[carboy]

Originally Posted by d.w.w.

Now in my case, I don't use much mobile data or make too many calls, there is no proper plan that fits my use. I always end up picking up a plan that is more than what I need

I use the Rs 459 plan for 84 days plan on Vodafone. It gives a total of 6 GB of data over 84 days, but unlimited calls.

[EV NXT]

Originally Posted by am1m

I thought that's exactly what we've been able to do, haven't our overall fertility rates dropped?

True, but isn’t it a case of too little too late? Did we not know that our population would explode to the current levels at least 50 years ago? Do we have the luxury of waiting for the population to decline on its own?

Population regulation could have begun with penalties for parasitic draws on the system.
A proof of income to support kids rather than bringing up kids in squalor and leading them to juvenile delinquency would be enough to prevent parents adding to their parasitic draw on the system. Similar to providing proof of 2 car parks before being allowed to buy a second car. But that will not happen as it will affect the vote bank.

And population is just one area.

Take a look at how other areas have declined since independence - judiciary has lost its independence with promises of positions after retirement leading to the executive being supreme with the ordinary citizen being delayed or denied justice. A lawyer on team bhp who has a problem with his new Virtus doesnt want to take things legally because he knows there will not be a proper outcome.

And then the chaos on roads - what was very well run traffic post independence in the 50’s, 60’s even 70’s with excellent road courtesies has declined over the last 50 years. We have gone from a situation where there was excellent traffic conditions to chaos that has increased in direct proportion to traffic.

These are just two areas - increase in corruption, lack of access to civic administration by those below the poverty line and those without connections, governance that is self serving are just some of the other instances.

Democracy is a form of government that needs competence, absence of vested interests and use of intellect by the powers be to be effective. Good in theory but not something that will ever happen in India. We will be deluding ourselves if we believe that what hasn’t happened in 75 years will happen in future. In my opinion democracy is suited for countries where citizens exercise self discipline and follow rules without external intervention - again something that will never happen in India. Which is why democracy will always be a failure in India - politically incorrect but true.

A wise old man once said, we need to learn to live within the chaos to be happy.

Wisdom indeed.

[digitalnirvana]

Originally Posted by EV NXT

If so, why haven’t we done it for 75 years and instead allowed the opposite to happen?

Because forcible sterilisation or following a one child policy has disastrous side effects 30 years later. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

All countries without exception fall below the replacement rate when they advance economically. Almost all states of India except for BIMARU have been far below replacement rate. Without us needing to do anything specifically around reducing birth rate nor have we "allowed the opposite to happen".

If we
1. Make healthcare more accessible
2. Increase awareness of family planning and availability of contraceptives
3. Bring people out of poverty
4. Reduce underage marriages
5. Increase women's education

Then population growth reduces.

That is exactly what is happening in India - and it's just like every other country that has done it before us, and like every other country that will follow.

Please have a look at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...fertility_rate and see for yourself.

[AZT]

I read a book a long while back - Breakout Nations by Ruchir Sharma and the India chapter was called The Great Indian Hope trick. Brilliant book. This was back in 2012 when optimism was very high. The below was a negative which we needed to overcome but it has gotten worse.

In the global media India is closely associated with its dynamic technology entrepreneurs, who often grace the covers of international magazines. But this misses the retreat inward, the high-context side of India. Lately the enterprising moguls are getting replaced on the billionaire list by a new group: provincial tycoons who have built fortunes based on sweetheart deals with state governments to corner the market in location-based industries like mining and real estate. India has always been top-heavy with billionaires, which is partly a function of the way ingroups work to horde the economic pie for themselves.

The hope trick still survives and we'll be having this same discussion next decade.

[shree_shell]

Statistics and graphs can be interpreted as positive or negative in economic discourse. Context is important - where were we and where are we at present? Are individuals and generations better off today than 10, 15, or 20 yrs ago?

One way to not complicate things is to look around at the friends and acquaintances we grew around. I had friends and acquaintances from the streets and friends and acquaintances sitting in the Ivory towers. I can say that an overwhelming majority of them are better off than their parents; at least the ones who were dirt poor. I understand that this is a biased set of samples from a statistical viewpoint, but the story of India is not that different.

For individuals who compare and aspire to a western lifestyle -
The United States is crippled by a generation that is living a life that is lesser than what their parents lived - an inflection point of sorts. The average age of cars is 12 years here! Homeownership has become an American dream even for young Americans. The population is aging, the fertility rate is dropping, and there are tons out there with liberal arts degrees wondering what to do with them and how to pay the related $100,000 student loan debt.
The situation is not much different in Europe. Financial mobility has stalled unless you have STEM, and nobody is willing to learn Calculus or Natural Sciences here. There is an epidemic of incompetence, and this is perfectly acceptable because it is made to believe that you are smart, strong, and brave, even if you are a cauliflower running an artisan coffee shop.

