertainty have weakened the investment climate, likely causing this erosion. This is not a good sign."
Telecoms companies Etisalat of Abu Dhabi and Bahrain Telecommunications Co are leaving India after their mobile phone licences were among those ordered cancelled by an Indian court amid a corruption probe.
New York Life recently exited its 26 percent stake in an Indian insurance venture with Max India for $530 million, while U.S. mutual fund giant Fidelity Worldwide Investment recently struck a deal to unload its India unit to local company L&T Finance Holdings.
Foreign companies have been increasingly frustrated by regulatory uncertainty and a lack of reforms. Rules that would allow foreign companies into the supermarket and airline industries are stalled.
Vodafone, the world's biggest mobile carrier, has repeatedly clashed with authorities in India, which is trying to collect more than $2 billion in taxes from it through a retroactive law change, even after India's highest court ruled in the company's favour.
Vodafone, the biggest overseas corporate investor in India, has said it will not walk away.
The Nomura report said the services, manufacturing and real estate sectors probably saw "the maximum outflow".
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/25/india-economy-fdi-idUSL4E8GP4EG20120525
.
May 25 (Reuters) - Foreign direct investment, the sort of sticky long-term money India craves to fund its current account deficit and build up its infrastructure, may not be so stable after all.
According to a Nomura report, multinational companies have been pulling money out of India at an accelerating rate, moving $10.7 billion out of the country in 2011, up from $7.2 billion in 2010 and just $3.1 billion in 2009. :ranger:
Outward flows are bad news for a country that this week saw its rupee currency hit a new record low as investors worry about its hefty fiscal and current account shortfalls, slowing economic growth and policy gridlock.
Still, corporate funds continue to enter India even as existing investors exit. Inbound foreign direct investment surged 88 percent to a record $36.5 billion in the fiscal year that ended in March, according to official data.
"Global deleveraging may have forced companies to sell their Indian assets and repatriate funds to their home country," Nomura analysts wrote in the Friday note.
"At the same time, domestic push factors such as slowing potential growth, the high cost of doing business and regulatory uncertainty have weakened the investment climate, likely causing this erosion. This is not a good sign."
Telecoms companies Etisalat of Abu Dhabi and Bahrain Telecommunications Co are leaving India after their mobile phone licences were among those ordered cancelled by an Indian court amid a corruption probe.
New York Life recently exited its 26 percent stake in an Indian insurance venture with Max India for $530 million, while U.S. mutual fund giant Fidelity Worldwide Investment recently struck a deal to unload its India unit to local company L&T Finance Holdings.
Foreign companies have been increasingly frustrated by regulatory uncertainty and a lack of reforms. Rules that would allow foreign companies into the supermarket and airline industries are stalled.
Vodafone, the world's biggest mobile carrier, has repeatedly clashed with authorities in India, which is trying to collect more than $2 billion in taxes from it through a retroactive law change, even after India's highest court ruled in the company's favour.
Vodafone, the biggest overseas corporate investor in India, has said it will not walk away.
The Nomura report said the services, manufacturing and real estate sectors probably saw "the maximum outflow".
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/25/india-economy-fdi-idUSL4E8GP4EG20120525
.
santosh10
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,666
- Likes
- 177
If India doesn't want our aid, stop it now, Cameron told after country labels £280m-a-year donations as 'peanuts' 
6 February 2012
David Cameron was under intense pressure last night to slash the £1billion in aid Britain gives to India after the country said it no longer wanted the money.
India's finance minister Pranab Mukherjee said the booming country should 'voluntarily' give up the £280million a year it receives from Britain. He told the Indian parliament: 'We do not require the aid. It is a peanut in our total development spending.'
It also emerged that in a leaked memo dating from 2010 India's then foreign minister Nirupama Rao suggested India should not accept any further aid from Britain's Department for International Development because of the 'negative publicity of Indian poverty promoted by DFID'.
Sources in Delhi suggested British officials begged India to accept the aid.
One commented: 'They said British ministers had spent political capital justifying the aid to their electorate.
'They said it would be highly embarrassing if [India] pulled the plug.'
The revelations raised fresh questions last night for ministers who have been struggling to defend the Indian aid programme in the face of criticism from the public and Conservative MPs.
They also risk raising fresh questions about the Coalition's controversial decision to pour billions more into foreign aid at a time of deep spending cuts at home. Tory MP Philip Davies called for the Indian aid programme to be cancelled immediately.
Mr Davies said: 'India spends tens of billions on defence and hundreds of millions a year on a space programme – in those circumstances it would be unacceptable to give them aid even if they were begging us for it. :coffee:
'Given that they don't even want it, it would be even more extraordinary if it were to be allowed to continue.
