Can India catch up with China? not in the next 25 years

China and India, despite being such large countries, accounted for only 4.5 per cent and 4.2 per cent of global GDP in 1950 in Purchasing Power Parity (PPP$) terms. The ratio of China’s GDP to India’s was 1.18 in 1913 ($241 billion/$204 billion); in 1950 it was 1.08 ($239 billion/$222 billion). Estimates of per capita income made by Angus Maddison and Dharma Kumar suggest that India might have had a higher per capita income. However, there was not a marked difference in the level of human development.

Both countries, in the course of history, have feared foreign domination, have considered the state as the driver of growth and have suspected the private sector’s initiatives. For India, the problems were achieving unity in diversity and accommodating various languages and religions in a democratic set up. On the contrary, China’s hard state enabled it to pursue a single goal with determination and mobilise maximum resources to achieve its goals.

China experienced many problems in initiating industrialisation, but after some hitches, it switched to an all-round emphasis on heavy and light industries, and had a more successful resource mobilisation strategy than India did. As a result, Chinese manufacturing grew at 9.5 per cent, twice as much as India’s rate, from 1965-80. Also, China managed its agrarian reform better than India did.

On the whole, estimates by Richard Herd and Sean Dougherty suggest that China grew at a much faster rate than India did during 1950-79, and Chinese per capita GDP was more than twice the rate of India’s. This is largely due to higher growth in Chinese labour productivity and capital deepening. By 1978, the per capita income of China was estimated at $979; India’s at $966. China had caught up with India over the 30 years, but not dramatically surpassed it.

Few people in 1978 could have imagined the monumental economic progress that China would make because of the economic reforms pushed by Deng Xiaoping. The reforms stressed the principle of “each according to his work” rather than “each according to his need,” professionalism and efficient economic management at all levels and the gradual introduction of policy changes to avoid problems in implementation.

Deng transformed agriculture first and then took on the industrial sector. He opened up the latter to foreign capital while making room for the growth of village and local enterprises. Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao and now Xi Jinping have continued to follow Deng’s principles, but with some adjustments. China’s economic growth was also made possible by a very large net inflow of foreign direct investment, a sign of confidence in the Chinese economy by outside investors.

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/comment-can-india-catch-up-with-china/article6757519.ece?ref=sliderNews#comments

You're right, Comrade!

Hellsangel wrote:You're right, Comrade!

It's not me saying that.

The problem in India has always been implementation. In a noisy political democracy, problems are compounded by the existence of multiple political parties with no coherent approach to development.

Prime Minister Modi, with his majority in Parliament, has an opportunity to reignite the engines of economic growth. Even if the Indian economy were to grow at 10 per cent a year, its GDP at 2011 PPP$ will reach only about 26 trillion in 2030; China can easily reach this by 2022. I don’t see India catching up with China in the next 25 years unless, of course, there is a massive failure of sorts in China.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:You're right, Comrade!

It's not me saying that.

The problem in India has always been implementation. In a noisy political democracy, problems are compounded by the existence of multiple political parties with no coherent approach to development.

Prime Minister Modi, with his majority in Parliament, has an opportunity to reignite the engines of economic growth. Even if the Indian economy were to grow at 10 per cent a year, its GDP at 2011 PPP$ will reach only about 26 trillion in 2030; China can easily reach this by 2022. I don’t see India catching up with China in the next 25 years unless, of course, there is a massive failure of sorts in China.

OK. He's right, Comrade!

Starting 2015, these two determinants—China and the neighbourhood—will intersect, leading to four possible scenarios for India.

Scenario 1
A stable South Asia that intersects with an orderly slowdown in China will strengthen the rise of the global South and its effort to create an alternate political and economic architecture that more accurately reflects its own conditions and global heft. Forums like BRICS will lead the way.
Impact on India: India and China will have a more equal voice in creating alternate global governance structures.

