MaxEntropy_Man wrote:the fundamental question is how successful the ploy of using gujarat's economic success to offset modi's image as a communally divisive leader is going to be.  the attempt at changing the conversation has definitely been loud, but will it also be effective? we'll see.

Hellsangel wrote:Not really. With institutions like BSE and NSE being located in Bombay, Maharashtra would not do anything to upset the goose that lays the golden egg. Also, Bombay alone contributes 20% of the state's GDP according the link above.

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:the fundamental question is how successful the ploy of using gujarat's economic success to offset modi's image as a communally divisive leader is going to be.  the attempt at changing the conversation has definitely been loud, but will it also be effective? we'll see.

Modi is definitely communally divisive. But maybe Indians could benefit from a new party in power. It will clean out some of the staleness.

Hellsangel wrote:

Idéfix wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

Does Maharashtra include Bombay?

what is the relevance of the question? does gujarat include baroda?

No Indian city can come any where close to Bombay in terms of economy. In fact, Bombay probably has an economy the size of some of the smaller states. And Bombay is not truly a Maharashtrian city. So if you include Bombay in Maharashtra's economy, the numbers are bound to be skewed.

Bombay is governed by MH. If the government of MH sets policy that adversely affects Bombay, MH GDP suffers. So the ethnic make up of the residents of Bombay makes no difference to the economic performance question we are talking about here.

Not really. With institutions like BSE and NSE being located in Bombay, Maharashtra would not do anything to upset the goose that lays the golden egg. Also, Bombay alone contributes 20% of the state's GDP according the link above.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:the fundamental question is how successful the ploy of using gujarat's economic success to offset modi's image as a communally divisive leader is going to be.  the attempt at changing the conversation has definitely been loud, but will it also be effective? we'll see.

Idéfix wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:Not really. With institutions like BSE and NSE being located in Bombay, Maharashtra would not do anything to upset the goose that lays the golden egg. Also, Bombay alone contributes 20% of the state's GDP according the link above.

Not screwing up Bombay is good economic policy for MH. Not screwing up Ahmedabad and Surat is good economic policy for Gujarat. BSE and NSE don't drive investment flows and job creation in MH; state government policies do.

Hellsangel wrote:Bombay also has a huge base of service sector jobs and as a percentage of income tax, Bombay is a huge contributor. One-fifth of Maharashtra's GDP is from Bombay alone. State government policies is not what brought Bombay to where it is. It is more historical than anything else. And Maharashtra has been lucky to have Bombay.

Hellsangel wrote:But going back to the topic, what are you so afraid of if Modi becomes Prime Minister of India?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:carvaka -- thanks for putting this together. here are some other things i'd like to see compared between gujarat and the other industrialized states (if such data are available)-- labor participation of women, sex ratios, health indices, child mortality, overall and female literacy rates and general levels of education, and income distribution.

Idéfix wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:Bombay also has a huge base of service sector jobs and as a percentage of income tax, Bombay is a huge contributor. One-fifth of Maharashtra's GDP is from Bombay alone. State government policies is not what brought Bombay to where it is. It is more historical than anything else. And Maharashtra has been lucky to have Bombay.

Most of what you said is irrelevant to the metrics we are comparing: growth rates of GDP. If I compared total GDP of MH and GJ, or per-capita GDP, these considerations would be relevant. Bombay's contributions to income tax have almost nothing to do with the growth rate that MH can achieve. Growth is driven by attracting real investments, building infrastructure, and creating jobs. All of those things are in the purview of the state government.

Hellsangel wrote:But going back to the topic, what are you so afraid of if Modi becomes Prime Minister of India?

I have already addressed that elsewhere, most recently here.

Hellsangel wrote:
So who would you rather see as the Prime Minister of India?

Idéfix wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:carvaka -- thanks for putting this together. here are some other things i'd like to see compared between gujarat and the other industrialized states (if such data are available)-- labor participation of women, sex ratios, health indices, child mortality, overall and female literacy rates and general levels of education, and income distribution.

