This is based on a article in the newspaper in I recently happened to read and would like to discuss on this forum… it really generates an array of thoughts... at least to me !!!
This thought crosses my mind quite often that with regular terror attacks, poor infrastructure and relatively unstable political scenario, how India managed to be the 2nd fastest growing economy in the world (didn't we hear it quite often)... There even goes a common saying that “Our economy grows at night when the government is asleep." As if to illustrate this, the mumbai stock market rose in the period after the recent terrorist attacks. Markets were closed next day but re-opened on Nov 28 and defying speculation of fall, it actually closed 66 points higher. Also in recent elections, incumbents were ousted on the basis of economic issues, not security. The fastest growing country is China, understandably with its quite efficient state. Scores of other nations have same sort of economic reforms as India, so why is it that Indian economy has become world’s second best. Answer may lie in the much reviled caste system. Vaishyas, members of the merchant caste, who have learned over generations how to accumulate capital, give the nation a competitive advantage. Not surprisingly, Vaishyas still dominate the Forbes list of Indian billionaires. That explains in some way, while growth in China is much induced by an efficient state; in India’s case, it may well happen despite the state.
Welcoming your views on this...
3 comments:
A high GDP growth rate does not necessarily means India's Economy is "2nd best " as stated by the author.
The second argument regarding vaishya community being engine of capitalism in India seems frivolous , because its not billionares alone who drive growth; but it is indeed integrated and collective action of whole working populace across the value chain which fuels growth.
i beg to differ from you when you say that State of China is more efficient as compared to Indian state as if you closely follow the unimaginable growth of china then you will come to know that their economic development was forced by the state and not it is natural. whearas in indian scene the state is acting as a facilitator and this is what is required from an efficient state.
i wud like to add some flesh to babita's thoughts with some questions:-
when u pitch in for caste, the obvious question arises - what if there was no caste? i think india wud have had more egalitarian development.
but then comes up the next question, is egalitarian system conducive to arts and other intellectual pursuits flourishing?
we cannot refute the liberal aid given by kings to scholars, artists, poets and so on and so forth. to put it a bit differently, would there have been birbal without akbar?
all of us feel proud to say that india before British supplied intellectual wealth to the world. but then v r ashamed to recognize tat this wealth had an unintended consequence of reinforcing a certain autocratic system of governance..
the final question is, is ther a way of balancing egalitarian development on one hand and capital accumulation(which includes both cerabral and materialistic wealth) on the other hand?
comments awaited...
Post a Comment