Make no mistake. I am not putting India down. When I refer to China as a guru, I must restrict it to their manner of doing business, expanding their infrastructure and exit ports (When I was in Shangai I was told that it takes no longer than 12 hours to turn a ship around. In Bombay I would look at anything between 3-4 days for the same ship!), their removal of red tape since the late 70's; their impatience for corruption. Offcourse Beijing needs much more reforms to edge itself to an acceptable global player and they could take notes from India in this respect. One simple example is comparing the Shangai and Shenzen stock exchanges with the Bombay stock exchange. We have much more transparency with the Stock Exchange Commission having investigative and punitative powers whilst in China one would have to go through the lengthy courts to investigate a company sinve their SEC doesn't have that much authority. A larger younger educated population in India compared to China is also an advantage. My point is that our advantages are long term and not an immediate bonus. We only started economic reform in the 1990s whilst Beijing blue-printed it in 1978 and started in 1979. Our disadvantages are not crippling. But we need to take a book out of Beijing when it comes to infrastructure, red tape removal, no-no to corruption and beurocracy. In that regards they need to be our gurus. Their advantages are glaring and their strides are noteworthy but for us to start competing with them at this early stage of our trip is shortsighted. Hence my suggestion that we use them as a benchmark (offcourse with limitations
) and not a competitor and my agreement with Mr Sen's sentiments
Younger, maybe. But more educated population?
Can you give me some quantitative evidence on exactly how much "more educated" India's youth is?
Lets talk literacy rates, secondary/tertiary enrollment, engineers graduated and PhDs graduated?
In terms of quality, the best judgment is PISA test results and IQ tests for non-college graduates, average wages for college graduates, and research output for masters/PhDs. In all 3 aspects, which one has India above China?
Corruption in China only slightly less bad than corruption in India. The red tape here is more than you think. The only obvious advantage, in your words, would then be the infrastructure.
But I think there's more.
I think the real advantage of China over India is that we invested in our youth, by giving them college educations, while India still has the education system of China's past: only educate the elite at taxpayer expense.
IIT is a typical example of the failure of the Indian educational system. IITians individually, of course, are amazingly talented individuals. But IITs disproportionately receive tax money, and they have an extremely low acceptance rate; lower than both Harvard and Beijing U. Thus, the end result is, a tiny batch of smart engineers is graduated every year, they see that India is not ready for their talents, and they leave for the West.
