the developing way of India is not available

[badguy2000]

I do feel the post is very interesting..so quote it .
--------------------------------------------------

" I think China and India have chosen two different paths to development, but China chose the fastest and most efficient path. They'll both get there eventually..."


This is worng I believe. Indeed there is only ONE way of development. Yes, just ONE way available. That is to manufacture goods. This is called Industrialization. Only after one is industrialized, one can divert heavily into service industry, etc. Not other way around , at least in both theory and in history.

All world powers have been developed in this way:

1. UK - Made In England was THE trademark of 19th century. UK was "factory of the world" at that time, as China is today

2. US - still remember the big Made In U.S.A of early 20th century? US only started outsourcing 2 decades ago in a large scale.

3. Japan; Germany, etc.etc. everyone !


There is NO second way as India is doing. Indeed India is the first one in human history to do so. WOW!


Particularly, if India were a small country with tiny populace such as Monaco, it might have a chance. But it has 1.1 billion hungry people.


Think rationally ! Without powerful industries and manufactoring across the fields, how IT call centers ,some back office stuff, and some most basic IT sofetware programming can drag a country of 1.1 billion , soon to be the most populour one in the world, from a agriculture backwater into the first world or second world, ever?

Everyone becomes world power by Making something, not Talking something as India does. Look around at your house, your classroom, or your work place, you can easily see things made from every estalished world power, USA, China, Japan, Germany, France, etc, etc,... Korea, even Malaysia. Have you ever seen anything "Made-In -India", high tech or mid tech or low tech, at all?

The rational answer is no way!



Now some say that maybe India can copy China's way to manufacture goods now. The answer is still almost impossible! It's just too too late.

To manafacturing in China's scale, India needs to have:

1. Finance (money): it has very little ---- 70% of China's original fiannce decades ago mainly came from HongKong, Taiwan, Singapore, etc Chinese ethnic countries/regions. Where India gonna get money? Fiji, Maldives, Srilanka? Surely you can foeget about Uncle Sam now.

2. Cheap oil (energies) and cheap raw materials : When china was developing 3 decades ago, both oil and raw materails were dirt cheap. NOW? Super expensive! Where India gonna got oil ? And with waht? Surely It can't learn from the US go with guns in Iraq? It even don't have enough electricity to run a 24*7 factory without seveal cuts in between.

3. Work force: China has always > 93% literate, high IQ, diligent and focused work force from the very start. And India? Nearly half of the Indians are illiterate! Almost 7 out of 10 are either malnutricious or suffer chronic hunger! We just skip the rest requirements here, ok?

4. Infrastruture: Need I say more here?


So you see? India is the biggest media hype of our time.

Yes, It seems that it is growing , and fast, but a large part is still from backwater agriculture sector and some tiny niche areas, unlike China which depends on a mix of high-middle-low tech world-class industrial machine in almost all fields. So Indias' current growth is not sustainable since there is a limit to land sizes suitable for agriculture at the end of the day. And one can not grow 6-7% in a long run by basic software programming and back office "talking".

Some argues it can depend on it domestic market. NO, no, no! That's another misnomer. China's domestic market is MUCH larger compared to India's . Even China still can not depends on her internal market alone with her level of development. And India is at least 30 years behind China in industrailization path generally speaking.

I can not figure out with what India can beat industrial powerhouses of UK and France, even Korea(when South unites with the North) or even fast declining Russia (Russia 's oveall industrial muscle is still far stronger than India's ).

Despite all those top line growth, India GDP is still slightly more than Australia, a nation of 23 million people. Let alone ask one to imagine how and with what India can jump into the league of heavyweights such as Germany, Japan , China and the US in the future. No logical explainations avaliable. Therefore India is likely to become a second or thrid tier power in the future IF it is lucky.

The real India has already failed in my honest opinion because it has missed the train of industrialization, since its "development path"will proved to be just an illusion, a dead-end. I can barely see a decent chance left in today's world for India to be industrialized, even half -industrialized.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[NSG_Blackcats]

Let me say you have very little knowledge about Indian Economy. If certain policies are good for Chinese economy it does mean that the same policy will work for India. China is predominately an export oriented economy where as Indian economy is driven by its domestic demand.

The economic policies adopted by GoI is very successful that is why we are the 2nd fastest growing economy after China for last 10 years. It really does not matter how world powers has been developed. They chose their own path for development India has its own path.

