NYTimes - India Is Losing the Race

Moderators: Moderators, Administrator

Joined: March 30th, 2012, 3:19 am

February 13th, 2013, 10:31 am #41

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... ef=opinion

India Is Losing the Race

By STEVEN RATTNER

Steven Rattner on economic policy, finance and business.
As recently as 2006, when I first visited India and China, the economic race was on, with heavy bets being placed on which one would win the developing world sweepstakes.

Many Westerners fervently hoped that a democratic country would triumph economically over an autocratic regime.

Now the contest is emphatically over. China has lunged into the 21st century, while India is still lurching toward it.

Thats evident not just in columns of dry statistics but in the rhythm and sensibility of each country. While China often seems to eradicate its past as it single-mindedly constructs its future, India nibbles more judiciously at its complex history.

Visits to crowded Indian urban centers unleash sensory assaults: colorful dress and lilting chatter provide a backdrop to every manner of commerce, from small shops to peddlers to beggars. That makes for engaging tourism, but not the fastest economic development. In contrast to Chinas full-throated, monochromatic embrace of large-scale manufacturing, India more closely resembles a nation of shopkeepers.

To be sure, India has achieved enviable success in business services, like the glistening call centers in Bangalore and elsewhere. But in the global jousting for manufacturing jobs, India does not get its share.

Now, after years of rocketing growth, Chinas gross domestic product per capita of $9,146 is more than twice Indias. And its economy grew by 7.7 percent in 2012, while India expanded at a (hardly shabby) 5.3 percent rate.


The New York Times
Chinas investment rate of 48 percent of G.D.P. a key metric for development also exceeded Indias. At 36 percent, Indias number is robust, particularly in comparison with Western countries. But the impact of that spending can be hard to discern; on a recent 12-day visit to India, not many rupees appeared to have been lavished on Mumbais glorious Victoria Terminus, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, since it was constructed in the 1880s. Parts of Mumbais recently built financial district Bandra Kurla Complex already look aged, perhaps because of cheap construction or poor maintenance or both. Its hardly a serious competitor to Shanghais shiny Pudong.

China has 16 subway systems to Indias 5. As China builds a superhighway to Tibet, Indian drivers battle potholed roads that they share with every manner of vehicle and live animal. Indias electrical grid is still largely government controlled, which helped contribute to a disastrous blackout last summer that affected more than 600 million people.

Yet Morgan Stanley stands resolutely behind its 2010 prediction that India will be growing faster than China by the middle of this decade.

It isnt going to happen, Indias better demographics notwithstanding.

For one thing, many of Indias youths are unskilled and work as peddlers or not at all. For another, despite all the reforms instituted by India since its move away from socialism in 1991, much more would have to change. Corruption, inefficiency, restrictive trade practices and labor laws have to be addressed.

Democratic it may be, but Indias ability to govern is compromised by suffocating bureaucracy, regular arm-wrestling with states over prerogatives like taxation and deeply embedded property rights that make implementing China-scale development projects impossible. Unable to modernize its horribly congested cities, Indias population has remained more rural than Chinas, further depressing growth.

China and corruption may be almost synonymous to many, but India was ranked even worse in corruption in Transparency Internationals annual Corruption Perceptions Index. At its best, the Indian justice system a British legacy grinds exceptionally slowly.

To be sure, summary executions dont occur in India, and its legal system is more transparent and rule-based than Chinas. But a recent visit coincided with the tragic gang rape of a young Indian woman that led to her death; the governments ham-handed initial response was to ban protesters from assembling and impound vans with tinted windows like the one in which she was abducted.

Indias rigid social structure limits intergenerational economic mobility and fosters acceptance of vast wealth disparities. In Mumbai, where more than half the population lives in slums often devoid of electricity or running water, Mukesh Ambani spent a reported $1 billion to construct a 27-story home in a residential neighborhood.

Dont get me wrong I am hardly advocating totalitarian government. But we need to recognize that success for developing countries is about more than free elections.

While India may not have the same eye on the prize so evident in China, it should finish a respectable second in the developing world sweepstakes. It just wont beat China.
hahahahahaha......



0.0
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: December 15th, 2012, 2:27 am

February 13th, 2013, 8:07 pm #42

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... ef=opinion

India Is Losing the Race

By STEVEN RATTNER

Steven Rattner on economic policy, finance and business.
As recently as 2006, when I first visited India and China, the economic race was on, with heavy bets being placed on which one would win the developing world sweepstakes.

Many Westerners fervently hoped that a democratic country would triumph economically over an autocratic regime.

Now the contest is emphatically over. China has lunged into the 21st century, while India is still lurching toward it.

Thats evident not just in columns of dry statistics but in the rhythm and sensibility of each country. While China often seems to eradicate its past as it single-mindedly constructs its future, India nibbles more judiciously at its complex history.

Visits to crowded Indian urban centers unleash sensory assaults: colorful dress and lilting chatter provide a backdrop to every manner of commerce, from small shops to peddlers to beggars. That makes for engaging tourism, but not the fastest economic development. In contrast to Chinas full-throated, monochromatic embrace of large-scale manufacturing, India more closely resembles a nation of shopkeepers.

To be sure, India has achieved enviable success in business services, like the glistening call centers in Bangalore and elsewhere. But in the global jousting for manufacturing jobs, India does not get its share.

Now, after years of rocketing growth, Chinas gross domestic product per capita of $9,146 is more than twice Indias. And its economy grew by 7.7 percent in 2012, while India expanded at a (hardly shabby) 5.3 percent rate.


The New York Times
Chinas investment rate of 48 percent of G.D.P. a key metric for development also exceeded Indias. At 36 percent, Indias number is robust, particularly in comparison with Western countries. But the impact of that spending can be hard to discern; on a recent 12-day visit to India, not many rupees appeared to have been lavished on Mumbais glorious Victoria Terminus, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, since it was constructed in the 1880s. Parts of Mumbais recently built financial district Bandra Kurla Complex already look aged, perhaps because of cheap construction or poor maintenance or both. Its hardly a serious competitor to Shanghais shiny Pudong.

China has 16 subway systems to Indias 5. As China builds a superhighway to Tibet, Indian drivers battle potholed roads that they share with every manner of vehicle and live animal. Indias electrical grid is still largely government controlled, which helped contribute to a disastrous blackout last summer that affected more than 600 million people.

Yet Morgan Stanley stands resolutely behind its 2010 prediction that India will be growing faster than China by the middle of this decade.

It isnt going to happen, Indias better demographics notwithstanding.

For one thing, many of Indias youths are unskilled and work as peddlers or not at all. For another, despite all the reforms instituted by India since its move away from socialism in 1991, much more would have to change. Corruption, inefficiency, restrictive trade practices and labor laws have to be addressed.

Democratic it may be, but Indias ability to govern is compromised by suffocating bureaucracy, regular arm-wrestling with states over prerogatives like taxation and deeply embedded property rights that make implementing China-scale development projects impossible. Unable to modernize its horribly congested cities, Indias population has remained more rural than Chinas, further depressing growth.

