21 ms·
India has a hole where its middle class should be
- GreeniFi 9y agoBy design or a bug in the system?
- lotsofpulp 9y agoIt seems inevitable in a system where owners of capital reap all the benefits of automation and efficiency. Since most people do not own sufficient capital, they get less and less of the pie.
- jacobush 9y agoOh. The west’s middle class will vanish too, soon enough.
- jraby3 9y agoIt's declining already.
- YouAreGreat 9y agoTalking about India could be The Economist's attempt to warn about the dangers of a continued merciless pummeling of the western middle class without having to come out and say, "gee, maybe Trump has a point..."
- Retric 9y agoWhile he has s point it's pure talking point. His policies are dumping on the middle class even harder. Hint increase the debt and you increase taxes. So, you need to look at how the tax burden shits not nessisarily the specific rates. Aka if you get 50$ off your taxes this year but your share of the national debt increases by 5,000$ then you are far worse off.
- topmonk 9y ago> Aka if you get 50$ off your taxes this year but your share of the national debt increases by 5,000$ then you are far worse off. Why? Do you suppose in the future, we'll all pay off the debt equally?
- Retric 9y agoNot equally, but if you pay X% of taxes then ~X% of the national debt is effectively yours. Either through interest payments or failure to lower taxes in the future. Yes, there is some wiggle room if the tax burden shifts again, but if your taxes are dropping significantly less than average as a % of overall revenue you are going to be significantly worse off in the future. (Assuming you're not going to die soon.) Cutting spending works, cutting taxes is meaningless without that.
- mcny 9y agoThank you. I've been saying this for years but nobody influential wants to acknowledge it. Starve the beast is an incredibly stupid plan if you actually care about reducing national debt. Reducing income can't help us reduce spending. To reduce spending, we have to actually sit down and do the difficult task of reducing spending. Nothing else will do. At best, we are kicking the can down the road.
- Spooky23 9y agoRemember that the big power people behind these movements control resources. So their wealth stands to increase relatively speaking as more and more money is printed and the value declines.
- jessaustin 9y agoIs it possible to reduce national debt? Sure, some nations occasionally miscalculate and have a year or two in which the budget is balanced and the debt doesn't grow, but afterward their debt continues its inexorable rise. Some resourceful and wise nations like Norway have never gotten on the debt elevator, but has anyone ever gotten off? (Poor nations who have had debts forgiven are excluded from this question.)
- lotsofpulp 9y agohttps://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/14/business/world-inequality.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/14/business/worl... Take your pick of the data.
- jacobush 9y ago"If you care about equity, it doesn’t look good."
- jp555 9y agoBenefits or profits? Are there more cancer treatments today than ten years ago?
- lotsofpulp 9y agoMaybe, but who is going to allow you to benefit without paying them (with the profits, that you're not getting)?
- jp555 9y agoRockefeller for all his wealth, could not buy penicillin. I’m just trying to make the point that productivity improvements diffuse out to everyone over time. Cell phones were $10K when they came out and now how many Indians have them?
- throwaway00123 9y agoThe Indian 'middle class', is composed generally of descendents (literal and/or otherwise) of the old Angrezi babus who were colonizing the country for the British, and thus are extremely wealthy (in relative terms) since they control the system. The system has itself became self-sustaining in a big way after 'independence', and thus continuing the large-scale inequity, often entirely along linguistic lines (English vs rest). No wonder, everything, including the highest courts continue to be run by the (cultural) Anglical retainers. It's almost amusing when FabIndia + Bindi wearing bimbos (faureign/desi) come and lecture about the 'caste system'. This is the market demographic that the Americans are so keen to tap into; the other neither has much wealth nor is it culturally Anglo-Saxon (and thus American recipes are not transplantable, effective, or profitable).
- yedava 9y agoThe fact is that the well off in India come from traditionally "upper" castes. Linguistically speaking too (like English speakers), the caste correlation is quite strong. Even among the non-English speaking rich (like wealthy farmers in the rural areas), the same caste correlation pops up. In a country where upwards of 90% of marriages are within the same caste[1], wealth accrued to certain castes stays within them (a self-sustaining system). So it shouldn't be surprising to see caste used an explanation for inequality. 1. http://www.thehindu.com/data/just-5-per-cent-of-indian-marriages-are-intercaste/article6591502.ece# http://www.thehindu.com/data/just-5-per-cent-of-indian-marri...!