These data are harder to come by than GDP. Incidentally, that is one of Sen's critiques of focusing on GDP (or per-capita income) alone. The metrics you mention arguably more important to people in their everyday lives, but they aren't easily available because the government doesn't really focus on them. I will look into what I can find when I have some time, and post them here.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:
So who would you rather see as the Prime Minister of India?

what's wrong with chidambaram, compared to the rest of the choices that is?

Hellsangel wrote:So who would you rather see as the Prime Minister of India?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:
So who would you rather see as the Prime Minister of India?

what's wrong with chidambaram, compared to the rest of the choices that is?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:
So who would you rather see as the Prime Minister of India?

what's wrong with chidambaram, compared to the rest of the choices that is?

Idéfix wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:So who would you rather see as the Prime Minister of India?

Answered that here.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:thanks carvaka. didn't realize TN's numbers are worse than rajasthan's!

Idéfix wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:So who would you rather see as the Prime Minister of India?

Answered that here.

Propagandhi711 wrote:

Idéfix wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:So who would you rather see as the Prime Minister of India?

Answered that here.

 mousy chidambaram? what leadership qualities has he ever displayed besides being finance minister? it's like asking helicopter ben to run US govt. can he get the unruly douches from some of those unruly states under control, I highly doubt it. he'll be the effete singh part deux. there is no alternative to modi, baggage or not, imagined or not, not withstanding color coded barcharts by newly minted data scientists

Idéfix wrote:

Propagandhi711 wrote:

Idéfix wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:So who would you rather see as the Prime Minister of India?

Answered that here.

 mousy chidambaram? what leadership qualities has he ever displayed besides being finance minister? it's like asking helicopter ben to run US govt. can he get the unruly douches from some of those unruly states under control, I highly doubt it. he'll be the effete singh part deux. there is no alternative to modi, baggage or not, imagined or not, not withstanding color coded barcharts by newly minted data scientists

I put Nitish Kumar ahead of Chidambaram. I agree with Merlot's suggestion in that thread that Arun Jaitley seems like a good candidate. There are all these alternatives to Modi; chanting "there is no alternative" like a mantram won't make it so.

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:thanks carvaka. didn't realize TN's numbers are worse than rajasthan's!

And Uttarakhand. Oh the ignominy!hing

goodcitizn wrote:I am not so sure that the female labor force participation rate is as important as other, more significant, factors that contribute to the standard of living (and quality of life) in India such as:
 
GDP, inflation rate, cost of housing, education and healthcare, employment rate, literacy rate, poverty rate, life expectancy etc.
 
I am not sure if the government publishes the standard of living indicators by state and for India overall each year. They might be an ideal way to compare how each state administration is performing as against the others and the national average.

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:It is sickening to see how people waste their brains to indulge in hate-mongering against one person while ignoring the most important issues - development, eradication of corruption and building security. Even after seeing how China has become a strong nation, these brilliant people haven't changed. Looks like India can't be saved from these characters. Disgusting.

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:all these % data...

% with respect to what?

over which year ? year to year or over 5 years or since independence ?

how about trendlines? that too for the last 5 years - that is what matters.

Or, we can continue to give ambiguous graphs without "clear" explanation.

and finally, what matters is the perception of the common man....

data means diddly to the denizens if there is no dough in the wallet and dough to make roti.

Idéfix wrote:

goodcitizn wrote:I am not so sure that the female labor force participation rate is as important as other, more significant, factors that contribute to the standard of living (and quality of life) in India such as:
 
GDP, inflation rate, cost of housing, education and healthcare, employment rate, literacy rate, poverty rate, life expectancy etc.
 
I am not sure if the government publishes the standard of living indicators by state and for India overall each year. They might be an ideal way to compare how each state administration is performing as against the others and the national average.

Yes, HDI is a much better measure of standard of living. It covers most of the items you listed above. I posted HDI improvement metrics above. With all the data I have looked at so far, my conclusion is:

1. If you look at development narrowly as GDP growth, Modi's record is good, but not great. Gujarat has kept up with its peers, not beat them comprehensively. And Gujarat has delivered higher GDP growth before. 