China and corruption may be almost synonymous to many, but India was ranked even worse in corruption in Transparency Internationals annual Corruption Perceptions Index. At its best, the Indian justice system a British legacy grinds exceptionally slowly.

To be sure, summary executions dont occur in India, and its legal system is more transparent and rule-based than Chinas. But a recent visit coincided with the tragic gang rape of a young Indian woman that led to her death; the governments ham-handed initial response was to ban protesters from assembling and impound vans with tinted windows like the one in which she was abducted.

Indias rigid social structure limits intergenerational economic mobility and fosters acceptance of vast wealth disparities. In Mumbai, where more than half the population lives in slums often devoid of electricity or running water, Mukesh Ambani spent a reported $1 billion to construct a 27-story home in a residential neighborhood.

Dont get me wrong I am hardly advocating totalitarian government. But we need to recognize that success for developing countries is about more than free elections.

While India may not have the same eye on the prize so evident in China, it should finish a respectable second in the developing world sweepstakes. It just wont beat China.
\\They like Churchill sincerely beleived that Indian diversity is a weakness

who predicted India will collapse, Churchill or Mao/Zhou? can you provide the link?


Quote
Like
Share

Joined: December 15th, 2012, 2:27 am

February 13th, 2013, 8:09 pm #43

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... ef=opinion

India Is Losing the Race

By STEVEN RATTNER

Steven Rattner on economic policy, finance and business.
As recently as 2006, when I first visited India and China, the economic race was on, with heavy bets being placed on which one would win the developing world sweepstakes.

Many Westerners fervently hoped that a democratic country would triumph economically over an autocratic regime.

Now the contest is emphatically over. China has lunged into the 21st century, while India is still lurching toward it.

Thats evident not just in columns of dry statistics but in the rhythm and sensibility of each country. While China often seems to eradicate its past as it single-mindedly constructs its future, India nibbles more judiciously at its complex history.

Visits to crowded Indian urban centers unleash sensory assaults: colorful dress and lilting chatter provide a backdrop to every manner of commerce, from small shops to peddlers to beggars. That makes for engaging tourism, but not the fastest economic development. In contrast to Chinas full-throated, monochromatic embrace of large-scale manufacturing, India more closely resembles a nation of shopkeepers.

To be sure, India has achieved enviable success in business services, like the glistening call centers in Bangalore and elsewhere. But in the global jousting for manufacturing jobs, India does not get its share.

Now, after years of rocketing growth, Chinas gross domestic product per capita of $9,146 is more than twice Indias. And its economy grew by 7.7 percent in 2012, while India expanded at a (hardly shabby) 5.3 percent rate.


The New York Times
Chinas investment rate of 48 percent of G.D.P. a key metric for development also exceeded Indias. At 36 percent, Indias number is robust, particularly in comparison with Western countries. But the impact of that spending can be hard to discern; on a recent 12-day visit to India, not many rupees appeared to have been lavished on Mumbais glorious Victoria Terminus, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, since it was constructed in the 1880s. Parts of Mumbais recently built financial district Bandra Kurla Complex already look aged, perhaps because of cheap construction or poor maintenance or both. Its hardly a serious competitor to Shanghais shiny Pudong.

China has 16 subway systems to Indias 5. As China builds a superhighway to Tibet, Indian drivers battle potholed roads that they share with every manner of vehicle and live animal. Indias electrical grid is still largely government controlled, which helped contribute to a disastrous blackout last summer that affected more than 600 million people.

Yet Morgan Stanley stands resolutely behind its 2010 prediction that India will be growing faster than China by the middle of this decade.

It isnt going to happen, Indias better demographics notwithstanding.

For one thing, many of Indias youths are unskilled and work as peddlers or not at all. For another, despite all the reforms instituted by India since its move away from socialism in 1991, much more would have to change. Corruption, inefficiency, restrictive trade practices and labor laws have to be addressed.

Democratic it may be, but Indias ability to govern is compromised by suffocating bureaucracy, regular arm-wrestling with states over prerogatives like taxation and deeply embedded property rights that make implementing China-scale development projects impossible. Unable to modernize its horribly congested cities, Indias population has remained more rural than Chinas, further depressing growth.

China and corruption may be almost synonymous to many, but India was ranked even worse in corruption in Transparency Internationals annual Corruption Perceptions Index. At its best, the Indian justice system a British legacy grinds exceptionally slowly.

To be sure, summary executions dont occur in India, and its legal system is more transparent and rule-based than Chinas. But a recent visit coincided with the tragic gang rape of a young Indian woman that led to her death; the governments ham-handed initial response was to ban protesters from assembling and impound vans with tinted windows like the one in which she was abducted.

Indias rigid social structure limits intergenerational economic mobility and fosters acceptance of vast wealth disparities. In Mumbai, where more than half the population lives in slums often devoid of electricity or running water, Mukesh Ambani spent a reported $1 billion to construct a 27-story home in a residential neighborhood.

Dont get me wrong I am hardly advocating totalitarian government. But we need to recognize that success for developing countries is about more than free elections.

While India may not have the same eye on the prize so evident in China, it should finish a respectable second in the developing world sweepstakes. It just wont beat China.
\\Indians live and work in India; the chinese on the other hand escape to western democracies where \\they work as slaves and champion china

There are millions Indian working in California. are they counted as Indian working in India? lol

you Indian are amusing.


Quote
Like
Share

Joined: December 16th, 2005, 11:53 am

February 14th, 2013, 4:14 am #44

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... ef=opinion

India Is Losing the Race

By STEVEN RATTNER

Steven Rattner on economic policy, finance and business.
As recently as 2006, when I first visited India and China, the economic race was on, with heavy bets being placed on which one would win the developing world sweepstakes.

Many Westerners fervently hoped that a democratic country would triumph economically over an autocratic regime.

Now the contest is emphatically over. China has lunged into the 21st century, while India is still lurching toward it.

Thats evident not just in columns of dry statistics but in the rhythm and sensibility of each country. While China often seems to eradicate its past as it single-mindedly constructs its future, India nibbles more judiciously at its complex history.

Visits to crowded Indian urban centers unleash sensory assaults: colorful dress and lilting chatter provide a backdrop to every manner of commerce, from small shops to peddlers to beggars. That makes for engaging tourism, but not the fastest economic development. In contrast to Chinas full-throated, monochromatic embrace of large-scale manufacturing, India more closely resembles a nation of shopkeepers.

To be sure, India has achieved enviable success in business services, like the glistening call centers in Bangalore and elsewhere. But in the global jousting for manufacturing jobs, India does not get its share.

Now, after years of rocketing growth, Chinas gross domestic product per capita of $9,146 is more than twice Indias. And its economy grew by 7.7 percent in 2012, while India expanded at a (hardly shabby) 5.3 percent rate.


