Look at the per capita numbers again. Pakistan is about the same or better than India in per capita gdp, income, energy use, transportation, infrastructure etc.
As to space technology, India has no business to be in space, given the fact that one out of every two hunger persons is an Indian (World Hunger data), and two-thirds of its citizens still defecate in the open (UNICEF-WHO joint study), and one out of every three illiterate adults in an Indian, etc etc. Your priorities are all screwed up.
Here's a Guardian report making this point:
Britain will spend £825m over the next three years in aid to India, a nuclear-armed power that sent a spacecraft to the moon last month, to lift "hundreds of millions of people" out of poverty, the secretary of state for international development said yesterday.
Douglas Alexander, the first cabinet minister to visit India's poorest state Bihar, said that despite "real strides in economic growth" there were still 828 million people living on less than $2 a day in India.
Critics argue British taxpayers should not be devoting the largest single sum in its aid budget to one of the fastest-growing economies in the world. They say, in terms of national wealth, as measured by purchasing power parity, India's economy is larger than Britain's. The IMF's figures put the Indian economy at $3tr (£2tr) compared with Britain's $2.2tr.
British minister defends 825m aid to help India's poor | World news | The Guardian
