Friend,
I have got a link from my very good friend who time and again enlightened me with such link....and after reading it I thought it fit to reproduce it here for my readers to read......
My comments will follow in due time...as I am busy with something else.....
India’s elephant charges on through the crisis
By Martin Wolf
Published: March 2 2010 19:55
Last updated: March 2 2010 19:55
Crisis? What crisis? Indian policymakers are not asking such a complacent question. But India has had a “good crisis”. Now its task is to unwind the exceptional support given to the economy and push through the reforms needed to sustain fast and inclusive growth.
When Pranab Mukherjee, the finance minister, presented his budget last week he noted that a year ago, India confronted a double challenge: the global crisis, and a poor monsoon. Now, “I can say with confidence that we have weathered these crises well.” As the Indian government’s Economic Survey put it: “A variety of stimulus packages were put in place in the second half of 2008-09, in the Interim Budget 2009-2010 and, again, three months later, in the main Budget 2009-2010. By the second quarter the economy showed signs of turning; and now, close to the end of the year, India seems to be rapidly returning to the buoyant years preceding 2008.” In the 2008-09 financial year, India’s gross domestic product expanded by 6.7 per cent. This year it is forecast to grow by 7.2 per cent. If the Indian economy has succeeded in surviving this test with so little damage, even cautious analysts must be more optimistic about the future.
The Economists’ Forum
Have your say on Martin Wolf’s column and read contributions by leading economists
Stimulus has its costs. The central government’s fiscal deficit expanded from 2.6 per cent of GDP in 2007-08 to a provisional figure of 5.9 per cent in 2009-09 and an estimate of 6.5 per cent for this year. If one includes the states, the deficit jumped from 4 per cent of GDP in 2007-08, to 8.5 per cent in 2008-09 and a forecast of 9.7 per cent this year. India’s nominal GDP grew at an average rate of 14 per cent between 2004-05 and 2009-10. That makes deficits of 10 per cent of GDP quite sustainable. I wish that were equally true of the UK.
Nevertheless, continuation of such deficits is undesirable. First, much of the spending – particularly on fertiliser, food and petroleum subsidies – is poorly targeted. Second, the public sector’s savings collapsed from 5 per cent of GDP in 2007-08 to 1.4 per cent in 2008-09. This needs to be reversed.
Before the crisis the country’s gross savings rate had hit 36 per cent of GDP (see chart). Given the country’s attractions to long-term foreign capital, that would allow an investment rate of close to 40 per cent of GDP. Such a high rate of investment could deliver 10 per cent growth. It might deliver even more: since India’s output per head (at purchasing power parity) is roughly a fifteenth of that of the US, the potential for fast growth is huge.
EDITOR’S CHOICE
India leaves stimulus measures in place - Feb-26Economists’ forum - Oct-01Market relief at India deficit commitment - Feb-26India forecasts growth of up to 8.75% - Feb-25Analysis: India: Potholes in the road - Feb-04The extent of the optimism became evident during a week spent in India last month. Among the highlights was a conference on a book of essays in honour of Montek Singh Ahluwalia, deputy chairman of the planning commission and, after Manmohan Singh, prime minister, India’s most influential economic policymaker of the last two decades (and a friend of mine for 39 years).*
I was struck by the upbeat tone of the essay on “macroeconomic performance and policies, 2000-8” by Shankar Acharya, a former chief economic adviser to the Indian government. Dr Acharya is the most sober of competent analysts of the Indian economy. Indeed, the book gives a strong sense of the confidence of the technocratic elite in India’s performance and prospects. Similar confidence is palpable among the business elite. This confidence makes this a radically different India from the one I knew when I was the senior divisional economist for India, at the World Bank, in the mid-1970s. The emergence of an elite consensus on where the country is going is clear to any regular visitor. When entering the commerce ministry, bastion of opponents of open markets in the 1970s, I was struck by a poster describing India as the “world’s largest free-market democracy”.
Another feature is the belief that the pragmatism of India’s policies, particularly over global finance and the balance of payments, had proved correct. Those in charge of a vast country with so many vulnerable people are rightly wary of making their economy hostage to the sociopathic tendencies of the financial sector. This was the theme of an essay by Rakesh Mohan, former deputy governor of the Reserve Bank of India.
Yet caution cannot be inertia. Dr Acharya’s list of needed reforms rightly includes “infrastructure, agriculture, labour laws, banking, energy, education and retail trade”. Fortunately, a country as big as India could sustain fast growth even if the external environment remained less friendly than before. But that would make lifting internal obstacles to growth even more urgent.
The external environment also matters, in at least three respects. First, India has followed China in becoming far more open to trade. Indeed, India’s ratio of trade in goods and non-factor services to GDP in 2008 was where China’s was in 2003 (see chart). Second, India depends on access to foreign raw materials, particularly energy. So energy price shocks would be very destabilising. Finally, India needs peace.
India and China are both ancient civilisations. But China’s ancient state has a powerful legitimacy. India’s state is young. Politics are a permanent negotiation. Democracy is not, as some argue, an obstacle to India’s progress, but a necessary condition for its existence as a state. For all the frustrations and failures, the political system is workable.
As a chapter in the Economic Survey on the “Micro-foundations of Growth” argues, even “India’s unpardonably large bureaucratic costs are like a valuable resource buried under the ground”. So much could be achieved if the state got out of the way. I have little difficulty in imagining that India can sustain growth of close to 10 per cent a year for a long time. Under conservative assumptions, the Indian economy would be bigger than the UK’s, in market prices, in a decade and bigger than Japan’s in two. I argue in a chapter on “India in the World” that India is following China as a “premature superpower”, by which I mean a country with low living standards, but a huge economy.
Exhausted by the burden of its pretensions, the UK should soon offer its seat on the security council of the United Nations to its former colony. Its condition would be that France does the same in favour of the European Union. Whether or not such enlightened statesmanship is forthcoming (presumably not), we are moving into the age of continental superpowers. Asia will be home to not one, but two, of them.
Shankar Acharya and Rakesh Mohan, India’s Economy, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2010.
martin.wolf@ft.com
My Comments:
Well, I have been citing all types of reasons for Indian Economy to prosper.Many may have apprehension about it.But after reading the above article all doubts has been laid to rest.
See, reading and inviting negative views is good but if it is going to disturb you and if u r going to end up taking negative stand and selling a Gem of a stock better not to read negative views.Some people are always such they will always find negative in everything and as said , we better keep away from NEGATIVE VIBES...because those negative waves can affect us...be with someone who has positive thinking....
No comments:
Post a Comment