Indian Economy - News & Discussion 27 May 2012

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 28 Jun 2012 14:18

Guys Guess which Industry like many cases of TDS etc is exempot for Place of Provision for Services Rules?

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 28 Jun 2012 21:35

http://www.livemint.com/2012/06/2722560 ... rowin.html

So what’s the growth rate if we take the totals of all the states and UTs over the years? The chart alongside says it all. In 2010-11, when the all-India GDP growth rate was 8.4%, the growth of the sum total of state and UT GDPs was much higher at 9.6%. In 2009-10 too, they grew faster than the all-India total. If the numbers are to be believed, the states and UTs are together growing faster than the Indian Union! Small wonder then that a footnote to the table at the CSO website pointedly says that state GDPs have been compiled by the directorate of economics and statistics of the respective state governments.

Rather surprisingly, the growth rates by the two methods were the same in 2007-08 and 2008-09. But in 2006-07, their combined growth rate was much higher than for the Indian Union as a whole, while states were more modest about their growth in 2005-06.

At present, 7 states and UTs haven’t yet given their state GDP numbers for 2011-12. The growth rate of the sum total of the rest of the states and UTs, the ones that have already furnished the data, was 7.9%, much higher than the all-India growth of 6.5%. Gujarat, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Mizoram, Rajasthan, Sikkim and Chandigarh haven’t yet given their GDP data, or at least it isn’t reflected on the CSO website. For the sum totals of the state GDPs to grow by 6.5%, which is the all-India figure, these states will have to show a growth rate, on average, of a mere 3.6%.

All this doesn’t mean that some of the states are not doing much better than the country as a whole. But it shows once again that we should take the macro data with large doses of salt.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 28 Jun 2012 21:57

And the worm has turned. Turns out even 5.6% makes us the fastest growing economy around. Excluding the people who make up stuff.

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/06/ ... vestments/

But Coke and Ikea aren't nearly as dismayed. Looking long-term, India's economy is too hard for the biggest companies to ignore. A few reasons: With 1.2 billion people, India is the world's second-most populous country; a rapidly growing middle class; and even with slower growth at 6.5%, India's economy looks far better than much of the developed world as parts of Europe struggles with an ongoing debt crisis and the U.S. economy has grown at an average of about 1.6% over the past 10 years.

More broadly, the latest investments illustrate what's perhaps a bigger draw: a response to open-market reforms.

Ikea's entrance into India was made possible by a policy change last year that allows some retailers to own 100% of their Indian businesses. Before, single-brand retailers were allowed to own only 51% of a partnership with an Indian company. The change is significant, since it could open India, one of the last big consumer markets of the world, to many of the biggest retailers that were previously shut out, said Urjit Patel, a nonresident senior fellow at Brookings Institution based in Mumbai.

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 29 Jun 2012 01:15

allowing 100% FDI in single brand retail went under the radar in all the commotion on FDI in retail. we will see many western brands enter india. Ikea is the start.

i would personally like to see "Childrens Place" in india. there clothing is very high quality and worth the money.

as we in BR see CT in every thing -- the hoopla for FDI was to actually get the single brand thing passed in the first stage and mask the political effects. INC managed to turn it into a black mark on the opposition. 100% FDI in multi-brand retail will be fought later

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 29 Jun 2012 01:48

[youtube]fiK5-oAaeUs&feature=relmfu[/youtube]
India and china will reach the economy of uncle in 2048 july 27 according to this presentation.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 Jun 2012 02:00

V_Raman wrote: as we in BR see CT in every thing -- the hoopla for FDI was to actually get the single brand thing passed in the first stage and mask the political effects. INC managed to turn it into a black mark on the opposition. 100% FDI in multi-brand retail will be fought later

Majority of CTs on BR turned out to be true. Not in 500-1000 year timescale but 2-10 year range.

FDI at this point, in any field is not in Indian interests in the long run, given the fact that India is yet to get freedom.

