India was called hope of Asia in 50s. The hope and promise was nothing new, and the delivery was never there.
Big scary (sometimes foreign) players only manage to "destroy" a local industry when the local industry is failing to satisfy local customers.
You're speaking neither as an Indian national, an Indian shopowner, or even an employee of a low-margin local business in India.
I understand that people living elsewhere have perspectives on this, as do ex-pats living in India, but those aren't the people who are principally harmed by this. It's very easy to conclude that this is "worth it" when you're only benefiting from it[0] not the one feeling the pain.
[0] 'As a person [from the US] who's shopped at both walmart and local "mom and pop shops" [in India]'
Uber's valuation is: http://www.wsj.com/articles/uber-valued-at-more-than-50-bill...
One might disagree with this valuation, let's assume it's 1/10 th of it. Can they provide health insurance to their drivers? Absolutely yes, but they're solely interested in revenue and being profitable. I don't want to sound like an Uber basher, this is true for most companies; they operate in their own self interest which they arguably should. It's up to the govt. to act as a counter balance to blatantly unjust policies adopted by companies.
One example, http://storyofstuff.org/blog/dear-jeff-bezos-im-leaving/
http://www.chinafirstcapital.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/201...
As a bangladeshi I have watched privatization and IMF destroy my own country.
Its rich that someone who took a vacation in India somehow figured out all its problems and knows all its solutions.
Strong labour laws in India prevented Indian workers from being exploited by foreigners - Unlike in my own country where my people are slaves to american consumer demands via walmart.
India is exactly what you end up when you institute democratic rule over a real nation.
The idea of self-reliance is what allowed Indians to develop their own space mission, nuclear power, submarines and unique cryogenic rockets that even the american cannot get their hands on. And now the british use our rockets.
I went to a rural village in west bengal where they got their first light bulb. What is cool about it is not that its basic electricity but because it was powered using a nuclear plant.
Its embarrassing that in the UK the electricity is generated mostly by coal. Who is the backward nation again ?
Indians are not interested in your fancy iphones. They have no purpose when you think about it. India is completely happy to wait for technology to catch up rather than destroy and pillage their environment and water.
Unlike the americans the indians didn't have the luxury to rape and pillage an entire continent and another one. Resources are scares - water, food, land.
India is now developing thorium and is building power plants in the south. Sounds like they are doing perfectly fine. Slow,steady and sustainable progress.
> India really is not a rational country. The English mushed India together in the panic of independence in 1947, but little heed was given to ethnic, religious, linguistic, historic, national, or geographic considerations which is one reason India has had problems with every one of its neighbors since. India as we know it will not survive another 30 or 40 years. This of course does not have to end in disaster, but it probably will given the chauvinism of its government and the way history has always worked.
Really? A democracy of 1.3 billion people which has held together for > 60 years and endured > 4 major wars will just topple? I find that very unlikely.
The fact is that despite a lot of troubles, the country has managed to remain more or less true to its principles of democracy and secularism, instead of devolving into a chaotic mess that most of the neighboring countries have faced. One reason is that the Indian Military has historically been apolitical, unlike many neighboring countries. I don't really understand how it has managed to stay together this way but I really hope that it does continue.
I don't ascribe this to malice, but to sheer bewilderment. From a rational perspective, India should not really exist. It is just too large and heterogeneous to stick together.
When I was in the US, some people asked me if I "speak Indian". The rational brain assumes that if they speak French in France, Italian in Italy and German in Germany, they must speak Indian in India.
Half an hour later, I figured out why the west never can and never will understand India
But a lot has to do with our freedom movement - the way Gandhi, Nehru and Patel unified the different kingdoms into a single freedom struggle is incredible. And that has never gone away. We actually unified India AFTER the formal independence from the British. Hyderabad's Princely State (to which I notionally belong to... and Satya Nadella ) actually wanted to be independent and was annexed by the Indian Union by force.
And now, there is so much growth and money in India, that it is really hard to make a case for Balkanization - Kashmir is an edge case with a lot of international politics. But even in the far northeast (Mizoram, etc), the struggle is for a separate federal state... only a few splinter groups demand full independence.
A good piece of writing - quite critical about the country, but also comes from a place of affection for the country.
I'm not sure where you're reading "affection" from. Rogers has been predicting and even actively cheerleading India's financial decline consistently for literally two decades. He even closes the article with a claim that is laughably ignorant[0] of historical facts, and just reeks of colonial apologism.