The rational answer is no way!

But facts say we are doing a great job.

1. Finance (money): it has very little ---- 70% of China's original fiannce decades ago mainly came from HongKong, Taiwan, Singapore, etc Chinese ethnic countries/regions. Where India gonna get money? Fiji, Maldives, Srilanka? Surely you can foeget about Uncle Sam now.

Check these below given link. You will have a better idea. If you want I will provide you more.

http://www.dipp.nic.in/fdi_statistics/india_FDI_June2009.pdf

FDI.net-Countries-India

Cheap oil (energies) and cheap raw materials : When china was developing 3 decades ago, both oil and raw materails were dirt cheap. NOW? Super expensive! Where India gonna got oil ? And with waht? Surely It can't learn from the US go with guns in Iraq? It even don't have enough electricity to run a 24*7 factory without seveal cuts in between.

Check the following links. you will have a better idea from where India will get oil. if you want I will provide you more links.

ONGC Videsh Limited ::. The International Petroleum Company of India

Crain’s India to reach 200,000bpd by 2010 Just NEWS

The Hindu Business Line : Reliance to double KG Basin gas output

Indian oil company invests US$1.45 billion in Iraq | Onshore | Oil And Gas News | ArabianOilandGas.com

OIL-IndianOil combine to start drilling in Libyan blocks

I will answer your remaining queries in my next post.

 

[ajay_ijn]

Some argues it can depend on it domestic market. NO, no, no! That's another misnomer. China's domestic market is MUCH larger compared to India's . Even China still can not depends on her internal market alone with her level of development. And India is at least 30 years behind China in industrailization path generally speaking.

actually the reason for this is China predominantly exports, China cannot simply switch to domestic market with push of a button. Indias domestic market as percentage of GDP is much bigger compared to China.

Thats how economies are. Much of Indias growth has come from domestic demand.

Yes, It seems that it is growing , and 1fast, but a large part is still from backwater agriculture sector and some tiny niche areas, unlike China which depends on a mix of high-middle-low tech world-class industrial machine in almost all fields. So Indias' current growth is not sustainable since there is a limit to land sizes suitable for agriculture at the end of the day. And one can not grow 6-7% in a long run by basic software programming and back office "talking".

India isn't growing only with services. Indias manufacturing grew by more than 8 to 9% which inturn helped economic growth of close to 9%. also exports grew by 25 to 30% consistently.

just think logically. agriculture generates just 17-18% of GDP, how can rest of industry depend largely on farmers consumption?

1. Finance (money): it has very little ---- 70% of China's original fiannce decades ago mainly came from HongKong, Taiwan, Singapore, etc Chinese ethnic countries/regions. Where India gonna get money? Fiji, Maldives, Srilanka? Surely you can foeget about Uncle Sam now.

There are trillions of dollars always waiting to be invested if one has developed the right mechanism, good & assured returns,. The only China had to do was providing good returns, and then money will flow like a water. AFAIK, China grew by large amounts of FDIs from western countries.

if we forget Uncle Sam. How will China or the rest of the world even survive? afterall all the export oriented badly depend on Uncle Sam for exports.

again this article heavily biased. It indirectly says China zindabad and India murdabad. China is all right, world class, India is the worst and failed nation. wrong facts, exaggerating problems, solutions presented without any logic or any good reason.

I can give you a answer as to why British, France, US were first built with factories.
because they didn't have computers in 19th or early 20th century, didn't know what can they do, didn't know what is a software.
But now things have changed a lot.

your post also doesn't explain why Services Sector cannot drive growth. for most economies around the world, it is the services sector which contributes to the GDP most. However I do not mean services sector alone.

 

[tharikiran]

Dear badguy,

1.1 billion hungry people. Are you out of your mind.What kind of statements are these.

let me tell you something, even if we end up being second it will still be good progress for India. It's a win- win situation.Absolutely nothing to lose. It will close any chance China has of threatening India. You can have the crown and sleep with it too.

The next time you have flu check out where the medicines are made.