If you ask what is going for India economically -
1. Tons and tons of up-and-coming STEM talent. Even after the brain drain, there is still enough to power the world's STEM needs
2. Increasing population with massive disposable income; thriving middle-class. I am surprised at how much people spend these days just for experiences every time I come to India.
3. The above (2) will provide employment for the poor class' under-belly and the stragglers until they move up the economic ladder.

What may spoil the India story:
1. Entrenched ideological conservatism and resting on the romanticism of our glorious past
2. Political instability, also conversely - a stable Political unwillingness to break loose off the red-tape
3. Corruption. My only hope here is waiting for a generational change that may lead to an institutional detox


India's population is its asset; it always was. It was always a populous country that thrived on its massive agricultural plains and resources (the world's largest!). Back then, India contributed to the world's 25-35% GDP. Nobody complained about the population and stats then.

[EV NXT]

Do appreciate your clarification and here are my counters:

Originally Posted by digitalnirvana

Because forcible sterilisation or following a one child policy has disastrous side effects 30 years later. later.

Aren’t we already in state of disaster as far as population growth is concerned? Isn’t the ignominy of being the largest population in the world bad enough?

Originally Posted by digitalnirvana

All countries without exception fall below the replacement rate when they advance economically. Almost all states of India except for BIMARU have been far below replacement rate. Without us needing to do anything specifically around reducing birth rate..

Thats what it says in theory, but the states I have pointed out in my earlier post don’t substantiate it. Also China’s population did not fall below the replacement rate on its own despite becoming an economic superpower and they had to resort to punitive measures to bring the population under control.

Originally Posted by digitalnirvana

If we
1. Make healthcare more accessible
2. Increase awareness of family planning and availability of contraceptives
3. Bring people out of poverty
4. Reduce underage marriages
5. Increase women's education

Then population growth reduces.

Again in theory and proven wrong as indicated.

Originally Posted by digitalnirvana

it's just like every other country that has done it before us, and like every other country that will follow.

Wrong. The other country that was close to us in population was China. They had to adopt a one child policy and other punitive measures to bring the population under control.

Originally Posted by digitalnirvana

Please have a look at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...fertility_rate and see for yourself.

Have seen this earlier and my point is that while the fertility rates are reducing it is a case of too little too late.

All of the above is only in the context of population.

The broader point I am making is that India is on the route to becoming a failed state in almost every area except economic growth. And this economic growth has happened inspite of the government on account of demographic dividend which is masking the symptoms of India speedily going down the path to becoming a failed state.

Do read this interview with a former World Bank and International Monetary Fund economist and current Professor at Princeton University Ashoka Mody. It’s about his book “India is Broken: A people Betrayed Independence to Today”.

https://article-14.com/post/-a-small...-63c752d70a18f

In essence he says:

1. India is broken. (on the route to becoming a failed state)

2. Most of what you read is a narrative controlled by the elite

3. India is celebrating a superficial gloss over rosy predictions about its future

4. Talk of this being India’s decade is Juvenile Economics.

I couldn’t agree more.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by shree_shell

2. Increasing population with massive disposable income; thriving middle-class. I am surprised at how much people spend these days just for experiences every time I come to India.

What we call middle class is grossly mislabeled. It's actually the economic upper class which is labelled as middle class in India by us. It's less than around 15% of the population. To majority of the country, those we label as middle class are actually the economic upper class

[Samurai]

To define in vehicle terms: Households whose primary transportation is a two-wheeler, they are the real middle class of India. Those who can't even afford a motorized two-wheeler are the poor.

If you own a car, you are not middle class in India. Plenty of people find this hard to accept.

[am1m]

Originally Posted by EV NXT

Did we not know that our population would explode to the current levels at least 50 years ago? Do we have the luxury of waiting for the population to decline on its own?

We did know, as long as I've been alive (in my 40s) I've heard that we needed to do something about the population. But the right measures have been taken and the reduction in growth is happening. Whether we have that luxury or not, it's where we are and it's what it is. Because for certain:

Originally Posted by EV NXT

Population regulation...

Is not the way to go about it. We've tried it in the past, it doesn't work. And then where do you stop? Someone decides which section of the population can grow, which can't? I'd rather live in an overpopulated country than in a country where the government can decide things like that.

Originally Posted by EV NXT

...what was very well run traffic post independence in the 50’s, 60’s even 70’s with excellent road courtesies...

A myth I think. I remember drives with my family in the 80s in Bangalore, and going to school by public transport. Even with that low traffic, back then, I remember incidents of road rage and rule breaking. If anything, the Bangalore Traffic Police has improved dramatically since those decades. Not enough to keep up with the traffic density these days, yes, but definite improvement.

Originally Posted by carboy

To majority of the country, those we label as middle class are actually the economic upper class

Absolutely spot-on! Even in this forum when we complain about our issues, we complain as the "middle-class". All of us are far from that segment.

[hondatoyotafan]

Originally Posted by Samurai

To define in vehicle terms: Households whose primary transportation is a two-wheeler, they are the real middle class of India. Those who can't even afford a motorized two-wheeler are the poor.