The New York Times
Chinas investment rate of 48 percent of G.D.P. a key metric for development also exceeded Indias. At 36 percent, Indias number is robust, particularly in comparison with Western countries. But the impact of that spending can be hard to discern; on a recent 12-day visit to India, not many rupees appeared to have been lavished on Mumbais glorious Victoria Terminus, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, since it was constructed in the 1880s. Parts of Mumbais recently built financial district Bandra Kurla Complex already look aged, perhaps because of cheap construction or poor maintenance or both. Its hardly a serious competitor to Shanghais shiny Pudong.

China has 16 subway systems to Indias 5. As China builds a superhighway to Tibet, Indian drivers battle potholed roads that they share with every manner of vehicle and live animal. Indias electrical grid is still largely government controlled, which helped contribute to a disastrous blackout last summer that affected more than 600 million people.

Yet Morgan Stanley stands resolutely behind its 2010 prediction that India will be growing faster than China by the middle of this decade.

It isnt going to happen, Indias better demographics notwithstanding.

For one thing, many of Indias youths are unskilled and work as peddlers or not at all. For another, despite all the reforms instituted by India since its move away from socialism in 1991, much more would have to change. Corruption, inefficiency, restrictive trade practices and labor laws have to be addressed.

Democratic it may be, but Indias ability to govern is compromised by suffocating bureaucracy, regular arm-wrestling with states over prerogatives like taxation and deeply embedded property rights that make implementing China-scale development projects impossible. Unable to modernize its horribly congested cities, Indias population has remained more rural than Chinas, further depressing growth.

China and corruption may be almost synonymous to many, but India was ranked even worse in corruption in Transparency Internationals annual Corruption Perceptions Index. At its best, the Indian justice system a British legacy grinds exceptionally slowly.

To be sure, summary executions dont occur in India, and its legal system is more transparent and rule-based than Chinas. But a recent visit coincided with the tragic gang rape of a young Indian woman that led to her death; the governments ham-handed initial response was to ban protesters from assembling and impound vans with tinted windows like the one in which she was abducted.

Indias rigid social structure limits intergenerational economic mobility and fosters acceptance of vast wealth disparities. In Mumbai, where more than half the population lives in slums often devoid of electricity or running water, Mukesh Ambani spent a reported $1 billion to construct a 27-story home in a residential neighborhood.

Dont get me wrong I am hardly advocating totalitarian government. But we need to recognize that success for developing countries is about more than free elections.

While India may not have the same eye on the prize so evident in China, it should finish a respectable second in the developing world sweepstakes. It just wont beat China.
//Indians live and work in India; the chinese on the other hand escape to western democracies where they work as slaves and champion china.


This is a fresh news: 240,000 illegal Indian immigrants could get US citizenship
http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/240-0 ... hip-323873
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: November 30th, 2012, 5:55 pm

February 14th, 2013, 8:15 am #45

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... ef=opinion

India Is Losing the Race

By STEVEN RATTNER

Steven Rattner on economic policy, finance and business.
As recently as 2006, when I first visited India and China, the economic race was on, with heavy bets being placed on which one would win the developing world sweepstakes.

Many Westerners fervently hoped that a democratic country would triumph economically over an autocratic regime.

Now the contest is emphatically over. China has lunged into the 21st century, while India is still lurching toward it.

Thats evident not just in columns of dry statistics but in the rhythm and sensibility of each country. While China often seems to eradicate its past as it single-mindedly constructs its future, India nibbles more judiciously at its complex history.

Visits to crowded Indian urban centers unleash sensory assaults: colorful dress and lilting chatter provide a backdrop to every manner of commerce, from small shops to peddlers to beggars. That makes for engaging tourism, but not the fastest economic development. In contrast to Chinas full-throated, monochromatic embrace of large-scale manufacturing, India more closely resembles a nation of shopkeepers.

To be sure, India has achieved enviable success in business services, like the glistening call centers in Bangalore and elsewhere. But in the global jousting for manufacturing jobs, India does not get its share.

Now, after years of rocketing growth, Chinas gross domestic product per capita of $9,146 is more than twice Indias. And its economy grew by 7.7 percent in 2012, while India expanded at a (hardly shabby) 5.3 percent rate.


The New York Times
Chinas investment rate of 48 percent of G.D.P. a key metric for development also exceeded Indias. At 36 percent, Indias number is robust, particularly in comparison with Western countries. But the impact of that spending can be hard to discern; on a recent 12-day visit to India, not many rupees appeared to have been lavished on Mumbais glorious Victoria Terminus, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, since it was constructed in the 1880s. Parts of Mumbais recently built financial district Bandra Kurla Complex already look aged, perhaps because of cheap construction or poor maintenance or both. Its hardly a serious competitor to Shanghais shiny Pudong.

China has 16 subway systems to Indias 5. As China builds a superhighway to Tibet, Indian drivers battle potholed roads that they share with every manner of vehicle and live animal. Indias electrical grid is still largely government controlled, which helped contribute to a disastrous blackout last summer that affected more than 600 million people.

Yet Morgan Stanley stands resolutely behind its 2010 prediction that India will be growing faster than China by the middle of this decade.

It isnt going to happen, Indias better demographics notwithstanding.

For one thing, many of Indias youths are unskilled and work as peddlers or not at all. For another, despite all the reforms instituted by India since its move away from socialism in 1991, much more would have to change. Corruption, inefficiency, restrictive trade practices and labor laws have to be addressed.

Democratic it may be, but Indias ability to govern is compromised by suffocating bureaucracy, regular arm-wrestling with states over prerogatives like taxation and deeply embedded property rights that make implementing China-scale development projects impossible. Unable to modernize its horribly congested cities, Indias population has remained more rural than Chinas, further depressing growth.

China and corruption may be almost synonymous to many, but India was ranked even worse in corruption in Transparency Internationals annual Corruption Perceptions Index. At its best, the Indian justice system a British legacy grinds exceptionally slowly.

To be sure, summary executions dont occur in India, and its legal system is more transparent and rule-based than Chinas. But a recent visit coincided with the tragic gang rape of a young Indian woman that led to her death; the governments ham-handed initial response was to ban protesters from assembling and impound vans with tinted windows like the one in which she was abducted.

Indias rigid social structure limits intergenerational economic mobility and fosters acceptance of vast wealth disparities. In Mumbai, where more than half the population lives in slums often devoid of electricity or running water, Mukesh Ambani spent a reported $1 billion to construct a 27-story home in a residential neighborhood.

Dont get me wrong I am hardly advocating totalitarian government. But we need to recognize that success for developing countries is about more than free elections.

While India may not have the same eye on the prize so evident in China, it should finish a respectable second in the developing world sweepstakes. It just wont beat China.
Hey Hawksssss, could you mind explain us what's the purpose of the list you posted above?

