China might not have a democratic government like india, but its goverment's policy regards to economic developments

is much more efficient than india. When comes to education system, china has done a remarkable jobs in transforming its primary and secondary education which india lacks. I am serously doubt india's university system is much better than china. Building a great infrastructure like airports, railways, superhighway, and power plants is a prerequisite to substain economic development. China is far ahead in this comparison and continues to do so. I am not so sure india will able to find that kind of investment dollars to carry it out. Remember china has more than $1 trillion foreign reserve. Increasing population will only drain more resource instead of create a better life. Read more: http://news.cnet.com/India-or-China--who-will-prevail/2010-1028_3-6164996.html#ixzz1Om8r7lqv

India has an edge in IT only because of the use of English as the national language, thanks to the Briton. However, for the same reason, India cannot take IT projects from Japan, Korea, Taiwan which are now all go to China. And China has developed a highly successful Internet economy. Most importantly, China has seized the opportunity of being the world's manufacturer left open by Japan and Korea (due to the rising labor costs) in the 1980's. Today, it would be hard for India or other 3rd world country to take over it, not until Chinese labor wage go up significantly, but there are 1 billion laborers in China. That also mean China's business model is more diversified and much larger than that of India. When I was in China, I met many Indian people over there, all for procuring Chinese products. Read more: http://news.cnet.com/India-or-China--who-will-prevail/2010-1028_3-6164996.html#ixzz1OmChm1Gu

http://www.ihs.com/products/global-insight/industry-economic-report.aspx?id=106594493

http://www.gongol.com/research/economics/growthstages/

http://ilookchina.net/2010/11/02/the-india-china-battle-to-eliminate-poverty-and-illiteracy/

India Falling Short

On October 13, I posted Comparing India and Chinas Economic Engines , which referred to a flawed opinion piece in The Economistpredicting that the future economic growth of India would eventually surpass China. I felt that The Economists opinion was flawed because it was based primarily on a multi-party democracy being superior to the one-party republic in China. However, reading that issue of The Economist painted a grim picture for India. It is as if The Economist were promising that India was going to sprout wings and fly then the piece goes into a long list of facts that prove it cannot happen anytime soon. The China Law Blog chastised me for being unfair to India. The Blog said, that he wanted me to provide a super-quick summary of The Economist cover story comparing India with China, but it (I) did not, which was correct. In fact, I dont see how I could have quickly summarized the complexity of Indias economy. To create an in-depth profile of China, Ive written hundreds of posts. To talk about the reason Indias economy will not surpass China for a long time led to this post, which may be the longest single post Ive written. Sorry, it isnt a super-quick summary. At thirteen hundred words, its just quick. Next, Manjeet Pavarti challenged my opinion in a comment to the post. It is obvious that Pavarti must be a nationalist who loves his countryan admirable trait except when a patriot is misguided and possibly misinformed. In Pavartis last comment of October 16 at 01:33, he challenged my sources a photojournalist (Tom Carter) with extensive experience traveling in China and India, and my use of evidence from The Economist. To correct the shortcomings of the first post on this topic, I talked toGurnam S. Brard, the author of East of Indus, My Memoires of Old Punjab . He agreed with my opinion and said there are many in India like Pavarti that refuse to see the problems that hold India back from achieving its potential. I also talked to Alon Shalev, author of The Accidental Activist. Shalev told me of his extensive trip through India with his wife and his impressions were the same as Tom Carter and Gurnam Brard.