'There will be millions of hard-pressed families wondering why on earth the Government is wasting money in this way.'
Fellow Tory Douglas Carswell said: 'This is concrete proof that Britain's aid programme is run in the interests of Whitehall officials and the DFID machine.
'The fact is that India's economy is growing much faster than our own. We should be encouraging free trade with them and trying to learn from them rather than handing out patronising lectures.'
Tory MP Peter Bone urged ministers to abandon the 'vanity project' of pursuing a target to hand out 0.7 per cent of the UK's entire national income in aid.
He said: 'India has its own foreign aid programme so it is absurd for us to be still giving them aid. They are more than capable of looking after their own issues.
'As for the 0.7 per cent target, it is a vanity project that is being pursued for no good reason at all. I do not understand the Government's position on this and I don't think the British public do either.'
Some critics in India have also questioned the value of the aid, warning that much of it is lost to corruption and bureaucracy.
As recently as 2010 the country was the biggest net recipient of British aid, receiving £421million.
Despite India's rapid economic development the International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell decided last year to approve a further £1.1billion in aid over the next four years.
The timing of the latest revelations is particularly embarrassing for ministers, coming in the wake of India's decision last week to reject the British-built Typhoon fighter jet as preferred candidate for a £13billion defence deal.
Mr Mitchell said last year that the continuing aid programme was partly 'about seeking to sell Typhoon'.
British foreign aid: India tells Britain 'we don't need the peanuts you offer us' | Mail Online
.
=>
the above news is welcomed and its good if the British government live in the above belief. as it would at least avoid "Pig Talks" before any big deal/ tender like MRCA
6 February 2012
David Cameron was under intense pressure last night to slash the £1billion in aid Britain gives to India after the country said it no longer wanted the money.
India's finance minister Pranab Mukherjee said the booming country should 'voluntarily' give up the £280million a year it receives from Britain. He told the Indian parliament: 'We do not require the aid. It is a peanut in our total development spending.'
It also emerged that in a leaked memo dating from 2010 India's then foreign minister Nirupama Rao suggested India should not accept any further aid from Britain's Department for International Development because of the 'negative publicity of Indian poverty promoted by DFID'.
Sources in Delhi suggested British officials begged India to accept the aid.
One commented: 'They said British ministers had spent political capital justifying the aid to their electorate.'They said it would be highly embarrassing if [India] pulled the plug.'
The revelations raised fresh questions last night for ministers who have been struggling to defend the Indian aid programme in the face of criticism from the public and Conservative MPs.
They also risk raising fresh questions about the Coalition's controversial decision to pour billions more into foreign aid at a time of deep spending cuts at home. Tory MP Philip Davies called for the Indian aid programme to be cancelled immediately.
Mr Davies said: 'India spends tens of billions on defence and hundreds of millions a year on a space programme – in those circumstances it would be unacceptable to give them aid even if they were begging us for it. :coffee:
'Given that they don't even want it, it would be even more extraordinary if it were to be allowed to continue.
'There will be millions of hard-pressed families wondering why on earth the Government is wasting money in this way.'
Fellow Tory Douglas Carswell said: 'This is concrete proof that Britain's aid programme is run in the interests of Whitehall officials and the DFID machine.
'The fact is that India's economy is growing much faster than our own. We should be encouraging free trade with them and trying to learn from them rather than handing out patronising lectures.'
Tory MP Peter Bone urged ministers to abandon the 'vanity project' of pursuing a target to hand out 0.7 per cent of the UK's entire national income in aid.
He said: 'India has its own foreign aid programme so it is absurd for us to be still giving them aid. They are more than capable of looking after their own issues.
'As for the 0.7 per cent target, it is a vanity project that is being pursued for no good reason at all. I do not understand the Government's position on this and I don't think the British public do either.'
Some critics in India have also questioned the value of the aid, warning that much of it is lost to corruption and bureaucracy.
As recently as 2010 the country was the biggest net recipient of British aid, receiving £421million.
Despite India's rapid economic development the International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell decided last year to approve a further £1.1billion in aid over the next four years.
The timing of the latest revelations is particularly embarrassing for ministers, coming in the wake of India's decision last week to reject the British-built Typhoon fighter jet as preferred candidate for a £13billion defence deal.
Mr Mitchell said last year that the continuing aid programme was partly 'about seeking to sell Typhoon'.
British foreign aid: India tells Britain 'we don't need the peanuts you offer us' | Mail Online
.