We have seen what happened with FDI in energy sector (Enron), FDI in media...

Why? because unlike China, India will be consuming the products of this FDI. So we are indirectly passing the value-added benefits outside to the FDI owner and not keeping it in India.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 29 Jun 2012 02:16

I disagree. FDI has risen to ~$50 billion a year now; there's been a push to increase FDI instead of FII for well over a decade, spanning 3 administrations. Foreign control of media aside, there are plenty of sectors where FDI has brought in capital, technology and generated both domestic consumption and exports - auto/auto parts, machinery and contract electronics being a few examples. In fact our export profile no longer has traditional sectors like textiles and gems/jewelry at the top - those slots are occupied by engineering goods, chemicals and refined petroleum products.

Abhijeet · Post by **Abhijeet** » 29 Jun 2012 03:31

Even on a relatively enlightened forum like BR, it boggles my mind that we still have the same old blanket "FDI is bad" statements over and over.

I despair of the average person in India internalizing the idea that open markets, FDI etc are in the best interests of the country. Without that, all reforms will have to be by stealth for the foreseeable future -- public opinion by and large will always be against them.

member_23626 · Post by **member_23626** » 29 Jun 2012 03:40

Walmart and other yamreeki companies will go for cheap labour for importing all their products, expect more unemployment if the chosen country is not yours. Given the gulams mentality we have in desh, we might loose the control of our own market and might join the yahudi-bank nexus. It's also not good for domestic companies. Cheeni companies never allow cent percent FDI, they also go for joint ventures. Expect a lot of corruption from outsiders and a lot of "tentacles" that will be spread in our economic foundations (we all know what happens after that). The fact that hilary amma had to come down to this garib desh tells volumes of how important this fdi thingy is to yamreeks and their e-khanomy... another self goal by khangrass, but then, khangrass is again succesful in breaking another leg of the country... short term, it will control inflation and all, but long term, it will be a "kiss of death" to our companies. All this fdi bullcrap is good for countries that don't have much to contribute to the world (kaneda,austrailia,new zealand, pretty much a big part of europe etc.). A dumb decision by dumb people. But people are free to form any opinion (and break this CT if possible

)

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 29 Jun 2012 03:50

I think the real opposition is to Wal-Mart. If there was a way to open multi-brand retail and still keep Wal-Mart out GOI would do it in a heart beat.

member_23626 · Post by **member_23626** » 29 Jun 2012 03:53

^^ by the way what happened to the 30% domestic manufacturing clause put out by GOI?? Last time I heard, there was a lot of

from firangi companies

One such article published way back in Jan : http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... ghav-gupta

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 29 Jun 2012 05:40

Everyone loves a good outrage
Nitin Pai shreds P sainath.

The reform agenda must be defended from Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s attackers

As far as op-eds go, this one marks a new low from P Sainath. It is not uncommon for him to frame grave issues in a divisive manner by conflating them with unrelated matters—like, for instance, agrarian crises and beauty pageants. This technique seeks to arbitrage outrage, as if decent people cannot be anguished at a tragedy without having to contrast it with an unrelated celebration. But when Mr Sainath links the poverty line, expenses incurred by the Planning Commission chief while traveling on official business overseas, the lavishness with which some tycoons spend their private funds and dubious dealings of crony capitalism, it can’t merely be his usual, unfortunate and misguided conflation.

Make no mistake: Mr Sainath’s hatchet job on Montek Singh Ahluwalia is part of an internal campaign against reform-minded individuals within the UPA government. This week’s manufactured controversy over renovation expenses of toilets in the Planning Commission’s headquarters is another manifestation of the same campaign.

You don’t need to read the Planning Commission’s response to conclude that Mr Sainath’s allegations are sensationalistic nonsense.

