Talk:Economy of India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Business and economics Portal

This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject.

rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale

High

rated as High-importance on the assessment scale

Economy of India is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 2, 2005.

	Article milestones

Date

Process

Result

August 10, 2005

Peer review

Reviewed

August 18, 2005

Featured article candidate

Promoted

August 26, 2006

Featured article review

Kept

Current Status: Featured article

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.

This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)

Archives
Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3

[edit] Query arising from FAR

Dear contributors

Can someone reveal whether Maddison's estimates on India's share of global income, as cited in the colonial section, were based on PPP? These are fascinating figures, and we need to verify the methodology. Tony 14:15, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] India has been judged as the sixth most dangerous country

http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=72099

India 6th most dangerous country for kids: Poll

New Delhi, August 7: India has been judged as the sixth most dangerous country for children in the world, according to a recent poll. Afghanistan, Palestinian territories, Myanmar and Chechnya were placed better than India in the poll conducted by Reuters Alertnet, a humanitarian news website run by Reuters Foundation, Rajya Sabha was told today.

During the survey, the website asked more than 110 aid experts and journalists to highlight the most dangerous places for children. The first five dangerous countries are Sudan, Northern Uganda, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq and Somalia, Minister of State (independent charge) for Women and Child Development Renuka Chowdhury said while replying to a written question.

The facts that have been taken into account for the poll survey include the children involved in armed conflict, the psychological trauma experienced by children caught up in violence, the children living in poverty and forced to work to support themselves and their families and malnutrition among children, the minister said.

vkvora 04:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Note: I've commented out the copyrighted news story pasted here verbatim from Times of India's website [1]. --Ragib 05:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Economy of India and Rationing Card

Article 'Economy of India' contains many subject including silver coin, RBI, currency note of 1000 rupees, Metro railway and Bombay Stock Exchange. Only the missing information is of Rationing Card which is meant for poor to get food grains at subsidised rate. Will some body give some short of information on Indian Rationing Card and no of persons holding this cards?

Many Industrialist are also holding Rationing Card means they are poor in thinking also.

vkvora 15:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GDP Ranking

The GDP ranking is wrong. The world need not be accounted for. Hence the Rank becomes 5th from the present 6th.

Now the European Union also cannot be accounted for since the economy of various nations of the European Union is shown as different and in many places like in the Economy of France EU is unaccounted for. Either make the change in all the Economy of <countryname> or place the rank of India as 4th. Chanakyathegreat 09:22, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Poverty

The poverty point in India has declined to 22% in 2006. Please see the link - http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/702850.cms Can some update the infobox.

[edit] Infobox

Some of data given in the infobox is wrong. Even CIA world fact book has updated data. Can some please help me in umderstanding how to update the infobox. User:apurv1980 18:30, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nationalisation of Banks

203.199.104.65 12:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)WIKIPEDIA mentions in this article:

Prime Minister Indira Gandhi nationalised 15 banks in 1969, followed by six others in 1980, and made it mandatory for banks to provide 40% (since reduced to 10%) of their net credit to priority sectors like agriculture, small-scale industry, retail trade, small businesses, etc. to ensure that the banks fulfill their social and developmental goals.

ACTUALLY only 14 banks were nationalised in 1969 [19th July 1969 to be precise].

Source: Website of Reserve Bank of India http://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/chro_1968.aspx

S.Ravindranath Bank of India Mumbai India203.199.104.65 12:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Indian Poors sacrifice their children for Prosperity.

Indian Poors sacrifice their children for Prosperity.

http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=79072

Parents sacrificing sons to be prosperous.

vkvora 04:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Killing for 'Mother' Kali

Human sacrifice has always been an anomaly in India. Even 200 years ago, when a boy was killed every day at a Kali temple in Calcutta, blood cults were at odds with a benign Hindu spiritualism that celebrates abstinence and vegetarianism. But Kali is different. A ferocious slayer of evil in Hindu mythology, the goddess is said to have an insatiable appetite for blood. With the law on killing people more strictly enforced today, ersatz substitutes now stand in for humans when sacrifice is required. Most Kali temples have settled on large pumpkins to represent a human body; other followers slit the throats of two-meter-tall human effigies made of flour, or of animals such as goats.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,501020729-322673,00.html

http://www.newhumanist.org.uk/forum/threads.php?id=2220_0_23_0_C

The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.184.161.148 (talk) 05:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC).

What's your point ? --Milki 15:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] World bank external links

These links:

Were added by an editor whose only contributions have been to promote the World Bank Group (doingbusiness.org is a World Bank Group project). We have recently uncovered significant edits promoting this organization (see this WikiProject Spam discussion). In the interest of our neutral point of view policy and conflict of interest guideline I've moved the links here for other editors to consider. I personally think that four data links from one organization may be overkill without competing points of view. Also, Wikipedia has articles on the Ease of Doing Business Index and the World Bank Group which may be more appropriate than an external link. Thanks -- Siobhan Hansa 14:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Economic Reforms

Hi, Shouldn't we be covering the Economic Reforms instituted. They have had a massive impact on the Indian economy and we need to cover it.