=>
@ FARHAAN, WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO OUR MOON MISSION
nahiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
the above news is welcomed and its good if the British government live in the above belief. as it would at least avoid "Pig Talks" before any big deal/ tender like MRCA
Last edited:
santosh10
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,666
- Likes
- 177
@Ray
sir, the above fight between Indian and British side occurred during MRCA deal, which was won by Rafale. and only one statement i like in the above news, that is, "India's wishes to 'voluntarily' give up the Aid" but they couldn't, as British side made them accept the Aid. and then all these Pigs Talks start.....
sir, the above fight between Indian and British side occurred during MRCA deal, which was won by Rafale. and only one statement i like in the above news, that is, "India's wishes to 'voluntarily' give up the Aid" but they couldn't, as British side made them accept the Aid
. and then all these Pigs Talks start.....
santosh10
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,666
- Likes
- 177
.first here, the Table by World Bank as below clearly tells us the dominance of China on the side of High Tech Productions, the real Rise of China
also its good to see India exporting more High Tech Products than Brazil, as below. it does says that India is somewhere, but yes, far behind China :ranger:
even if High Tech business of China has a share of imported component too, but we do know that it would only rise :ranger:
=> High-technology exports (current US$) | Data | Table
Indian Economy on PPP would come closed to $11.0trillion, if we include 'undocumented' part of GDP too
we find on PPP, Indian economy closed to $8.0trillion by end 2015, more than total of UK+Canada+Australia+Pakistan+Bangladesh+NewZealand+other Commonwealth countries...
on PPP basis, we find Indian economy closed to $8.0trillion by end 2015...
The World Factbook
but it still doesn't includes the 'undocumented' part of GDP, the share of GDP of developing countries, which doesn't come in light, remains undocumented. which estimated over 30% in case of developing countries like India, Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, China, Sri Lanka etc.
and its not just the "non-Taxed" or "black money", but, more than half of the people of India aren't even aware that they would pay tax on the salary they earn....
The World Factbook
hence, i would say, by end of 2015, Indian economy would come closed to $11.0trillion on PPP term, if we consider the undocumented part of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) also.
nowdays UK and their allies are hopeful to maintain food supply for their coming generation through India only, have bet theri every credibility to get this "Elephant", whose economy size is bigger than the total Commonwealth Economies as whole. with dreams of source of money and power from this country,only, by using Bangladeshi souls to occupy bodies of Indian govt-military-political people, including businessmen too...
(the technologies of NASA-US, which were developed by the Indian immigrant professionals there itself, with immigrant professionals of other developing countries and Japan etc..... and this is the final outcome of these US's technologies, which is being used for every form of crimes in the countries like India... a disaster on this world as whole by UK and their allies...)
santosh10
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,666
- Likes
- 177
India failed to copy Chinese Economic Reform in 1991
Average GDP Growth Rate of Asian Industrialized Countries Since 1981
My this post is just to keep a record of the comparative 'Average' Growth rate of India with "Newly Asian Industrialized" countries, along with the Matured Industrialized Asian countries like Korea, Japan, Singapore as below.
this effort is just to keep an eye on the Average Growth Rate of India since 1981 to 2013, as compare to other 'Asian' Industrialized Countries :thumb:
Select Country or Country Groups
Newly industrialized country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
=> Growth Rate Comparison since 1980 to 2013, for the 34 years
1st, China: 9.89% since 1980
2nd, India: 6.1% since 1981
3rd, Philippines: 3.5% since 1980
4th, Thailand: 5.4% since 1980
5th, Indonesia: 5.2% since 1980
6th, Malaysia: 5.8% since 1980
7th, Singapore: 6.4% since 1980
8th, Korea: 6.0% since 1980
9th, Taiwan: 5.5% since 1980
10th, Japan: 2.1% since 1980
Select Country or Country Groups
Newly industrialized country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
=> here, we generally know 1991 Economic Reform as the year, till then Per Capita Income of India was higher than that of China. and this comparison clearly tells us, how population growth rate of around 2% since 1981, with 500mil extra people this way, has covered every success of India since 1947. while total number of Middle Class of India is itself more than total population at the time of freedom, 1947
=> we have a comparison of India and China's Per Capita Income on PPP since 1990 as below, telling us the difference between Indian Open Market strategy with Chinese one since 1990...... India could have only around 5.4% growth rate for the 12 years in between 1991 to 2001, because of failing to even 'copy' the Chinese or ASEAN region Economic Reforms in 1991. even during 80s, the growth rate of India was at around 5.8%, before 1991 economic reform, which pulled India's growth rate down to 5.4% during the 12 years time since 1991 to 2002
)
first 8.0%+ groath rate was achieved by 2003-04, under Vajpayee government, and then he retired by June 2004. and it was mainly because of the investment initiatives, he adopted since 1997, and its effects we saw since 2003-04 onwards...
even MBA degree expires in every 10 years time, clearly stating, 1991 economic reform failed to copy those like China or ASEAN region, and the blame goes to the concerned government departments as whole....
