India: Is Growth Coming at Expense of Development

#50Harimau
Foreign Direct Investment and Special Economic Zones cannot be free for all within a sovereign state .....Interest of citizens within the boundries of country with residency 12 Months a year is status much above any investment intrusion by foreigners....

#56 Arjun
agreed high ways and bridges necessary for infrastucture which is real development compared to stocks and MNC....r u Kannadinga btw...

#55 by mystical_facet on February 27, 2007 11:30am PT


Is that why they are building a massive highway there


a massive highway linking bangalore and mysore helps all the farmers who live along that route get their produce to the market and helps them get a better price..

has the comrade considered that?

Has the Indian government forgotten those 260 mn people who live on $1 a day? And are they just focused to get as many foreign firms into ..lets say..Bangalore..as possible? Is that why they are building a massive highway there...could that money not have been put to better use?

Overall a reasonable article however the quagmire that India is stuck in at the moment is no different from what most developing countries/TWC (third world countries) face.

This growth vs development dilemma was very finely described by Ardeshir Cowasjee in a Pakistan daily.. quote unquote

The two concepts are not synonymous and all growth must be measured against the collateral damage accrued thereby. Even otherwise, growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of a cancer cell.

Ref ahmedmadani # 51

[What UKP stands for ?]

Ulloo ka patha.

Ref tolkinin #49

[Besides if stocka go up and Mittal owns Steel factory in Holland its god moral booster to browns in U.K. but Mass of Indians in India Care two hoots for that ..]

Actually, the brown sahebs in India used to care a whole lot about it. The UKPs made sure that no Indian industrialist ever invested in a foreign country... or in India for that matter. The only one allowed to invest was the Indian government. So the UKPs did give more than two hoots about these issues.

Re: # 50

What UKP stands for ?
This my hypotheical question and have no answer known to me.
All subcontinetal companies P/E ratios are extremely high compared to major companies on world scene.(Who are in same business)
Are these PEs extreme high as people are not allowed to buy stocks of foreign companies.( or is it conspiracy by elits to keep ppor in proper places while elites go to foreign and keep poor people depressed example Bhuttos,Musharraf ,nehru, Gandhis etc), so they are forced to buy high PE local stocks. Is it fare to allow local capital to pray on people with no choices?
Wonder is it due national capital groups want that way or just traditionally still govts are afraid and still fighting ``East India Company `` syndrome . As a part of liberal reforms can people of subcontinent should have right to buy international and foreign companies. Companies paying dividends will be giving foreign dollars.
Will this lead to improvement working of local companies and better product and services.
I wonder some Indian companies are ripping benefits by buying foreign companies and getting access to funds with less interest rates are real interest rests in Pakistan and India are very high. Then they can avoid local capital markets and raise capital formation and loans at much less rates and will this help them in producing cheaper products and services ?.
Technoligy has helped to democratise capital markets, mutual funds make possible for average person have stake in equity markets. Its is ironic American inovations have helped (microsoft etc) to make available economic data available to to any person which was not available even for richest bankers just 30 to 40 years ago. Many average person have so much information have lead to efficient equity markets.
What opinion of many of you regarding freedom to average person to have free access to buying foreign stocks.
Good day everybody

#34 HIND SIGHT IS ALWAYS 20/20 iTS VERY easy to cricize somthing past 40 years or even earlier when things have played out....
The same rhetoric can be applied

what has been the growth compared to other counties paticularly asian Japan China even Korea...
Indians have not invented but only reflect the changes that has resulted from inventions and techniology just transfered in...

Besides if stocka go up and Mittal owns Steel factory in Holland its god moral booster to browns in U.K. but Mass of Indians in India Care two hoots for that ..

The commie argument is this...

GDP has grown xx%. Exports have shot up yy%. Per capita income is up zz%. So WHAT????!!! Babies are dying at xx rate. Clean water goes to only yy%. Access to education, health, blah blah blah only to zz%.
conveniently ignoring the fact that
these statistics were much the same even in the good old days of Nehruvian socialism.