Scenario 2
An unstable South Asia that overlaps with an orderly Chinese economic slowdown will strengthen Beijing’s authority in new institutions, even as it increases its influence in the existing world order. China will be on course for parity with the United States, resulting in a G2.
Impact on India: India will be sidelined, as it will no longer be required as the swing power. The US and China will be making the global decisions, not necessarily in India’s interest. India might find itself excluded from new global trade agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP) and the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP).

Scenario 3
If both South Asia and China are unstable—South Asia because of security, and China because of its economy—then the US will consolidate its power and retain its unipolar dominance. Co-operation with Pakistan for a tidy draw-down of troops from Afghanistan is on the cards, as is a surrender by India on trade and climate change negotiations. The dollar strengthens with the US exercising “exorbitant privilege,” using the advantage of printing its currency to finance growth without significant devaluation. BRICS and G20 will recede in importance, and the World Bank and IMF will call the shots again. The Voice of America will be gospel.
Impact on India: The US will become India’s godfather—pre-eminent arms provider, with pressure mounting to assist the US in military interventions in West Asia. The US will disregard IPR issues and promote its multinationals. It will be back to the 1970s, when India leaned on the US for capital, technology and innovation.

Scenario 4
A stable South Asia combined with a disorderly Chinese economic slowdown will reinforce the idea of democratic dividends—The vibrancy of private sector-led entrepreneurship, public participation in political processes, adoption of business models that serve both stake-holders and shareholders, and framing of equitable policies.
Impact on India: Achhe din, for sure. The Focus will turn away from counter-insurgency and law-and-order issues, as the world looks to India as a reliable alternative to China for goods and services—giving us room to grow, sustainably.

http://qz.com/321335/how-chinas-economy-and-an-unstable-neighbourhood-will-isolate-india-in-2015/

-> Looks like all the stars will have to be aligned for Modiji to jump start India's economy.

You're the sort that cuts off your nose to spite your face, aren't you, Comrade?

You'd rather see India fail coz it is headed by a government you hate?

Hellsangel wrote:You're the sort that cuts off your nose to spite your face, aren't you, Comrade?

You'd rather see India fail coz it is headed by a government you hate?

Assumptions! assumptions! I was being sympathetic to Modiji for the difficult situation he was put in.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:You're the sort that cuts off your nose to spite your face, aren't you, Comrade?

You'd rather see India fail coz it is headed by a government you hate?

Assumptions! assumptions! I was being sympathetic to Modiji for the difficult situation he was put in.  

True and pigs also have wings.

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:You're the sort that cuts off your nose to spite your face, aren't you, Comrade?

You'd rather see India fail coz it is headed by a government you hate?

Assumptions! assumptions! I was being sympathetic to Modiji for the difficult situation he was put in.  

True and pigs also have wings.

I don't hate Modiji rather don't agree with his chaddi ideology.

In the 70's, not many in the US believed that China would be a dominant economic power. Many of my friends laughed at me when I predicted that China would be a major player. One of them was a well known economist. LOL. 

One factor that wasn't considered in the analysis that CD has posted:  CONartistry/corruption. Once people turn their backs to CONmen, India can begin to try and compete with China.

Hellsangel wrote:You're the sort that cuts off your nose to spite your face, aren't you, Comrade?

You'd rather see India fail coz it is headed by a government you hate?

Accurate diagnosis.

truthbetold wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:You're the sort that cuts off your nose to spite your face, aren't you, Comrade?

You'd rather see India fail coz it is headed by a government you hate?

Accurate diagnosis.

Can't help but laugh at you guys naivete. I'm afraid an illiterate in my village has better sense than you guys; Even he wouldn't believe that Modi is the next coming of Krisnha Bhagavan and has the cure for all the ills and wrongs.

Cd
First you mischaracterise opinions of those that are different from you and then you call them ignorant. 
That just proves who is objective.

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:In the 70's, not many in the US believed that China would be a dominant economic power. Many of my friends laughed at me when I predicted that China would be a major player. One of them was a well known economist. LOL. 