- gaius 9y agoIt’s not about who speaks English but about who was born Brahmin - that’s been true in India for 5000 years! India couldn’t function as a modern state with out a de jure lingua franca, that being English is an enormous advantage for international trade too.
- tiuPapa 9y agoNot true. The fascination with Brahmin has been replaced with the Rich quite a while back. Not saying that there is no cast discrimination in India, there is. But being born Brahmin is not as big an advantage today as it was in the past. Being born rich however is a different story.
- otalp 9y ago>The fact that barely a quarter of women work—a share that has seen a precipitous decline in the past decade Wait, fewer women are working in India over time? Why is that?
- fauigerzigerk 9y agoThey say it's a smaller share, which doesn't necessarily mean fewer women, depending on what is counted as "work". It could be (I'm just guessing here), that the type of work that men do has been "legalized" (and hence counted) to a much greater extent than the type of work that women predominantly do.
- satya71 9y agoMost people in India work in the informal sector and are not counted.
- denzil_correa 9y agoThat also means these most people won’t have acceptable work conditions and other employee rights that the formal sector has.
- tomrod 9y agoOr they work on farms, or they build crafts as craftsmen/craftswomen in their own workshops, etc. Definition is very broad.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- godzilla82 9y agoI don't have data to back it up. But this simply is not correct. Social norms have changed over the last few decades and that alone means the percentage of working women have gone up. Very few of the women of my age group are housewives, which was the default a few decades back.
- MechEStudent 9y agoThe US is moving that direction too.
- l33tbro 9y agoI'm sure the neocons would probably write this off as India being in the early stages of of Kuznets Curve (1), but it's probably a case of what Piketty found when writing 'Capital in the Twenty-First Century'. Ie, in developed nations, the rate of return on capital greater exceeds the rate of economic growth, which creates an increasing gap between rich and poor. It's difficult to see how they will mobilise these people to become consumers, when nothing suggests a disruption of Indian wealth becoming increasingly concentrated. (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuznets_curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuznets_curve
- anovikov 9y agoWhat is the problem of wealth being concentrated? Common people do not need wealth to earn money, they earn money from jobs. Gradually business will see it needs consumers to grow further and some measures will be taken to make these people more productive to be able to earn and spend, as rich don't exist in a vacuum.
- nickthemagicman 9y ago> Gradually business will see it needs consumers to grow further and some measures will be taken to make these people more productive to be able to earn and spend To rephrase: You're saying that the "common" people are just not working hard enough and the rich need to take measures to make them work harder so that they can be better consumers. It's the "common peoples" fault that there is no middle class because they don't work hard enough. According to you...India has a half billion lazy people.
- StephenMelon 9y agoBesides the scientifically proven downsides for society and general human wellbeing that inequality is known to cause, why should people’s lives be improved or not at the whim of “business” and the “non-common”, most of whom are the beneficiaries of inherited wealth or a gamed system? What gives people the right to live a parasitic, non-contributory existence at the expense of the labour of other humans? You seem to be systematising and forgetting that you are talking about billions of real lives?
- billfruit 9y agoThe governance in India has stagnated and haven't kept pace with changing times. I thing the problem is its half-born federal structure. Without the states having sufficient power to enact meaningful policy, there is little or no competition between the states, because of the fact that there is barely anything to differentiate between them.
- dingo_bat 9y agoI agree, and this is exacerbated by the absolute power the Supreme Court can exert over all states.
- rapsey 9y ago> I thing the problem is its half-born federal structure. And corruption, political dynasties, general incompetence and huge cultural baggage.
- marcosdumay 9y agoFrom the far side of the world, it looks like India is sustaining a huge fight against corruption. This can only make its governance improve, not stagnate. I'd bet only the appearances are getting worse.
- fineng123 9y agoThe problem is religion. That's why there's too many people (birth control is evil and God doesn't want it, etc.), and that's why they have a lazy culture.
- dimmuborgir 9y agoThere is no 'birth control is evil' concept in Hinduism. 80% Indians are Hindus. Poverty is the reason for there being too many people. Poor people tend to have more children.