> India really is not a rational country. The English mushed India together in the panic of independence in 1947, but little heed was given to ethnic, religious, linguistic, historic, national, or geographic considerations which is one reason India has had problems with every one of its neighbors since. India as we know it will not survive another 30 or 40 years. This of course does not have to end in disaster, but it probably will given the chauvinism of its government and the way history has always worked.
The reason that India has been at war is because the world's then-largest superpower[1] (the British) openly declared that they wanted to start a civil war in India, and then actively funded terrorist[2] groups to ensure that it happened.
There are people in the US who have affection for India. Rogers is not one of them.
[0] No, I don't think that Rogers is actually ignorant of history; I'm saying he chooses to ignore history.
[1] India's fight for independence was just around the time that the US took over that epithet from the British
[2] That word didn't exist then, but that's absolutely what we would call them today
> That word didn't exist then, but that's absolutely what we would call them today
It had actually existed for about a century and half before that, and had been used in the modern sense (including referring to non-state and subnational actors, often directing violence against a state, rather than the original use referring to terrorism strictly in the sense of a top-down means of state control originating with the French Revolution's Reign of Terror and its architects, the original "terrorists") for about 70-80 years prior to Indian independence.
To a certain extent, even if the article was recent, it's not a surprise. Democracies are SLOW and India is still a social democracy trying to be a capitalistic democracy - so even slower.
Democracies move fast only during a crisis. Otherwise, they are inherently slow.
Even in the US, a majority of top issues have not changed much since the 90s. Politicians have been debating pretty much the same thing without much progress...
1. You can get cross country SIM card easily in India today.
2. Taxes for IT business is uniform (no incentive for export per se)
3. Indian IT industry did just fine during bubble burst so Author's cyncism was bit misplaced.
4. Indian aviation industry is fierecly competitive. Today no one worries about future of Air India not because Air India has become good but there is enough competition.
5. I would argue that a lot has been done to ease Foreign investment since Article was written. Why just yesterday new measures were announced (http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/no-mat-on-fii-why...)
Despite the tax reform, doing any business in India is still a hassle nevertheless.
Indian aviation industry may be competitive, but can a middle-class family really afford an airplane ticket ? No. They are only afforded the option of a second class train ticket which have toilets worse than the one shown in Trainspotting. And I haven't even touched the topic of trains being overcrowded. Seriously, who thought letting any number of people with a ticket on the train was a good idea ?
We will bemoan the corrupt system; but given a chance to make life a little bit easier, not hesitate to offer a bribe.
We will spew venom at the useless politicians who do nothing but line their pockets; but then turn around and vote for one based on caste/religion.
We will express angst at the garbage that litters our cities; but not hesitate to toss it out the window (or our home's garbage on the street).
Gandhi said, be the change you want to see. I'm not a fan of Gandhi, but in this he was right. We must change our behavior, before we can expect the system to change.
India has a corruption problem - and so does the americans, british, europeans, etc . Hell The LIBOR scandal is on 900 trillion dollars. And this is before I bring up 2008.
Privatization is not that answer. Look at the situation at Bangladesh if you want to see what privatization leads to.
Secondly: I never brought up privatization.
* Capitalism good, Socialism bad * All countries should emulate the west. * "Not Business friendly" - Code for this country won't let us exploit their people.
Then we come to the actual substance.
>First, revenues from software made by Indian companies is taxed while export revenues are tax-exempt. In other words, an Indian company has no incentive to do local business.
Uh, yeah. Sure. All the people doing exactly that don't exist. They have no incentive !!
>By then, India may have learned to practice true economic reform, taking a lesson from their neighbors in China.
Why would anyone want to take a lesson from China? - Which BTW continues to forcibly exert control over the lives of her people (including businesses).
>Maybe then they will understand that a free-market economy isn't necessarily a new form of colonialism.
Wow. Dude, India has been trading and doing business with East Africa, the Middle East, all of south Asia including China since like 6 AD. We 'understand' how to trade just fine.
It seems like the software bubble ended with lows for maybe half that time. Is there anything peculiar to software or that time that made it different than other bubbles in history?
I think it may make sense to use this title in the original article as the site might carry some context but using it in HN doesn't seem too efficient.
If I've to read an essay to understand the context the chances are I'll put it off for later and unfortunately will not be able to participate in the discussion.
Any concrete examples? I think this is inappropriate any more.
Investment Biker
A Bull in China
Adventure Capitalist
Hot Commodities
(seriously, http://www.jimrogers.com/) This guy has traveled the world and learned lots of puns.
From the content this looks pretty old, like India having 25 states etc.
He recently appeared in the news for "quitting" India: http://www.livemint.com/Money/Hii5NshplbswnJpcb0cHgM/Jim-Rog...
