Indian Economy-News & Updates

[BSF]

Rs.50 is too costly don't you guys think.
When i was in NOIDA we had a DND i used to frown every time i had to take Rs.15 to pay the toll.
I would use the normal route some times to save me money.
I have heard that the cost has gone up to Rs.20 after i left.

Not that i am a cheapo but I am not in such a hurry. And more over you always find a jam in Ashram, defeats the purpose.

 

[TopCat]

The author probably forgot about Bangladesh as being an Asian country. BD bureucracy is the worst. They are good for nothing.

 

[third eye]

Bureaucrats are the same all over - at least in S Asian countries. On a lighter note I'd like to share a joke on them

One man to another while traveling in a bus : "This guy next to me has this irritating habit of scratching his elbow every now & then.its bugging me."

His Fr replies : " Forget it .. I know him -he suffers from piles".

The 1st man : "Damn it what has piles to do with him scratching his elbow ??"

His Fr replies : Relax.. he is a civil servant , he doesn't know his a*rse from his elbow "!!

 

[Choppers]

The sealink saves a lot of time and petrol too.So overall its cheaper compared to using the existing road.

 

[Jako]

The sealink saves a lot of time and petrol too.So overall its cheaper compared to using the existing road.

what bout the rs 50 toll tax silly???

 

[shravan]

what bout the rs 50 toll tax silly???

What about 50Rs.? It's not a big deal.
Time is money in Mumbai.....

 

[Jako]

What about 50Rs.? It's not a big deal.
Time is money in Mumbai.....

bhai sab,take a look at the jam today in the sea link...........

 

[shravan]

bhai sab,take a look at the jam today in the sea link...........

I had been there today. 4 days free hai.

 

[Jako]

I had been there today. 4 days free hai.

lolz.....now i know the real cause of the jam!......how was the view ,buddy

 

[Choppers]

wat i m tryin to say is that travelling on existing road consumes a lot of petrol.
Using sealink will certainly save your money spent on fuel.This is also environment friendly.Also it will ease up the existing route.

Irrespective of the toll,people will use this sealink as saving TIME is more important for the people in this commercial capital of India.

 

[Choppers]

Rs 1,634-cr sea link may change hands for Rs 282 cr

Chittaranjan Tembhekar | TNN

Mumbai: The Maharashtra government might have spent Rs 1,634 crore to build the Bandra-Worli Sea link (BWSL), but it could end up giving the BWSL to the contractor that wins the bid for the Worli-Haji Ali Link (WHAL) for just Rs 282 crore.

MSRDC sources said that once the WHAL is completed, the sea link’s toll would rise even higher. To reduce the hefty toll that motorists would have to pay, the state could pay Rs 1,352 crore upfront to the new contractor. However, the new contractor would also have to purchase the BWSL from the state government for Rs 1,634 crore. So, the contractor would end up shelling out just the difference, Rs 282 crore, for the BWSL. The new contractor then collects the toll.

UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi on Tuesday directed the state government to immediately start building the next sea link between Worli and Haji Ali. “But it’s not going to be an easy task as the state will have pay Rs 1,352 crore to make the toll affordable. Building the next three links will prove to be expensive,’’ said a senior MSRDC official.

The total cost of the next 4.2-km WHAL section, including buying the BWSL, would come to around Rs 4,600 crore. As the builder cannot have a second toll post on WHAL, he will have to buy the existing BWSL at Rs 1,634 crore. If calculated with the cost of escalation and interest during construction, the total cost of the WHAL would be Rs 5,000 crore. Unlike the Bandra Worli Sea Link’s contracted work, where the government paid the entire money, WHAL is going to be built on a build, operate and transfer (BOT) basis.

To recover Rs 5,000 crore through toll over a 40-year period, they could charge motorists using both links over Rs 130 for just one-way toll.

“The toll would be beyond the paying capacity, so the state will have to subsidise it by paying Rs 1,352 crore. Hence, the decision on the new sea link is taking time,’’ said a senior MSRDC official.

He added that that the subsidy would ensure that the toll remains at an affordable Rs 50 to Rs 60.

Rs 10 lakh toll expected per day

Mumbai: The Bandra Worli Sea Link is expected to generate over Rs 10 lakh in toll a day. As per the contract with Mumbai Entry Point Toll (MEPT), which will collect the toll, the agency has to give Rs 1.44 crore to the makers of the bridge, Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation (MSRDC), every week.

The contract with MEPT is for 52 weeks, during which the MSRDC expects to generate over Rs 75 crore. The MSRDC expects to sell the BWSL to the builder developing the Worli-Haji Ali Link within 52 weeks, after which the WHAL builder will collect the toll.

HIGH-POWERED DRIVE: The convoy of vehicles carrying UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi rides down the sea link on Tuesday

 

[shravan]

lolz.....now i know the real cause of the jam!......how was the view ,buddy

From there i can see my building....

