Indian Economy: News and Discussion

[Roshan]

Depending on how the exchange rate goes I'd say we should get to $5k+ per capita by 2030 quite easily.

 

[Shuturmurg]

There is hunger and malnutrition in India, that's for sure, the thing though is NFHS is most likely overestimating it and by quite a margin.

Some data:
NFHS 5 tracker(2019-2020):

Stunting	Underweight	Wasting
35%	32%	19%

Poshan tracker(November 2023 data):

Stunting	Underweight	Wasting
37%	17%	6%

Now Poshan tracker is actually far more reliable. It's a real time community based monitoring app that monitors more than 75 million children. The data is entered by Asha workers each month.

NFHS skews rural and their dataset is much smaller, just 7 lakh households are surveyed. Poshan data also is rural only since it sources the data exclusively from Anganwadi centers. If you also include urban India, as an overall %age, the above numbers might be even lower.

But of course the shitty German and other Soros funded NGO's + their Liberandu coolies will continue to use the 4 year old poor quality NFHS data and other random shitty opinion polls.

And Nigeria for god's sake is literally having food riots where people were looting local granaries last week. No such riots in India. No way in hell we're worse than them.

Data Source :https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1988614

Even there 37% stunting is too high, even for our income peer groups. For eg: For Vietnam it is 19%, Indonesia 21% and Sri Lanka 15% (this after rising for 2 years due to economic issues). My hunch is this is because of non-balanced diet.

 

[ezsasa]

Even there 37% stunting is too high, even for our income peer groups. For eg: For Vietnam it is 19%, Indonesia 21% and Sri Lanka 15% (this after rising for 2 years due to economic issues). My hunch is this is because of non-balanced diet.

1998 - 51%
2005 - 44%
2010 - no data
2015 - 38 %
2019 - 35 %
2023 - ?

if this is historical data on stunting, what would be your takeaway from this?

National Family Health Survey

 

[Crazywithmath]

1998 - 51%
2005 - 44%
2010 - no data
2015 - 38 %
2019 - 35 %
2023 - ?

if this is historical data on stunting, what would be your takeaway from this?

National Family Health Survey

If more than half of the children born in the '90s were 'truly' stunted there would be massive socioeconomic repurcussions and India would not be experiencing 8% real growth. This is why I keep saying findings of the NFHS are not worth the papers they are printed on - we should simply scrap this shit and start afresh with a complete overhaul.

 

[ezsasa]

If more than half of the children born in the '90s were 'truly' stunted there would be massive socioeconomic repurcussions and India would not be experiencing 8% real growth. This is why I keep saying findings of the NFHS are not worth the papers they are printed on - we should simply scrap this shit and start afresh with a complete overhaul.

how is stunting of 3 year olds related to 8% growth in 90's ?

 

[sauntheninja]

 

[NutCracker]

how is stunting of 3 year olds related to 8% growth in 90's ?

He meant 8% growth now ..
those kids are the workforce now .

 

[ezsasa]

He meant 8% growth now ..
those kids are the workforce now .

this is going to need a thesis level answer, which is beyond my capacity. i haven't seen any domestic academic study which look at this from a causation angle, most available academic studies are correlation and derived from global academic papers which in turn rely on NHFS data for India. causation would be, tracking a lakh people across the country who were recorded as stunted and how are they placed economically today, but even it would not give a correct picture, since India is a statistical data nightmare, nothing is ever truly accurate.

but let me try giving some response. but first we need to have some baseline, without it the convo will not remain anchored and will keep floating all over, in this case let's presume a baseline that NHFS data is correct.

same correlation of stunting and GDP growth rate can also be interpreted as, if there was lesser stunting GDP growth would have been more, that 8% growth is being achieved inspite of past and present historical stunting numbers.

we can add one more layer of complexity too, i.e supply side and consumption side. on supply side our economic complexity index comes into play, there is enough diversity in the economy that it can accommodate HDI of all types. on consumption/demand side, if we presume stunted population is mostly in bottom of the pyramid. it's not the case of zero consumption, subsidised consumption perhaps, but some level of consumption is happening and these numbers do get recorded in the GDP estimates.

https://www.orfonline.org/research/the-importance-of-nutrition-in-building-the-human-capital

note : i know i have taken too many liberties since topic is such, every sentence will have inbuilt unspecified caveats.

