PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

[wong]

David,

Your right about the timeline, my bad. However, just a note to everyone, I'm not going to waste my time to discuss this stupid assertion that somehow China became a capitalist society after 1992. China was, is and will be for some time to come a dictatorship run by a single party which represents a small clique of people with political and economic power.

That's the way it is. Live with it.

You've never been to China, have you?? I grew up in the West, so I think I know capitalism when I see it. If China is not capitalist, I don't know what is ?? One party vs two party state, who cares? For your information, there are corrupt "1 percenters" in multi-party states too (in case you didn't know).

[Advait]

I am often accused of derailing threads, but since the train is off its tracks here anyway, here's my 2 cents

Why do we have to keep saying China started reforms in 1978, so we are a decade behind them onlee. Why do we keep comparing ourselves with China. So if China had not started its economic reforms for whatever reasons, there would be no pressure on our government and elites to work for providing Indians a better life??

Before China's economy took off, our elites would often claim that there was no country that matched India's population size, so comparisons with S.Korea, Japan, Singapore and other smaller countries was not being reasonable. This India-China equal equal onlee sounds just like that.

We should benchmark our performance with even more developed countries IMHO.

[ashi]

If 12 years were spent in "undoing communism", I will claim that India needed 12 years in "undoing NehruGandhi socialism".

Two can play that game.

That doesn't matter. India has not reached or exceeded China's growth rate during the last thirty years. So it is not just the 10 years late start, it is lot more than that.

[Hari Seldon]

^^Dunno how that works. India's GDP 2012 is == PRC one in 2003. <10 yrs behind. Wonder how that worked if India has *never* exceeded PRC's steroidal growth rates starting 1978. Just wondering onlee. jai hu, jai mao.

[ashi]

^^Dunno how that works. India's GDP 2012 is == PRC one in 2003. <10 yrs behind. Wonder how that worked if India has *never* exceeded PRC's steroidal growth rates starting 1978. Just wondering onlee. jai hu, jai mao.

I also have that question. It is widely accepted in the world that China has grown at 10% annually in the last 30 years. India in 2012 doesn't look like China in 2003. Rupee overvalue and RMB undervalue?

[Theo_Fidel]

You've never been to China, have you?? I grew up in the West, so I think I know capitalism when I see it. If China is not capitalist, I don't know what is ?? One party vs two party state, who cares?

I think this should say it all. What a stupid asinine comment. Takes ones breath away.

It is staggering that people such as this grew up in the 'West', says something about the education system and the precipitous decline. Goes along with the McD quality standards.

[Suraj]

I'd argue that China spent between 1978 and 2000 undoing what would really be the communist procurement and production system, and is still not done. What they have in its place is state capitalism. They went from being a totalitarian state with a communist socio-economic system to a totalitarian state with a state capitalist system. As recently as the late 1990s China was facing massive restructuring issues as the old SoE behemoths were reoriented and made more efficient through capital infusion and massive workforce retrenchment. The 2001 WTO entry enabled them to channel that surplus workforce into the export engine better.

It's not as if India had little to do to reform. India had a license raj system, which was nothing more than a very well entrenched socialist production/procurement system. It spent the 1991-1998 period (approximately) undoing that system legislatively. It subsequently spend 1998-2003 period reforming the fiscal division system between centre and states. It has since spent the 2003-present period trying to reform the eminent domain and land acquisition policy framework, urban renewal, development of trade and manufacturing.

India still has to address the fiscal division of powers between states and cities, which is why urban development remains the starkest contrast between India and other newly industrializing nations, including China. Nearly all E/SE Asian countries prioritized this because their political systems did not require a mandate from the rural population to make decisions, and they could develop their cities far earlier in the reform process. As India's urban:rural ratio crosses the 50:50 mark, this process will rapidly accelerate - it has already begun in several places.

Fact remains that GDP-wise, whether in absolute dollars or PPP ones, Indian GDP today is approximately where Chinese GDP was in the early-mid 2000s. It has nothing to do with exchange rates - the approximate per capita production level and purchasing power of the citizenry for the two countries - as measured in a fixed unit - during these respective periods were about the same.

Comparing growth rate numbers amounts to very little - you have two systems with opposite political motives to massage their growth numbers: the Indian political system wants to understate it so as to perpetuate the populist dole system that wins elections. The Chinese system desires to show the people that the state is generating rapid economic growth, so as to keep the masses quiet and prevent revolt. Doesn't change the fact that Indian GDP in 2012 = Chinese GDP in the early/mid 2000s, whatever unit you use.

[gakakkad]

I also have that question. It is widely accepted in the world that China has grown at 10% annually in the last 30 years. India in 2012 doesn't look like China in 2003. Rupee overvalue and RMB undervalue?

Indian currency is grossly undervalued ..the recent depreciation is mainly due to faulty monetary policy ..INR will fall to its usual levels once policy is corrected ...INR has been appreciating for the last 2 days...that was as soon as petrol prices were raised ...once diesel and lpg prices are raised , the correction will be swift...

the recent depreciation in INR has been due to crude oil and gold..India is the largest consumer of bullion ...

You are merely parroting the lines of a blogger ,posted by someone in the Indian econ dhaaga...

India in 2012 looks like China in mid 2000s by most parameters ... and looks like the China of 2020 by some other parameters...