Next, is Foreign Policy magazines Prime Numbers, Mega Cities, where there are no opinions just facts. Im going to list three that are roadblocks to India future economic growth. WATER From National Geographic we have Mumbais Shadow Cityby Mark Jacobsona slum holding 12 million people, who live in the middle of Indias financial capital. Then there is Delhi with 17.3 million residents. One third of the citys residents have little access to clean water. See Life in the Slums of Delhi, India Foreign Policy magazine says, In India, service delivery (of fresh water) will fall woefully short of demand in coming years across most urban infrastructure sectors. China, on the other hand, has long-term infrastructure projects and is drilling the worlds longest tunnel to carry water under hundreds of miles of mountains to reach Manc huria in the northeast from the Yangtze River. Then in Tibet, China is building reservoirs to catch water from glaciers that are melting due to global warming while building villages to relocate Tibetan nomads who discover that the high altitude grasslands they once depended on to feed their herds has dried up and turned to desert due to lack of rainfall. LITERACY For a republic or democracy to thrive and survive the population must be literate to understand the issues and support a complex modern society . However, only 66% of Indias 1.2 billion people are considered literatethats more than four hundred million people who cannot read. In China, literacy is 93.3% up from 20% in 1978. Prior to 1978 Adult literacy was given first priority in literacy campaigns designed to sweep away illiteracy (saochu wenmang). Because 80% of adults were illiterate, they were targeted as crucial for securing new Chinas economic security. It may sound clich, but reading was (and continues to be) power, and leaders kn that the ew literate could have considerable influence. Source: China Philanthropy The World Illiteracy Map says, Illiteracy is one of the major hindrances that come in the way of economic growth. Literate manpower helps a country in developing. POVERTY & THE MAOIST REVOLT Foreign Policy magazine reports that rural poverty in India is turning a Communist Revolt in to a raging resource war. For India this is no longer rural unrest, but a full-fledged guerrilla war. Economic liberalization has not even nudged the lives of the countrys bottom 200 million people. India is now one of the most economically stratified societies on the planet The number of people going hungry in India hasnt budged in 20 years. New Delhi, Mumbai, and Bangalore now boast gleaming glass-and steel IT centers and huge engineering projects. But Indias vaster hinterland remains dirt poor China, on the other hand, has managed to contain the Falun Gong problem and the Tibetan and Islamic separatists over the objections of Western human rights activists that cannot stand how China manages unrest.

Due to what many in the West would call brutal measures, harmony and economic progress continue as planned for the vast majority of Chinese. In addition, in rural China, Living standards soared in the early 1980saverage incomes doubled in both the cities and the countryside, while there was a boom in both food consumption and the availability of consumer goods. Source: Socialist Review Index.org.uk Growth in (Chinas) peasant income, which had reached a rate of 15.2% a year from 1978 to 1984, dropped to 2.8% a year from 1986 to 1991. Some recovery occurred in the early 1990s, but stagnation of rural incomes marked the latter part of the decade. Source: Asia Times In fact, the last five-year plan extends electricity to rural China and subsidizes the cost of appliances for rural villages once the electricity is turned on Tom Carter, one of my sources for this post, is currently living in a small rural village in the teaproducing region of China near Hangzhou and has internet access from a village of twenty people. I agree that India has the potential to surpass China, but I doubt that will happen in the next few decades due to the economic long-term problems that have to be overcome. I dont know where Manjeet Pavarti lives, but I suspect it isnt outside of the gleaming glass and steel cites like New Delhi, Mumbai or Bangalore. People living inside these economic growth bubbles may have no idea how serious it is outside and probably dont care or India would be dealing with these challenges as China has been doing since Mao died in 1976 when Deng Xiaoping and his supporters ended the Cultural Revolution and rejected Maoism. India became a democracy in 1947, which means it has had more than sixty year to solve these s problems, while China has had less than thirty since 1982 when the Republic got its new constitution. Isnt it ironic how the West seldom hears about Indias problems but always hears about every bit of negative news that happens in China.

http://ilookchina.net/2010/10/22/china-and-indias-potential/

Growing Cautiously Into a Modern Republic Part 1/7

The China Law Blog challenged an opinion I wrote about China becoming a republic with more freedom for the people. I wrote, The Economist wants India to win this race, because it is called a democracy as is the U.S., but what isnt mentioned is that China is becoming a republic with a Chinese twist, which is what Dr. Sun Yat-sen wanted. Once you read the two pieces in The Economist, you may understand why Indias democracy cannot beat Chinas evolving republic. Source: Comparing India and Chinas Economic Engines The China Law Blog criticized this post saying, In other words, iLook takes what he sees as Chinas aspirations and assumes (without a shred of factual support or even argument) that China will very shortly fully achieve those aspirations. I dont recall writing very shortly. In fact, the freedoms the worlds democracies are urging Chinas government to implement ASAP may not materialize for decades and some freedoms found in the West may never appear.