One factor that wasn't considered in the analysis that CD has posted:  CONartistry/corruption. Once people turn their backs to CONmen, India can begin to try and compete with China.

Corruption is rampant in China too. As long as execution improves we will be OKAY, it would be a pipe dream too imagine that corruption will be completely eliminated.

truthbetold wrote:Cd
First you mischaracterise opinions of those that are different from you and then you call them ignorant. 
That just proves who is objective.

That's precisely what HA & you did. What makes you think that I want India to fail because BJP is at the helm. Only BJP-bhakts would imagine such nonsense, love jihad and what not.

confuzzled dude wrote:

truthbetold wrote:Cd
First you mischaracterise opinions of those that are different from you and then you call them ignorant. 
That just proves who is objective.

That's precisely what HA & you did. What makes you think that I want India to fail because BJP is at the helm. Only BJP-bhakts would imagine such nonsense, love jihad and what not.

That proves you're more demented than we thought, if even for a moment you thought TBT or I were what you call 'BJP-Bhaktas'.

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

truthbetold wrote:Cd
First you mischaracterise opinions of those that are different from you and then you call them ignorant. 
That just proves who is objective.

That's precisely what HA & you did. What makes you think that I want India to fail because BJP is at the helm. Only BJP-bhakts would imagine such nonsense, love jihad and what not.

That proves you're more demented than we thought, if even for a moment you thought TBT or I were what you call 'BJP-Bhaktas'.

OK Mr. Balanced-composed genius, I'm demented; Only Modiji err Abhinava-Govardhagiri can uplift the country with his little finger. Agreed.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

truthbetold wrote:Cd
First you mischaracterise opinions of those that are different from you and then you call them ignorant. 
That just proves who is objective.

That's precisely what HA & you did. What makes you think that I want India to fail because BJP is at the helm. Only BJP-bhakts would imagine such nonsense, love jihad and what not.

That proves you're more demented than we thought, if even for a moment you thought TBT or I were what you call 'BJP-Bhaktas'.

OK Mr. Balanced-composed genius, I'm demented; Only Modiji err Abhinava-Govardhagiri can uplift the country with his little finger. Agreed.

Time will tell. But obviously the Indian people were fed up of the old government.

Cd
China is a historical accident. It is communist country in 1970s. That means it could deliver labor to international investors without union trouble. ( you can fill in stuff about sheep and Kasai) . You cannot reuse that model in any other country.
Indian democracy is feeble and flawed but it can replicated in other parts of the world.
Indian people delivered when mms and pvn gave them a chance in 1990s. If modi provides a second chance India will make big progress. The goal is not to beat China but to create a self sustaining economy that can employ and feed billion plus people.
India can do it but can modi deliver. Let us wait and see.

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

truthbetold wrote:Cd
First you mischaracterise opinions of those that are different from you and then you call them ignorant. 
That just proves who is objective.

That's precisely what HA & you did. What makes you think that I want India to fail because BJP is at the helm. Only BJP-bhakts would imagine such nonsense, love jihad and what not.

That proves you're more demented than we thought, if even for a moment you thought TBT or I were what you call 'BJP-Bhaktas'.

OK Mr. Balanced-composed genius, I'm demented; Only Modiji err Abhinava-Govardhagiri can uplift the country with his little finger. Agreed.

Time will tell. But obviously the Indian people were fed up of the old government.

Sure. We're still waiting to see if you or Propa would give any credit to Obama's administration for the turn around. Hope you guys won't cut off your noses to spite your faces.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:
That's precisely what HA & you did. What makes you think that I want India to fail because BJP is at the helm. Only BJP-bhakts would imagine such nonsense, love jihad and what not.

That proves you're more demented than we thought, if even for a moment you thought TBT or I were what you call 'BJP-Bhaktas'.

OK Mr. Balanced-composed genius, I'm demented; Only Modiji err Abhinava-Govardhagiri can uplift the country with his little finger. Agreed.

Time will tell. But obviously the Indian people were fed up of the old government.