Do you really believe that USA is the weakest country because she's in the last position? IMO your list means nothing for a country's financial status and dynamic, you just found it and threw it in.
<center><center>One of the Penalties for Refusing to Participate in Politics<font></font><center>Is That you End Up Being Governed<font></font><center><center>by your Inferiors. - Plato -<font></font><center>
</center></center></center></center></center></center>
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 14th, 2006, 12:06 am

February 14th, 2013, 5:48 pm #46

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... ef=opinion

India Is Losing the Race

By STEVEN RATTNER

Steven Rattner on economic policy, finance and business.
As recently as 2006, when I first visited India and China, the economic race was on, with heavy bets being placed on which one would win the developing world sweepstakes.

Many Westerners fervently hoped that a democratic country would triumph economically over an autocratic regime.

Now the contest is emphatically over. China has lunged into the 21st century, while India is still lurching toward it.

Thats evident not just in columns of dry statistics but in the rhythm and sensibility of each country. While China often seems to eradicate its past as it single-mindedly constructs its future, India nibbles more judiciously at its complex history.

Visits to crowded Indian urban centers unleash sensory assaults: colorful dress and lilting chatter provide a backdrop to every manner of commerce, from small shops to peddlers to beggars. That makes for engaging tourism, but not the fastest economic development. In contrast to Chinas full-throated, monochromatic embrace of large-scale manufacturing, India more closely resembles a nation of shopkeepers.

To be sure, India has achieved enviable success in business services, like the glistening call centers in Bangalore and elsewhere. But in the global jousting for manufacturing jobs, India does not get its share.

Now, after years of rocketing growth, Chinas gross domestic product per capita of $9,146 is more than twice Indias. And its economy grew by 7.7 percent in 2012, while India expanded at a (hardly shabby) 5.3 percent rate.


The New York Times
Chinas investment rate of 48 percent of G.D.P. a key metric for development also exceeded Indias. At 36 percent, Indias number is robust, particularly in comparison with Western countries. But the impact of that spending can be hard to discern; on a recent 12-day visit to India, not many rupees appeared to have been lavished on Mumbais glorious Victoria Terminus, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, since it was constructed in the 1880s. Parts of Mumbais recently built financial district Bandra Kurla Complex already look aged, perhaps because of cheap construction or poor maintenance or both. Its hardly a serious competitor to Shanghais shiny Pudong.

China has 16 subway systems to Indias 5. As China builds a superhighway to Tibet, Indian drivers battle potholed roads that they share with every manner of vehicle and live animal. Indias electrical grid is still largely government controlled, which helped contribute to a disastrous blackout last summer that affected more than 600 million people.

Yet Morgan Stanley stands resolutely behind its 2010 prediction that India will be growing faster than China by the middle of this decade.

It isnt going to happen, Indias better demographics notwithstanding.

For one thing, many of Indias youths are unskilled and work as peddlers or not at all. For another, despite all the reforms instituted by India since its move away from socialism in 1991, much more would have to change. Corruption, inefficiency, restrictive trade practices and labor laws have to be addressed.

Democratic it may be, but Indias ability to govern is compromised by suffocating bureaucracy, regular arm-wrestling with states over prerogatives like taxation and deeply embedded property rights that make implementing China-scale development projects impossible. Unable to modernize its horribly congested cities, Indias population has remained more rural than Chinas, further depressing growth.

China and corruption may be almost synonymous to many, but India was ranked even worse in corruption in Transparency Internationals annual Corruption Perceptions Index. At its best, the Indian justice system a British legacy grinds exceptionally slowly.

To be sure, summary executions dont occur in India, and its legal system is more transparent and rule-based than Chinas. But a recent visit coincided with the tragic gang rape of a young Indian woman that led to her death; the governments ham-handed initial response was to ban protesters from assembling and impound vans with tinted windows like the one in which she was abducted.

Indias rigid social structure limits intergenerational economic mobility and fosters acceptance of vast wealth disparities. In Mumbai, where more than half the population lives in slums often devoid of electricity or running water, Mukesh Ambani spent a reported $1 billion to construct a 27-story home in a residential neighborhood.

Dont get me wrong I am hardly advocating totalitarian government. But we need to recognize that success for developing countries is about more than free elections.

While India may not have the same eye on the prize so evident in China, it should finish a respectable second in the developing world sweepstakes. It just wont beat China.
\\who predicted India will collapse, Churchill or Mao/Zhou? can you provide the link? \\

Both ! I am a history buff so most of my info on history comes from the historical books in my rack more than from internet. If you want referances, for Churchill views on India, refer to " Gandhi & Churchill: The Epic Rivalry that Destroyed an Empire and Forged Our Age" by Authur Herman and for Mao/Zhou's views on India, refer to " Protracted Contest: Sino-Indian Rivalry in the Twentieth Century" by John Garver.


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

\\This is a fresh news: 240,000 illegal Indian immigrants could get US citizenship \\

From that same link, "Among the Asian countries, India is ranked third when it comes to illegal immigrants after China (280,000) and Philippines (270,000)".

Both China and India has one of the World's largest diasporas so there is no point in arguing who stays more in their country and who leaves more, although factually the Chinese diaspora may be bigger than Indian diaspora.

===========================================


Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam
(Make this World Noble)

- Rigveda

-------------------------------------------
<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value=""></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="315"></embed></object>

By the time you realize that this signature doesn't say anything it's too late to stop reading it
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: December 16th, 2005, 11:53 am

February 14th, 2013, 10:12 pm #47

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... ef=opinion

India Is Losing the Race

By STEVEN RATTNER

Steven Rattner on economic policy, finance and business.
As recently as 2006, when I first visited India and China, the economic race was on, with heavy bets being placed on which one would win the developing world sweepstakes.

Many Westerners fervently hoped that a democratic country would triumph economically over an autocratic regime.

Now the contest is emphatically over. China has lunged into the 21st century, while India is still lurching toward it.

Thats evident not just in columns of dry statistics but in the rhythm and sensibility of each country. While China often seems to eradicate its past as it single-mindedly constructs its future, India nibbles more judiciously at its complex history.

Visits to crowded Indian urban centers unleash sensory assaults: colorful dress and lilting chatter provide a backdrop to every manner of commerce, from small shops to peddlers to beggars. That makes for engaging tourism, but not the fastest economic development. In contrast to Chinas full-throated, monochromatic embrace of large-scale manufacturing, India more closely resembles a nation of shopkeepers.

To be sure, India has achieved enviable success in business services, like the glistening call centers in Bangalore and elsewhere. But in the global jousting for manufacturing jobs, India does not get its share.

Now, after years of rocketing growth, Chinas gross domestic product per capita of $9,146 is more than twice Indias. And its economy grew by 7.7 percent in 2012, while India expanded at a (hardly shabby) 5.3 percent rate.


The New York Times
Chinas investment rate of 48 percent of G.D.P. a key metric for development also exceeded Indias. At 36 percent, Indias number is robust, particularly in comparison with Western countries. But the impact of that spending can be hard to discern; on a recent 12-day visit to India, not many rupees appeared to have been lavished on Mumbais glorious Victoria Terminus, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, since it was constructed in the 1880s. Parts of Mumbais recently built financial district Bandra Kurla Complex already look aged, perhaps because of cheap construction or poor maintenance or both. Its hardly a serious competitor to Shanghais shiny Pudong.