India GDP - real growth rate - Economy
(and yes, India then became an "investment driven growth" economy since the Vajpayee government, similar to CHina-ASEAN region, true. higher the investments in infrastructure, higher the growth rate achieved....)
=> BRITAIN GDP PER CAPITA PPP at 1991, $23,924.22
United Kingdom GDP per capita PPP | 1990-2014 | Data | Chart | Calendar
RUSSIA GDP PER CAPITA PPP at 1991, $15,625.62
Russia GDP per capita PPP | 1990-2014 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast
INDIA GDP PER CAPITA PPP at 1991, $1,812.36 :ranger:
India GDP per capita PPP | 1990-2014 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast
CHINA GDP PER CAPITA PPP AT 1991, $1,554.01
China GDP per capita PPP | 1990-2014 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast
=> while Average Growth Rate of India since 1951 itself stands at around 5.81% to date.....
=> with that, there was a 'plagiarism case' on Indian Economic Reform in 1991 too
Average GDP Growth Rate of Asian Industrialized Countries Since 1981
My this post is just to keep a record of the comparative 'Average' Growth rate of India with "Newly Asian Industrialized" countries, along with the Matured Industrialized Asian countries like Korea, Japan, Singapore as below.
this effort is just to keep an eye on the Average Growth Rate of India since 1981 to 2013, as compare to other 'Asian' Industrialized Countries :thumb:
Select Country or Country Groups
Newly industrialized country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
=> Growth Rate Comparison since 1980 to 2013, for the 34 years
1st, China: 9.89% since 1980
2nd, India: 6.1% since 1981
3rd, Philippines: 3.5% since 1980
4th, Thailand: 5.4% since 1980
5th, Indonesia: 5.2% since 1980
6th, Malaysia: 5.8% since 1980
7th, Singapore: 6.4% since 1980
8th, Korea: 6.0% since 1980
9th, Taiwan: 5.5% since 1980
10th, Japan: 2.1% since 1980
Select Country or Country Groups
Newly industrialized country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
=> here, we generally know 1991 Economic Reform as the year, till then Per Capita Income of India was higher than that of China. and this comparison clearly tells us, how population growth rate of around 2% since 1981, with 500mil extra people this way, has covered every success of India since 1947. while total number of Middle Class of India is itself more than total population at the time of freedom, 1947
=> we have a comparison of India and China's Per Capita Income on PPP since 1990 as below, telling us the difference between Indian Open Market strategy with Chinese one since 1990...... India could have only around 5.4% growth rate for the 12 years in between 1991 to 2001, because of failing to even 'copy' the Chinese or ASEAN region Economic Reforms in 1991. even during 80s, the growth rate of India was at around 5.8%, before 1991 economic reform, which pulled India's growth rate down to 5.4% during the 12 years time since 1991 to 2002
)first 8.0%+ groath rate was achieved by 2003-04, under Vajpayee government, and then he retired by June 2004. and it was mainly because of the investment initiatives, he adopted since 1997, and its effects we saw since 2003-04 onwards...
even MBA degree expires in every 10 years time, clearly stating, 1991 economic reform failed to copy those like China or ASEAN region, and the blame goes to the concerned government departments as whole....
India GDP - real growth rate - Economy
(and yes, India then became an "investment driven growth" economy since the Vajpayee government, similar to CHina-ASEAN region, true. higher the investments in infrastructure, higher the growth rate achieved....)
=> BRITAIN GDP PER CAPITA PPP at 1991, $23,924.22
United Kingdom GDP per capita PPP | 1990-2014 | Data | Chart | Calendar
RUSSIA GDP PER CAPITA PPP at 1991, $15,625.62
Russia GDP per capita PPP | 1990-2014 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast
INDIA GDP PER CAPITA PPP at 1991, $1,812.36 :ranger:
India GDP per capita PPP | 1990-2014 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast
CHINA GDP PER CAPITA PPP AT 1991, $1,554.01
China GDP per capita PPP | 1990-2014 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast
=> while Average Growth Rate of India since 1951 itself stands at around 5.81% to date.....
=> with that, there was a 'plagiarism case' on Indian Economic Reform in 1991 too
India copied Pak reforms in 1990s: Nawaz Sharif
Sharif was the prime minister in October 1990 and initiated an ambitious economic programme. In June 1991, Rao became the Indian prime minister and appointed Manmohan Singh as the finance minister.