- fineng123 9y agoPulling out is specifically prohibited in the Bible. So is oral sex. But nobody gives a shit. The funny thing about religion is that there's so much nonsense in their official texts that you can make it mean whatever you want :)
- thallukrish 9y agoWe need more middle class people who are educated to come into political stream to counter the existing political class which caters to the rich and the poor. Then things my change for the better.
- thisisit 9y agoThe article is slightly inflating it's claim. There is a middle class. But, there are two things which drive markets in India - one is mentioned in the article, the price and second is utility. Frequent discussions in offices are about - What is the point of a Starbucks coffee when a "similar" thing can be had for much less. Phones tend to be measured on music volume or camera. I have seen Domnios in a tier 3 city. The opening night had a huge crowd and continued to do so for next 6 months. Then the novelty wore off. Now there are barely 4-5 people even on a weekend night. People fail to see the point of a "costly" pizza when 2-3 meals can be had for same price. But, if there is a grand occasion like birthday, anniversaries people still land up there.
- drieddust 9y agoAgreed. Indians are conservative in spending habits and I think that's a good thing. Eating out is the best example. In West eating out is the default choice, even those who can't afford it will choose to eat out. On the contrary in India, eating out is a conscious choice even for very rich. But I think with new generation, this culture is changing slowly.
- apexalpha 9y agoIn the US*. In Europe, cooking is still by far how most people eat. It's one of those things where our cultures drifted apart over the years.
- sanderjd 9y agoI think "eating out is the default" was hyperbole? If it's meant literally, it seems simply untrue in the US as well. I can believe that we eat out more, but most people I know eat breakfast and dinner at home and take leftovers to work for lunch. Are there statistics about this?
- stephenhuey 9y agoA huge percentage of Houstonians would eat out for lunch and maybe after work as well, even with a family. In a city of countless inexpensive restaurants, eating out might be the default for a lot more people here.
- IkmoIkmo 9y agoHere's a pretty decent technical note which covers definitions and quantifies 'middle class' in India: https://www.cgdev.org/doc/2013_MiddleClassIndia_TechnicalNote_CGDNote.pdf https://www.cgdev.org/doc/2013_MiddleClassIndia_TechnicalNot... Most data that I'm familiar with is from the National Survey of Household Income and Expenditure (NSHIE) by the NCAER, or the NSS by the gov. But they hold these surveys rarely, I'm hoping to see an update to the 2011 NSHIE data for example, this year. Another decent study building on NSHIE data: http://www.thesuniljain.com/files/thirdparty/NCAER%20How%20India%20Earns%20Spends%20and%20Saves.pdf http://www.thesuniljain.com/files/thirdparty/NCAER%20How%20I... Does anyone know where to get more recent data? In any case, the middle class in India is quite small, probably around 100m people, but definitely not above 200m. What's somewhat left unsaid by the Economist is that growth prospects are pretty good, with the middle class group doubling less than every decade, in addition to growth of the rich group. India will also be this century's most populous country, outgrowing China probably next decade and will keep growing a few decades after China's population will have started shrinking. And looking at the age-demographics, China is headed into difficult territory whereas India will have mostly young (i.e. productive) population for a long time. So I agree with most of this article, but it definitely also leaves a few things unsaid. In terms of India's attractiveness as a new global market, I'm cautiously more optimistic about India's position than most, but not by much.
- qwerty456127 9y agoHow does it happen India has Gini coefficient close to that of Canada (and better tan that of the USA, UK and even Australia) then?
- microcolonel 9y agoIt could be that Gini coefficients don't make that much sense in general, especially since you can skew the numbers in favour of "equality" simply by having more poor people. There are alternative measures of income inequality, but they seem not to be used basically at all by the broader public.
- YetAnotherNick 9y agoWhat? If there are more or all poor people with largely equal income, then I would say the country is equal. Even the top 1% holds much less in India as compared to US[1]. [1]: http://www.thehindu.com/business/income-share-of-top-1-surged-report/article21665296.ece http://www.thehindu.com/business/income-share-of-top-1-surge...
- barry-cotter 9y agoBecause inequality is really low, almost everyone’s poor.
- statguy 9y agoThe Gini coefficient only accounts for relative differences and not absolute differences. A person/household at around the 25% income level in India might be below the US/Canada poverty line.
- throwaway21442 9y agoPoor article, even by the already low standards of The Economist. In effect, trying to tell business leaders they don't understand their market as well as the Economist column-writers do. > Firms peddling anything much beyond soap, matches and phone-credit are targeting a minuscule slice of the population Well, yes, but tell us something new. Even this minuscule slice is (a) A large market and (b) is growing quite rapidly. For example: Automobiles: growing at around 6% p.a, shifting towards more expensive models. Now 4th largest in the world in terms of numbers (no doubt, lower in total $ sales)[1] Smartphones: 2nd biggest in the world [2] Consumer Durables: growing at over 10% [3] Business leaders are not interested in India because they're stupid and they think India is a rich, egalitarian country. They are interested because of a fast rising middle class with a booming consumer economy, which, contrary to the claims of the article, is true. For millions of people like myself, who emerged into the middle class thanks to private sector jobs that only emerged after the 90s, this is lived experience. For a much better take on the topic, please read: https://swarajyamag.com/economy/demonetisation-how-neo-middle-class-is-redefining-political-landscape https://swarajyamag.com/economy/demonetisation-how-neo-middl... [1]http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/india-trumps-germany-uk-to-become-the-fourth-largest-auto-market-in-the-world-2322935.html http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/india-trumps-germa... [2] https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/27/india-second-largest-smartphone-market/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/27/india-second-largest-smart... [3] https://www.ibef.org/industry/consumer-durables-presentation https://www.ibef.org/industry/consumer-durables-presentation
- juanmirocks 9y agoFrom my very subjective experience, and my long trip around India in 2017, I can agree on all points raised by the Economist article. The state of education is appalling. And yet at the same time, you see tons of those in the low 90% of the population checking out Facebook in their cheap phones with 4G connectivity. Either way, my outlook for India is very positive. IMO They need only 1 or 2 more generations to truly rival or even surpass China.
- fineng123 9y agoToo religious. China's great advantage is that they're all atheists. Highly religious societies have a strong desire for tradition, and tradition is "women don't work and have no power, corruption is rampant, new things are bad (because they destroy the golden geese that keep the upper class rich and in power)". Pakistan and India are going nowhere soon.
- tiuPapa 9y agoA small subset of Indians will probably continue to prosper.
- farazbabar 9y agoAs an ex pakistani, I have always admired how much India has been able to overcome the odds and continues to prosper and charge forward. I think the gp has some merit in hoping that within a generation or two, India has a chance to overcome a number of these challenges. I do concur with your assessment of Pakistan however.
- pm90 9y agoThis is actually very sad. I had hoped the economic development would change society in Pakistan as much as it has changed it in India; perhaps that would finally end the enmity that exists b/w the countries. My Parents generation cared very much about Caste/Religion etc. while my friends and I are very much secular, and I imagine the next generation will be even more so.
- 9y ago
- deepGem 9y agoI'd be hard pressed to believe that 40% of Indians are on par with the most destitute bits of Africa. Any source to validate this ?
- RandomCSGeek 9y agoI live in India, so I can give a bit of overview. I don't have sources right now, but I have experience. You can roughly divide India into two parts, the British controlled, and the non-British controlled, based on the pre-independence situation. The british controlled areas, mainly the northern states like UP, bihar, bengal have huge number of poor families. UP has too many people, and most of them are poor. The non British controlled ares, like Maharashtra and some southern states, are generally a bit better off, and here is where you find most rich and middle class. The central states are riddled with decades old insurgency, which could be solved using military, but govt doesn't want to use military on it's own people. These areas contain tribal people, and they are very poor. Now, all this is not a perfect science, but this is how it generally is. Now when a foreigner visits India, he/she might visit places like Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, maybe North eastern Himalayan areas, Goa and some beaches in Lakshadweep. The image you get is that of extremely rich people and extremely poor people, along with a lot of middle-class people living in these cities. But outside these cities, when you go to central India(you won't, as rebels will kidnap you), you can see extreme poverty. Same with other non-tourist areas.
- sumedh 9y ago70 years after independence and you are still blaming the british. When will this finger pointing stop?
- ravivooda 9y agoI wonder, if you will agree, the rich always have an advantage compared to the poor. In terms of education, better life etc. So I can see why we blame British; the parts where they were most effective are factually poor when compared to the other side. Not in any way mean that we should blame them even after 70 years.
