Why India will not be able to match up with China

[aimarraul]

someone please close this thread,it's a military forum ，guys

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

someone please close this thread,it's a military forum ，guys

This thread is informative, shchinese should be given chance to continue posting reasons (continuing at #6). The photos and information is interesting to most readers.

Also, it seems the main reason that some find this thread 'offensive' is because it challenges their BELIEFS about China-vis-a-vis-India. Basically it is an attack on people's EGO.

But sometimes we need to put ourselves in other people's shoes. Even as recently as 1990s Japanese had a condescending view of Chinese people as 'primitive', poor, dirty, non-western/white, etc. Think how that feels and be a little more 'sensitive' in how we threat others. That does not mean we give up our values or rights! Nor does it mean we have to remain silent. Let's continue the thread, it was really interesting. Many things I didn't know, for example that factory of tanks was mind-boggling awesome!!!

 

[third eye]

This thread is informative, shchinese should be given chance to continue posting reasons (continuing at #6). The photos and information is interesting to most readers.

Also, it seems the main reason that some find this thread 'offensive' is because it challenges their BELIEFS about China-vis-a-vis-India. Basically it is an attack on people's EGO.

On the contrary, the 1st few posts are a series of " cut & paste" leading to nowhere.

Nations like humans progress at a pace best suited for themselves based on the constraints they have or live in.

Why should there be a comparison ? Each one of us are happy in our own worlds.

Where will this ( or similar) threads lead to ?..actually nowhere.

 

[dvk1982]

Agreed. When some members start to post nonsensical lies, it (sometimes) becomes necessary to refute it. However, we shouldn't get personal (even if it is true). Regarding arranged marriages, my feeling it it depends. For example 'forced' arranged marriages is not pleasant, but 'supported' arranged marriages (with right to refusal) is okay. Stuff like India brings to mind 'dirty', while true is NOT a nice thing to say. We should NOT make fun of people for being poor and lacking toilet paper/facilities --- if we need to bring this up, ask WHY they are in that situation (e.g. government corruption).

what truth r u blabbering abt ? who the heck r u to judge Indian customs of arranged marriages ? and cud any sensible person draw the link between Development and " marriage, toilet paper , party invitation, shower and the crap " ??

If i am allowed to blabber... how the heck one can force somebody to have just one child ? - "One child policy" - agreed, people need to be educated but can't be forced to make them live as some heads of state dictate, ohh sorry u don't feel nothing wrong abt it !!

India is dirty... so was China 10-15 years back.. it wasn't even a generation back remember that... If West says these things, its a little understandable.. but some people dont remember the not so distant past !!

And finally, we are n't a banana republic to get ur expert reasoning on why things r the way in India..

" But we have promises to keep,
And miles to go before we sleep, " -- adapted from Robert Frost's poem....

 

[praveen]

i c u ppl are only good at dragging projects and after 30 years still u ppl r NO WHERE instead of accepting the failure of Arjun

Inventing the wheel takes time and thats what we did it was a great learning experience for us regarding arjun.The failure was not technical,the designers forgot to include the army's doctrine into requirement while designing the tank

k n Low capability A/Cs u ppl are still wasting on it keep it up n btw

Viability we can use until Gorky arrives

he induction of LCA has been delayed it will be 2011-12

not so knowledgable about LCA

, thts wat ur good at isnt it girl???

Sorry Iam not a girl

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

what truth r u blabbering abt ? who the heck r u to judge Indian customs of arranged marriages ? and cud any sensible person draw the link between Development and " marriage, toilet paper , party invitation, shower and the crap " ??

If i am allowed to blabber... how the heck one can force somebody to have just one child ? - "One child policy" - agreed, people need to be educated but can't be forced to make them live as some heads of state dictate, ohh sorry u don't feel nothing wrong abt it !!

India is dirty... so was China 10-15 years back.. it wasn't even a generation back remember that... If West says these things, its a little understandable.. but some people dont remember the not so distant past !!