But why choose Mr Ahluwalia at all? Mr Sainath’s arguments against profligacy would have been worthy of respect if he had compared the travel expenses of the top officials of government—from President Patil to the lowest ranking minister of state. How much, for instance, does Sonia Gandhi, as chairperson of the National Advisory Council, spend on her foreign trips? Whatever her political role, she’s an official of equivalent rank. How much do the members of the National Advisory Council spend on their foreign and domestic trips? Unless we have some numbers to compare with, we can’t say anything about Mr Ahluwalia’s trips.

What we do know is that Mr Ahluwalia is among the few people known to be advocating economic reforms in the UPA government. Singling him out with a view to making him the lightning rod for public outrage has all the signs of a political hatchet job. The objective is to discredit the reformist agenda by associating it with imaginary wrongdoing. After running the Indian economy to the ground, the socialists that haunt the UPA government’s policymaking are now trying to bury the narrative of reform, liberalisation and markets through subterfuge and intellectual dishonesty.

The Acorn completely agrees with Mint’s editorial defence of Montek Singh Ahluwalia. Mr Ahluwalia has “done far more for the poor than the busybodies and peddlers of poverty p*rn who are now attacking him.”

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 29 Jun 2012 09:35

For a 8 day trip to the USA $10,000 is nothing for someone visiting DC officially. I personally have no problems with his expenses. On his silence on some of the chaos inside the UPA however I take exception. People of his stature need to speak out and provide some direction to this headless wonder.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Jun 2012 09:55

the hotel rate would likely be $500 alone in a good one there like say a westin or marriott, plus a limo service, plus dinner and lunches. its not cheap for sure.
the other option of putting up in a howard johnson motel on the far outskirts somewhere for $100 is also open but logistically complex

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 29 Jun 2012 10:09

krisna wrote:Everyone loves a good outrage
Nitin Pai shreds P sainath.

Nitin seems to be having difficulty coming to terms with the fact that INC is basically not a reformist party - neither on the governance front not on the economic front. Any reforms will only be as a result of the party and country having their backs to the wall and looking down the precipice.

Haven't followed Nitin and Pragati closely - but instead of wanting to save a 'reformist' Montek now, has he at any time over the last 8 years at all lamented the lack of reforms by the UPA?

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 29 Jun 2012 13:28

I do not understand as to why some people in India and as a reflection some people at BR are against any kind of foreign competition on our soil. Why do we lack the confidence within us on these matters?

People make it sound as if there is a grand conspiracy and slowly the west / China / Jews will rob indics of everything worthwhile they may possess. How are we different from Pakis in this respect?

As far as I know, the first stint of foreign direct investment in India has been beneficial for India and for them. Competition has given our companies to follow these foreigners back to their own land, compete and beat them in there own game. Banking / Insurance / Auto / IT. You name it and I'll tell you how we Indians have first competed here in India and are now going global.

I myself work in a Domestic IT industry, serving domestically to many MNCs. Today I am happy how a company that was started in India 2001 to serve Indian IT needs, today serves large MNCs who are now taking us global (yes Indian product, implemented globally). This is the story of actual Indian technologies, which fly well below the radar but generates value. Similarly, there are beautiful companies out there in their respective fields.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 29 Jun 2012 14:10

Is there some kind of list where MNCs have introduced world class cutting edge technologies in India?

Otherwise FDI is no more than old world mentality of mass market access for profits.

There is difference between FDI in USA

Increased US exports through the use of multinational distribution networks. FDI has resulted in 30% of jobs for Americans in the manufacturing sector, which accounts for 12% of all manufacturing jobs in the US.
..
Affiliates of foreign corporations spent more than $34 billion on research and development in 2006
..

and FDI in India

India has seen an eightfold increase in its FDI in March 2012.[14]

The world’s largest retailer WalMart has termed India’s decision to allow 51% FDI in multi-brand retail as a “first important step” and said it will study the finer details of the new policy to determine the impact on its ability to do business in India

There is complete lack of vision in India in terms of FDI.

Those foreign companies who do not add to Indian interests like R&D etc should be summarily banned.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 29 Jun 2012 14:30

The rule WRT, domestic contribution for FDI in multi brand retail ought to be all the materials have to sourced from Indian vendors. Starting with 30% in the first few years to 100 within a period of 5 years.

But this will never happen ever in this country.

satya · Post by **satya** » 29 Jun 2012 14:43

Sh. M.S Ahulwalia is top contender for MoF job should all go well this time . MMSjee wanted him as MoF in start of UPA-2 and had very strong vocal support from GotUS something that went against his candidature big time rest is history & so he waited for his chance now is his chance. So how will he or anyone else fare , answer is so long its not Sh. Pranab Mukherjee , he will fare better for he can't do more harm than already done by Sh. Pranab Mukherjee. Even when on his way out , he cut a deal on G-secs via FII route , man's greed know no limits. No one in govt. was on board .

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 29 Jun 2012 15:01

Pratyush wrote:The rule WRT, domestic contribution for FDI in multi brand retail ought to be all the materials have to sourced from Indian vendors. Starting with 30% in the first few years to 100 within a period of 5 years.

But this will never happen ever in this country.

This is a better idea than forcing them to take a local Indian partner. Further, Shops and establishment act is a state subject. GoI can only clear FDI, ultimately the companies will have to operate within the rules of the given state. So my suggestion would be 30% sourced from withing India and 10% from 500 km radius or state itself.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 29 Jun 2012 18:30

Sri wrote:This is a better idea than forcing them to take a local Indian partner. Further, Shops and establishment act is a state subject. GoI can only clear FDI, ultimately the companies will have to operate within the rules of the given state. So my suggestion would be 30% sourced from withing India and 10% from 500 km radius or state itself.

Wal-Mart has said no to this and that they would rather wait outside. They want freedom to import from Panda. Our economy does not have the current account surplus to handle this at the moment. The worst part about Panda junk is that it is completely non productive. All those trinkets and toys at Rs5-Rs10 will fall to dust in 6 months leaving us with the bill for borrowing.

Panda can afford to let in Wal-Mart because it can muscle it out any time too. We don't have that luxury.

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 29 Jun 2012 18:39

^^^ Theo Sir, Any source for this?

As far as I know Walmart is already in India.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 29 Jun 2012 18:49

Wal-Mart only has a single cash and carry somewhere in Punjab I believe. They have not expanded in 5 years so no I don't think that counts and it also betrays their mindset. Their opinion on the 30% clause is well known, not a particular secret. They could expand cash and carry right now but prefer to sit and wait for 'their' type of rules to be in place.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Jun 2012 18:56

if imports from panda are a concern, big bazaar and others who import big time from there should also be banned from doing so.
the unorganized shops are full of panda stuff.
some indian brands also import from there and stamp their brandname on it.
lots of MNC brands like shoes import made in china, vietnam, cambodia incl nike/adidas.

I am unable to understand what can walmart do that this flood of small scale and large scale imports is not doing already? none of the above to my knowledge (being local players and foreign single brand retail) have any obligation to source even 1% from india , let alone india SSI. the nike products sold all over india are 100% imported from around the world.

as it stands will wal mart go for a small shop retail model (compete with lower overheads of small shops, lack of parking, lack of expansion, high rentals in cities) or go the supercenter route on the outskirts which only people with cars can access?

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 29 Jun 2012 19:49

Singha wrote:I am unable to understand what can walmart do that this flood of small scale and large scale imports is not doing already? none of the above to my knowledge (being local players and foreign single brand retail) have any obligation to source even 1% from india , let alone india SSI. the nike products sold all over india are 100% imported from around the world.

This is a legitimate argument.

The only thing I can say is that at least they follow the 30% domestic clause. Wal-Mart refuses even that. Without the 30% clause, multi-brand retail is political suicide.

BTW can I just say that sending that Albright chik to lobby for retail in India is so stupid headed I can barely control my laughter. This is the woman who slapped all manner of sanctions and indignities on India/Indians (esp. those who have held on to their citizenship) when she was the cat in DC. The one thing babudom in India does have is long memories and it holds grudges too. Who ever came up with the idea needs to be examined for brain damage...

Abhijeet · Post by **Abhijeet** » 29 Jun 2012 20:11

As Singha says above, India is already flooded with all kinds of low quality Chinese imports -- often straight from the Chinese manufacturer, with no localization (Chinese language text and all) and no quality control. That really is junk -- just detritus dumped here from China because consumer standards here are so low.

Walmart and other large companies (Big Bazaar included) bring in quality control and products tailored to their customers. They will tweak their product mix in a way that's unimaginable to your friendly neighborhood subsistence retailer who has to make do with whatever low quality crap comes over the wall.

You can bet that people's standards for what constitutes acceptable quality will go up the more organized retail there is India -- no matter where the products are manufactured.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 29 Jun 2012 20:50

With Walmart, the local economy will take a huge hit. Small stores will shut down and the workers have to work at Walmart for lower wages without job security. Unlike Walmart, the local kirnana store usually employs relatives & family friends and rarely kicks them out.

Moreover, the profits that these kirana stores earn will go to the board members of Wal Mart in the USA. Further, one does not see how Walmart will help the local economy by decreasing product quality & no of jobs available.

For those who think that lower prices will be beneficial, they will remain low as long as competition exists in the area. The enormous buying power of Walmart ensures lower profits for producers & suppliers.

ashi · Post by **ashi** » 29 Jun 2012 20:53

India and China
Friend, enemy, rival, investor

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 29 Jun 2012 21:17

ashi wrote:India and China
Friend, enemy, rival, investor

Several problems with the facts
Even though China is not a free market and its currency is not a free float
it has been given a status of free market inside WTO and also MFN status with many countries.
This is skewed status for a country which is essentially a communist controlled and military controlled govt.

Meanwhile, India does not produce much that China wants to buy, a hole that British colonial rulers once plugged with exports of Indian opium.

If they think that colonial trade is still going on then there must be something wrong
If the implied msg is that during that period Indian export was not much then that is against the fact. EIC was the prinicple beneficiary of Indian exports for several centuries

member_23626 · Post by **member_23626** » 29 Jun 2012 21:27

Sri wrote:^^^ Theo Sir, Any source for this?

As far as I know Walmart is already in India.

Any idea (article or any video) about it's effect on local economy??
Sriji, I am not an economic expert but it's my gut feeling that our economy (and the gobermint) are not mature enough to handle these things..either they should go for a Joint venture or should just keep away from this boor country

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 Jun 2012 22:53

Abhijeet wrote:Even on a relatively enlightened forum like BR, it boggles my mind that we still have the same old blanket "FDI is bad" statements over and over.

I despair of the average person in India internalizing the idea that open markets, FDI etc are in the best interests of the country. Without that, all reforms will have to be by stealth for the foreseeable future -- public opinion by and large will always be against them.

I am sorry for yet to be enlightened. I used the qualifier "FDI at this point"

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 29 Jun 2012 23:04

FDI in the current form is not advisable where Indian govt does not have a control and influence on the
companies in their home base and ineffective laws

Most of the MNC have foriegn govt who are entering inside the soceity. But Indian media is also
under the same control and that is where the problem is. Then we have the same foreign source
as the social engineering (retail marketing)going on inside India. These are dangerous potent combination which no other free country is facing.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 Jun 2012 23:07

Earlier I posted how a thing like FDI in retail is made into a solution to the bad-bad caste issue and opposition to it a brahmin conspi-e-racy...

with this type of intellect running the national mood, we will be fools to bring these junk $$$ into the country....

EIC2 is the name of it.... some may argue it ended mughal rule, brought railways and postal service and so on... depends on how one sees history...

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 29 Jun 2012 23:17

RamaY wrote:Earlier I posted how a thing like FDI in retail is made into a solution to the bad-bad caste issue and opposition to it a brahmin conspi-e-racy...

with this type of intellect running the national mood, we will be fools to bring these junk $$$ into the country....

EIC2 is the name of it.... some may argue it ended mughal rule, brought railways and postal service and so on... depends on how one sees history...

Junk $$$? Really? When the Rupee's value keeps falling because of low forex inflows? We need these junk $$$ for making payments for our imports, unfortunately.

And please explain to me how MNC's are going to conquer and rule us like the EIC. I'm in the mood for a nice laugh.

And leaving aside the Wal-mart issue, people need to understand that investment, whether it is domestic or foreign, tends to create jobs. And thse crazy conspiracy theories being peddled here were peddled during our good old Nehruvian socialist days as well. We all know the result.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 29 Jun 2012 23:52

The question to also be asked is, if Chinese junk is already in India why do we need Wal-Mart? It does cut both ways. To get more junk more efficiently? The argument is always made about crops and harvesting but Reliance fresh invested Billions and has a pretty good organization going. Reliance also looks at it from Indian perspective and has gotten very very good at its local format. I have been very impressed with the Big Bazaar set up as well. Shrewd business types both.

Personally I oppose Wal-Mart due to their style of operations. They have access to 0% cash and 0% value Chinese junk. They are not the cheapest either, their MO is to underprice and put folks like Reliance fresh and big bazaar out of business and then jack up prices. Anywhere Wal-Mart opens competitors shut down and deliberately avoid. Entire cities turn into prisoners to Wal-Mart. Their strategy would be what they are doing in Mexico which has been a disaster their economy. This is a bad combination for India's deficit position.

http://business-standard.com/india/news ... ng/477343/

Reliance Retail, according to the new blueprint, plans to grow its retail business five to six times and achieve Rs 40,000 to 50,000 crore over the next three to four years. That means the country’s second largest retailer has to grow at 51-60 per cent compounded annual growth rate. That shouldn’t be difficult considering that it has grown at a CAGR of 50 per cent in the four years since FY 2008, though Future Group, its nearest rival, has managed just 28 per cent CAGR between FY 2008 and 2011.

That’s not all. Reliance Retail is looking to grow its customer base by over three times from about 3 million people visiting its retail stores every week currently to over 10 million every week in three to four years.

Can Ambani pull it off this time? Most experts say he will. Harminder Sahni, managing director of Wazir Advisors, a retail consultancy, says since 2010, Ambani is looking at the business seriously and has realised which formats will work and which would not.

Sahni may be right, going by the scaled up investments. Reliance invested Rs 5,027 crore in Reliance Retail in FY 2012. The last time it invested in the company was in 2009-10 when it put Rs 1,220 crore in the business. The Reliance Retail board also has an approval of Rs 4,500 crore fund infusion from the parent company that is expected to come in several tranches.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 29 Jun 2012 23:59

People who havn't experienced Wal-Mart should know what they did in Mexico.

At least on this babus are not stupid. Like I said, if there is a way to open multi-retail but keep WM out they would do it. the 30% clause was specifically aimed at WM, IMHO.

http://www.iol.co.za/business/business- ... -309ZGopQU

What of the effect of Walmart’s pursuit of its low-price strategy? French economist Cedric Durand has linked Walmex to a dramatic increase in imported goods into Mexico in an article published in the Cambridge Journal of Economics:

“After 1997, we observe a faster increase in Walmart’s imports in real terms compared with its competitors’. If we look at the imports-to-purchases ratio, we see that all the enterprises have been significantly increasing the share of imports in their purchases, but also that Walmart has shown a much more dramatic evolution: from 20 percent in 1997 to more than 55 percent in 2002 and 2003.”

Walmart’s pursuit of low prices significantly affected the total levels of imports into Mexico. In this, Durand’s findings echo similar conclusions by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), which analysed Walmart’s effects on imports and jobs in the US. It concluded that Walmart’s imports alone were responsible for destroying 200 000 jobs – including 130 000 manufacturing jobs – between 2001 and 2006. The destruction of manufacturing jobs is significant: a strong manufacturing industry is a key driver of development.