China has 16 subway systems to Indias 5. As China builds a superhighway to Tibet, Indian drivers battle potholed roads that they share with every manner of vehicle and live animal. Indias electrical grid is still largely government controlled, which helped contribute to a disastrous blackout last summer that affected more than 600 million people.

Yet Morgan Stanley stands resolutely behind its 2010 prediction that India will be growing faster than China by the middle of this decade.

It isnt going to happen, Indias better demographics notwithstanding.

For one thing, many of Indias youths are unskilled and work as peddlers or not at all. For another, despite all the reforms instituted by India since its move away from socialism in 1991, much more would have to change. Corruption, inefficiency, restrictive trade practices and labor laws have to be addressed.

Democratic it may be, but Indias ability to govern is compromised by suffocating bureaucracy, regular arm-wrestling with states over prerogatives like taxation and deeply embedded property rights that make implementing China-scale development projects impossible. Unable to modernize its horribly congested cities, Indias population has remained more rural than Chinas, further depressing growth.

China and corruption may be almost synonymous to many, but India was ranked even worse in corruption in Transparency Internationals annual Corruption Perceptions Index. At its best, the Indian justice system a British legacy grinds exceptionally slowly.

To be sure, summary executions dont occur in India, and its legal system is more transparent and rule-based than Chinas. But a recent visit coincided with the tragic gang rape of a young Indian woman that led to her death; the governments ham-handed initial response was to ban protesters from assembling and impound vans with tinted windows like the one in which she was abducted.

Indias rigid social structure limits intergenerational economic mobility and fosters acceptance of vast wealth disparities. In Mumbai, where more than half the population lives in slums often devoid of electricity or running water, Mukesh Ambani spent a reported $1 billion to construct a 27-story home in a residential neighborhood.

Dont get me wrong I am hardly advocating totalitarian government. But we need to recognize that success for developing countries is about more than free elections.

While India may not have the same eye on the prize so evident in China, it should finish a respectable second in the developing world sweepstakes. It just wont beat China.
Both China and India has one of the World's largest diasporas so there is no point in arguing who stays more in their country and who leaves more, although factually the Chinese diaspora may be bigger than Indian diaspora.

---------

Wasn't that stupid dumb India raised the issue?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 21st, 2012, 10:47 am

February 17th, 2013, 7:34 am #48

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... ef=opinion

India Is Losing the Race

By STEVEN RATTNER

Steven Rattner on economic policy, finance and business.
As recently as 2006, when I first visited India and China, the economic race was on, with heavy bets being placed on which one would win the developing world sweepstakes.

Many Westerners fervently hoped that a democratic country would triumph economically over an autocratic regime.

Now the contest is emphatically over. China has lunged into the 21st century, while India is still lurching toward it.

Thats evident not just in columns of dry statistics but in the rhythm and sensibility of each country. While China often seems to eradicate its past as it single-mindedly constructs its future, India nibbles more judiciously at its complex history.

Visits to crowded Indian urban centers unleash sensory assaults: colorful dress and lilting chatter provide a backdrop to every manner of commerce, from small shops to peddlers to beggars. That makes for engaging tourism, but not the fastest economic development. In contrast to Chinas full-throated, monochromatic embrace of large-scale manufacturing, India more closely resembles a nation of shopkeepers.

To be sure, India has achieved enviable success in business services, like the glistening call centers in Bangalore and elsewhere. But in the global jousting for manufacturing jobs, India does not get its share.

Now, after years of rocketing growth, Chinas gross domestic product per capita of $9,146 is more than twice Indias. And its economy grew by 7.7 percent in 2012, while India expanded at a (hardly shabby) 5.3 percent rate.


The New York Times
Chinas investment rate of 48 percent of G.D.P. a key metric for development also exceeded Indias. At 36 percent, Indias number is robust, particularly in comparison with Western countries. But the impact of that spending can be hard to discern; on a recent 12-day visit to India, not many rupees appeared to have been lavished on Mumbais glorious Victoria Terminus, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, since it was constructed in the 1880s. Parts of Mumbais recently built financial district Bandra Kurla Complex already look aged, perhaps because of cheap construction or poor maintenance or both. Its hardly a serious competitor to Shanghais shiny Pudong.

China has 16 subway systems to Indias 5. As China builds a superhighway to Tibet, Indian drivers battle potholed roads that they share with every manner of vehicle and live animal. Indias electrical grid is still largely government controlled, which helped contribute to a disastrous blackout last summer that affected more than 600 million people.

Yet Morgan Stanley stands resolutely behind its 2010 prediction that India will be growing faster than China by the middle of this decade.

It isnt going to happen, Indias better demographics notwithstanding.

For one thing, many of Indias youths are unskilled and work as peddlers or not at all. For another, despite all the reforms instituted by India since its move away from socialism in 1991, much more would have to change. Corruption, inefficiency, restrictive trade practices and labor laws have to be addressed.

Democratic it may be, but Indias ability to govern is compromised by suffocating bureaucracy, regular arm-wrestling with states over prerogatives like taxation and deeply embedded property rights that make implementing China-scale development projects impossible. Unable to modernize its horribly congested cities, Indias population has remained more rural than Chinas, further depressing growth.

China and corruption may be almost synonymous to many, but India was ranked even worse in corruption in Transparency Internationals annual Corruption Perceptions Index. At its best, the Indian justice system a British legacy grinds exceptionally slowly.

To be sure, summary executions dont occur in India, and its legal system is more transparent and rule-based than Chinas. But a recent visit coincided with the tragic gang rape of a young Indian woman that led to her death; the governments ham-handed initial response was to ban protesters from assembling and impound vans with tinted windows like the one in which she was abducted.

Indias rigid social structure limits intergenerational economic mobility and fosters acceptance of vast wealth disparities. In Mumbai, where more than half the population lives in slums often devoid of electricity or running water, Mukesh Ambani spent a reported $1 billion to construct a 27-story home in a residential neighborhood.

Dont get me wrong I am hardly advocating totalitarian government. But we need to recognize that success for developing countries is about more than free elections.

While India may not have the same eye on the prize so evident in China, it should finish a respectable second in the developing world sweepstakes. It just wont beat China.
You should tell that to the indians labourers that are here in Singapore and Malaysia.

Singapore got its name from singhpur. India conquered malaysia during the chola era.


being a communist country, there will be many more chicom slaves escaping their sh1thole country.



Why are the toorks screaming, are they gay?
maybe its their genes, they are born this way!

The toorks are hurt coz I whoop their arse
But thats just the price you pay for being a candy-arse

The toorks look at me, they'r full of hate and anger
But shoo away b1tch, I got no time for you modafocker

The toorks are gay, they are a bore
But what else can you expect from a filthy wh0re?