And finally, we are n't a banana republic to get ur expert reasoning on why things r the way in India..

" But we have promises to keep,
And miles to go before we sleep, " -- adapted from Robert Frost's poem....

You need a time-out to compose your thoughts/emotions. Don't know why you are ranting about, as my post was not 'offensive'.

 

[aimarraul]

This thread is informative, shchinese should be given chance to continue posting reasons (continuing at #6). The photos and information is interesting to most readers.

Also, it seems the main reason that some find this thread 'offensive' is because it challenges their BELIEFS about China-vis-a-vis-India. Basically it is an attack on people's EGO.

there is nothing wrong if india's future will benifit from this ego ,especially for a developing country,CPC inspire us alot, but they just compare to the “yesterday” china

 

[beckham]

why is this sh*#chinese still not banned ,he is disgrace to his nation and to other Chinese members here !

 

[grey boy 2]

why is this sh*#chinese still not banned ,he is disgrace to his nation and to other Chinese members here !

May i suggest you to stick to the topic?

For god sake , this topic is Why India will not be able to match China!

And who give you the damn right to judge him?

Look at your childish racist remark; sh*#chinese!!

You are the one that need to feel ashame of youself and be ban!!

 

[Gabbar]

I always stick to the topic, that was a response to post#202

Don't you try to make up an one side story!!

And what about the racist remark in post#46, Chinaman?

Then dont feed the trolls, just report to Mods. They know how to deal with them. Replies to trolls only makes it worse. I have also reported them before you mentioned it.

 

[beckham]

May i suggest you to stick to the topic?

For god sake , this topic is Why India will not be able to match China!

And who give you the damn right to judge him?

Look at your childish racist remark; sh*#chinese!!

You are the one that need to feel ashame of youself and be ban!!

why i dont have the right to judge him ? he has been ranting about my my nation and his racist remarks are unbearable ! just follow his posts . anyways back to topic.....

 

[dvk1982]

You need a time-out to compose your thoughts/emotions. Don't know why you are ranting about, as my post was not 'offensive'.

Me "offensive" ohh yeah.. when u diplomatically try to agree to the same thing what ur brother has said that "india is dirty and all the crap abt toilet papers relationship with Development" why can't I be more straightforward than beating around bush....

 

[grey boy 2]

why i dont have the right to judge him ? he has been ranting about my my nation and his racist remarks are unbearable ! just follow his posts . anyways back to topic.....

Plain simple; When you are a damn racist yourself, yes you have no right

to judge him!!!!

 

[beckham]

Plain simple; When you are a damn racist yourself, yes you have no right

to judge him!!!!

ha ha.. you are so lovely ! you asked me to get back to topic (which i thought of agreeing) and a final cheap shot ! just stop it...
Using Pakistani in flag in hope of gaining support is so pathetic .. i am sure senior , mature pak members wont be agreeing with u...
so any plan to get back on topic ??

 

[Gabbar]

Arvind Subramanian: The growth future - India and China​

Can China and India sustain their current growth rates? A traditional answer to this question is conditional: yes, provided they continue to implement policy reforms. But historical experience allows a less guarded answer. There are few examples of countries that have grown as strongly and for such long periods as India and China have — 6 per cent and 10 per cent, respectively, for nearly three decades — and then suffered a sharp slowdown or collapse. If history is a reliable guide, then barring major upheavals, economic growth looks likely to continue in both countries until some threshold level of prosperity is attained.

But why does growth beget more growth? One mechanism is simply that growth signals the fact of profitable economic opportunities, which encourages investors to rush in, first in response to these opportunities but then in response to each other — this is growth as a confidence trick — creating a virtuous circle. If countries are relatively poor, if their markets are large, and if their policy framework is basically sensible — all of which are true of China and India — the chances of the growth-begetting-growth dynamic taking hold are high.