India copied Pak reforms in 1990s: Nawaz Sharif | Zee News
santosh10
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,666
- Likes
- 177
@Ancient Indian
Comparison of 10 years of 1981-90 to 1991-2000, considering early 1991 "Economic Reform" of India
considering even MBA degree expires in 10 years time
sir, further to the above post, we have some fundamental analysis of India's "Economic Reform" in early 1991 as below:
1st; we have Excel Sheet Calculation of 10 years of 'Average Economic Growth Rate of India, for 1981-90 and 1991-2000, considering early 1991 as the year of Economic Reform. and 1981-90 10years, just before 1991 Economic Reform.
Average Growth Rate 1981-90 = 5.58%
Average Growth Rate 1991-2000= 5.57%
(considering, even a MBA degree expires in 10 years time, and 2001+ of India belongs to the steps taken by Mr Vajpayee government during 1998-2004 periods....)
India GDP - real growth rate - Economy
2nd; while comparing with China, its 'Excel Sheet' calculation of the 10 years of 1991-2000 as below:
Average Growth Rate of India for the 10years 1991-2000 = 5.57% (or 55.7% marks for Mr Manmohan Singh, "passed".)
India GDP - real growth rate - Economy
Average Growth Rate of China for the 10years of 1991-2000 = 10.4% (or, 100%+ marking for Chinese Economic Reform...)
China GDP - real growth rate - Economy
3rd; we just discussed, if India suffered with Asian Economic Crisis during the 1998+, then the same is true for China also???? and if India's Economic Reform occurred by early 1991, you have no discount of leaving the year 1991 or 1992, when the growth rate of India was lower....
4th; Chinese Economic Reform occurred by early 80s, following ASIAN economic reforms too, which resulted in 8.0%+ average growth rate of Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore etc during the whole 80s, check. and there was always a joke stating, "Per Capita Income of India was higher than that of China till 1991, as they couldn't even 'copy' Chinese or ASEAN Economic Reform of early 80s.
5th; even till the period of 1991-97, the Rao government with the Finance minister Mr M.M.Singh, the Excel Sheet calculation of India's growth rate is "5.24%", much lower than 1981-90 10years period of 5.58% average growth rate..
India GDP - real growth rate - Economy
.
6th; we find, total foreign investment in India during 1998-2004 period of Vajpayee government was much higher than 1991-97 period of Rao government. which does state more aggressive FDI policy of Vajpayee government than the Rao government. and yes, India too took the path of "Investment Driven Growth Rate", similar to China.... higher the investment in infrastructure, higher growth rate. for example of the current 5 years of plan, having around $1.0trillion investment in infrastructure, means for around $200billion a year in the $2.0trillion Indian economy on nominal terms, hence we would get at least 4%+ growth rate due to Investment in infrastructure only....
7th; and i repeat, the calculation of Indian Economic Reform 'includes' 1991, leaving no discount for manipulation of 10years growth rate comparison of 10 years of 1991-2000 to 1981-90, the 10 years of just before "early 1991 of Indian Economic Reform"... and yes, the strategic decision is taken by the concern departments as whole, so it was more the "Rao Government Economic Reform", in its true sense....
.
8th; The Share of Agriculture in GDP:- one more dominant factor in GDP calculation of Asian Economies, whats the share of agriculture which may hardly grow at around 2% on long run, mainly in case of Asian developing economies like India-ASEAN-China????? we find, GDP's overall growth rate is mainly determinant of Industrial and Service sector's contribution.
and for India, the 1981-90 10years time had around 35% share of Agriculture in Economy, 'on average for 1o years of 1981-90'.
while the 1991 to 2000 10years period had around 25% share of Agriculture in GDP, "on average" of 1991 to 2000.
means, 1981-90 period does suffer this dis-advantage too??? showing bit better performance of 80s as compare to India's Economic Reform period of 90s....
Comparison of 10 years of 1981-90 to 1991-2000, considering early 1991 "Economic Reform" of India
considering even MBA degree expires in 10 years time
sir, further to the above post, we have some fundamental analysis of India's "Economic Reform" in early 1991 as below:
1st; we have Excel Sheet Calculation of 10 years of 'Average Economic Growth Rate of India, for 1981-90 and 1991-2000, considering early 1991 as the year of Economic Reform. and 1981-90 10years, just before 1991 Economic Reform.
Average Growth Rate 1981-90 = 5.58%
Average Growth Rate 1991-2000= 5.57%
(considering, even a MBA degree expires in 10 years time, and 2001+ of India belongs to the steps taken by Mr Vajpayee government during 1998-2004 periods....)
