Indian Economics Thread II

[AssassinsMace]

If India hasn't figured it out by now. It's not going to happen without a revolution meaning something is going to have to be taken away that they're use to having that's preventing them from staying on the correct course if they ever were.

 

[Sardaukar20]

Why did these countries receive investment and tech transfers from the west? Do western companies just give away their technology for free? Why do western companies invest predominately in China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong -- and not India or Brazil?

All of the Asian Tigers, China, India, and Brazil received generous amounts of Western technology transfers. It is a pre-requisite for JV and local manufacturing of Western products in these countries. And no its not free. Its paid for in license fees, labour, and market access. What each of these recipients of Western technology transfer did with that technology is a whole different story.

In East Asia, Western technology transfer revolutionized the technology base of those countries. They've studied and worked on those technologies, thereby fully understanding them. And since technology is science, they can develop it further without further transfer of Western technology. The rest is history.

India, I would argue has been the biggest recipient of Western technology in Asia since independence. No other Asian nation have received that amount of Western technology. During post-independence, not only have the British Raj left behind Western technology in India. But they have also left behind industries, and functioning companies for the Indians to takeover. Companies and their respective industrial facilities: like Hindustan Motors, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, Hindustan Shipyard Limited, Tata, etc. When India was founded in 1947, they had all these British Raj era industrial companies to work with. Yet what did they do with it? To this day, India is still begging the West for license production deals. While Japan, South Korea, and China are directly competing with the West. Maybe it was this easy beginning that made India too complacent and arrogant to actually treasure the technology they've received, and learn from it.

So its ultimately not how much Western technology a developing country receives that determines its future economic success. Its actually the leadership and people in that developing country.

 

[Biscuits]

India recieved far far more western technology transfer than China.

Since Beijing defeated the Western coup attempt in 1989, China has been under complete (as much as US can afford without instantly backfiring) technological sanction at least from USA only. Yes, while before 1989 China did certainly recieve technology from the west to help fight the USSR, it was not in huge amounts.

USA has only exported to China things whose technology also exists in China itself.

Instead nearly all of Chinese developments come from R&D pursued since the cold war days, which due to Deng's NEP can be applied into civilian companies. From there grew in the early 80s to 90s the giants like Alibaba, SAIC, Sinopec etc.

Then under the cover of the giants, many startups rose up and the rest is history.

India on the other hand had never had a truly indigenized R&D powerhouse. Consequently, it didn't end up owning any know how about technologies whatsoever. China was forced by the cold war much like the other major competitors into developing technology so as not to fall behind.

India relied on handouts from the west which were never made in good faith and purchases or legacy Russian tech from Russians who are primarily looking at making money from India.

 

[56860]

All of the Asian Tigers, China, India, and Brazil received generous amounts of Western technology transfers. It is a pre-requisite for JV and local manufacturing of Western products in these countries. And no its not free. Its paid for in license fees, labour, and market access. What each of these recipients of Western technology transfer did with that technology is a whole different story.

In East Asia, Western technology transfer revolutionized the technology base of those countries. They've studied and worked on those technologies, thereby fully understanding them. And since technology is science, they can develop it further without further transfer of Western technology. The rest is history.

India, I would argue has been the biggest recipient of Western technology in Asia since independence. No other Asian nation have received that amount of Western technology. During post-independence, not only have the British Raj left behind Western technology in India. But they have also left behind industries, and functioning companies for the Indians to takeover. Companies and their respective industrial facilities: like Hindustan Motors, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, Hindustan Shipyard Limited, Tata, etc. When India was founded in 1947, they had all these British Raj era industrial companies to work with. Yet what did they do with it? To this day, India is still begging the West for license production deals. While Japan, South Korea, and China are directly competing with the West. Maybe it was this easy beginning that made India too complacent and arrogant to actually treasure the technology they've received, and learn from it.

So its ultimately not how much Western technology a developing country receives that determines its future economic success. Its actually the leadership and people in that developing country.

Let's just be realistic and say things as they are. Chinese people are of a superior genetic stock than Indians. Chinese are smarter, harder-working, more ambitious and innovative than Indians. This is why China and India are where they are today.

 

[Bellum_Romanum]

Revitalization plans for New Delhi approved by the Modi government. I hope this plan comes to fruition and succeeds for the good of the people of India writ-large.

 

[Bellum_Romanum]

Bro the Collective West will never allow India to become another China, Globalization is dead and Regionalism is in and India is despised in her sphere of influence, thus can't create a bloc that may harness her potential in fact her neighbors are conspiring against her. Its unfortunate cause India had that soft power to influence her neighbors as part of the former British empire, She have to join the Russian and Chinese entente to become relevant.

Correct IF China is dealing with a rationale actor which isn't.

Just to echo on what you wrote @ansy1968 judging from the recent proclamations and moves made by the West regarding Indias domestic and highly political issues, some prominent Indians like this retired diplomat is seeing a new trend against India.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1578714529625956353

 

[coolgod]

Just to echo on what you wrote @ansy1968 judging from the recent proclamations and moves made by the West regarding Indias domestic and highly political issues, some prominent Indians like this retired diplomat is seeing a new trend against India.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1578714529625956353

You're thinking of these two Indian guys

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1578754153152925696

Maitreya Bhakal is only a freelance reporter with spicy takes on twitter.

 

[Bellum_Romanum]

You're thinking of these two Indian guys

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1578754153152925696

Maitreya Bhakal is only a freelance reporter with spicy takes on twitter.

Oh yeah, I got mixed up my bad. I follow the former Ambassador and that chap as well. In any case, the Mr. Bhakal had an interesting take and talk on thinkers forum that was recently hosted if am not mistaken by Zhang Weiwei

 

[Biscuits]

Let's just be realistic and say things as they are. Chinese people are of a superior genetic stock than Indians. Chinese are smarter, harder-working, more ambitious and innovative than Indians. This is why China and India are where they are today.

This is just racist.

Indians can succeed but just haven't done so because of poor leadership which over the course of decades or even centuries created a culture of corruption. The problem is that hardworking and smart indians get funneled into either A) never realizing their potential due to poor upbringing, B) realizing their potential but in a harmful way such as becoming a corrupt official or "entrepreneur"(read:corrupt oligarch that isn't contributing 1 iota to Indian development).

India is also an artificial country, a project created by the British, like how Ukraine was created by the USSR. Such countries usually struggle more than average due to lacking cultural identity and disputes with neighbors. But nothing prevents an artifical country from succeeding, in theory at least. South Korea for example is not doing too bad.

 

[56860]

This is just racist.

Indians can succeed but just haven't done so because of poor leadership which over the course of decades or even centuries created a culture of corruption. The problem is that hardworking and smart indians get funneled into either A) never realizing their potential due to poor upbringing, B) realizing their potential but in a harmful way such as becoming a corrupt official or "entrepreneur"(read:corrupt oligarch that isn't contributing 1 iota to Indian development).

India is also an artificial country, a project created by the British, like how Ukraine was created by the USSR. Such countries usually struggle more than average due to lacking cultural identity and disputes with neighbors. But nothing prevents an artifical country from succeeding, in theory at least. South Korea for example is not doing too bad.

Does being a realist make me racist? So be it. I'm not politically correct like you. I have no issues with spelling out the truth.