Sure. We're still waiting to see if you or Propa would give any credit to Obama's administration for the turn around. Hope you guys won't cut off your noses to spite your faces.

Yes, the people gave him so much credit that the Democrats didn't even want to be associated with him in the 2014 midterms.

And we know how well the Democrats did in spite of that.

truthbetold wrote:Cd
China is a historical accident. It is communist country in 1970s. That means it could deliver labor to international investors without union trouble. ( you can fill in stuff about sheep and Kasai) . You cannot reuse that model in any other country.
Indian democracy is feeble and flawed but it can replicated in other parts of the world.
Indian people delivered when mms and pvn gave them a chance in 1990s. If modi provides a second chance India will make big progress. The goal is not to beat China but to create a self sustaining economy that can employ and feed billion plus people.
India can do it but can modi deliver. Let us wait and see.

>>>Yep. A reasonable assessment of Modi can take place only after a two - three time frame. If results are not forthcoming by then, short as that window is given the circumstances, the  people will tire of him.

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

That proves you're more demented than we thought, if even for a moment you thought TBT or I were what you call 'BJP-Bhaktas'.

OK Mr. Balanced-composed genius, I'm demented; Only Modiji err Abhinava-Govardhagiri can uplift the country with his little finger. Agreed.

Time will tell. But obviously the Indian people were fed up of the old government.

Sure. We're still waiting to see if you or Propa would give any credit to Obama's administration for the turn around. Hope you guys won't cut off your noses to spite your faces.

Yes, the people gave him so much credit that the Democrats didn't even want to be associated with him in the 2014 midterms.

And we know how well the Democrats did in spite of that.

I know you guy would rather see the country go bankrupt under Dems. A while ago when the US economy was showing signs of life, Propa said the turn around was because of EU policies, has got nothing to do with Obama.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:
OK Mr. Balanced-composed genius, I'm demented; Only Modiji err Abhinava-Govardhagiri can uplift the country with his little finger. Agreed.

Time will tell. But obviously the Indian people were fed up of the old government.

Sure. We're still waiting to see if you or Propa would give any credit to Obama's administration for the turn around. Hope you guys won't cut off your noses to spite your faces.

Yes, the people gave him so much credit that the Democrats didn't even want to be associated with him in the 2014 midterms.

And we know how well the Democrats did in spite of that.

I know you guy would rather see the country go bankrupt under Dems. A while ago when the US economy was showing signs of life, Propa said the turn around was because of EU policies, has got nothing to do with Obama.

Comrade, not everyone thinks like you. We would prefer a strong and vibrant America with or without Obama. Your bitterness has been obvious since the May elections in India and your daily Modi-chalisa.

Hellsangel wrote:
Comrade, not everyone thinks like you. We would prefer a strong and vibrant America with or without Obama. Your bitterness has been obvious since the May elections in India and your daily Modi-chalisa.

That's right! That's what we got from your comments all along (using your own logic). I suggest you to look in the mirror.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:
Comrade, not everyone thinks like you. We would prefer a strong and vibrant America with or without Obama. Your bitterness has been obvious since the May elections in India and your daily Modi-chalisa.

That's right! That's what we got from your comments all along (using your own logic). I suggest you to look in the mirror.

Still bitter about May and November 2014 aren't you, Comrade?

confuzzled dude wrote:

China and India, despite being such large countries, accounted for only 4.5 per cent and 4.2 per cent of global GDP in 1950 in Purchasing Power Parity (PPP$) terms. The ratio of China’s GDP to India’s was 1.18 in 1913 ($241 billion/$204 billion); in 1950 it was 1.08 ($239 billion/$222 billion). Estimates of per capita income made by Angus Maddison and Dharma Kumar suggest that India might have had a higher per capita income. However, there was not a marked difference in the level of human development.

That statement is patently wrong. Indians on the whole were in a much better shape than the Chinese from late 1940s to almost the end of 1950s. Ask anyone in India who was alive at that time, read the newspaper regularly and followed the national / international news closely.