India GDP - real growth rate - Economy
.
2nd; while comparing with China, its 'Excel Sheet' calculation of the 10 years of 1991-2000 as below:
Average Growth Rate of India for the 10years 1991-2000 = 5.57% (or 55.7% marks for Mr Manmohan Singh, "passed".)
India GDP - real growth rate - Economy
Average Growth Rate of China for the 10years of 1991-2000 = 10.4% (or, 100%+ marking for Chinese Economic Reform...)
China GDP - real growth rate - Economy
3rd; we just discussed, if India suffered with Asian Economic Crisis during the 1998+, then the same is true for China also???? and if India's Economic Reform occurred by early 1991, you have no discount of leaving the year 1991 or 1992, when the growth rate of India was lower....
4th; Chinese Economic Reform occurred by early 80s, following ASIAN economic reforms too, which resulted in 8.0%+ average growth rate of Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore etc during the whole 80s, check. and there was always a joke stating, "Per Capita Income of India was higher than that of China till 1991, as they couldn't even 'copy' Chinese or ASEAN Economic Reform of early 80s.
and we are discussing, why the 10years period of 1991 to 2000 Economic Reform of India had 'bit' lesser growth rate than the 1981-1990 10 years period, the 10 years of just 1991 Economic Reform? (5.57% average growth rate during 1991-2000, as compare to 5.58% average growth rate of 1981-1990 period? on this Excel Sheet Calculation)
5th; even till the period of 1991-97, the Rao government with the Finance minister Mr M.M.Singh, the Excel Sheet calculation of India's growth rate is "5.24%", much lower than 1981-90 10years period of 5.58% average growth rate..
India GDP - real growth rate - Economy
.
6th; we find, total foreign investment in India during 1998-2004 period of Vajpayee government was much higher than 1991-97 period of Rao government. which does state more aggressive FDI policy of Vajpayee government than the Rao government. and yes, India too took the path of "Investment Driven Growth Rate", similar to China.... higher the investment in infrastructure, higher growth rate. for example of the current 5 years of plan, having around $1.0trillion investment in infrastructure, means for around $200billion a year in the $2.0trillion Indian economy on nominal terms, hence we would get at least 4%+ growth rate due to Investment in infrastructure only....
7th; and i repeat, the calculation of Indian Economic Reform 'includes' 1991, leaving no discount for manipulation of 10years growth rate comparison of 10 years of 1991-2000 to 1981-90, the 10 years of just before "early 1991 of Indian Economic Reform"... and yes, the strategic decision is taken by the concern departments as whole, so it was more the "Rao Government Economic Reform", in its true sense....
.
8th; The Share of Agriculture in GDP:- one more dominant factor in GDP calculation of Asian Economies, whats the share of agriculture which may hardly grow at around 2% on long run, mainly in case of Asian developing economies like India-ASEAN-China????? we find, GDP's overall growth rate is mainly determinant of Industrial and Service sector's contribution.
and for India, the 1981-90 10years time had around 35% share of Agriculture in Economy, 'on average for 1o years of 1981-90'.
while the 1991 to 2000 10years period had around 25% share of Agriculture in GDP, "on average" of 1991 to 2000.
means, 1981-90 period does suffer this dis-advantage too??? showing bit better performance of 80s as compare to India's Economic Reform period of 90s....
Last edited:
santosh10
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,666
- Likes
- 177
.
9th; last but not least, first 8%+ growth rate of India was achieved by the year 2003-04,and then Mr Vajpayee retired by June 2004, after 12 years of Economic Reform of early 1991.
http://www.rediff.com/money/2004/jun/30gdp.htm
while, even before Vajpayee government which started since 1998, "the 7 years" of 1991 to 1997 of Rao led economic reform achieved hardly around 5.24 average growth rate, as per Excel Sheet calculation from the IMF's data's as below.
India GDP - real growth rate - Economy
.
10th; and what the "economic reform" really means for? check the growth rate of China, including ASEAN region like Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore, since their early 80s economic reform, as below. over 8.0%+ growth for these economies was a news almost every year during the 80s, while this happiness India achieved after 12 years of 1991 economic reform, by the financial year 2003-04
India is best comparable to CHina+ASEAN region 'only'. and its very true that first India had a 'late' Open Market Strategy, and also we got no learning of early 80s economic revolution in China+ASEAN.... just have a look on the 80s growth rate of China and ASEAN region as below, who had these open market strategy mainly since the early 80s..... and compare to first India's 8.0%+ growth rate by 2003-04,after 12 years of 1991 economic reform....