2. If you look at development holistically using HDI, Gujarat seriously underperformed compared to the rest of the country. It also underperformed in comparison to its relatively more industrialized peers.

goodcitizn wrote:
It would be meaningful to see both the base level and the growth rate across the states to really understand how the states stack up against each other and against the national average.
 

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:all these % data...

% with respect to what?

over which year ? year to year or over 5 years or since independence ?

how about trendlines? that too for the last 5 years - that is what matters.

Or, we can continue to give ambiguous graphs without "clear" explanation.

and finally, what matters is the perception of the common man....

data means diddly to the denizens if there is no dough in the wallet and dough to make roti.

the answers to all your questions are already there in the prior posts. it appears you have only nuNippul mEnjufied the posts.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

goodcitizn wrote:
It would be meaningful to see both the base level and the growth rate across the states to really understand how the states stack up against each other and against the national average.
 

hasn't he already done that? the states are arranged in increasing or decreasing order of the figure of merit or index of interest, while the bars show the rate of growth in most plots. kerala is always going to be an outlier and i think he has compared the large states (from the standpoint of population), especially those with a large industrial base. so what am i missing from your question?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

goodcitizn wrote:
It would be meaningful to see both the base level and the growth rate across the states to really understand how the states stack up against each other and against the national average.
 

hasn't he already done that? the states are arranged in increasing or decreasing order of the figure of merit or index of interest, while the bars show the rate of growth in most plots. kerala is always going to be an outlier and i think he has compared the large states (from the standpoint of population), especially those with a large industrial base. so what am i missing from your question?

Idéfix wrote:GC, please disregard the previous chart I posted on year-over-year growth rates. Those numbers were not for Gujarat, but Maharashtra. Here are the year-over-year growth numbers for Gujarat, shown against all-India average growth rates. 



These data show that Modi hasn't achieved some miraculous steadiness of growth that is being claimed for him. In the nine years for which we have data available, during three years Gujarat's growth was slower than national average. Growth has fluctuated between 4 and 17%. As I said before, the 4% is not Modi's fault, just as the 17% is not his singlehanded achievement the way it is portrayed by Modi's supporters.

Idéfix wrote:

Propagandhi711 wrote:

Idéfix wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:So who would you rather see as the Prime Minister of India?

Answered that here.

 mousy chidambaram? what leadership qualities has he ever displayed besides being finance minister? it's like asking helicopter ben to run US govt. can he get the unruly douches from some of those unruly states under control, I highly doubt it. he'll be the effete singh part deux. there is no alternative to modi, baggage or not, imagined or not, not withstanding color coded barcharts by newly minted data scientists

I put Nitish Kumar ahead of Chidambaram. I agree with Merlot's suggestion in that thread that Arun Jaitley seems like a good candidate. There are all these alternatives to Modi; chanting "there is no alternative" like a mantram won't make it so.

goodcitizn wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

goodcitizn wrote:
It would be meaningful to see both the base level and the growth rate across the states to really understand how the states stack up against each other and against the national average.
 

hasn't he already done that? the states are arranged in increasing or decreasing order of the figure of merit or index of interest, while the bars show the rate of growth in most plots. kerala is always going to be an outlier and i think he has compared the large states (from the standpoint of population), especially those with a large industrial base. so what am i missing from your question?

Typically a chart should indicate both the value and the change %. I didn't see the value, only a reference to it being in ascending order. Hence my comment.

Propagandhi711 wrote:in this contest, as it stands in 2013, modi stands as the ONLY viable alternative to the tired, the bumbling, the leaderless, can-fuck-up-a-cup-of-coffee congress with nothing to offer other than the promises to give patronising sops to vote banks and "secular" credentials AND the old orthodox fart club of BJP . if tomorrow somehow the power to select candidates was bestowed upon the brain council of SUCH, then yea we'll go with yours and merlot's suggestions of jaitley/chidambaram/nitish kumar. until then "there is no alternative".

Idéfix wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

goodcitizn wrote:
It would be meaningful to see both the base level and the growth rate across the states to really understand how the states stack up against each other and against the national average.
 

hasn't he already done that? the states are arranged in increasing or decreasing order of the figure of merit or index of interest, while the bars show the rate of growth in most plots. kerala is always going to be an outlier and i think he has compared the large states (from the standpoint of population), especially those with a large industrial base. so what am i missing from your question?

