The Economists and the Media have joined hands to push hard for Reforms Drive in India which is Systematic Ethnic Cleansing and Mass Destruction of the Excluded Communities, the Mulnivasi Bahujan who not only lose land, home, jof, livelihood but are selected to be killed.
Globalization's poster child to a laggard among major economies, India isn't shining any more Globalization's poster child to a laggard among major economies, India isn't shining any more. Not ours, it is the conclusion of Amreican Media. New York times puts the Truth in its right prospect which is denied by Reputed Economist who promote the LPG Mafia Rule in india.
Nobel laureate and economist Joseph Stiglitz on Friday said that India's growth at 7% is a mark of achievement in the current global scenario. Speaking to ET NOW, he said that India can afford a high deficit if invested for larger capex. On the other hand New York Times says that It's a testimony to the lingering effects of a four-decades-old socialistic economy: Each time India makes a policy move toward creating wealth, it does so with a grudging sense of sacrifice and an insistence that it's doing the world, and specifically the United States and the West, a favor. The Economists and the Media have joined hands to push hard for Reforms Drive in India which is Systematic Ethnic Cleansing and Mass Destruction of the Excluded Communities, the Mulnivasi Bahujan who not only lose land, home, jof, livelihood but are selected to be killed. New York Times says that the most recent example came in November, when the coalition government, headed by the Congress Party, attempted to liberalize rules governing investment by foreign companies in organized retail. Protests from the opposition soon had the government retracing its steps.
Such backtracking, along with a logjam on reform, explain how India, in three years, has gone from being globalization's poster child to becoming the laggard among the major emerging economies. In 2008-2009, India and China were the standout survivors of thefinancial crisis, invited to the Group of Twenty high table and expected to steer the course for 21st-century commerce. As the sun set on 2011, however, key stakeholders in the Indian economy were contemplating rough, cold nights ahead. New York Times says that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government had proposed that 51-per cent foreign direct investment (FDI) be allowed in the multi-brand retail space. This would have let companies such as Wal-Mart and Carrefour, banned from investing even a dollar in front-end retail stores in India, set up shop in Asia's third-largest economy. The Singh government also announced a decision to enhance permissible FDI in single-brand retail to 100 per cent from the previous 51 per cent. With the government's retreat, however, the multi-brand decision is off, though the single-brand policy change will go ahead.
The FDI-in-retail controversy is telling for three reasons.
First, it's a reminder that, despite the country's having been among the biggest beneficiaries of the globalization process during the past two decades, significant sections of Indian society remain deeply suspicious of foreign investment. Second, the outcry has underlined the difficulties of pursuing even fairly obviously needed economic reform and policy change in India's extraordinarily competitive and fractious democracy. Limits to foreign equity in retail are decided by executive order and do not require parliamentary approval or changes in legislation. Nevertheless, facing broad opposition and blackmail by junior parties in the ruling coalition, the government had to capitulate. Finally the episode renewed pressure on the Singh government to restore India's momentum. Growing at close to 10 per cent three years ago, the economy is showing alarming signs of slowdown. GDP growth in 2011-2012 - the financial year runs from April to March - is likely to fall below 7 per cent, against the government's target of 9 per cent. The fiscal deficit is certain to overshoot the 4.6-per cent figure promised in the 2011 budget, and could be closer to 6 per cent. The rupee is sliding toward historic lows compared to the dollar.
Statistics released by the government report that in October 2011 industrial production declined 5.1 per cent, compared to the same month in 2010. The contraction in the capital-goods sector was an astonishing 25.5 per cent, indicating business pessimism and wariness in investing in new capacity. Declining FDI and investor confidence in India's capital markets are also causing concern. Unremitting inflation and the government's use of fiscal measures to check it have created a vicious circle. To optimize the advantages of an interlinked economic system, a country needs to keep its eyes not only on globalization, but also on another ''g'' word: governance. This is where India has faltered. Complacent about the inevitability of rapid growth, the Congress-led government has an internal division as to the necessity and political legitimacy of deregulation, decontrol and market-friendly reform.
While Singh is clearly a believer, his party president and political boss, Sonia Gandhi, does not see growth as an overriding priority - and the mounting bill of a range of welfare programs she favors has had a devastating impact. Paradoxically, it is the rural constituency she is keen to protect that would have benefited most from the now-botched reform. Stiglitz said that India's knowledge, economy and democracy is its strength. Commenting on the economic growth, he said, "Today, we look with amazement at some of the rates of growth in theemerging markets. That growth is not small measure because these countries have learned how to close the knowledge gap." He also said the emerging countries have learnt to close the knowledge gap with the developed countries. The economist also cautioned India that it cannot afford to waste its resources to mitigate the impact of economic crisis. He said that the US economy is far from being completely healthy, and the government had 'wasted' resources to mitigate the scale of devastation in the country's financial sector brought about by the recession. "Let this be a warning for India. America is a rich country that can, perhaps, afford such waste. India is not," he said.