The toorks are hurt, they not like being called a wh0re
But thats just what they get for being a kebab-vendor.

---- Gangsta rap FN style.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: December 13th, 2012, 3:30 pm

February 17th, 2013, 12:37 pm #49

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... ef=opinion

India Is Losing the Race

By STEVEN RATTNER

Steven Rattner on economic policy, finance and business.
As recently as 2006, when I first visited India and China, the economic race was on, with heavy bets being placed on which one would win the developing world sweepstakes.

Many Westerners fervently hoped that a democratic country would triumph economically over an autocratic regime.

Now the contest is emphatically over. China has lunged into the 21st century, while India is still lurching toward it.

Thats evident not just in columns of dry statistics but in the rhythm and sensibility of each country. While China often seems to eradicate its past as it single-mindedly constructs its future, India nibbles more judiciously at its complex history.

Visits to crowded Indian urban centers unleash sensory assaults: colorful dress and lilting chatter provide a backdrop to every manner of commerce, from small shops to peddlers to beggars. That makes for engaging tourism, but not the fastest economic development. In contrast to Chinas full-throated, monochromatic embrace of large-scale manufacturing, India more closely resembles a nation of shopkeepers.

To be sure, India has achieved enviable success in business services, like the glistening call centers in Bangalore and elsewhere. But in the global jousting for manufacturing jobs, India does not get its share.

Now, after years of rocketing growth, Chinas gross domestic product per capita of $9,146 is more than twice Indias. And its economy grew by 7.7 percent in 2012, while India expanded at a (hardly shabby) 5.3 percent rate.


The New York Times
Chinas investment rate of 48 percent of G.D.P. a key metric for development also exceeded Indias. At 36 percent, Indias number is robust, particularly in comparison with Western countries. But the impact of that spending can be hard to discern; on a recent 12-day visit to India, not many rupees appeared to have been lavished on Mumbais glorious Victoria Terminus, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, since it was constructed in the 1880s. Parts of Mumbais recently built financial district Bandra Kurla Complex already look aged, perhaps because of cheap construction or poor maintenance or both. Its hardly a serious competitor to Shanghais shiny Pudong.

China has 16 subway systems to Indias 5. As China builds a superhighway to Tibet, Indian drivers battle potholed roads that they share with every manner of vehicle and live animal. Indias electrical grid is still largely government controlled, which helped contribute to a disastrous blackout last summer that affected more than 600 million people.

Yet Morgan Stanley stands resolutely behind its 2010 prediction that India will be growing faster than China by the middle of this decade.

It isnt going to happen, Indias better demographics notwithstanding.

For one thing, many of Indias youths are unskilled and work as peddlers or not at all. For another, despite all the reforms instituted by India since its move away from socialism in 1991, much more would have to change. Corruption, inefficiency, restrictive trade practices and labor laws have to be addressed.

Democratic it may be, but Indias ability to govern is compromised by suffocating bureaucracy, regular arm-wrestling with states over prerogatives like taxation and deeply embedded property rights that make implementing China-scale development projects impossible. Unable to modernize its horribly congested cities, Indias population has remained more rural than Chinas, further depressing growth.

China and corruption may be almost synonymous to many, but India was ranked even worse in corruption in Transparency Internationals annual Corruption Perceptions Index. At its best, the Indian justice system a British legacy grinds exceptionally slowly.

To be sure, summary executions dont occur in India, and its legal system is more transparent and rule-based than Chinas. But a recent visit coincided with the tragic gang rape of a young Indian woman that led to her death; the governments ham-handed initial response was to ban protesters from assembling and impound vans with tinted windows like the one in which she was abducted.

Indias rigid social structure limits intergenerational economic mobility and fosters acceptance of vast wealth disparities. In Mumbai, where more than half the population lives in slums often devoid of electricity or running water, Mukesh Ambani spent a reported $1 billion to construct a 27-story home in a residential neighborhood.

Dont get me wrong I am hardly advocating totalitarian government. But we need to recognize that success for developing countries is about more than free elections.

While India may not have the same eye on the prize so evident in China, it should finish a respectable second in the developing world sweepstakes. It just wont beat China.
Singapore got its name from singhpur. India conquered malaysia during the chola era.

Oh, did you learn that in school?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 30th, 2012, 3:19 am

February 17th, 2013, 5:31 pm #50

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... ef=opinion

India Is Losing the Race

By STEVEN RATTNER

Steven Rattner on economic policy, finance and business.
As recently as 2006, when I first visited India and China, the economic race was on, with heavy bets being placed on which one would win the developing world sweepstakes.

Many Westerners fervently hoped that a democratic country would triumph economically over an autocratic regime.

Now the contest is emphatically over. China has lunged into the 21st century, while India is still lurching toward it.

Thats evident not just in columns of dry statistics but in the rhythm and sensibility of each country. While China often seems to eradicate its past as it single-mindedly constructs its future, India nibbles more judiciously at its complex history.

Visits to crowded Indian urban centers unleash sensory assaults: colorful dress and lilting chatter provide a backdrop to every manner of commerce, from small shops to peddlers to beggars. That makes for engaging tourism, but not the fastest economic development. In contrast to Chinas full-throated, monochromatic embrace of large-scale manufacturing, India more closely resembles a nation of shopkeepers.

To be sure, India has achieved enviable success in business services, like the glistening call centers in Bangalore and elsewhere. But in the global jousting for manufacturing jobs, India does not get its share.

Now, after years of rocketing growth, Chinas gross domestic product per capita of $9,146 is more than twice Indias. And its economy grew by 7.7 percent in 2012, while India expanded at a (hardly shabby) 5.3 percent rate.


The New York Times
Chinas investment rate of 48 percent of G.D.P. a key metric for development also exceeded Indias. At 36 percent, Indias number is robust, particularly in comparison with Western countries. But the impact of that spending can be hard to discern; on a recent 12-day visit to India, not many rupees appeared to have been lavished on Mumbais glorious Victoria Terminus, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, since it was constructed in the 1880s. Parts of Mumbais recently built financial district Bandra Kurla Complex already look aged, perhaps because of cheap construction or poor maintenance or both. Its hardly a serious competitor to Shanghais shiny Pudong.

China has 16 subway systems to Indias 5. As China builds a superhighway to Tibet, Indian drivers battle potholed roads that they share with every manner of vehicle and live animal. Indias electrical grid is still largely government controlled, which helped contribute to a disastrous blackout last summer that affected more than 600 million people.

Yet Morgan Stanley stands resolutely behind its 2010 prediction that India will be growing faster than China by the middle of this decade.

It isnt going to happen, Indias better demographics notwithstanding.

For one thing, many of Indias youths are unskilled and work as peddlers or not at all. For another, despite all the reforms instituted by India since its move away from socialism in 1991, much more would have to change. Corruption, inefficiency, restrictive trade practices and labor laws have to be addressed.