- 3of90s 9y agoGovt of India spends less than 1.5% of its GDP on education and an equal share on its health. Now compare this with shares of other countries like US and European countries. Indians save money (who ever can save) to take care of these.
- itissid 9y agoHow does one go figuring out income levels? India has such a poor tax base just 2%[1] of people pay taxes. > If nearly 300m Indians count as “middle class”, as HSBC has proclaimed, some of them make around $3 a day. Then, I would be curious to know how one accurately is someone "measuring" what a middle class is since only 2% of the population sample is available. [1]https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/03/22/517965630/why-do-so-few-people-pay-income-tax-in-india https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/03/22/517965630/...
- statguy 9y agoThere are other ways of arriving at it, apart from tax-filings, such as cars/electronics/consumer goods purchased.
- itissid 9y agoIt is hard though Car owner ship is < 2% in india[1] And Cars is probably the second most expensive asset after a home (assuming stock and bonds are not really owned by that many people). [1] https://www.fastcompany.com/40422065/inside-indias-plans-to-leapfrog-the-western-model-of-car-ownership https://www.fastcompany.com/40422065/inside-indias-plans-to-...
- geodel 9y agoThere is a disconnect between hard economic data that NPR talks about and media/marketers/financial analysts like HSBC talk. So a person hustling wares on a moped for 12 hrs a day, making $2-3K per annum is poor enough to not file for income tax. But for media hype generators if that person ate out at McDonalds on his kid's birthday, he would be the face of new, confident, aspirational middle class who enjoys international cuisines.
- dd0123 9y agoSo, The Economist proved Trump was right. It's a shit hole.
- ravirajx7 9y agoFew points which i would like to add: 1. India does have very large middle class population and most of their income is unaccounted. 2. Majority of middle class Indians who belong to certain religion/caste hide their income so as to get many freebies and reservation benefits. 3. Very few rich individuals pay taxes and file correct income tax return. Government is very much responsible for this as filling a simple itr form consist of many different sections and people avoid getting into official paperwork. 4. Though poor people are given various subsidies on paper but because of lack of education they barely know all the scehmes running around them and politicians eat most of their money. 5. Longer judicial proceedings make it even more tough for the system to catch corrupt individuals and implement good policies.
- vsundar 9y ago> India does have very large middle class population and most of their income is unaccounted. At least until Nov 2016, wouldn't this income have been cash given that cash transactions accounted for 95+% of transactions[1]? (Percentage by total amount would have been useful too but I couldn't find that stat.) If these were 'unaccounted' then demonetization would have caught that. But only 1% of banned currency wasn't deposited (as of Aug 2017) [2]. The initial estimates given were for about 20% to not show up [3]. That didn't turn out to be the case. So while I'm sure there is unaccounted income, I'm not sure this is most of the income of a very large middle class. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/12/14/inside-indias-cashless-revolution/#38f374fe4d12 https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/12/14/inside-i... [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Indian_banknote_demonetisation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Indian_banknote_demonetis... [3] https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/12/10/indias-central-bank-denied-its-big-payday-as-demonetization-flops/#6a440eb65494 https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/12/10/indias-c...
- ravirajx7 9y agoVery good point but i believe the cash in hand doesn't account for all the money you have. There are many facets for accountability. And I don't think that any middle class person having more cash in hand while exchanging his cash could potentially prove that his money is accountable because there exist some form of money which he has given to some other person or may be has invested in some business. My point is by totalling out just the amount of cash maybe 5-10k rupees the income cannot be accounted.
- oarla 9y agoThis article is very weird. It's written by someone in a first world country, presumably USA, for companies based in West(Amazon, Starbucks , IKEA etc) on how to monetize in India. The primary complain is that India doesn't have enough people who can spend money on certain luxuries, when compared to China. I find it hard to believe that companies had to make only minor tweaks to their business model to succeed in China. For ex, Amazon is making a "killing" in China, by doing exactly what it did to bolster it's business in USA. http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-is-struggling-to-find-its-place-china-2017-8 http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-is-struggling-to-find-... It's no wonder that businesses have to adapt to local markets. Lamenting that there are too many poor people is a bad idea, because as many comments here have mentioned, it's a different mindset in India when it comes to spending than the West. If companies can adapt to break into the market, let them. But claiming that its not worth it, would be a bad choice.