 

[Crazywithmath]

this is going to need a thesis level answer, which is beyond my capacity. i haven't seen any domestic academic study which look at this from a causation angle, most available academic studies are correlation and derived from global academic papers which in turn rely on NHFS data for India. causation would be, tracking a lakh people across the country who were recorded as stunted and how are they placed economically today, but even it would not give a correct picture, since India is a statistical data nightmare, nothing is ever truly accurate.

but let me try giving some response. but first we need to have some baseline, without it the convo will not remain anchored and will keep floating all over, in this case let's presume a baseline that NHFS data is correct.

same correlation of stunting and GDP growth rate can also be interpreted as, if there was lesser stunting GDP growth would have been more, that 8% growth is being achieved inspite of past and present historical stunting numbers.

we can add one more layer of complexity too, i.e supply side and consumption side. on supply side our economic complexity index comes into play, there is enough diversity in the economy that it can accommodate HDI of all types. on consumption side, if we presume stunted population is mostly in bottom of the pyramid. it's not the case of zero consumption, subsidised consumption perhaps, but some level of consumption is happening and these numbers do get recorded in the GDP estimates.

https://www.orfonline.org/research/the-importance-of-nutrition-in-building-the-human-capital

note : i know i have taken too many liberties since topic is such, every sentence will have inbuilt unspecified caveats.

There are peer reviewed studies correlating infant health indicators with future economic growth (a few decades down the line). Of course, none of those studies are done on India (mostly focusing on the OG miracle economies of Japan, Korea, Singapore, Israel etc) but the broader trends should hold regardless. You can count the nations that experienced consistent 6%+ growth for at least two decades in your fingers and I am pretty damn sure not one of them had a stunting rate anywhere close to 50% a decade prior to their high growth phase.

 

[ezsasa]

There are peer reviewed studies correlating infant health indicators with future economic growth (a few decades down the line). Of course, none of those studies are done on India (mostly focusing on the OG miracle economies of Japan, Korea, Singapore, Israel etc) but the broader trends should hold regardless. You can count the nations that experienced consistent 6%+ growth for at least two decades in your fingers and I am pretty damn sure not one of them had a stunting rate anywhere close to 50% a decade prior to their high growth phase.

point taken. from my end, i can park this topic in "may be there is more to it" category for now.
for India, who knows may be aadhaar seeding will provide even more richer data two three decades down the line.

yesterday, i did check if they changed the machines or machine standards between two three NHFS surveys, since this is about height and weight, they remain the same.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

Our hosuing will never look as good as Umrica simply because there is no space.

What you have here might as well be considered bungalow in India.
A large lawn, swimming pool, garden, parking garage these things only 1 to 3% of the population can afford even in the future.
Your can increase GDP you cannot increase land mass

Here is a bit of infofaphic.

Their suburbs.

Our suburbs.

Our developmental goal shouldn't be to ape the nation that has 9 million sq km of land and 350 million people.
Our developmental goal should be the country that has the size of old MP ( before Chattisgarh was separated from it) with the population of Bihar : Japan.

 

[Tejbrahmastra]

 

[Tejbrahmastra]

 

[RoaringTigerHiddenDragon]

it is from S&P Global

Are they just applying a uniform India growth rate to current base PCI of states and not a state wise expected growth rate? If that is the case, the projections are wrong. I expect UP to grow at double the rate of other states as we are implementing an authoritarian economy and will forcibly move people to urban areas and higher paying jobs. That is what all the expressways are for. The Delhi-Varanasi HSR will also make that entire stretch into a manufacturing zone with new cities. We are moving agriculture people to take up energy production through organic measures and get away from low income cultivation. Also, AI is being focused as the skill of choice for moving IT and Robotics here. So, UP might have a much higher PCI than stated here. It is all about leadership and speed of execution.

 

[nongaddarliberal]

If more than half of the children born in the '90s were 'truly' stunted there would be massive socioeconomic repurcussions and India would not be experiencing 8% real growth. This is why I keep saying findings of the NFHS are not worth the papers they are printed on - we should simply scrap this shit and start afresh with a complete overhaul.

I dont see a contradiction between high stunting in 90s kids and 8% growth today. The construction workers I see up north are very visibly stunted, yet are able to slog it out in the sun doing heavy labour (I personally don't like seeing their conditions). As far as IT and other sectors requiring education go, 90% of that work force are from families that were already middle class in the 80s-90s. Not necessarily upper middle class with cars and expensive schools, but their parents were able to provide at least decent nutrition, housing and higher education. I haven't met a single person in todays professional middle class who used to be a child labourer or who used to go hungry. Which is actually sad. It is only over the past 10 years that I'm seeing some level of actual poverty removal, where many people who were genuinely impoverished are now able to make a 25k-50k living.