City has started to change. Even I was shocked to see the changes.
Nobody can deny it.

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

Great job India! Mumbai!!!

May I make some practical suggestions? Turn this bridge into a tourist attraction like the BUND in Shanghai. Have water fountains (with multi-color lighting) like they do in Korea and a light-show in the evening. It will also increase tourist revenue and world-wide opinion of India/Mumbai.

By the seashore, clean it up a little, have some clean eateries by the beach and umbrellas and lights for evening stroll like they do in many world-class beachside resorts. Mumbai can turn into a real money earner. Build some hotels by beach. This doesn't have to be entire beach, focus on a few km of beach first.

I had my doubts before, but I see India Shinning is not only a shallow marketing blitz -- it is India's dream.

TO BE HONEST, I am very exited and impressed with the Gujarat GIFT project. India is big enough and important enough to have its very own Financial Capital. Don't give up hope! If you work a little each and everyday, it all adds up.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

The rural poor fare better than in China.

By JOHN LEE From today's Wall Street Journal Asia.

China and India will likely defy the economic malaise in Western economies and grow at more than 7% this year. But that is where the comparison should end. Contrary to popular hype, India is actually outpacing China where it counts most -- the economic growth of the rural poor.

Half of China's population and two-thirds of India's still live in rural areas -- roughly 700 million people in each country, most of whom remain poor. In China, the urban-rural income ratio has become increasingly disparate; it was 1.8 times more in the mid-1980s, 2.4 in the mid-1990s, 2.9 in 2001 and now around 3.5.

This trend starkly contrasts with the early years of Chinese economic reform. Over 80% of the poverty reduction in China occurred during Deng Xiaoping's reforms, between 1978 and 1988. Although per-capita incomes have risen since then, the net incomes of about 400 million people have declined over the past decade.

India started from a lower economic base but has made greater gains: Its urban-rural income gap has slowly but steadily declined since the early 1990s. Over the past decade, economic growth in rural India has outpaced growth in urban areas by almost 40%. Rural India now accounts for half of the country's GDP, up from 46% in 1993. Unlike the Chinese, rural Indians do not have to migrate to already crowded urban areas to earn a better living.

These trends mirror the path of economic reform in both nations. China had a huge head start in alleviating poverty. It began free-market reforms in 1978, while India only started on its current journey away from socialism toward a market-based system in the early 1990s. Since the turn of the century, India has been rapidly improving, but China has been getting worse. And since 2000, poverty and illiteracy in India have halved, while the same figures doubled in China.

The role of domestic consumption in the economy also demonstrates the divergent paths of these two developing giants. In China, domestic consumption as a proportion of GDP has fallen to 35% from around 60% in the 1980s. The Chinese "economic miracle" depends mostly on exports and state-led fixed investment. Even Beijing consistently admits this is an unbalanced, unsustainable strategy. Moreover, depressed consumption levels and correspondingly high levels of savings by the citizens of a still-poor country mean growth is uneven and benefits relatively few. In contrast, domestic consumption composes more than two-thirds of the Indian economy. India has a lot of catching up to do, but its poor are rising with the tide, unlike in China.

China's emphasis on state-led fixed-investment growth in urban areas may have fostered this trend, exacerbating inequality and heavily favoring a relatively small number of well-placed insiders. After the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, Beijing decided the state should reassert its control of economic growth, which had rested on private-sector entrepreneurship. Before Tiananmen, private-sector investment growth in rural China was growing at 20% annually. After Tiananmen, it dropped to 7%. Hundreds of millions of Chinese have since missed out on the fruits of the country's spectacular growth.

The Chinese and Indian development models are not actually in competition, despite what newspaper headlines and books may suggest. But as magnificent as Shanghai now is, its shiny buildings have been built on the backs of peasants forced to deposit their savings into state-owned banks and receiving little in return. In contrast, India started its reforms 15 years later than China but is quietly and gradually building its base. Now that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is starting his second term, he will do well to reject the dangerous appeal of the Chinese approach.

India's Rising Tide - WSJ.com

 

[ANDUBYLL]

Agree with the author here.

Actually India's agricultural reforms started well before China, starting in 1965 with the 'green revolution'. Since then, India had made substantial gains in agricultural production.

What India lacked is the industrial and economic reforms that it needed in 1965, to go with its agricultural reforms.

Instead, Indira Gandhi proceeded with blanket socialism and nationalisation of industries, effectively killing free market reforms and made India lagging in these vital sectors.

China for its part, its reforms started in 1978 was to build economic reforms on top of large 'kibbutz' type agricultural reforms typical of the soviet union. While largely successful in increasing state GDP output of agriculture, it never gain individuals to become successful farmers or increase wealth through agriculture. Therefore the huge disparity between the Chinese farmer seeking wealth in large cities against the Indian farmer remaining in the farms of India.