Malaysia: http://www.indexmundi.com/malaysia/gdp_real_growth_rate.html
China: http://www.indexmundi.com/china/gdp_real_growth_rate.html
Thailand: http://www.indexmundi.com/thailand/gdp_real_growth_rate.html
Indonesia: http://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/gdp_real_growth_rate.html
Singapore: http://www.indexmundi.com/singapore/gdp_real_growth_rate.html
9th; last but not least, first 8%+ growth rate of India was achieved by the year 2003-04,and then Mr Vajpayee retired by June 2004, after 12 years of Economic Reform of early 1991.
http://www.rediff.com/money/2004/jun/30gdp.htm
while, even before Vajpayee government which started since 1998, "the 7 years" of 1991 to 1997 of Rao led economic reform achieved hardly around 5.24 average growth rate, as per Excel Sheet calculation from the IMF's data's as below.
India GDP - real growth rate - Economy
.
10th; and what the "economic reform" really means for? check the growth rate of China, including ASEAN region like Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore, since their early 80s economic reform, as below. over 8.0%+ growth for these economies was a news almost every year during the 80s, while this happiness India achieved after 12 years of 1991 economic reform, by the financial year 2003-04
India is best comparable to CHina+ASEAN region 'only'. and its very true that first India had a 'late' Open Market Strategy, and also we got no learning of early 80s economic revolution in China+ASEAN.... just have a look on the 80s growth rate of China and ASEAN region as below, who had these open market strategy mainly since the early 80s..... and compare to first India's 8.0%+ growth rate by 2003-04,after 12 years of 1991 economic reform....
Malaysia: http://www.indexmundi.com/malaysia/gdp_real_growth_rate.html
China: http://www.indexmundi.com/china/gdp_real_growth_rate.html
Thailand: http://www.indexmundi.com/thailand/gdp_real_growth_rate.html
Indonesia: http://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/gdp_real_growth_rate.html
Singapore: http://www.indexmundi.com/singapore/gdp_real_growth_rate.html
Last edited:
santosh10
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,666
- Likes
- 177
.
rev10, Income-Debt-Buying Power comparison of Indians, British and Americans
(in exchange rates terms)
Per Capita income of US = $50,000 (around)
Per Capita Income of UK = $38,000 (around)
Per Capita Income of India = $2,000 (around)
25 times difference
.
=> Government Debt
Government Debt per Capita in US = $18.5trillion for 310 million population = $60,000
Government Debt per Capita in India = $1.2trillion for 1.25billion population = $1,000
Government Debt per Capita in UK = $2.2trillion for 64million population = $34,000
=> "Total Debt" Per Capita of US = $61.0trillion for 310million population = $190,00 per person (around)
"Total Debt" Per Capita of India = $3.0trillion for 1.25billion population = $2,500 per person (around)
Total Debt Per Capita on UK = $12.0trillion for 64 million population = $190,000 per person (around)
around 80 times higher
=> buying products in Market, would be around 6 to 10 times difference, as per my experience.
flat white medium size coffee in India at 30 cents and in Sydney its $3.2 (10 times difference)
something we usual buy, a mineral water for Rs15 (30cents) in Delhi, while it was around $2.4, the cheapest one, for a similar one liter mineral water in Sydney.....
the cheapest Chinese take away food at $12 plus $2.0 for water, as compare to i pay around Rs90 ($1.5) a time here in Delhi
renting flat in Sydney starts with around $350 per week, the cheapest, means around $1,500 per month, plus other charges. as compare to renting a flat in my city, Lucknow, at around Rs 15,000 a month ($300).
parking in city, as you first drive to a shopping complex and then buy food whose prices isn't much different than India, for example. and similarly, even if you watch a movie, you pay dollar as compare to rupees in India.
even mobile charge at around 30 paisa per minute in India, less than 0.5 cent, while its around 15 cents per minute in Australia....
even for transportation, its around Rs 20 rupees(30 cents) in Delhi metro, as compare to minimum $3.5 one way in Perth-Sydney metro.....
i would put "on ground" purchasing power difference at around 6 to 10 times between India and US-Aus. the prices which matters us, the prices of driving, renting, food, travelling, mobile etc.... :tup:
hence, $2,000 'exchange rate term' per capita income of India would stand at around $14,000, using the factor of '7.0', as per its prices in US, for the what we buy-use the money on the ground, which affect the buying power of people.
hence this way, we find per capita income of India at around $15,000, as compare to per capita income of around $50,000 and $38,000 in case of US and UK respectively....
(considering Per Capita Income in the developing countries like India-Philippines-Vietnam etc rise by over 6%+ per year with inflation too...)
.