 

[ajay_ijn]

1.1 billion people is indias population. I am included in that and i am surely not hungry right now.:blum3:

let me tell you something, even if we end up being second it will still be good progress for India. It's a win- win situation.Absolutely nothing to lose. It will close any chance China has of threatening India. You can have the crown and sleep with it too.

no tharikiran, what he means is India is abolute failure, all are dehatis, good for nothing, all are hungry doing basic software programming like teaching computer how to do 1+2 and growing like this. what he says he our economy grows only by farmers consumption which inturn depends on agriculture. he concludes that there is no way India can industrialize like China, its over for India now, its impossible for them. She is good for nothing.

all the foreign investors, foreign companies investing in India are probably fools and idiots to do and don't realise that India is a failure already.


badguy, it is not even worth to copy paste the krappy post from elsewhere. Its far easier. to just say China zindabad and India murdabad. u probably won't understand that but its completely presented in biased way, no member is going to agree that post, not even 50% of that.
i would be happy if you respected the fact that ur in a Indian forum and try and post a neutral point of view but that seems like far fetched and expecting too much from guyz like you. ur still the same badguy from IDF, haven't changed a bit. although i have changed, i stopped getting unecessarily angry with ur posts. I thought it just isn't worth to argue with people like you anymore. Although i did reply as my area of interest is economy, i was tempted to.

 

[borgking82]

My Chinese friend, you obviously did not read this article:

How China Cooks Its Books
It's an open secret that China has doctored its economic and financial statistics since the time of Mao. But could it all go south now?
BY JORDAN CALINOFF | SEPTEMBER 3, 2009

In February, local Chinese Labor Ministry officials came to "help" with massive layoffs at an electronics factory in Guangdong province, China. The owner of the factory felt nervous having government officials there, but kept his mouth shut. Who was he to complain that the officials were breaking the law by interfering with the firings, he added. They were the law! And they ordered him to offer his workers what seemed like a pretty good deal: Accept the layoff and receive the legal severance package, or "resign" and get an even larger upfront payment.


"I would estimate around 70 percent of workers took the resignation deal. This is happening all over Guangdong," the factory owner said. "I help the Department of Labor, and they'll help me later on down the line."


Such open-secret programs, writ large, help China manipulate its unemployment rate, because workers who "resign" don't count toward that number. The government estimates that roughly 20 million migrant factory workers have lost their jobs since the downturn started. But, with "resignations" included, the number is likely closer to 40 million or 50 million, according to estimates made by Yiping Huang, chief Asia economist for Citigroup. That is the same size as Germany's entire work force. China similarly distorts everything from its GDP to retail sales figures to production activity. This sort of number-padding isn't just unethical, it's also dangerous: The push to develop rosy economic data could actually lead China's economy over the cliff.


Western media outlets often portray Chinese book-cooking as part and parcel of a monolithic central government and omnipotent Beijing bureaucrats. But the problem is manifold, a product of centralized government as well as decentralized officials.


Pressure to distort or fudge statistics likely comes from up high -- and it's intense. "China announces its annual objective of GDP growth rate each year. In Chinese culture, the government has to reach the objective; otherwise, they will 'lose face,'" said Gary Liu, deputy director of the China Europe International Business School's Lujiazui International Financial Research Center. "For instance, the government announced that it wanted to ensure a GDP growth rate of 8 percent in 2009, and it has become the priority for government officials to meet that objective."


But local and provincial governmental officials are the ones who actually fiddle with the numbers. They retain considerable autonomy and power, and have a self-interested reason to manipulate economic statistics. When they reach or exceed the central government's economic goals, they get rewarded with better jobs or more money. "The higher [their] GDP [figures], the higher the chance will be for local officials to get promoted," explained Liu.


Such statistical creativity is nothing new in China. In 1958, Chairman Mao proclaimed that China would surpass Britain in steel production within 15 years. He mobilized villages throughout China to establish backyard steel furnaces, where in a futile attempt to reach outrageous production goals, villagers could melt down pots and pans and even burn their own furniture for furnace fuel. This effort produced worthless pig iron and diverted enough labor away from agriculture to be a main driver in the devastating famine of the Great Leap Forward.


Last October, Vice Premier Li Keqiangsaid in a speech after inspecting China's Statistics Bureau, "China's foundation for statistics is still very weak, and the quality of statistics is to be further improved" -- a brutally harsh assessment coming from a top state official.