[ashi]

Indian currency is grossly undervalued ..the recent depreciation is mainly due to faulty monetary policy ..INR will fall to its usual levels once policy is corrected ...INR has been appreciating for the last 2 days...that was as soon as petrol prices were raised ...once diesel and lpg prices are raised , the correction will be swift...

the recent depreciation in INR has been due to crude oil and gold..India is the largest consumer of bullion ...

You are merely parroting the lines of a blogger ,posted by someone in the Indian econ dhaaga...

India in 2012 looks like China in mid 2000s by most parameters ... and looks like the China of 2020 by some other parameters...

Rupee depreciates because foreign investors do not believe in India's economy and pulls out. India doesn't produce much that is worthy to export but at the same time India have to import from oil/coal to toys.

http://www.rediff.com/business/slide-sh ... 120123.htm

[gakakkad]

^^ the article is written by the former editor of the pink toilet paper (et)..his knowledge of econ seems rusty at best ...Most of Indian currecnt account efecit was produced by gold+oil+other raw material...Most of Indian exports are manufactured goods like chemicals/pharmaceuticals /refined petro chemicals etc...

if service exports are taken into account we have a positive BOP...


reason why FIIs are pulling out is because Dollar is the safe haven in times of econ crisis ..if has nothing to do with the Indian econ fundamentals ...

[Hari Seldon]

^^Dunno how that works. India's GDP 2012 is == PRC one in 2003. <10 yrs behind. Wonder how that worked if India has *never* exceeded PRC's steroidal growth rates starting 1978. Just wondering onlee. jai hu, jai mao.

I also have that question. It is widely accepted in the world that China has grown at 10% annually in the last 30 years. India in 2012 doesn't look like China in 2003. Rupee overvalue and RMB undervalue?

You missed the point.

How come china, with a larger base + higher growth rates since at least 1991 is only <10 yrs ahead of India today? IMO, it makes PRC growth numbers look suspect. India's relatively transparent and open society+economy makes fudge-ing such numbers much harder.

[Raja Bose]

You've never been to China, have you?? I grew up in the West, so I think I know capitalism when I see it. If China is not capitalist, I don't know what is ?? One party vs two party state, who cares? For your information, there are corrupt "1 percenters" in multi-party states too (in case you didn't know).

I am gonna use this phrase now "China is a single-party democracy". This needs to go on the BRF Dictionary.

BTW wong sir, if you grew up in the "West" you would know that more than 2 political parties participate in US elections.

[harbans]

I am not certain whether some of our esteemed posters can engage our Chinese origin posters without name calling or massive ROFLs. That sort of takes the sheen away from the discussion. In the process some genuine points made get countered less on logic and more on rhetoric. Two things that struck me here, is Chinese posters putting 92 as the real date they kick started reform like India. That point can be considered relevant from one aspect. PRC and India had similar GDPs and per cap incomes that time 92. 20 years later China is more than doubly ahead than India is today. It certainly has indicated China's ability to implement change in infrastructure faster than India has. A point on this forum we have acknowledged aned several times by saying China's authoritarian approach has enabled it to acquire land and build relevant infrastructure much faster than India has been able to..in the last 20 years. This is certainly indicated in the higher growth rates from about the same GDP and percap base 20 years ago. China ramped it's manufacturing and industrial bases on major reforms mid 90's, while we struggle to get a POSCO, Mittal in Odisha, still discuss whether retail reform is good or bad. The reasons why China's growth rate and present GDP/ per cap and infrastructure levels are higher are certainly reflected in it's figures.

The other point was production of cars. So what are the numbers for our domestic consumption 4 wheeler passenger and 4 wheeler export. Amit Ji..Wong wrote

15% of a total production of 20 million vehicles is 3 million cars. That's total production, both domestic and exports. Now, unless Indians consumed zero cars domestically, your 3 million car exports are impossible. Something doesn't add up in your math.

Seriously, 2.9 million cars exported to be exact. So India only consumed ~100,000 cars domestically last year???

There obviously is something wrong somewhere. So Wong bringing this out enhances the clarity, not takes it away. Reading through the figures get confusing. I am sure the relevant figures are there somewhere. I too will try and find them out. Amit Ji's posts i find always good clarity backed by good sensible data. But i confess i am a little confused here.

Another relevant point made is the Rupee drop. Why is it wrong to state that the present rapid drop in value is because of FII hot money makiig rapid exit? Even i thought that is the biggest reason for it today.

[Singha]

CNN

Beijing (CNN) -- At just after midnight on Saturday, in a bar down an old lane in Beijing, the band suddenly stops playing. Grabbing the microphone, the manager tells everyone to remain in the venue; the police are outside threatening to escort to the nearest police station any foreigner not carrying valid documents. The atmosphere instantly sours.
This is just one of many incidents that have occurred in Beijing over the weekend following last week's launch of a 100-day campaign to "clean out" non-Chinese living or working illegally in the city. Until the end of August, all foreigners are expected to always have on them a valid passport, visa and resident permit, as stipulated by an announcement on Peaceful Beijing, the official Beijing Public Security Bureau account on popular Chinese micro-blogging site Sina Weibo.
If not, they will face repercussions, which range from fines to police detention and deportation.
A number for a hotline locals can call to report suspicious foreigners was also included in the announcement. Since then, the police presence in the main expat and student areas of the city has noticeably increased, households and companies have been spot checked, and queues at local police stations to register residency are large.
The new prickliness could be a sign the government is feeling under pressure from its own population.
Lars Laaman, Professor of Chinese History
Lin Song, media officer of the Exit-Entry Administration Department under the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau, was not available to immediately comment when asked about the crackdown. However, last week in an editorial in the Global Times, he remarked: "Some foreigners do not know Chinese laws well, and they might feel strange being randomly questioned by the police, but it is necessary to improve their legal awareness and make sure they stick to Chinese regulations."
Beijing police announced on Thursday that the city's friendly attitude toward foreigners has not changed. "Beijing will stick to the policy of reform and opening up, and we sincerely welcome foreign friends to work and live in Beijing," a spokesman told the state-run Xinhua news agency, adding that foreigners' legitimate rights will be protected.
But the crackdown has left a bitter taste in the mouths of many, not least those who have resided in the city for years and see it as home. Media worker Jacob Trent was pulled off his bike by the police on Saturday and demanded to produce his papers. "I have been living here for a decade and yet I still get treated like -- and sometimes called -- a foreign barbarian," lamented the American, who speaks perfect Mandarin and is engaged to a Chinese girl.
Another longtime expat, David Park, was equally distressed. "I have noticed a change in how I am treated. It has gone from curiosity to hostility," commented Park. The 27-year-old, an employee at a renewable energy firm, has been contemplating a move back to England. These events will make his decision easier, he said.
Park was not the only person expressing a desire to leave in the wake of tensions. Mia Bate, an African-American doing an internship, has no intention to renew her visa once it expires in September. "I never used to notice people looking at me on the streets," she said. "Now I do and it makes me feel really uncomfortable."
The campaign comes amid a heated online debate about the behavior of foreigners in China. The most noticeable example has been the uploading of a video onto the Chinese video sharing site Youku of a foreign man sexually assaulting a Chinese woman in Beijing. The video attracted more than 11 million views and 80,000 comments to date. Beijing police revealed the foreigner in the video to be a Briton on a tourist visa.
I have noticed a change in how I am treated. It has gone from curiosity to hostility.
David Park, UK expat
Police deny the incidents are related, but in the minds of both foreigners and Chinese they are. Prominent host on Chinese Central Television, Yang Rui, posted on Sina Weibo that Beijing must clean out its "foreign trash" to "protect innocent girls." According to Yang, they must "cut off the foreign snake heads."
Similar rhetoric has been voiced by locals offline. When Beijing resident Mandy Zhang's mother caught wind of the video, she called her 26-year-old daughter and asked her not to visit places that foreigners frequent. For both mother and daughter, the visa crackdown might not be an ideal solution, but it is necessary.
"Police cannot tell who is good or not. Some foreign men come here with the wrong intentions," Zhang said, adding: "We treat Westerners too well and this needs to change."
According to statistics provided by the city government, Beijing is home to about 120,000 foreigners. Most have arrived during the past decade, attracted by a booming economy and a visa policy that has been relatively relaxed. Crackdowns on this scale are very rare, with the last noticeable one being in the lead up to the 2008 Beijing Olympics.
Lars Laaman, a professor of Chinese history at London's SOAS, who has lived in the capital on and off since the 1980s, says these incidents only occur when the government is feeling uneasy," he commented, alluding to events that have gripped the nation over the past few months such as the dramatic fall from power of Chongqing party chief Bo Xilai.
Whatever the cause, as China's economy continues to grow, its foreign population will likely rise too. Finding a workable solution to the visa situation will become increasingly important.

[ArmenT]

From MSNBC:
China's economy suffers 'sharp slowdown'

A nationwide real estate downturn, stalling exports and declining consumer confidence have produced what a Chinese cabinet adviser, quoted on the official government Web site on Thursday, characterized as a “sharp slowdown in the economy.”

[gakakkad]

@ harbans , fii pull out is an important cause..but they are not pulling out because Yindia is weak ,but because unkil is regarded as safe haven...chini athiti are laato ke bhoot so giving the kicks onlee..other wise it is athiti devo bhava onlee ..

[chola]

I am often accused of derailing threads, but since the train is off its tracks here anyway, here's my 2 cents

Why do we have to keep saying China started reforms in 1978, so we are a decade behind them onlee. Why do we keep comparing ourselves with China. So if China had not started its economic reforms for whatever reasons, there would be no pressure on our government and elites to work for providing Indians a better life??

Before China's economy took off, our elites would often claim that there was no country that matched India's population size, so comparisons with S.Korea, Japan, Singapore and other smaller countries was not being reasonable. This India-China equal equal onlee sounds just like that.

We should benchmark our performance with even more developed countries IMHO.

A very good post, Advait. That is something that is always missing in discussion of India-China when it is taken as faith that China and India is comparable. The truth is China-India comparison is used in India onlee not in the rest of the world and especially not in the sale-driven world of the MNCs.

There is no reason to suspect that we are "only" a decade behind because the two system are so extremely different that there cannot be a comparison of start dates to even begin comparing. You can only compare likes with likes. You cannot compare, as the old adage says, "apples and oranges."

The day that China began its "liberalization" it was and still is missing all the fundamentals that make a truly liberalized economy work.

For example, in China a private business woman is now on death row for attempting to raise capital. Yes, raising capital for a private firm can result in the death penalty in Pandaland.

So in most basic foundation of modern wealth creation -- the ability to raise money -- China is not only not ahead of India, it is actually centuries behind India.

The other is intellectual property protection. MNCs in chiniland cannot sell things without having them copied and stolen but they are hardly the biggest losers. The biggest losers are firms in chini land itself who cannot prosper from their innovation. The MNCs can always place factories in China to sell to the local population but reserve their R&D at home. And this they do. The protection of IP is what gave the US its greatest boom since the 1980s. It is always what drives Indian tech outsourcing and BPO.

So just in capitalization of private firms and intellectual property protection, India is way ahead.

That is why we cannot pretend that China is simply a decade ahead and that their "liberalization" is already done. If and when the chinis allow private business capitalization and IPP (both of which the MNCs are pushing China to do) then the gap can widen exponentially. Because those things are so basic, their impact can be greater than any change that India can do because it is already a very free and law-based society.

What worse is to imagine a day when the PRC becomes a free society like Taiwan, Japan or South Korea. Again, the international business community is pushing China towards that day. Why? Because they want to sell to an economy that's Japan times 10.

As Indians, we cannot pretend that there is any straight line comparison between India of today and China of 2002. Especially when the chinis themselves compare themselves to the Taiwans and South Koreas of yesteryears. We should not be comparing ourselves with a communist nation. We should be comparing ourselves with democracies like the United States or Brazil and figuring why we are behind them.

[amit]

The other point was production of cars. So what are the numbers for our domestic consumption 4 wheeler passenger and 4 wheeler export. Amit Ji..Wong wrote

Ok my bad on this. I should have responded earlier to what Wong wrote to clear confusion. Unfortunately have been very busy with some stuff at the work place.

First of all some clarity to the export numbers are needed. But even before that we need to understand what are the things covered under "auto exports" category.

This table should clarify for India:



[Note: taken from http://www.siamindia.com/scripts/export-trend.aspx]

Wong ji is right about two-wheelers and three wheelers being included in the total export mix. However, I want to point one figure for 2010-11, that is passenger car exports, because that's where the discussion started. According to SIAM, 456,479 units of passenger cars were exported in this period.

Now, my original point which was challenged by Wong ji, was that India was the third biggest auto exporter in Asia after Japan and South Korea. And to bolster this point he came up with the number for China which was 849,500 units for 2011. Well at first glance it does seem I was wrong because the figure for China is almost double for that of India.

However...

I do have a bad habit of digging behind the numbers. In my search I found something interesting. That is all Chinese news sites, including Xinhua have reported this 849,500 units in such a way that the only conclusion you could draw was that these were passenger vehicle (as distinct from commercial vehicles and truck etc) exports.

Further digging led me to what I would think is a more credible site because its a specialist site called Just Auto

Now this site also gives the same number 849,500. However, it adds an interesting breakdown:

Exports of sedans more than doubled to 372,100 units, up 110%. Bus exports were up 34.63% to 102,900 units, while truck exports were up 39.4% to 291,300 units.

Figures released from China Customs varied slightly. Total auto car exports were up 52.2% to 824,000 units, while value of exports increased by 60.5% to $9.9bn.

It does seem from this site that the contentious point about who exports more cars, India or China would show I was right after all!

Chinese car (only) exports were 372,000 units in 2011 while India was 456,479 units.

If we insist on taking the 849,500 number for China we might as well take the 2,339,333 number for India.

My investigation showed that in one area Wong ji was right. In dollar valuation Chinese exports were higher because bus and truck exports were higher for China than India where the vast majority comprises two and three wheeler which fetch lower per unit price.

Bottomline, India exports more cars than China does. However, China is way ahead in heavy vehicle exports.

[Singha]

actually china's internal heavy vehicle and bus market is much larger than india's and has been for a long time. all those factories and chi chi roads need plenty of HCV.

[amit]

We should benchmark our performance with even more developed countries IMHO.

And what makes you think that's not the case? Benchmarking with the best in the world is always done, which is why everybody now says that India is the world's largest producer of milk (as a random example) rather than say India produces more milk than China does (minus all the melamine tainted stuff, that is). However, this is not a race which everybody started at the same time (except India and China as I explain in the next para) and so if we were to compare, say social security in Scandinavia with that of India then that would be just political rhetoric rather than a serious economic discussion.

The comparisons with China are inevitable as both became modern nation states around the same time and both have comparable populations and both were dirt poor. But more importantly there's something more fundamental which makes comparisons inevitable and that is India and China present the modern era's greatest laboratory experiment and everyone who's interested in these kind of things are look at this "race". The experiment is to see which system - an authoritarian dictatorship or a chaotic democracy - can help to pull more than a billion people out of dire poverty and put them back on their traditional pedestal of being the centre of humanity.

Folks who say nobody is watching this "race" either don't know what they are talking about or are too esconded in their ivory tower of specialisation to realise what's happening in the real world. Every developmental economist worth his/her salt is/has/will follow this "race". And you know what? Intuitively it seemed that the race was loaded in favour of the dictatorship, however, events have shown that this is not necessarily the case and a chaotic democracy does seem to work. Picture abhi baki hai dost...

A final point: The ruling dispensation in China is watching this "race" with intensity that can't be found anywhere else. If India succeeds then the big lie that has been sold - you need single party dictatorship in order to grow rich - to the Chinese people becomes exposed.

Before China's economy took off, our elites would often claim that there was no country that matched India's population size, so comparisons with S.Korea, Japan, Singapore and other smaller countries was not being reasonable. This India-China equal equal onlee sounds just like that.

Sorry this is just empty rhetoric.

[wrdos]

Political systems can be changed over night, sir.

The comparison or race between China and India, especially in long term, is more between 2 peoples and 2 civilizations than between 2 political systems as suggested here.

- In 1950s, the comparison between Taiwan and the Philippines, could be called a race between an authoritarian dictatorship and a chaotic democracy, while Taiwan being the former.
- In 1980s, the comparison between Taiwan and the Philippines, could also be called a race between an authoritarian dictatorship and a chaotic democracy, while Taiwan being the latter.

But now we know that the comparison between Taiwan and the Philippines has been always between 2 different peoples and cultures, through all the years.

[wrdos]

As for automobile export,

I guess the bulk of the so-called Indian car export is in fact by Hyundai, right? China doesn't allow a 100% foreign automobile assembly, thus nobody, those big MNCs, willing to use China as an export base. Thailand has been such a base for many Japanese vendors, and now India is in the eyes of the South Korean. I really doubt India or Thailand can earn too much from the "auto export", as most components are from Japan or South Korea, or at least from local factories owned by them.

On the other hand, Chinese auto export is dominated by the domestic names, in a good contrast of the domestic Chinese market. Sir, a strong domestic market can earn you a lot, either economic or political interests. Hyundai is selling more cars in China than in either South Korea or America market, or even their combination (in the near future). So you know why the South Korean government has to be very careful to deal with the Sino-Korean relationship.

[amit]

As for automobile export,

I guess the bulk of the so-called Indian car export is in fact by Hyundai, right? China doesn't allow a 100% foreign automobile assembly, thus nobody, those big MNCs, willing to use China as an export base. Thailand has been such a base for many Japanese vendors, and now India is in the eyes of the South Korean. I really doubt India or Thailand can earn too much from the "auto export", as most components are from Japan or South Korea, or at least from local factories owned by them.

On the other hand, Chinese auto export is dominated by the domestic names, in a good contrast of the domestic Chinese market. Sir, a strong domestic market can earn you a lot, either economic or political interests. Hyundai is selling more cars in China than in either South Korea or America market, or even their combination (in the near future). So you know why the South Korean government has to be very careful to deal with the Sino-Korean relationship.

Wrdos,

Before jumping in to the debate, please read up what's been written already. The "strong domestic market" meme has been responded to, see my first post in the previous page. Nobody is/has denied that the Chinese domestic demand is far higher than that in India. However, the gap is not as much (in terms of number of years required to catch up) that you think it is.

As to your Hyundai not being Indian blah blah, that's been answered to, too, thank you very much. Representing a country whose economy is totally dependent on 100 per cent export oriented units owned by foreign companies, this argument is amusing to say the least!

[amit]

Political systems can be changed over night, sir.

The comparison or race between China and India, especially in long term, is more between 2 peoples and 2 civilizations than between 2 political systems as suggested here.

- In 1950s, the comparison between Taiwan and the Philippines, could be called a race between an authoritarian dictatorship and a chaotic democracy, while Taiwan being the former.
- In 1980s, the comparison between Taiwan and the Philippines, could also be called a race between an authoritarian dictatorship and a chaotic democracy, while Taiwan being the latter.

But now we know that the comparison between Taiwan and the Philippines has been always between 2 different peoples and cultures, through all the years.

I'm sorry to say this, but this shows the total bankruptcy in thinking or the total inability for lateral thinking that has been foisted on the Chinese people by the Communist Party.

There is never any kind of race between two peoples, it's the governments and/or opinion makers, political systems which foist such comparisons. India has been a Westminster Democracy for a very short period of time in terms of civilisational memory. China has been a Communist dictatorship for an even shorter period of time when compared to the age of its civilisation.

For a vast majority of recorded history both countries have coexisted and yet why is it only now you hear about competition, race to the top etc? Why is it that Chinese folks who post here are obsessed with economic numbers and are bent on proving - as you do in your previous post for example - that how "far ahead" China is from India. In contrast to this "mine's bigger than yours" atititude, in almost all historical writings in China, in which India is mentioned, there's been very few - if at all any - mention of "comparisons in terms of developmental stats". Why is this so? Most ancient Chinese scholars who have visited India and have written about their visits have talked about what each cultures can and have learnt from each other. Ditto for scholars from ancient India.

Nope it's never been about the people. Its all about the governments and political systems.

Heck, I don't think even the Taiwanese and Filippinos think they are in any kind of race - expect for perhaps who's going to feel the wrath of an expansionist dictatorship first.

[wrdos]

Wrdos,
Before jumping in to the debate, please read up what's been written already. The "strong domestic market" meme has been responded to, see my first post in the previous page. Nobody is/has denied that the Chinese domestic demand is far higher than that in India. However, the gap is not as much (in terms of number of years required to catch up) that you think it is.

- In 2002， India auto market was about 1/2 of China's
- In 2011, India auto market was about 1/8 of China's

And you are talking about the gap is not as much in terms of number of years required to catch up.

[amit]

And you are talking about the gap is not as much in terms of number of years required to catch up.

Sorry to prick you bubble Wrdos but your post confirms that you did not understand one bit the correlation between per capita GDP and consumption - the subject of my previous post that I referred you to. I'm not going to bother trying to make you understand but I do note a few of your fellow Chinese posters have understood and hence this sudden haste to prove that Deng was not the one who kicked off liberalisation in 1978 and that China's liberalisation actually started in 1992 the year India's started (surprise, surprise).

The reason for that is not hard to understand, if you concede that decade long head start then all these fancy numbers of 1/2, 1/8, double, treble etc lose their sheen.

I think that one point which I made (without realising its significance) - that is the decade long head start coupled with the car consumption comparison between the two countries when their per capita GDP touched the US$1 k has hit Chinese (drone) H&D more than anything else.

Notice the comments: China became capitalist in 1992 the same year India became capitalist. It's a race between different peoples and not between different political systems etc.

Somehow all this is giving me tremendous satisfaction.

[wrdos]

Dear amit, consumption is correlated to per capita GDP just as rich people buy more than poor people. Sir, you really need to reprove it here?

And this consists of any proof of your conclusion, "The Gap is very small in term of years for catching up". Especially when the truth is that the GAP between India and China, no matter per capita GDP or car consumption is widening year by year.

Sir, instead of car consumption, I'd rather you to pay more attention to the consumption of food. Averagely an Indian citizen consumes barely half of cereal and less than 1/10 of meat, if compared with an average Chinese citizen. Sir, pay more attention to the skinned children, who are the future of a country.

Cars? I'd rather all Chinese would use trains, or at least buses instead.

And you are talking about the gap is not as much in terms of number of years required to catch up.

Sorry to prick you bubble Wrdos but your post confirms that you did not understand one bit the correlation between per capita GDP and consumption - the subject of my previous post that I referred you to. I'm not going to bother trying to make you understand but I do note a few of your fellow Chinese posters have understood and hence this sudden haste to prove that Deng was not the one who kicked off liberalisation in 1978 and that China's liberalisation actually started in 1992 the year India's started (surprise, surprise).

The reason for that is not hard to understand, if you concede that decade long head start then all these fancy numbers of 1/2, 1/8, double, treble etc lose their sheen.

I think that one point which I made (without realising its significance) - that is the decade long head start coupled with the car consumption comparison between the two countries when their per capita GDP touched the US$1 k has hit Chinese (drone) H&D more than anything else.

Notice the comments: China became capitalist in 1992 the same year India became capitalist. It's a race between different peoples and not between different political systems etc.

Somehow all this is giving me tremendous satisfaction.

[amit]

Sir, instead of car consumption, I'd rather you to pay more attention to the consumption of food. Averagely an Indian citizen consumes barely half of cereal and less than 1/10 of meat, if compared with an average Chinese citizen. Sir, pay more attention to the skinned (I suppose this is a Freudian slip!) children, who are the future of a country.

You know Wrdos, you're paragraph (above) got me thinking. The same para can be reworded in the following way:

Sir, instead of crowing about how China has over taken the US of A as the world's largest car market, I'd rather you pay more attention to the consumption of (unadulterated) food. Averagely a Chinese citizen consumes barely half of cereal and less than 1/10 meat, if compared with an average American citizen. Sir, please pay more attention to the young children, who are the future of a country and please ensure they do not fall victims of adulterated food stuff which is rampant in your country and results in 100s of deaths (of children) each year. Next time before thumping your chest about how China has overtaken Japan and become the worlds second largest economy, pause a moment to think how far behind your country is in human development index (let alone parameters such as individual freedom) than the Japanese.

And Oh, even punny Thailand has more cars per 1000, than the Chinese despite the per capita GDP of the two countries being similar? I wonder why? Is it because the Chinese car industry is inherently more inefficient than the Thai industry?

Questions, questions...

Anyway my dear Wrdos, my last post in this mine's bigger than yours comparisons (which is just a polite way of calling rampant trolling).

[wrdos]

Dear amit, you are using the wrong data. Chinese per capita meat consumption is about 1/2 of America, not 1/10. And one more correction of myself, Indian per capita meat consumption is 1/20 of China, rather than 1/10.

As for car consumption, Sir, China's per capita GDP surpassed Thailand on 2011, the first time within at least 100 years. Thailand had been a richer country thus the accumulative car consumption of the past 10 to 15 years, i.e. the current total car ownership, is of course more in Thailand, in a sense of per capita.

Furthermore, in many if not most Chinese major cities, car consumption is strictly restricted. You need spend >US$5000 for only a license plate in Shanghai, sir. Car in China is much more expensive because at least 1/3 of the total amount paid by a Chinese car buyer going to the government wallet, in fact. And China provinces have much better infrastructure and public transportation systems than Thailand as a country. The poor public transportation in Bangkok and the terrible railways of Thailand, I fear really sorry for them. They are importing buses of BRT types and railway cars from China in a large amount now and we are helping them to build now. Good for them.

Sir, instead of car consumption, I'd rather you to pay more attention to the consumption of food. Averagely an Indian citizen consumes barely half of cereal and less than 1/10 of meat, if compared with an average Chinese citizen. Sir, pay more attention to the skinned (I suppose this is a Freudian slip!) children, who are the future of a country.