 

[RoaringTigerHiddenDragon]

If more than half of the children born in the '90s were 'truly' stunted there would be massive socioeconomic repurcussions and India would not be experiencing 8% real growth. This is why I keep saying findings of the NFHS are not worth the papers they are printed on - we should simply scrap this shit and start afresh with a complete overhaul.

It is not about stunting per se but does stunting affect basic intelligence and productively participate in economic growth? The answer IMO is a no. There is an agenda behind this incessant focus on stunting and wasting because companies like Monsanto might want to introduce GM crops and good products. These may eliminate stunting but cause cancer. Why are the western societies not being measured on cancer or obesity stunting their intelligence and productivity? In fact the significant health issues in America post wuhan virus and obesity/cancer from packaged food has significantly affected productivity and overall intelligence levels.

 

[Crazywithmath]

I dont see a contradiction between high stunting in 90s kids and 8% growth today. The construction workers I see up north are very visibly stunted, yet are able to slog it out in the sun doing heavy labour (I personally don't like seeing their conditions). As far as IT and other sectors requiring education go, 90% of that work force are from families that were already middle class in the 80s-90s. Not necessarily upper middle class with cars and expensive schools, but their parents were able to provide at least decent nutrition, housing and higher education. I haven't met a single person in todays professional middle class who used to be a child labourer or who used to go hungry. Which is actually sad. It is only over the past 10 years that I'm seeing some level of actual poverty removal, where many people who were genuinely impoverished are now able to make a 25k-50k living.

There is visible correlation between infant health indicators and future economic growth - the attached paper, for instance, studies the effect of stunting on long term economic growth in Indonesia. Heck, a few African nations are estimated to lose some ~4-5% of their GDP (annually) due to malnourishment (stunting prevalence of 50%+, as claimed by the NFHS surveys back in the '90s, is comparable with Sub Saharan Africa - perhaps even worse) and none of these nations are expected to experience sustained 7-8% growth anytime soon. Not to forget that 8%+ in 2023 is already pretty damn good and at the risk of sounding overly simplistic - possibly equivalent to managing 9-10% in the 2000s or the cold war era. And if the claims of the NFHS were true this trend would actually fly in the face of the previous Asian miracle economies - all of whom had achieved remarkable improvement across all the infant health indicators before embarking on their high growth phase.

 

[omaebakabaka]

Our developmental goal shouldn't be to ape the nation that has 9 million sq km of land and 350 million people.
Our developmental goal should be the country that has the size of old MP ( before Chattisgarh was separated from it) with the population of Bihar : Japan.

Well said brother... Only donkeys copy apes

 

[omaebakabaka]

W

It is not about stunting per se but does stunting affect basic intelligence and productively participate in economic growth? The answer IMO is a no. There is an agenda behind this incessant focus on stunting and wasting because companies like Monsanto might want to introduce GM crops and good products. These may eliminate stunting but cause cancer. Why are the western societies not being measured on cancer or obesity stunting their intelligence and productivity? In fact the significant health issues in America post wuhan virus and obesity/cancer from packaged food has significantly affected productivity and overall intelligence levels.

Well said bhai, eating like pigs and sporting pot bellies in USA means nothing. Not to mention woke and 2 party bs... Nothing intelligent about it and it is high bcos it's idiot quotient

 

[omaebakabaka]

There is visible correlation between infant health indicators and future economic growth - the attached paper, for instance, studies the effect of stunting on long term economic growth in Indonesia. Heck, a few African nations are estimated to lose some ~4-5% of their GDP (annually) due to malnourishment (stunting prevalence of 50%+, as claimed by the NFHS surveys back in the '90s, is comparable with Sub Saharan Africa - perhaps even worse) and none of these nations are expected to experience sustained 7-8% growth anytime soon. Not to forget that 8%+ in 2023 is already pretty damn good and at the risk of sounding overly simplistic - possibly equivalent to managing 9-10% in the 2000s or the cold war era. And if the claims of the NFHS were true this trend would actually fly in the face of the previous Asian miracle economies - all of whom had achieved remarkable improvement across all the infant health indicators before embarking on their high growth phase.

Of course anyone that doesn't get enough to eat may die bcos of starvation and develop deficiencies but anyone that gets 2 meals or even one good meal a day is at no risk and nothing to do with intelligence