If they can only fix their corruption, bureaucracy and the totally broken governmental system, thousands of entrepreneurs can emerge and create millions of gadgets...
If they can only fix their corruption, bureaucracy and the totally broken governmental system, thousands of entrepreneurs can emerge and create millions of gadgets...
Subsidized government programs exist because this is where the market fails and governments have a larger and more important mission than just maximizing profits and putting on fancy keynotes for drooling fans.
GDP per capita is around $1300 precisely because the governmnet always felt it had a LARGER and MORE important mission than (simply doing their job with no corruption). And these larger and more important missions almost always end up channeling tax payer's money into politicians via some crazy project like this
While corruption in socialism is bad, corruption in capitalism is just as bad. Even the most developed capitalist countries have failed to remove corruption. (hence the 2008 subprime crisis)
To India's credit, its socialist tendencies kept the country unaffected from 2008 subprime crisis.
No boom, no bust....
> While corruption in socialism is bad, corruption in capitalism is just as bad. Even the most developed capitalist countries have failed to remove corruption. (hence the 2008 subprime crisis)
The 2008 "subprime crisis" wasn't capitalist corruption, it was govt corruption. The US govt decided to subsidize home ownership via various means, which created a property bubble. Bubbles eventually pop, and the govt then decided to "socialize" the losses and try to restore the bubble.
The Irish govt went one step further - it decided to guarantee all bank losses.
That's not capitalism.
This snippet from the Wikipedia entry for capitalism synthesizes it pretty well: "Classical liberals such as Mises, Rand, and Rothbard define capitalism as a market system with no interference by States (laissez faire). Some define capitalism as a system governed by capital accumulation regardless of the legal ownership titles."
anamax is referring to what could be referred to "classical capitalism," while you, ramchip, seem to be referring to "state capitalism".
I meant to say India was unaffected from 'global recession'. Obviously there was no housing bubble in India.
"...it was govt corruption."
You mean in a crony-capitalism govt alone is guilty? How?
Things are bad enough for the vast majority. If left to the "market" 3/4 of the population would be starving.
By the way, there is no such thing as government without corruption. There is always corruption. Always.
If India now creates a national or city wide free wifi network, their economy would skyrocket in the next two decades.
Also, if this device proves to be the best way to deliver essential public services (e.g. education, tele-medicine, etc.), it most certainly is the job of the government to make tablets. If this is a platform on which people can innovate and build apps on top of, it is not a stretch to compare this to US federal funding of basic science.
May be those who come out of such an education system will know better than working within a corrupt, bureaucratic and broken system.
But I've always wondered, what came first, the corrupt government, or citizens who don't pay tax?
I see the same thing in Greece. The government is corrupt, but the people don't pay taxes.
Does the government become corrupt because there isn't enough money to pay civil servants, or does do people refuse to pay taxes because they will be misused by a corrupt government?