It is obvious to all but the Brain-Dead that economic growth is coming at the expense of the political clout of the Commie momofukus.

#37/#41 by mohar11

err .. Mexico has 12.5 billion bbl of proven oil reserves and exports almost 2 million bbl per day ... i.e same as Iraq :~)

..so I don`t think the comparison fits....

The comparison is perfect, though scale is much larger in India`s case and the prognosis is much worse. Mexico has a free economy with free trade agreements with 40 countries; India is heading in the same direction. Mexico has 90% of trade with USA alone; Indians are dying for the same. Mexico despite its oil, manpower export and trade with USA is largely poor; India despite its service exports, manpower export to USA is desperately poor. The only difference is in debt. But isn`t Harimau saying its a no-brainer to borrow and build infrastructure ?

Take off the rosy shades ... guys ... and don`t believe what these IMF types say at cocktail parties. :~)

Re: # 45

Like I said - political-social conditions of india and mexico are very different... Trade, export to US ALONE will NOT automatically make a countries economy - that goes without saying...

Anycase - mexico still has better economy than most other latin america countries... I think mexico is already part of OECD with $10K+ per capita income... The major problem is the rich-poor gap... mexico has to fix that... So - if india reaches mexican numbers in economy with better distribution of wealth, that would be an achievement in itself...

IMF types [and others] talk about india because indian growth path is clear, the necessary resources are there, indians have proven their abilities in various ways even though many other things needs to be done... that`s the reason why india is talked about... BRIC is the term used these days - Brazil, Russia, India, China... all of them huge problems but the forecast is that they can overcome all that to become much better...

Ref mohar11 #41

[well, every country pumps some amount oil for themselves, even india does... but only a few export oil... that`s what I was pointing to...


From http://www.photius.com/rankings/economy/oil_exports_2005_0.html

Rank Country Oil Exports in Barrels/Day
1 Saudi Arabia 7,920,000
2 Russia 6,110,000
3 European Union 5,322,000
4 Norway 3,466,000
5 United Arab Emirates 2,500,000
5 Iran 2,500,000
6 Venezuela 2,100,000
7 Kuwait 1,970,000
8 Mexico 1,863,000
9 United Kingdom 1,498,000
10 Iraq 1,490,000
11 Netherlands 1,418,000
12 Canada 1,370,000

[...mexico, as far as I know, is not part of OPEC...]

Same thing holds good for Norway. Doesn`t mean Norway doesn`t export oil. And Mexico exports more oil than Indonesia, an OPEC member.

I think it`s fairly universally accepted that the Nehruvian era was a massive dragdown for India which severly inhibited our performance on the world stage. Bar some commies and ``intellectuals`` everyone agrees that the 40 odd years of ``socialism`` was a dark, depressing period where we were denied access to a quality lifestyle in the name of some half-assed concept of patriotism.

All that phase did was produce a decent middle class with aspirations but no way to realise them for the most part. Most of the educated middle class that lived out their working adulthood in the 70s and 80s (my parents` generation) had no way to realise their dreams and managed to do it almost entirely through their children. Which meant ensuring there was enough food on the table and a constant exhirtation to study hard and do well in life. If those children went on to a good engineering or medical college and established themselves in life either at home or more likely in the US, those parents who were denied their own opportunities had a big role to play in that.

Thanks Mom and Dad. You`re retired now, but it must be giving you SUCH a kick to see those beautiful malls and multiplexes and 8-lane highways and mushrooming affordable airlines and quality apparel and perfurmery and this-calendar-year Japanese and American cars and all those things that once were just things you heard about from lucky relatives and bosses who were able to go ``abroad`` (that too on a too-measly daily allowance).

Let the commies whine all they will. We shall enjoy, guilt-free.

Re: # 42
I don`t miss those days either...you still have the odd uncle-type telling you simple living is good. In my experience the only people who talk about simple living and high thinking are those who know nothing about high thinking or the good life, and it is just hypocrisy to pretend otherwise. I remember looking greedily at pictures of dolls in comics and wishing my parents had never returned from the UK, and the electricity being switched off at our private school to save the diocese money. I`m glad those days are over.