You know Wrdos, you're paragraph (above) got me thinking. The same para can be reworded in the following way:

Sir, instead of crowing about how China has over taken the US of A as the world's largest car market, I'd rather you pay more attention to the consumption of (unadulterated) food. Averagely a Chinese citizen consumes barely half of cereal and less than 1/10 meat, if compared with an average American citizen. Sir, please pay more attention to the young children, who are the future of a country and please ensure they do not fall victims of adulterated food stuff which is rampant in your country and results in 100s of deaths (of children) each year. Next time before thumping your chest about how China has overtaken Japan and become the worlds second largest economy, pause a moment to think how far behind your country is in human development index (let alone parameters such as individual freedom) than the Japanese.

And Oh, even punny Thailand has more cars per 1000, than the Chinese despite the per capita GDP of the two countries being similar? I wonder why? Is it because the Chinese car industry is inherently more inefficient than the Thai industry?

Questions, questions...

Anyway my dear Wrdos, my last post in this mine's bigger than yours comparisons (which is just a polite way of calling rampant trolling).

[amit]

^^^^^^

I suppose it's beyond your ken to know that a large portion of Indians are vegetarians by choice.

The more I see your (and other drones) posts here the more I can understand why Pakistan and China are natural "taller than mountains and deeper than oceans" friends. They both desperately seek approval from the White skinned Westerner, which is why they love to use discredited Western inspired parameters like meat consumption to measure "progress".

[ashi]

^^^^^^

I suppose it's beyond your ken to know that a large portion of Indians are vegetarians by choice.

The more I see your (and other drones) posts here the more I can understand why Pakistan and China are natural "taller than mountains and deeper than oceans" friends. They both desperately seek approval from the White skinned Westerner, which is why they love to use discredited Western inspired parameters like meat consumption to measure "progress".

Geeez, where does this "desperately seek approval from the white skinned westerner" come from? When your data doesn't hold water and you are losing argument, don't resort to the old tactics of name calling, please.

[wrdos]

Even so, it is still too low in India.

Sir, vegetables could not provide enough protein of good quality to the children. If they could not eat meat adequately, at least they need to consume more fishes, other sea foods, milk, and eggs. Except milk, all too low in India, i have to say. Even the cereal consumption is too low in India, which means not enough calorie.

Average meat eating is for sure a good index of a country's economy level, health level as well. No matter how rich, a people can not eat a pig let alone a cow everyday. It is why in many sense, it would become a better index than the per capita GDP.

BTW, we Chinese start enjoying meat eating much earlier than the Europeans.

^^^^^^

I suppose it's beyond your ken to know that a large portion of Indians are vegetarians by choice.

The more I see your (and other drones) posts here the more I can understand why Pakistan and China are natural "taller than mountains and deeper than oceans" friends. They both desperately seek approval from the White skinned Westerner, which is why they love to use discredited Western inspired parameters like meat consumption to measure "progress".

[Raja Bose]

Dear amit, you are using the wrong data. Chinese per capita meat consumption is about 1/2 of America, not 1/10. And one more correction of myself, Indian per capita meat consumption is 1/20 of China, rather than 1/10.

A huge portion of Indians are vegetarian by choice (whether religion/community or other reasons). Haven't met any Chinese who are vegetarians till date - would be hard to find since pork seems to be a major staple. Hence, the meat consumption stats will give you a misleading picture.

[amit]

Raja Saheb,

I suggest you ignore Wrdos' comments. He's throwing flame baits in order to derail the discussion and take the focus off the preposterous suggestion that Deng (he of the famous black cat, white cat and poor little mice analogy) didn't start the liberalisation drive and China's economic liberalisation actually started in 1992 the same year India's did (an equal-equal which would make the Pakistanis proud).

This is surely a flamebait:

Sir, vegetables could not provide enough protein of good quality to the children. If they could not eat meat adequately, at least they need to consume more fishes, other sea foods, milk, and eggs.

Wrdos is taking on himself to admonish dark skinned Indians for a eating habit developed over several millennia. Someone needs to be desperate to be that stupid.

[Hari Seldon]

Yawn. same old same old. Discussion derailment 001 in plogless by the drone company.

And these drones have developed immunity to several de-derailment techniques BRfites have used over time. Heck, I tried a new one recently, that of vehemently agreeing with them and joining in chorus of their suplemacist song ...all in the forlorn hope they'd declare victory (like unkil in A'stan) and phak off. Sadly, I'm proven wrong yet again....

[kapilrdave]

Sir, vegetables could not provide enough protein of good quality to the children. If they could not eat meat adequately, at least they need to consume more fishes, other sea foods, milk, and eggs. Except milk, all too low in India, i have to say. Even the cereal consumption is too low in India, which means not enough calorie.

My friend, how long have you been out of meat? Please go get some immediately because your brain desperately need nutrition

<OT>
BTW if you want to recover your slumping economy fast and make china a more eco friendly then get your people be vegetarian. Reason...
http://ecopolproject.blogspot.in/2010/0 ... anism.html
http://imparo.wordpress.com/2007/07/19/ ... l-warming/
http://www.time.com/time/health/article ... 95,00.html
</OT>

[chola]

The experiment is to see which system - an authoritarian dictatorship or a chaotic democracy - can help to pull more than a billion people out of dire poverty and put them back on their traditional pedestal of being the centre of humanity.