But in addition to the signalling effect, growth may itself cause changes which have in turn a growth-reinforcing effect — a kind of positive feedback loop. A good example is education. For long, development economists bemoaned the poor levels of educational attainment in India, directing their critique at the government’s failure to supply better education. But economic growth changed the education picture dramatically. It increased the returns to, and hence the demand for, education. And if government supply remained weak, consumers simply turned to the private sector to meet their demand for education. Improvements in educational attainment over the last 15 years are attributable in part to more rapid growth.

An important question then is whether India and China can take the positive feedback loop for granted, especially in relation to two key determinants of long-run growth: state capacity or effectiveness and the private sector’s entrepreneurial capacity. In other words, is it inevitable that over time growth will itself improve the quality of private entrepreneurship and public institutions? Consider each in turn.

Policy reforms have created the conditions for the private sectors in both countries to flourish. Yasheng Huang of MIT in his new book, Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics, argues that the Indian private sector, especially the indigenous part, is more efficient and entrepreneurial than its Chinese counterpart.

One crude measure of relative sophistication or entrepreneurial capability is how much direct investment (FDI) these countries are exporting, especially to the richer countries and especially in sophisticated sectors. Based on new data on mergers and acquisitions, Aaditya Mattoo of the World Bank and I calculated that India’s FDI exports to the OECD countries overall and even in the manufacturing sector were substantially greater than China’s (measured as a share of GDP). China is rightly considered the world’s manufacturing powerhouse and export juggernaut, and yet in the manufacturing sector, Indian entrepreneurial and managerial capital (in the form of FDI) has been more successful than China’s in taking control of and managing assets in the sophisticated markets of Europe and the US. So, while both private sectors have improved, India can claim today that it is ahead of China in fostering entrepreneurial capitalism.

Turn next to institutions. In the case of China, the focus of the world, and indeed the disappointment, has been the absence of the positive political feedback loop: growth and the attendant economic freedoms have not led to greater political development and openness. Implicitly, there has been less concern about the effect of growth on the state’s economic capacity. Over the last thirty years, the Chinese state has successfully created physical infrastructure and delivered essential services.

Contrast that with the Indian experience. While there are many exceptions, and at the considerable risk of over-generalising, the Indian state despite rapid economic growth has deteriorated over time. Whether it is providing basic law and order, or ensuring sanctity of contract, or delivering public services, the stench of decline is hard to ignore. For example, on a crude measure of government effectiveness on which I compiled data across time, India’s performance declined sharply: in the early 1960s, India was in the top 5th percentile of countries in the sample, slipping to the middle of the pack in recent years (http://www.petersoninstitute.org/publications/papers/subramanian0407b.pdf). The education example discussed earlier is an exception to the growth-institutions dynamic, made possible only because of private alternatives to state supply. For the core public sector functions, where such an alternative does not exist, the growth-institutions dynamic has been weak or non-existent.

So, growth in India has come with a more entrepreneurial private sector but accompanied by deteriorating state capacity. China has a vastly superior state capacity but an indigenous private sector that is still finding its feet. Which combination augurs better for the future?

There is a fundamental asymmetry between state and markets. It is easier to create markets than it is to create state capacity or to prevent its deterioration. Creating markets is a lot about letting go, establishing a reasonable policy framework, and allowing the natural hustling instinct to take over. In other words, hustling is the natural state. Building state capacity, on the other hand, is quite different. It involves overcoming collective action problems, mediating conflict, creating accountability mechanisms where outputs are multiple and fuzzy and links between inputs and outputs murky, and contending with the deep imprints of history. In Weber’s memorable words, building public institutions is like the “slow boring of hard boards”.

In that light, China’s task of improving its private sector seems easier to accomplish than India’s task of arresting institutional decline. So, while China and India can probably both count on more years of high growth, the odds still favour China pulling off that feat than India. That, and not just the meagre medal tally, should be what India mulls over as the curtain descends on the Beijing Olympics.

The author is Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics and Center for Global Development, and Senior Research Professor, Johns Hopkins University.