Indian Economy

[srini]

Well that whole writeup was not so much about Modi's 3rd term but was more about comparing growth of Indian and Chinese economies after both countries started opening up their economies. The point i wanted to convey was that though China had a head start of 13 years, the difference in the economies now is at 15 years time period. So India didn't lag behind China by much in spite of a black swan event like Covid. Morgan Stanley has recently upgraded Indian stocks to 'Overweight' where as it downgraded Chinese stocks to 'Equal weight'. Please note i am saying none of this credit goes to Modi or who ever is at helm...i am only saying this is how demography dividend plays out in the growth of economies...it takes a while to build a big base and then each year even a 6% growth results in growth of about 3 to 4 hundred billion dollars which is actually the size Indian economy in the 1990s.Politicians like Modi are content to talk only about real GDP size (not per capita) because it suits them to score some brownie points. Why do you think Modi and Shah keep saying we will be 3rd largest economy by next term during the no confidence motion? They know some of the electorate tunes into TV during such debates and that it will help them...Yes i agree economy is NOT the only thing that helps in reelection, but it does sway some votes especially in the new aspirational India. India was not so in PV Narasimha rao times.

[prasen9]

But people are also not that gullible. If you say that the economy is doing great but people are struggling to put food on the table and their friends are too, then they will vote you out. However, the opposition has to present a better vision. And, the opposition cannot be so fractured. These are the important points.

[Omkara]

But people are also not that gullible. If you say that the economy is doing great but people are struggling to put food on the table and their friends are too, then they will vote you out. However, the opposition has to present a better vision. And, the opposition cannot be so fractured. These are the important points.

The opposition was useless in 1989 and also 2004. But people did get voted out. Alliances were formed after election in these years. Here the problem isn't that people have trouble putting food on table. Thats quite an old way of thinking. It's just that there is one class that has to really slog to put food on table. They are hardly able to beat inflation and are mostly the viscous cycle. One calamity and they are back to square one. There angst is that while they are struggling others are moving ahead. While partly I agree that's how capitalism works, last nine years policies have also worsened this have vs have nots gap. But the current difference in income levels is unsustainable. Hopefully generating communal violence may help people ignore such problems.

[srini]

But people are also not that gullible. If you say that the economy is doing great but people are struggling to put food on the table and their friends are too, then they will vote you out. However, the opposition has to present a better vision. And, the opposition cannot be so fractured. These are the important points.

Hopefully generating communal violence may help people ignore such problems.

You're hopeful of generating communal violence ?? i guess you might want to rephrase what you're hoping for!

[prasen9]

Or rethink.

I used putting food on the table metaphorically in a larger sense, although there are still many who are struggling to put food on the table.

[Omkara]

I am not hopeful of communal violence. I am sure of it. What the ruling party is hoping is that people will get engulfed in those events and the income disparity is not discussed.

And yes the post could have been written better.

[jayakris]

^^^ If you are worried of the communal violence that we see now, just wait till an opposition party takes power, whenever they manage to. Then we will see what real communal violence is. The current rule has made the Hindu forces too bold (and really misguided on many things, with fake social media narratives and all that). The opposition parties will underestimate them, and we will have some real issues.

Or we may get lucky and the trickle-down economics will kick in really fast, with 8+ or 10+ percent growth in the right way (i.e., lessening/removing unemployment in the lower stratum, especially in young people - causing their not having time to bother about communal violence). I doubt this will happen fast enough.

So we are looking at a couple of decades of a lot of strife. But I do think India is a mature enough country now, and basically "too big to fail". So we will get through it. The immediate 10 years are the real concern.

[Sin Hombre]

Does India really have more communal violence today? More whatsvideos and phone cameras is not evidence.

Have we really forgotten all the riots we had through the 80s and 90s?

We had a 7.8% GDP growth in the last quarter. We have high inequality but it has been the same the past few years.

Where is this fear of decades of a lot of strife coming from?

[prasen9]

Don't know how to measure this and folks know I am not a fan of the current regime. However, crime has come down on a per capita basis steadily. There are some years that are spikes though. Why? Also, homicide has gone down too. As has maternal mortality rate. However, there is perhaps no Modi magic in that we do not find drastic improvements or discontinuities and acceleration or deccelerations after the Modi regime came to power. So, it is the same old slow progress.

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/IND/india/crime-rate-statistics#:~:text=India%20crime%20rate%20%26%20statistics%20for,a%201.16%25%20decline%20from%202017.