The great race between democracy and dictatorship was determined years ago in the contest between the West and the Soviet bloc. Democracy won by a landslide.

Every nation other than India know that democracy creates wealth while dictatorship creates poverty and misery. It is only us who thinks that democracy is somehow a detriment to wealth creation. Look at the G20, see how many dictatorships are there?

And you know what? Intuitively it seemed that the race was loaded in favour of the dictatorship, however, events have shown that this is not necessarily the case and a chaotic democracy does seem to work. Picture abhi baki hai dost...

Intuitively, every facet of wealth creation is loaded heavily in favor of the democracy. You are delusional if you think that anyone rational thinks that dictatorships are better in the race for wealth. Who doesn't know that West Germany was far wealthier than East Germany and South Korea is far wealthier than North Korea? Who would pick the USSR to have been wealthier than the US?

Before China's economy took off, our elites would often claim that there was no country that matched India's population size, so comparisons with S.Korea, Japan, Singapore and other smaller countries was not being reasonable. This India-China equal equal onlee sounds just like that.

Sorry this is just empty rhetoric.

No that is not. Instead of comparing ourselves to a communist nation we should be comparing ourselves to other democracies and free nations and examining how they are wealthier and why we failed to keep pace. Who is there outside chiniland, except Indians, who doesn't know that communism is a failed system?

Communism lost completely and utterly several decades ago. Whatever is working in China is not communism but the importation of processes from the rest of East Asia. Our natural benchmark must be the free nations. If they were, we'd be decades ahead of the Panda instead of a decade behind.

[Theo_Fidel]

Am I the only one who finds the entire bench marking thing ridiculous. The only bench mark should be how fast we can grow without causing harm and finding what works for us. Of course there are things to learn but we should not get into this TFTA race. I'm of the view we will always be different because we are a tropical nation. Just as Italy is different from Finland.

We compare ourselves to Panda as a way of lighting a fire under our sleepy politico's. Nothing more. To the average Indian on the street China is a different planet that does not mostly does not exist.

India is poor because we started poor and were unable to make enough investments in our people and nation. India still looks a bit shabbier than GDP would indicate because we only now have the money to make some serious investments. It is going to take another 30-50 years of steady $ Trillion plus investments to upgrade the entire national capital base. Panda looks better because they started cleaning up in 1978 but you can go all the way back to 1940's as I once did and you can see that 10-20 year gap.

For instance at Independence 1947 Indias literacy rate was hovering at 6%-10%. Chinas was at about 25%-30%.

[Suraj]

Per capita cereal consumption in India and malnutrition are two separate topics. The latter indeed still exists, due to a combination of economic and social factors. But per capita cereal consumption data between India and China hides more than it reveals . Chinese consumption figure is indeed 2x that of India according to this:

Note the Japanese and Korean stats ? Does that mean Japanese suffer twice the malnutrition of Korea ? Or that Japanese are much hungrier than Chinese ? Both suggestions are bullsh_t. If everyone in every country ate exactly the same thing throughout the last few decades, then such comparisons make some sense. If anything, Chinese data indicates a lot of wasteful production compared to Japanese figures. Indian stats aren't really poor considering consumption level close to one of the most advanced nations on the planet, well known for its healthy cuisine.

Children in both India and China are taller and heavier than they were a few decades ago:
link

On average an 18 year old child belonging to an upper income family is about 4.5 centimeters (about 2 inches) taller and about 4 kilograms heavier than in 1992, researchers from the Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences (INMAS) and All-India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) have reported.

[url=http://www.china.org.cn/english/health/194691.htm]link[url]

Chinese children are 6 centimeters (2.34 inches) taller and roughly 3 kilograms (6.6 pounds) heavier than 30 years ago as a result of the country's improved economic situation and better nutrition, according to national research published by the Ministry of Health on Saturday.

4.5cm average height increase in 20 years vs 6cm increase in 30 years sounds about the same level of improvement - in fact 2.25cm increase/decade in the Indian case is slightly better than 2cm in Chinese data.

[Suraj]

Per capita cereal consumption in India and malnutrition are two separate topics. The latter indeed still exists, due to a combination of economic and social factors. But per capita cereal consumption data between India and China hides more than it reveals . Chinese consumption figure is indeed 2x that of India according to this:

Note the Japanese and Korean stats ? Does that mean Japanese suffer twice the malnutrition of Korea ? Or that Japanese are much hungrier than Chinese ? Both suggestions are bullsh_t.

Children in both India and China are taller and heavier than they were a few decades ago:
link

On average an 18 year old child belonging to an upper income family is about 4.5 centimeters (about 2 inches) taller and about 4 kilograms heavier than in 1992, researchers from the Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences (INMAS) and All-India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) have reported.

link

Chinese children are 6 centimeters (2.34 inches) taller and roughly 3 kilograms (6.6 pounds) heavier than 30 years ago as a result of the country's improved economic situation and better nutrition, according to national research published by the Ministry of Health on Saturday.

4.5cm average height increase in 20 years vs 6cm increase in 30 years sounds about the same level of improvement - in fact 2.25cm increase/decade in the Indian case is slightly better than 2cm in Chinese data, and they gained 2kg/decade, compared to 1kg/decade in China. I wonder how that happened when Chinese are eating so much ?