Venkatesh 06:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] L&T 54?? Impossible

The article is wrong in stating that L&T is ranked #54 and higher than reliance, indian oil, etc. in the forbes listing. Someone probably got that number from one of the niche rankings forbes publishes and wrongly added it to this list. --Blacksun 15:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Numbers vs Text

The following section:

The economic reforms that caused a surge in economic growth after 1980 can be attributed to two stages of reform. The pro-business measures of 1980, initiated by Rajiv Gandhi, eased restrictions on capacity expansion for incumbents, removed price controls and reduced corporate taxes. The economic liberalisation of 1991, initiated by then Indian prime minister P. V. Narasimha Rao and his finance minister Manmohan Singh in response to a balance-of-payments crisis, did away with the Licence Raj (investment, industrial and import licensing) and ended many public monopolies, allowing automatic approval of foreign direct investment in many sectors.

Implies that the economy grew after 1980. According to the graph opposite, the GDP/Capita went down after 1980. Also, even accounting for the subsequent recovery, the growth after reforms doesn't seem greater than the growth before refroms. In fact it seems less.

I imagine that the graph is right, and the neoliberal propaganda is wrong. Can we do something about this? 87.194.30.86 13:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This Article Can Be Improved

I think that there are several ways that this article can be improved. 1. The name of the "Notes" section should be changed with the name of the "References" section. 2. The external links should be organized into "official" and "unofficial" branches, each one containing organized groups of organized links. 3. The introduction should be made shorter, with some of the information that would be cut away going to their sections. Johnsmithcba 19:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Average Wage

I cannot find any information on this page regarding the average or median income for India. Where might that information be found. Shouldn't it be incorporated into this page... Discussion?

207.157.13.2 15:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Sbilogo.gif

Image:Sbilogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:54, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Reliance group logo.png

Image:Reliance group logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

[edit] GDP growth projection with PPP shift taken into consideration

With the calculation currently there in the article, hyper inflation would lead to hyper GDP growth. An inflation rate of 100% would increase GDP growth by 100%, the way the math has been done there.

GDP growth numbers reported by the IMF, World Bank and UN agencies are based on dollars. The 2006/7 GDP growth of 9.4% for example is calculated from: (GDP in 2006 in rupees * dollar-rupee-rate in 2006) - (GDP in 2005 in rupees * dollar-rupee-rate in 2005)

This automatically accounts for rupee appreciation against the dollar.

Goldman Sachs is a reputed investment firm. You can't question their economic reports without substantial backing.

Yeah, the section was written as an essay, and should never have been there in the first place. So it's gone now. My fault for continually reverting you. But the stuff that's there now needs a source. Gscshoyru 16:08, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:IndianBankNotes.JPG

Image:IndianBankNotes.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Excised text

I removed a huge block of text which disputed the Goldman Sachs report in excruciating depth. While interesting, it is original research and throws the article completely out of balance. The block may be found here for reference. — Ravikiran 16:48, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Opening discussion

Gunjan, please discuss here about that disputed block of text. My objections are stated above. It is original research and makes the article unbalanced. — Ravikiran 13:17, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Once again, Gunjan/207... Please discuss this [2]. — Ravikiran 17:49, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Gunjan, your "compromise" [3] does nothing to fix the two problems, which I will restate below:

This is an article about the Economy of India, not an analysis of Goldman Sach's prediction. Anything over 2-3 lines on that report is overkill.
Wikipedia is not the place where you can publish original analyses. Even something as simple as the Goldman's model overpredicting past growth rates for India - that has to be attributed to someone. There is no way your text can be retained anywhere in Wikipedia, but I am right now concentrating on this article. — Ravikiran 23:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

This issue has been on my to-do list for a very long time, and I completely agree with Ravikaran's analysis. To summarize:

The "Future predictions taking purchasing power parity into account" was not only unnecessarily detailed but also violated wikipedia's policies on verifiability and no original research. Therefore it has no place in this or any other wikipedia article and I have deleted it.
The lengthy "Future predictions: "conventional wisdom" from Goldman Sachs" was redundant (it basically repeated the same statement thrice) and gave a single report undue weight, especially considering that wikipedia is not a crystal ball. It certainly did not deserve a section of its own, and I have compressed the prediction to a sentence in the After 1991 section.

Gunjan, I understand that you added your analysis in good faith, but I hope you will click on the policy links I have provided above and understand why the additions are inappropriate for wikipedia. If you disagree, feel free to discuss it on this talk page. Cheers. Abecedare 00:33, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

OK - hope you guys listen to this, because this is the last straw, and my faith in the sincerity of the people maintaining this page (and not something driven by pure ego) has already fallen quite low:

1.Ravikaran- stop reverting the rankings - India is now the 3rd largest economy as of 2007 not 4th- read the Wiki data behind the link!!!! Be a bit less trigger happy about deleting content or reverting to old data before verifying stuff- unless you really want to kill this page and make it obsolete, or want to get blocked from editing because of 3RR.

2. Perhaps I might be less familiar with Wiki, but Ravikiran you need to be a bit more thoughtful before put sentences which don't make any sense or severely damage the page content (like the future economy is now a meaningless stubb and a huge gap in an article that talks about the second fastest growing and the third largest economy in the world -what a terrible decline in just 1 week- and thanks to the history we all know who is behind it!)- you even deleted reasonable stuff about Goldman Sachs report that was not even added by me. Just because you think it is not relevant does not make it so- remember that. You have to have a strong reason for going around deleting contents that have no errors in them- and fit well in the page. Remember- there are a lot of pages in Wikipedia that do not go beyond the superficial stuff- you don't want this page to end up there- just because knowledgeable people find it difficult to add any new content because of your hegemony.

3. The stuff I added was a summary of what I presented at the Linucon 2004 conference - it was my research but not "original research" (and had a link to that paper presentation). The historical data on decline of India's PPP were not even research -that was just facts- important ones in the context of the discussion. Oh, btw, having a PhD in Machine Learning from UT Austin, and having worked for S&P, Amazon and other companies as a financial modeler for a few years now- I "might" know more than you about macro-economics (not sure what your background is - but sorry to say Ravikaran, you do not seem to be able to grasp even basic concepts-from what I could tell from your toxic comments. It is a huge and unfortunate loss for this page having an unqualified zealot driving it. Taking advice from Wikipedia itself, I am now formally giving up wasting my time on it- as the Wiki page on mediating dispute suggests - move on... creat a new page, perhaps in the future some more reasonable editors who would be open to new ideas and facts glaring at their face that are relevant today, and who respect others as they would want others to respect them, will come along.

gunjankg 01:19, 5 October 2007, PST

Those who are interested in Gunjan's presentation at the Linucon 2004 conference on the future of space exploration given the rapid rise of India and China can read it here [4]. Those who wish to actually read about the Indian economy may read the article. Thank you. — Ravikiran 14:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Time cove june 26 2006 1101060626 400 1.jpg

Image:Time cove june 26 2006 1101060626 400 1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Partisan Interpretation of Colonial Economics

Hi,

"An estimate by Cambridge University historian Angus Maddison reveals that India's share of the world income fell from 22.6% in 1700, comparable to Europe's share of 23.3%, to a low of 3.8% in 1952.[17] While Indian leaders during the Independence struggle, and left-nationalist economic historians have blamed colonial rule for the dismal state of India's economy in its aftermath, a broader macroeconomic view of India during this period reveals that there were sectors of growth and decline, resulting from changes brought about by colonialism and a world that was moving towards industrialisation and economic integration.[18][19]"

This statement is partisan, and only puts forth one point of view. The phrase "left-nationalistic economic historians have blamed" is a straw man, and the following statements seem to be cyclical ("changes brought about by colonialism" is presented as a counterpoint to "blamed colonial rule", while these two ideas are essentially the same). Much scholarship at Cambridge, Chicago, and other universities have put forth a more balanced view which factors in British mismanagement of the Indian economy and the use of poverty for political gain (ex. Easterly's "White Man's Burden"). I believe that there should be room for these viewpoints rather than airing just one rather one-sided one, and one that's from a unbalanced source (references 18, 19 are from OUP, and Oxford is not renound for allowing discussion of the negative aspects of colonialism). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.1.153.51 (talk) 01:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

--Agreed, please add any solid references you have. Make sure they are watertight, because some people on here are only too happy to delete anything 'anti-colonial'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.192.78 (talk) 09:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Income distribution

After the liberalization of the economy, the poor has benifited the most. [5] Before the license raj, a limited amount of people who did business with the politicians, the politicians and those who started very early were wealthy. This has changed with the liberalization and the wealth distribution is getting even. This is a good sign of progress. Chanakyathegreat (talk) 12:26, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Indian Oil logo.png

Image:Indian Oil logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Saillogo.JPG

Image:Saillogo.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ril logo.jpg

Image:Ril logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:TCS LOGO.JPG

Image:TCS LOGO.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cite error

Can any contributor to this article fix cite error at ref 72 with named ref 2005-TI-study?--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Infosys logo sml.gif

Image:Infosys logo sml.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

BetacommandBot (talk) 12:44, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:NTPC logo.png

Image:NTPC logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] +Bombay Plan

I created Bombay Plan earlier today. Would editors familiar with the history of the Indian economy please take a look at it? Thanks. -- Fullstop (talk) 21:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)