http://ilookchina.net/2010/10/23/growing-cautiously-into-a-modern-republic-%E2%80%93-part-17/

Comparing India and Chinas Economic Engines

The cover for The Economist of October 2 8, 2010, is betting on a race that cannot be won by India. I opened the magazine and read the two pieces that the cover was about. One is about Indias surprising economic miracle and the second piece was A bumpier but freer road . On page 11, I read, many observers think China has done a better job than India of curbing corruption On page 77, a Western banker was quoted saying, Its much easier to deal with the wellunderstood org chart of China Inc than the freewheeling chaos of India. After reading both pieces comparing China with India, it was obvious that India would never beat China economically. The Economist wants India to win this race, because it is called a democracy as is the U.S., but what isnt mentioned is that China is becoming a republic with a Chinese twist, which is what Dr. Sun Yat-sen wanted. The reason The Economist is wrong about India is because Americas Founding Fathers hated democracy and they had a good reason. The Live Journal goes into detail on this topic. To quote the Live Journal, It would be an understatement to say that the (U.S.) Founding Fathers hated democracy. They warned against it vehemently and relentlessly. They equated it properly with mob rule. in a democracy, two wolves and a sheep take a majority vote on whats for supper, while in a constitutional republic (which China is becoming), the wolves are forbidden on voting on whats for supper and the sheep are well armed. The Founders, who hated democracy, gave us a free country (a republic). Our (meaning many Americans) ignorance of history, which has lead to a love of democracy, is causing us to surrender our freedoms at an alarming rate. Dr. Sun Yat-sen (1866 1925), known as the father of modern China, said he wanted to model Chinas government after America but by combining Western thought with Chinese tradition. When he said this, it was 1910, and America, by definition, was still a republic. Once you read the two pieces in The Economist, you may understand why Indias democracy cannot beat Chinas evolving republic. This topic is continued (with more details and facts) at India Falling Short

http://ilookchina.net/2010/10/13/comparing-india-and-chinas-economic-engines/

The India, China battle to eliminate poverty and illiteracy

Chris Devonshire-Ellis wrote a convincing piece at China Briefing that Indias economic growth would speed past China in the near future. He says, It (Indias) growth rate could overtake Chinas by 2013 Some economists think India will grow faster than any other large country over the next 25 years.

However, there are flaws in that opinion.

Once again, the foundation of this prediction is based on India being a democracy where entrepreneurs are all furiously doing their own thing while China is a culture of secrecy and censorship. Chris mentions a few of Chinas other flaws too, which China is struggling to overcome. What Chris doesnt mention is the difference in poverty and illiteracy between India and China.
India and China both became independent about the same timeChina in 1949 and India in 1947. Due to Chairman Maos policies, China suffered horribly from 1949 to 1976 and little progress was made. For China, all of the progress has taken place in the last three decades. India, on the other hand, has had more than 60 years to solve its problems. Lets see what each has accomplished. The World Bank says, that Chinas record of poverty reduction and growth is enviable. Between 1981 and 2004 the fraction of the population consuming less than a dollar -a-day fell from 65% to 10% and more than half a billion people were lifted out of poverty. For India, the World Bank says, poverty remains a major challenge. According to the revised official poverty line, 37.2% of the population (about 410 million people remains poor, making India home to one-third of the Worlds poor people. UNICEF shows the poverty in India to be 42%. World Bank studies also established the direct and functional relationship between literacy and productivity on the one hand and literacy and the overall quality of human life on the other. Indias literacy rate was about 12% when the British left in 1947. Today, literacy is 68%. In China, literacy is more than 93% with a goal to reach 99% in the next few years. This means that India has about 800 million literate people competing with 1.2 billion in China. As for India succeeding, MeriNews.com says, At a time when we (India) are poised on the threshold of becoming a superpower, the rampant malnutrition and prevalence of anemic children and women to the extent of 48 per cent of the population is a definitive indicator that we have failed as a democracy in ensuring the fundamental requirements of our citizens. It appears that Chinawith its censorship, secrecy and socialist governmenthas done a much better job of taking care of its citizens. http://ilookchina.net/2010/11/02/the-india-china-battle-

to-eliminate-poverty-and-illiteracy/

China versus India: which one is destined to rule the 21st century?