Nobel laureate and economist Joseph Stiglitz on Friday said that India's growth at 7% is a mark of achievement in the current global scenario. Speaking to ET NOW, he said that India can afford a high deficit if invested for larger capex. On the other hand New York Times says that It's a testimony to the lingering effects of a four-decades-old socialistic economy: Each time India makes a policy move toward creating wealth, it does so with a grudging sense of sacrifice and an insistence that it's doing the world, and specifically the United States and the West, a favor. The Economists and the Media have joined hands to push hard for Reforms Drive in India which is Systematic Ethnic Cleansing and Mass Destruction of the Excluded Communities, the Mulnivasi Bahujan who not only lose land, home, jof, livelihood but are selected to be killed. New York Times says that the most recent example came in November, when the coalition government, headed by the Congress Party, attempted to liberalize rules governing investment by foreign companies in organized retail. Protests from the opposition soon had the government retracing its steps.
Such backtracking, along with a logjam on reform, explain how India, in three years, has gone from being globalization's poster child to becoming the laggard among the major emerging economies. In 2008-2009, India and China were the standout survivors of thefinancial crisis, invited to the Group of Twenty high table and expected to steer the course for 21st-century commerce. As the sun set on 2011, however, key stakeholders in the Indian economy were contemplating rough, cold nights ahead. New York Times says that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government had proposed that 51-per cent foreign direct investment (FDI) be allowed in the multi-brand retail space. This would have let companies such as Wal-Mart and Carrefour, banned from investing even a dollar in front-end retail stores in India, set up shop in Asia's third-largest economy. The Singh government also announced a decision to enhance permissible FDI in single-brand retail to 100 per cent from the previous 51 per cent. With the government's retreat, however, the multi-brand decision is off, though the single-brand policy change will go ahead.
The FDI-in-retail controversy is telling for three reasons.
First, it's a reminder that, despite the country's having been among the biggest beneficiaries of the globalization process during the past two decades, significant sections of Indian society remain deeply suspicious of foreign investment. Second, the outcry has underlined the difficulties of pursuing even fairly obviously needed economic reform and policy change in India's extraordinarily competitive and fractious democracy. Limits to foreign equity in retail are decided by executive order and do not require parliamentary approval or changes in legislation. Nevertheless, facing broad opposition and blackmail by junior parties in the ruling coalition, the government had to capitulate. Finally the episode renewed pressure on the Singh government to restore India's momentum. Growing at close to 10 per cent three years ago, the economy is showing alarming signs of slowdown. GDP growth in 2011-2012 - the financial year runs from April to March - is likely to fall below 7 per cent, against the government's target of 9 per cent. The fiscal deficit is certain to overshoot the 4.6-per cent figure promised in the 2011 budget, and could be closer to 6 per cent. The rupee is sliding toward historic lows compared to the dollar.
Statistics released by the government report that in October 2011 industrial production declined 5.1 per cent, compared to the same month in 2010. The contraction in the capital-goods sector was an astonishing 25.5 per cent, indicating business pessimism and wariness in investing in new capacity. Declining FDI and investor confidence in India's capital markets are also causing concern. Unremitting inflation and the government's use of fiscal measures to check it have created a vicious circle. To optimize the advantages of an interlinked economic system, a country needs to keep its eyes not only on globalization, but also on another ''g'' word: governance. This is where India has faltered. Complacent about the inevitability of rapid growth, the Congress-led government has an internal division as to the necessity and political legitimacy of deregulation, decontrol and market-friendly reform.
While Singh is clearly a believer, his party president and political boss, Sonia Gandhi, does not see growth as an overriding priority - and the mounting bill of a range of welfare programs she favors has had a devastating impact. Paradoxically, it is the rural constituency she is keen to protect that would have benefited most from the now-botched reform. Stiglitz said that India's knowledge, economy and democracy is its strength. Commenting on the economic growth, he said, "Today, we look with amazement at some of the rates of growth in theemerging markets. That growth is not small measure because these countries have learned how to close the knowledge gap." He also said the emerging countries have learnt to close the knowledge gap with the developed countries. The economist also cautioned India that it cannot afford to waste its resources to mitigate the impact of economic crisis. He said that the US economy is far from being completely healthy, and the government had 'wasted' resources to mitigate the scale of devastation in the country's financial sector brought about by the recession. "Let this be a warning for India. America is a rich country that can, perhaps, afford such waste. India is not," he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment