Comments on Global Economy Matters: An Overheated Debate About India Overheating

As I've repeated in few other places, The Economis...

2007-02-12T12:40:33.279-08:00

As I've repeated in few other places, The Economist & many Westerners have troubles with digesting the new growth of India. Many of their data and observations are hoplessly skewed, reaffirming stereotyped thoughts and remarkably outdated.

The fact that Indian companies have become leaders in Steel & Aluminum in the last 1 week, has not been covered in any major US publication. The implications of this for a nation that is stereotyped as a country that doesnt know manufacturing, can be enormous. While, it might be a drain of resources temporarily, in the long term it could help those companies to flex their muscles for bigger projects in India.

While, the west is totally enamored by the small scale Chinese producers of cheap stuff, they dont realize that great nations are not produced by cheap shoes & steel. Great nations - from US, Japan to Germany & UK are produced by great enterprises & by the process of entrepreneurship over the last 150 years.

It is here that India has stunning potential as its children occupy the board room of every major global company and that starts one of the highest number of companies in US, that produces one of the highest number of MBAs, financial experts & economists apart from Chip Designers & Software Engineers...

Great nations are built by great neurons, and if India has it, I'm sure India has, infrastructure, investments & inflation are just short term irritants.

Hi Glenn, Thanks for the comment. Just one detail...

2007-02-07T00:26:26.944-08:00

Hi Glenn,

Thanks for the comment. Just one detail, this post is from Nanubhai (although I obviously agree with much of it).

I was a mere intermediary here, since Nanubhai was having a hectic day and I transferred to post over from IEB, and forgot to change my log-in to admin. Oh well, these things happen.

Having said all of this, I more or less agree with your take on the Economist, although I would say it has gotten worse of late.

But I think the point you make about them being jornalists is well taken, and in this sense I don't really hold them too responsible for their actions, since this is all now a very difficult process to read, and things are moving rapidly, and life is notably moving ahead more quickly than theory is etc etc.

Again, the Economist is not alone here, as Claus has pointed out on Japan the Morgan Stanley GEF had to apologise to its readers for mis-reading the BoJ rate decision, but again, over at MS they are not theorists but merely analysts.

best wishes,

Edward

Edward, You say "until recently, the Economist ha...

2007-02-06T04:31:36.525-08:00

Edward,

You say "until recently, the Economist has not always been prone to such error"

Well I've been reading the economist for 10 years or so - and yes, its always been prone to errors.

And its always after the headlines, the stories. You must assess the economist as a piece of economic journalism, and not a serious source of economic analysis.

They quite often get it wrong, or grab something by the tail rather than the head.

And they are not averse to making bold front pages - such as the one denouncing Berlusconi a few years ago.

Having said that I enjoy reading th economist - a lot of useful journalism in the one publication. I just wouldn't put all my stock in what's written there.