That's right. I showed the base values for FLFPR in a separate chart, after sorting the percentage declines in the first chart, and keeping in the same order as the chart with base values. I felt that the second chart was redundant, and here is why.

When we are trying to judge the effectiveness of a particular government, what is most relevant is the improvement that they have brought about. The purpose of this thread is not to show which states are more or less developed; my purpose is to bring a data-driven perspective to the question whether Modi has a stellar record on development. And to be fair to all parties, I showed the states in the order of the base value of the index, to address the concern that it is harder to improve an already good position than a mess. So it is easy to see on the literacy chart that Bihar is in the worst position, and has made the largest improvement among the major states. Gujarat is among the three-best placed major states, but it has shown less improvement than Maharashtra, which has an even better position.

Idéfix wrote:

goodcitizn wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

goodcitizn wrote:
It would be meaningful to see both the base level and the growth rate across the states to really understand how the states stack up against each other and against the national average.
 

hasn't he already done that? the states are arranged in increasing or decreasing order of the figure of merit or index of interest, while the bars show the rate of growth in most plots. kerala is always going to be an outlier and i think he has compared the large states (from the standpoint of population), especially those with a large industrial base. so what am i missing from your question?

Typically a chart should indicate both the value and the change %. I didn't see the value, only a reference to it being in ascending order. Hence my comment.

Like I said above, I didn't post the base values because of the nature of the question I was trying to answer: how much improvement has Modi presided over, and how does that compare to the improvement in other states, or in his state before Modi took over? 

It is a trivial exercise to post the base values, because I have them handy. 

Here is the base values chart for gender ratios, as of the 2011 census, in number of females per 1,000 males:


Here is the chart for literacy rates, as of the 2011 census: 



And here is the chart for HDI scores, per the 2011 HDI report, with latest data from 2008. HDI of 0.8 or more characterizes a highly developed society:


As you can see, all these charts show is the latest known position of these states; those positions exist because of a complex set of historical, social, and political factors far beyond the work of any single administration.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:all these % data...

% with respect to what?

over which year ? year to year or over 5 years or since independence ?

how about trendlines? that too for the last 5 years - that is what matters.

Or, we can continue to give ambiguous graphs without "clear" explanation.

and finally, what matters is the perception of the common man....

data means diddly to the denizens if there is no dough in the wallet and dough to make roti.

the answers to all your questions are already there in the prior posts. it appears you have only nuNippul mEnjufied the posts.

truthbetold wrote:Idefix and gc,
I have to disagree with your declarations on Modi economics.
You guys were touting that gujarat's Literacy growth rate was 1% behind mh and it shows Gujarat is somehow not progressing.
Go to wikipedia data link above and do a cumulative growth analysis.
India Gdp grew by 178% between 2004 and 2012.
Gujarat Gdp grew by 204% in the same period. That is a difference of 26%.
If we do similar analysis between States Gujarat would ahead among all large States.
In the last tour years of between 2009 and 2012,  Gujarat beat India by large % of points.  This is remarkable for a time of worldwide economic crisis.
I think it dishonest to refuse to acknowledge gujarats economic success and steady performance. Modi is no superman but his high level consistent performance is unmatched in Indian politics. Prove me wrong if you have data.

truthbetold wrote:Idefix and gc,
I have to disagree with your declarations on Modi economics.
You guys were touting that gujarat's Literacy growth rate was 1% behind mh and it shows Gujarat is somehow not progressing.
Go to wikipedia data link above and do a cumulative growth analysis.
India Gdp grew by 178% between 2004 and 2012.
Gujarat Gdp grew by 204% in the same period. That is a difference of 26%.
If we do similar analysis between States Gujarat would ahead among all large States.
In the last tour years of between 2009 and 2012,  Gujarat beat India by large % of points.  This is remarkable for a time of worldwide economic crisis.
I think it dishonest to refuse to acknowledge gujarats economic success and steady performance. Modi is no superman but his high level consistent performance is unmatched in Indian politics. Prove me wrong if you have data.