- lappet 9y agoI don't know how to better put this, but the Economist comes off as very condescending whenever it talks about countries not in the West. India doesn't have a hole where its middle class should be - it is just smaller than what you would expect for a country of its size. I grew up in India and probably went from lower middle class to a upper middle class with time. The Indian middle class is not on par with with the American middle class - they can be much poorer, and have different priorities and often span a wide spectrum. And to be honest, I don't see why rampant consumerism is good for any society. India has a huge native market for Indian consumers - it is the fact that so many people cannot afford those goods is appalling.
- debt 9y agoThe argument they’re making is that those people should be able to afford those goods and the fact that they cannot at this point in time means there’s a massive hole where there should be a middle class. This assessment seems to suggest that either the Indian economy has stalled or there’s rampant corruption or both or something else altogether entirely. It seems they’re merely making an observation.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- pm90 9y agoSpeaking as someone who grew up in India, I've noticed a very real lack of understanding of non-western countries by Western media (specifically India, but I'm guessing if there is so much misunderstanding about an English speaking country, probably more so about other non-English speaking ones). I was rather appalled by articles in NYT, Times and Economist in particular. Sometimes even BBC, although that usually got it mostly right. I have noticed that NYT has become a LOT better in its coverage of India recently. I wonder if that's because they've hired quality talent in the country? Whatever the reason, I'm glad for that change.
- therealdrag0 9y ago
- neel8986 9y agoEntire benefit of globalization in India has only reached the top 10% (or maybe 1%). If you think about Indian exports it is mostly concentrated in IT and high skill crafts like jewelry. Only a few Indians can take benefit of that. What we need is a system which can mass export cheap goods like clothes or shoes. China and Korea have crawled out of poverty by following this simple formula of exporting cheap goods which need some basic skills. But sadly even Indias much smaller neighbor like Bangladesh is doing far better in such sectors. Archaic labor laws are still holding back India in mass manufacturing
- statguy 9y agoAutomation is rapidly closing that window.
- senatorobama 9y agoSad. As an NRI, I keep thinking about moving back to India to help improve the situation of my homeland.
- ravivooda 9y agoNo worries! History teaches us that people do move from destitute to better situations. India is sure as hell a gigantic mammoth task, but not giving up. Unless you have kids, I would suggest you to try moving back and attempt a helping hand. If we fail, we can again look for other opportunities. Just a personal perspective.
- senatorobama 9y agoAre there any promising startups in India working on anti-poverty, anti-hunger schemes?
- pm90 9y agoThere are, but I don't think you should be seeking them unless you are willing to take a significant hit in your quality of life. Generally speaking, Western economies compensate much better for being highly educated or advanced scientific/engineering skillsets. The rule of thumb I've come up with, after talking about it a lot with other NRI's, is to go back only if you really "love" your home city/country etc. e.g. my cousin went back because he simply wouldn't be happy if he couldn't visit the extended family at least once a month (i.e. very lonely) and really missed the food. If you go back and work in a job you don't like, YOU will be unhappy. That is perhaps the most important factor in making these decisions... you cannot help others unless you are yourself happy and content.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- naruvimama 9y agoA movies has been made out of the aspirational eating out part https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSt5_uw49Mc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSt5_uw49Mc
- known 9y agoCould be due to http://www.livemint.com/Leisure/3u2QUPuXBEFPaBQXU2R8mJ/When-will-the-BrahminBania-hegemony-end.html http://www.livemint.com/Leisure/3u2QUPuXBEFPaBQXU2R8mJ/When-...
- pankajdoharey 9y agoThe state of indian population is so abysmal and all Modi/Shah/yogi talk about is Ram temple, construction of Statue of religious figurines, hindu muslim love affairs, national vs anti national and other such non sense. such a shame on the government.
- dafty4 9y agoSounds like a very interesting article, but could you modify the title to include '[paywall]'? I realize that paid news is the way things are going, but we don't have to give paywalls free clicks, do we?
- YetAnotherNick 9y agoTo most of the comments here, inequality is not the same as poverty. Everyone agrees India is poor, but most stats(except this) don't support India has too much inequality for its league.