
China’s prosperity will be induced by the state; India's may be despite the state. - robg
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/02/opinion/02das.html
======
graemep
India's government, judiciary and bureaucracy are pretty good by comparison
with other countries in the same income range or region.

The government also put money into education (more than was needed according
to assorted "experts") which has enabled the boom in service exports.

I would also question how efficient China's government is given the high level
of corruption, and its inability to enforce important regulations (like not
putting melamine in milk...). Maybe the Chinese government is just good at
convincing people it is efficient because it suppresses all reporting that
suggests other wise.

~~~
tokenadult
"I would also question how efficient China's government is given the high
level of corruption"

That's an important point. I think India's greater press freedom and thus
greater transparency is to its long-term advantage. Free and fair elections
that can turn out the ruling party keep politicians somewhat more honest.

Here's a question for readers of HN who live in China or have recently
traveled there: when you are out at night looking at new high-rise buildings,
how occupied do they look? Do most windows show lights, or are most units in
the buildings presumably unoccupied? I ask this to check a statement I read
from a recent visitor to one city in China.

~~~
dataman85
In Shanghai I thought the Pudong area was surprisingly empty, considering the
tall buildings coming up everywhere. It is almost deserted compared to
Manhattan, or even the other side of the river in Shanghai.

Did not notice this phenomenon in Beijing, however. I used to live there until
recently, and know first hand that affordable office space is a huge headache.

------
senthilnayagam
good read. never been to china so wont be commenting on it.

India has more young people, and they believe in changing their destiny in
their own ways.

newer generation is coming out of old moulds of poverty, and socialism.

satyajit ray and international media were interested only promoting the image
of poverty in India. 20 years back there were many monopolies and license raj,
starting any business was very tough if dont have deep pockets and influence
with bureacrats.

we dont want the government to help or support us, if they dont create trouble
and provide a security, rest the people will take care

------
DanielBMarkham
FP had a great article months ago about India and China. If I remember
correctly, the money was on India out-growing China, mainly due to corruption
in China.

I put my money on systems that iterate and have the ability to be wrong often.
As a rough example, in the U.S., we just elected a new guy and we'll be
heading in a new direction. For about half the country, we were wrong and now
we've changed course. We never stick with the same guys and the same policy:
we're always mixing it up.

I don't see that kind of radical change-up of leadership and policy in China,
but I do see some of it in India. So my money's on India as having a brighter
future.

~~~
ChaitanyaSai
Corruption is as big a problem in India as it is in China. Deregulation
however means that the Indian media is much more open and competitive. This,
while resulting in tabloid sensationalism, also means that government scandals
are highlighted and often magnified which help keep them in check. As far as
choosing a direction goes, anti-incumbency always triumphs because the
disgruntled are always in sizable numbers. That, however, does not affect
corporate policies much more that changing the governmental cogs that need to
be greased. In a nutshell, this is India's formula for growth: A patchwork
democracy that moves slowly and clumsily, and sustainable corruption that
allows enough breathing space for far more nimble corporate entities. This
reminds me of what is said of Italy: the economy grows at night while the
government sleeps.