=> while for the developing counties like India have their 40%+ GDP remains "undocumented", simply because they dont show their half of the salary. so even if we consider the factor just at around "5.0", GDP Per Capita of India would still come at around $15,000 on PPP, as compare to around $38,000 in UK and $50,000 in US. while high growth rate of countries like India-Philippines-Indonesia-Vietnam-China etc does promise a brighter future, while the today's OECD economies are mostly saturated, having done hefty cuts in budget expenditure since 2009 recession too, hence limited investment has further undermined the growth prospects. which would hard for them to even match with their 1.5% average growth rate of last 25years since 1991 too...
List of countries by GDP (PPP) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
.
=> further, as discussed in the above post, the term "Total Debt" or "Overall Debt" includes Government Debt+Household Debt+Business debt, mainly....
its a rough calculation for US-UK-India from the picture of 'The Economist' newspaper as below. an article about US's total debt, here we have.....
Total US debt soars to nearly $60 trn, foreshadows new recession — RT USA
=> the 'factored' Total Debt on major OECD economies is as below:-
rev10, Income-Debt-Buying Power comparison of Indians, British and Americans
(in exchange rates terms)
Per Capita income of US = $50,000 (around)
Per Capita Income of UK = $38,000 (around)
Per Capita Income of India = $2,000 (around)
25 times difference
.
=> Government Debt
Government Debt per Capita in US = $18.5trillion for 310 million population = $60,000
Government Debt per Capita in India = $1.2trillion for 1.25billion population = $1,000
Government Debt per Capita in UK = $2.2trillion for 64million population = $34,000
=> "Total Debt" Per Capita of US = $61.0trillion for 310million population = $190,00 per person (around)
"Total Debt" Per Capita of India = $3.0trillion for 1.25billion population = $2,500 per person (around)
Total Debt Per Capita on UK = $12.0trillion for 64 million population = $190,000 per person (around)
around 80 times higher
=> buying products in Market, would be around 6 to 10 times difference, as per my experience.
flat white medium size coffee in India at 30 cents and in Sydney its $3.2 (10 times difference)
something we usual buy, a mineral water for Rs15 (30cents) in Delhi, while it was around $2.4, the cheapest one, for a similar one liter mineral water in Sydney.....
the cheapest Chinese take away food at $12 plus $2.0 for water, as compare to i pay around Rs90 ($1.5) a time here in Delhi
renting flat in Sydney starts with around $350 per week, the cheapest, means around $1,500 per month, plus other charges. as compare to renting a flat in my city, Lucknow, at around Rs 15,000 a month ($300).
parking in city, as you first drive to a shopping complex and then buy food whose prices isn't much different than India, for example. and similarly, even if you watch a movie, you pay dollar as compare to rupees in India.
even mobile charge at around 30 paisa per minute in India, less than 0.5 cent, while its around 15 cents per minute in Australia....
even for transportation, its around Rs 20 rupees(30 cents) in Delhi metro, as compare to minimum $3.5 one way in Perth-Sydney metro.....
i would put "on ground" purchasing power difference at around 6 to 10 times between India and US-Aus. the prices which matters us, the prices of driving, renting, food, travelling, mobile etc.... :tup:
hence, $2,000 'exchange rate term' per capita income of India would stand at around $14,000, using the factor of '7.0', as per its prices in US, for the what we buy-use the money on the ground, which affect the buying power of people.
hence this way, we find per capita income of India at around $15,000, as compare to per capita income of around $50,000 and $38,000 in case of US and UK respectively....
(considering Per Capita Income in the developing countries like India-Philippines-Vietnam etc rise by over 6%+ per year with inflation too...)
.
=> while for the developing counties like India have their 40%+ GDP remains "undocumented", simply because they dont show their half of the salary. so even if we consider the factor just at around "5.0", GDP Per Capita of India would still come at around $15,000 on PPP, as compare to around $38,000 in UK and $50,000 in US. while high growth rate of countries like India-Philippines-Indonesia-Vietnam-China etc does promise a brighter future, while the today's OECD economies are mostly saturated, having done hefty cuts in budget expenditure since 2009 recession too, hence limited investment has further undermined the growth prospects. which would hard for them to even match with their 1.5% average growth rate of last 25years since 1991 too...
List of countries by GDP (PPP) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
.
=> further, as discussed in the above post, the term "Total Debt" or "Overall Debt" includes Government Debt+Household Debt+Business debt, mainly....
its a rough calculation for US-UK-India from the picture of 'The Economist' newspaper as below. an article about US's total debt, here we have.....
Total US debt soars to nearly $60 trn, foreshadows new recession — RT USA
.
=> the 'factored' Total Debt on major OECD economies is as below:-