Democratic it may be, but Indias ability to govern is compromised by suffocating bureaucracy, regular arm-wrestling with states over prerogatives like taxation and deeply embedded property rights that make implementing China-scale development projects impossible. Unable to modernize its horribly congested cities, Indias population has remained more rural than Chinas, further depressing growth.

China and corruption may be almost synonymous to many, but India was ranked even worse in corruption in Transparency Internationals annual Corruption Perceptions Index. At its best, the Indian justice system a British legacy grinds exceptionally slowly.

To be sure, summary executions dont occur in India, and its legal system is more transparent and rule-based than Chinas. But a recent visit coincided with the tragic gang rape of a young Indian woman that led to her death; the governments ham-handed initial response was to ban protesters from assembling and impound vans with tinted windows like the one in which she was abducted.

Indias rigid social structure limits intergenerational economic mobility and fosters acceptance of vast wealth disparities. In Mumbai, where more than half the population lives in slums often devoid of electricity or running water, Mukesh Ambani spent a reported $1 billion to construct a 27-story home in a residential neighborhood.

Dont get me wrong I am hardly advocating totalitarian government. But we need to recognize that success for developing countries is about more than free elections.

While India may not have the same eye on the prize so evident in China, it should finish a respectable second in the developing world sweepstakes. It just wont beat China.
it's nice to see an assame bhangee calling others sh!thole!


that's too hard when more than 600 million indian sh!tting in open public !


Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 8th, 2005, 10:52 am

February 17th, 2013, 11:49 pm #51

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... ef=opinion

India Is Losing the Race

By STEVEN RATTNER

Steven Rattner on economic policy, finance and business.
As recently as 2006, when I first visited India and China, the economic race was on, with heavy bets being placed on which one would win the developing world sweepstakes.

Many Westerners fervently hoped that a democratic country would triumph economically over an autocratic regime.

Now the contest is emphatically over. China has lunged into the 21st century, while India is still lurching toward it.

Thats evident not just in columns of dry statistics but in the rhythm and sensibility of each country. While China often seems to eradicate its past as it single-mindedly constructs its future, India nibbles more judiciously at its complex history.

Visits to crowded Indian urban centers unleash sensory assaults: colorful dress and lilting chatter provide a backdrop to every manner of commerce, from small shops to peddlers to beggars. That makes for engaging tourism, but not the fastest economic development. In contrast to Chinas full-throated, monochromatic embrace of large-scale manufacturing, India more closely resembles a nation of shopkeepers.

To be sure, India has achieved enviable success in business services, like the glistening call centers in Bangalore and elsewhere. But in the global jousting for manufacturing jobs, India does not get its share.

Now, after years of rocketing growth, Chinas gross domestic product per capita of $9,146 is more than twice Indias. And its economy grew by 7.7 percent in 2012, while India expanded at a (hardly shabby) 5.3 percent rate.


The New York Times
Chinas investment rate of 48 percent of G.D.P. a key metric for development also exceeded Indias. At 36 percent, Indias number is robust, particularly in comparison with Western countries. But the impact of that spending can be hard to discern; on a recent 12-day visit to India, not many rupees appeared to have been lavished on Mumbais glorious Victoria Terminus, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, since it was constructed in the 1880s. Parts of Mumbais recently built financial district Bandra Kurla Complex already look aged, perhaps because of cheap construction or poor maintenance or both. Its hardly a serious competitor to Shanghais shiny Pudong.

China has 16 subway systems to Indias 5. As China builds a superhighway to Tibet, Indian drivers battle potholed roads that they share with every manner of vehicle and live animal. Indias electrical grid is still largely government controlled, which helped contribute to a disastrous blackout last summer that affected more than 600 million people.

Yet Morgan Stanley stands resolutely behind its 2010 prediction that India will be growing faster than China by the middle of this decade.

It isnt going to happen, Indias better demographics notwithstanding.

For one thing, many of Indias youths are unskilled and work as peddlers or not at all. For another, despite all the reforms instituted by India since its move away from socialism in 1991, much more would have to change. Corruption, inefficiency, restrictive trade practices and labor laws have to be addressed.

Democratic it may be, but Indias ability to govern is compromised by suffocating bureaucracy, regular arm-wrestling with states over prerogatives like taxation and deeply embedded property rights that make implementing China-scale development projects impossible. Unable to modernize its horribly congested cities, Indias population has remained more rural than Chinas, further depressing growth.

China and corruption may be almost synonymous to many, but India was ranked even worse in corruption in Transparency Internationals annual Corruption Perceptions Index. At its best, the Indian justice system a British legacy grinds exceptionally slowly.

To be sure, summary executions dont occur in India, and its legal system is more transparent and rule-based than Chinas. But a recent visit coincided with the tragic gang rape of a young Indian woman that led to her death; the governments ham-handed initial response was to ban protesters from assembling and impound vans with tinted windows like the one in which she was abducted.

Indias rigid social structure limits intergenerational economic mobility and fosters acceptance of vast wealth disparities. In Mumbai, where more than half the population lives in slums often devoid of electricity or running water, Mukesh Ambani spent a reported $1 billion to construct a 27-story home in a residential neighborhood.

Dont get me wrong I am hardly advocating totalitarian government. But we need to recognize that success for developing countries is about more than free elections.

While India may not have the same eye on the prize so evident in China, it should finish a respectable second in the developing world sweepstakes. It just wont beat China.
-// Singapore got its name from singhpur. India conquered malaysia during the chola era.
Oh, did you learn that in school? //-

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

Singapore :-

The English name of Singapore is derived from the Malay word Singapura (Sanskrit: , lit. Lion City), hence the customary reference to the nation as the Lion City.
Singa = Lion in Sanskrit
Pur = City in Sanskrit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore
------

Chola dynasty:-

During the period 10101200, the Chola territories stretched from the islands of the Maldives in the south to as far north as the banks of the Godavari River in Andhra Pradesh.[5] Rajaraja Chola conquered peninsular South India, annexed parts of what is now Sri Lanka and occupied the islands of the Maldives. Rajendra Chola sent a victorious expedition to North India that touched the river Ganges and defeated the Pala ruler of Pataliputra, Mahipala. He also successfully invaded kingdoms of the Malay Archipelago.[6]

Historical era Middle Ages
- Established 300s BC
- Rise of the medieval Cholas 848
- Disestablished 1279

Today part of India
Sri Lanka
Bangladesh
Malaysia
Indonesia
Singapore

Maldives

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chola_dynasty
------

The decline of Srivijaya was contributed by foreign piracy and raids that disrupted the trade and security in the region. Attracted to the wealth of Srivijaya, in 1025 Rajendra Chola, the Chola king from Coromandel in South India, launched naval raids on ports of Srivijaya and conquered Kadaram (modern Kedah) from Srivijaya and occupied it for some time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srivijaya_empire
------




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_history

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

Not so difficult ..