If you own a car, you are not middle class in India. Plenty of people find this hard to accept.

Very easy explanation for a petrol-head like me

[d.w.w.]

Originally Posted by shree_shell

2. Increasing population with massive disposable income; thriving middle-class. I am surprised at how much people spend these days just for experiences every time I come to India.

There is an other side to this. A major fraction of such people pull the extra disposable income from the part which is supposed to go to savings or use credit/loan. They are blindly following the West where people spend because their govt provides social security at old age. I know people who took huge personal loans for posh marriages/ fancy honeymoon which they could have easily avoided. How these people are going to survive post-retirement era, only time can tell.

There is also this concept of money rolling(a local term) which means you take debt from person 1 , spend it and then take loan from person 2 and pay person 1 and this go on until the bubble finally bursts. Many of these cases ends in suicide.

Originally Posted by carboy

What we call middle class is grossly mislabeled. It's actually the economic upper class which is labelled as middle class in India by us. It's less than around 15% of the population. To majority of the country, those we label as middle class are actually the economic upper class

100% true. I think most of us Indians compare ourselves with the segment above us and to us they are the upper class and we will always be middle; ALWAYS.

Originally Posted by EV NXT

The other country that was close to us in population was China. They had to adopt a one child policy and other punitive measures to bring the population under control.

From what I know, China adopted one child policy when they were facing huge poverty and unemployment. Govt had to feed the country and having a less population made sense. We are yet to run in to the same issue, but we might end up there some day if we don't take any action.

[PGA]

Originally Posted by SmartCat

Improve literacy rate, put significant percentage of young population into college and create economic opportunities that is not dependent on farming/construction etc.

I wonder many a times as to why farming has to be such a low paying activity. All economic models talk of getting farmers out of their profession. Why can't farming be as renumerative as any other economic activity.

And who is going to do farming if we get farmer out, is it possible for a company to do farming any more efficiently than what a farmer does.

Why does a farmer has to be illiterate, poor slogger always cursing middleman and nature. Is there an economic model which can give farmer his due, where educated could be employed as well and can hope for a future.

[digitalnirvana]

Originally Posted by EV NXT

Again in theory and proven wrong as indicated.

Proven wrong as indicated where exactly? Show me one iota of evidence apart from those in your opinions.

You're missing the forest for the trees, am sorry to be harsh.

Also we started with population and then you went off on a tangent which has nothing to do with the topic I am debating.

Coming back to purely population control.

China and her policy was introduced BEFORE they uplifted, on an average a million people out of poverty every year.

They tackled the symptom, not the problem. Just like any centrally run command and control society will do. Just like the Great Leap Forward. It is an unmitigated disaster that will cripple their society.

And they know now how horribly they went wrong as evidenced by their subsequent efforts at full reversal of the policy, but they have lost 2 full generations of working population and they WILL pay the price. Theirs is a fast aging population who will not contribute towards economic growth and instead be a burden on the exchequer. And guess what happens to their economy then? See Japan for example which is in a stagflation for two generations now.

People have less kids when they are better off economically, when they have better medical facilities and access to abortions and contraceptives, and when they are better educated. Governments need to ensure these factors, and nudge people towards family planning through incentives.

To be clear, I am not debating or challenging your contention that our PACE of population de growth is poor. It is extremely poor considering we have not yet hit net replacement level. Less than one third of women have ready access to safe abortions. Our family planning programs leave a lot to be desired, as evidenced by the laggards in BIMARU.

I'm just questioning your concept of WHAT & HOW i.e. that governments need to be authoritarian to reduce population.

China is THE singular example of what not to do in population control.

Also, a large working population in one of the most fertile places on Earth is not ignominy. It is a tool that can be used wisely to bring us to a middle income economy fairly quickly, if other aspects of our policy frameworks work cohesively.

Let's see how sub Saharan Africa deals with this, because they are next. By the end of this century half of the biggest megapolises will be theirs. Whether they go the China route or the middle of the ground route will decide their economic and social prosperity.

[v1p3r]

Originally Posted by EV NXT

A proof of income to support kids rather than bringing up kids in squalor and leading them to juvenile delinquency would be enough to prevent parents adding to their parasitic draw on the system.

Bit rich to assume that poor kids just grow up to become criminals.

[Dry Ice]

Originally Posted by PGA

I wonder many a times as to why farming has to be such a low paying activity. All economic models talk of getting farmers out of their profession. Why can't farming be as renumerative as any other economic activity.

And who is going to do farming if we get farmer out, is it possible for a company to do farming any more efficiently than what a farmer does.

Why does a farmer has to be illiterate, poor slogger always cursing middleman and nature. Is there an economic model which can give farmer his due, where educated could be employed as well and can hope for a future.

Very pertinent question. I wonder if the inefficiences are due to small land holdings? Punjab has the highest average land holding of 3.6 hec (from here) but most other states (with arable land) are close to 1 hec or less.