That Walmart’s massive bargaining power and its importation practices lead to increased job losses is borne out by the Mexican evidence. For instance, Walmart expert and professor at the University of California, Nelson Lichtenstein, has said: “Walmex has had a devastating impact on Mexican manufacturing. Although Wal-mart initially claimed that it would incorporate local Mexican firms into its supply chain, the famous squeeze on profits and labour never let up.”

He quoted an executive of a small clothing manufacturer as saying: “Walmart has driven many suppliers out of business. Walmart maintains its profit margins… They never reduce their margin. They do pass on savings in price, but at the expense of the manufacturer. You can increase efficiency a certain amount, but… for example, they may tell you, ‘We’re going to sell shirts at a 40 percent discount – you, the manufacturer have to cut your price 40 percent.’ So the consumer benefits, but they’re driving out of business the manufacturers that provide jobs.”

Even when Walmex purchases goods locally, it squeezes manufacturers to continuously reduce costs. This usually ends in manufacturers having to import the goods they supply, as they cannot manufacture at such low prices, legally anyhow.

Clothing makers and workers have not been the only casualties of Walmex. Many other sectors have been affected. For instance, while productivity has increased within the soaps, detergents and surfactants industry in Mexico, employment in that industry has decreased by about 20 percent, largely as a result of Walmart.

paramu · Post by **paramu** » 30 Jun 2012 01:57

You can't just keep Walmart away and let others in. Walmart always can buy MNC retailer overseas and enter India. GoI has to force it to be a joint venture between an Indian company and MNC retailer, and ask them to float shares in BSE/NSE.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 30 Jun 2012 02:05

paramu wrote: Walmart always can buy MNC retailer overseas and enter India.

Yes, that is how Wal-Mex entered Mexico, actually buying local company, despite the Mexican governments vigorous defense and rear guard action.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 30 Jun 2012 02:38

Current Kerala CM has apparently sent a note in support of retail FDI, according to to Shree Anand Sharma, but after everyone including his own party yelled, he has done some deft downhill dash. This current CM reminds one of a combined Brig Rashid Qureishi-Musharaff in his promise-withdraw cycles. Loves his airtime beyond normal.

We should welcome FDI in supply-chain OEMs and consultancies that provide the backbones for these big retailers, but not those neo-East India companies

I dont want some suit to tell me that my "farmed" mathi-fry must taste like the backside of a "farmed" buffalo, which in turn tastes like stale wheat.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 30 Jun 2012 02:58

^^^^
regarding walmart-

Code: Select all

   Polarized themes in Wal-Mart debates 

                    Positive                                                       Negative 

                    Lowers prices                                 Exploits labor 

                     Supports diversity                           Practices gender/racial discrimination 

                    Increases business efﬁciency                  Pushes down wages 

                    Provides jobs                              Increases unemployment 

                     Employs nontraditional workers               Increases poverty, welfare allocations 

                    Industry leader                               Erodes downtown business centers 

                    Promotes environmental sustainability         Increases environmental degradation

Wal-Mart saw its mission as simple: “offer the lowest price. Cut costs to the bone, and keep cutting so you can offer the lowest price.”

60% of us population are within 5 miles of walmart stores, and 96% within 20 miles in usa

successful in khan land, mexico ukstan and canada.(predominant english speaking and adjacent to uncle land.)
They also indulge in politicking with govts(local and national ) for favorable terms to themselves with their big money .
failed in Germany, South Korea, Hong Kong Indonesia and Japan.
In Germany stayed for 8 years lost roughly 200 million every year.
South Korea and Japan-- interestingly could not compete with locals who also emphasised buy SK or japan goods.

along with other reasons-- failing to understand the local market conditions and cultural issues.

website-- http://www.walmartwatch.com and to counter the anti walmart people walmart has its own http://www.walmartfacts.com.