Last edited by Aceee1 on February 18th, 2013, 12:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 14th, 2006, 12:06 am

February 17th, 2013, 11:51 pm #52

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 ... ef=opinion

India Is Losing the Race

By STEVEN RATTNER

Steven Rattner on economic policy, finance and business.
As recently as 2006, when I first visited India and China, the economic race was on, with heavy bets being placed on which one would win the developing world sweepstakes.

Many Westerners fervently hoped that a democratic country would triumph economically over an autocratic regime.

Now the contest is emphatically over. China has lunged into the 21st century, while India is still lurching toward it.

Thats evident not just in columns of dry statistics but in the rhythm and sensibility of each country. While China often seems to eradicate its past as it single-mindedly constructs its future, India nibbles more judiciously at its complex history.

Visits to crowded Indian urban centers unleash sensory assaults: colorful dress and lilting chatter provide a backdrop to every manner of commerce, from small shops to peddlers to beggars. That makes for engaging tourism, but not the fastest economic development. In contrast to Chinas full-throated, monochromatic embrace of large-scale manufacturing, India more closely resembles a nation of shopkeepers.

To be sure, India has achieved enviable success in business services, like the glistening call centers in Bangalore and elsewhere. But in the global jousting for manufacturing jobs, India does not get its share.

Now, after years of rocketing growth, Chinas gross domestic product per capita of $9,146 is more than twice Indias. And its economy grew by 7.7 percent in 2012, while India expanded at a (hardly shabby) 5.3 percent rate.


The New York Times
Chinas investment rate of 48 percent of G.D.P. a key metric for development also exceeded Indias. At 36 percent, Indias number is robust, particularly in comparison with Western countries. But the impact of that spending can be hard to discern; on a recent 12-day visit to India, not many rupees appeared to have been lavished on Mumbais glorious Victoria Terminus, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, since it was constructed in the 1880s. Parts of Mumbais recently built financial district Bandra Kurla Complex already look aged, perhaps because of cheap construction or poor maintenance or both. Its hardly a serious competitor to Shanghais shiny Pudong.

China has 16 subway systems to Indias 5. As China builds a superhighway to Tibet, Indian drivers battle potholed roads that they share with every manner of vehicle and live animal. Indias electrical grid is still largely government controlled, which helped contribute to a disastrous blackout last summer that affected more than 600 million people.

Yet Morgan Stanley stands resolutely behind its 2010 prediction that India will be growing faster than China by the middle of this decade.

It isnt going to happen, Indias better demographics notwithstanding.

For one thing, many of Indias youths are unskilled and work as peddlers or not at all. For another, despite all the reforms instituted by India since its move away from socialism in 1991, much more would have to change. Corruption, inefficiency, restrictive trade practices and labor laws have to be addressed.

Democratic it may be, but Indias ability to govern is compromised by suffocating bureaucracy, regular arm-wrestling with states over prerogatives like taxation and deeply embedded property rights that make implementing China-scale development projects impossible. Unable to modernize its horribly congested cities, Indias population has remained more rural than Chinas, further depressing growth.

China and corruption may be almost synonymous to many, but India was ranked even worse in corruption in Transparency Internationals annual Corruption Perceptions Index. At its best, the Indian justice system a British legacy grinds exceptionally slowly.

To be sure, summary executions dont occur in India, and its legal system is more transparent and rule-based than Chinas. But a recent visit coincided with the tragic gang rape of a young Indian woman that led to her death; the governments ham-handed initial response was to ban protesters from assembling and impound vans with tinted windows like the one in which she was abducted.

Indias rigid social structure limits intergenerational economic mobility and fosters acceptance of vast wealth disparities. In Mumbai, where more than half the population lives in slums often devoid of electricity or running water, Mukesh Ambani spent a reported $1 billion to construct a 27-story home in a residential neighborhood.

Dont get me wrong I am hardly advocating totalitarian government. But we need to recognize that success for developing countries is about more than free elections.

While India may not have the same eye on the prize so evident in China, it should finish a respectable second in the developing world sweepstakes. It just wont beat China.
Many of South East Asian countries national names have Sanskrit (and in certain instances Tamil) origin which is a relic of Indian cultural influence on them which goes back to anceint times.Before the arrival of Islam, Hinduism was the dominant religion in South East Asia.Many of the most beautiful and biggest Hindu temples are actually not in India but in South East Asia.One can cite examples like Angkor Wat in Cambodia which is the largest Hindu Temple in the World, the many beautiful Temples in Bali, Indonesia etc.

During 11th century, the Indian Cholan dynasty also exercised political control over Java and Malay Peninsula.The Cholans defeated srivijaya (which is a Indonesian/Malay Hindu Empire and was the dominant South East Asian Empire of that time) in a succession of wars and made them their vassals.Contrary to perception the Tamil immigration to South East Asia did not start during British rule but much earlier during the days of Cholan dynasty which was a Tamil dynasty.

Here is a list of South East Asian countries whose names have Indian influence on them.

Singapore - Its derived from two Sanskrit words "Singa" (meaning Lion) and Pura (city). It was initially called as "Singapura" (Lion City). The name was given by a Hindu Malay/Indonesian prince who landed in Singapore and thought he saw a lion.The British anglicised the name to "Singapore".

Malaysia - Its derived from the Indian word "Malaydweepa" (Malay Island/Peninsula). The word 'Malay' is derived from the word "Melayu" of Tamil origin which means 'mountain land'.

Indonesia - Its derived from two latin words 'Indo' (referring to India) and 'nesos (islands). Indonesia literally means 'Indian Islands' and the name was given by the Europeans because of historic Indian influence there.Before Indonesia became a nation, it was mainly known by the two largest Islands - Java and Sumatra, both of which names have Sanskrit connection. Java is derived from Yava/Yavadweepa (Barley Island) and Sumatra is derived from Suvarnadweepa (Gold Island).

Brunei - Its derived from Sanskrit word 'Varunai' (Sea people).

Kingdom of Thailand - The full Thai name is 'Ratcha Anachak Thai' which is of Sanskrit origin. Both Ratcha (derived from Sanskrit 'Raja') and Anachak (derived from Sanskrit words 'ana' meaning power and 'Chak' from Chakra meaning wheel/authority).Thailand's previous name 'Siam' which also has Sanskrit connection and thought to be derived from Sanskrit word 'Shama'

Phillipenes - Phillipenes is a name given by the Spanish colonizers.But the indigenous name of Phillipenes is 'Maharlika' which is a Sanskrit word for 'Nobility'. Recently, there is a growing demand in Phillipenes to re name the country from Spanish name to Sanskrit name.

Cambodia - Its a anglicised word for 'Kampuchea' (land of Khmer).Its derived from Sanskrit word 'Kambuja' from Hindu Epics.


===========================================


Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam
(Make this World Noble)

- Rigveda

-------------------------------------------
<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value=""></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="315"></embed></object>

By the time you realize that this signature doesn't say anything it's too late to stop reading it
Quote
Like
Share