When it comes to divining the future, only a sucker or a veritable oracle would dare handicap that burgeoning geopolitical rivalry. Ignoring my own warning, let me try to give it a shot. The conventional wisdom is that the Middle Kingdom is the rabbit in this race, destined to leave the tortoise that is India in the dust. At first blush, that sounds like the more plausible outcome. Clearly, China's post-Mao transformation is the story of post-war economic history. The nation's economy has grown more than 7 percent annually for the last couple of decades. China's emergence as a manufacturer of high-tech goods is equally impressive with a roster of companies featuring the likes of Lenovo, Baidu.com and Huawei Technologies. But China's hyper-growth has disguised several increasingly pronounced blemishes. After spending nearly a month traveling throughout China, a friend wrote me how hard it was for a visitor to comprehend the magnitude of all one encounters. Two powers: one winner? China may have the edge over India right now, but tomorrow may be a very different story. "The multitudes of people, the size of their building projects, and the sheer audacity of their vision to transform this country into a mega-powerhouse," the friend wrote. "What do you do with an infrastructure that is developing so rapidly, that there are more than 160 cities with populations over 1 million each and no fewer than 10 cities with populations over 10 million?" Talk about an understatement. That mind-numbing question is as big as all of China. He also could have added that almost 15 million people in China each year move from the countryside to the cities. With so vast a population in transition, the absence of a safety net carries with it the everpresent potential for social unrest. So far, things have worked out. After Deng Xiaoping came to power following Mao's death in 1976, the government made a covenant with the rising entrepreneurial class. To put it simply, it went like this: "We'll let you get rich, but leave the politics to us." Of course, the state has had to deal with occasional turbulence, such as the rebellion at Tiananmen or the northwestern province of Xinjiang. But these rate as momentary detours on an otherwise unimpeded march toward superpower status. Meanwhile, India has had its own issues. The state doesn't invest enough in vital infrastructure while it spends too much money subsidizing agriculture. "China's invested more in infrastructure than India, which is in a big catch-up situation," said Michael Spence of Stanford University, who won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2001. "If they don't do that, they won't grow at the rates being projected." Nobody knows whether India's leadership will act on that warning. But if I were a betting man, I'd say there's a lot to like here. For all the mess that is India, it's still one heck of a productive mess. In its latest five-year plan, the country forecast average growth accelerating from 9 percent to more than 10 percent. That's a breathtaking climb. And consider the following: In 2002, the country's annual GDP growth was lower than that of China, Vietnam, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda and Bangladesh. Within a year, India had closed to No. 2 behind China, largely on the strength of its emerging IT and business process outsourcing sectors. India also reaps benefits from an excellent educational system that's generated thousands of graduates who work for overseas American corporations. Above all, India's political power doesn't emanate from the barrel of a gun. On Tuesday, the U.S. statement included China with the likes of Iran, Zimbabwe, Cuba, North Korea and Myanmar as a country where human rights protections routinely get violated. Compare that with India. The system may sometimes be raucous and inefficient, but it remains the world's largest functioning democracy. That counts for a lot and helps feed into a touchy-feely attribute that can't be measured like a dry economic input.

Spence summed it up this way: It has a lot to do with a sense of optimism and momentum, a feeling that today will be better than yesterday and tomorrow will be better than today. It's a very American way to explain India's phenomenal growth, but I think it helps fill in some of the gaps. In China, you can dream of being rich, but it then behooves you to keep your opinions to yourself. The average Indian can also dream about making her fortune--and then figure out how to apply those lessons to building a better society.

http://news.cnet.com/India-or-China--who-will-prevail/2010-1028_3-6164996.html