Indeed, China has predicated its very claim of being the healthiest large economy in the world on faulty statistics. The government insists that even though China's all-important export sector has been devastated -- contracting about 25 percent in the past year -- a massive uptick in domestic consumption has kept factories producing and growth churning along. A close examination of retail sales and GDP growth, however, tells a different story. China's domestic retail sales have risen about 15 percent year on year, but that does not really translate into Chinese consumers purchasing 15 percent more televisions and T-shirts. The country tabulates sales when a factory ships units to a retailer, meaning China includes unused or warehoused inventory in its consumption data. There is ample evidence that state-owned enterprises buy goods from one another, simply shifting products back and forth, and that those transactions count as retail sales in national statistics.


China's retail statistics seem implausible for other reasons, too. They would imply an increase in salaries among Chinese people, allowing them to purchase that extra 15 percent. To be sure, the Statistics Bureau reported salaries had increased 12.9 percent in the first half of 2009. But Chinese netizens complained such numbers were hard to believe -- as did the bureau's chief.


A look at GDP growth also raises serious questions. China's economy grew at an annualized 6.1 percent rate in the first quarter, and 7.9 percent in the second. Yet electricity usage, a key indicator in industrial growth and a harder metric to manipulate, declined 2.2 percent in the first six months of the year. How could an economy largely dependent on manufacturing grow while its industrial sector shrank?


It couldn't; the numbers don't add up. China announced a $600 billion stimulus package (equal to about 14 percent of GDP) last fall. At that point, local governments started counting the dedicated stimulus funds in GDP statistics -- before finding projects to use the funds, and therefore far before the trillions of yuan started trickling into the economy. Local governments keen to raise their growth and production numbers said they spent stimulus money while still deciding on what to spend it, one economist explained. Thus, China's provincial GDP tabulations add up to far more than the countrywide estimate.


Alternative macroeconomic metrics, such as the purchasing managers' index (PMI), which measures output, offer a no more accurate reflection. One private brokerage house, CLSA, compiles its own PMI, suggesting a sharp contraction in industrial output between December 2008 and March 2009. Beijing's PMI data, on the other hand, indicated that industrial output was expanding during that period.


Unfortunately, such obfuscation means China's real economic health is difficult to assess. Most indicators that would help an intrepid economist correct the government numbers -- progress on infrastructure projects, end-user purchases, and the number of "resigned" workers -- are not public.


Still, it is possible to infer the severity of the gap between economic reality and China-on-paper by looking closely at monetary policy. China's state-owned banks dramatically increased lending in the first half of 2009 -- by 34.5 percent year on year, to more than $1 trillion. This move seems intended to keep growth artificially high until exports bounce back. Most analysts agree that it is leading to large bubbles in the stock, real estate, and commodity markets. And the Chinese government recently announced plans to raise capital requirements -- an apparent sign it sees the need to reign in the expansion.


For the long term, China is banking on its main export markets -- in the United States, Europe, and Japan -- recovering and starting to consume again. The hope is that in the meantime, rosy economic figures will placate the masses and stop unrest. But, if the rest of the world does not rebound, China risks the bursting of asset bubbles in property and stocks, declining domestic consumption, and rising unemployment.


That's when the Wile E. Coyote moment could happen. Once Chinese citizens no longer believe that the economy is doing well, social unrest and more widespread worker riots -- already increasing in scope and severity -- are likely. That's something that China will have a harder time hiding. And then we'll know whether China's statistical manipulation was a smart move or a disastrous mistake.


How China Cooks Its Books | Foreign Policy

Look who's dreaming now.

 

[Yusuf]

Badguy,
India has no finance? Great.. thats breaking news. Thats why Indian companies have acquired some big western companies in the last few years. Thats why we have an MRCA deal worth 10 billion waiting to happen.
Infrastructure WAS horrible to say the least. BUT have a look now. The highways are getting better. Underground trains coming up in major cities etc. If you have missed there is a thread here which has reports of the estimate to spend anywhere between $500-750 BILLION on infrastructure.

Live in your world mate. The day when your masters realize they cannot lie anymore, you will not find a place to hide.

 

[ahmedsid]

[mod] Badguy, Take this as a Strong Warning, Do Not Post links to other forums, If you are found doing this again, then Appropriate measures will be taken. Kindly keep this in Mind before you post links again. [/mod]

 

[thakur_ritesh]

[mod]guys,

its just too pointless to get into rhetoric. there are questions about india that others have in their mind, discuss those issues, rather than rants which only degrades a possible good discussion. this thread is about india, discuss only india, and not china, for china there are other threads.

already a few posts have been deleted, where rants have been made. so best will be to stick to the topic and continue discussing.[/mod]