[dragracer567]

Looks like it's not just the Chinese Yuan that has gotten a boost thanks to sanctions on Russia. It seems Russian diamonds are being traded on the international market using Indian rupees - probably because most diamonds are processed in India anyway.

Another currency that has seen a boost is the UAE dirhams which Russia is using for oil sales including to India. The UAE dirhams is fully pegged to the US dollar which provides it with an inherent stability.

[guru_max]

Originally Posted by Samurai

The current count of white collar workers in India is less than 2 crores.
The current count of blue collar workers in India is around 40 crores, give or take a few crores.

That is why we are not facing South Korea's problem yet. However, kids of lots of blue collar workers are getting educated rather well. I often talk to Uber taxi drivers about their kids, and practically everyone says their kid is either studying in professional college, or planning to do so. BTW, my cook's daughter is preparing for IPS since a year at some coaching college. All the kids of farm workers I knew growing up are all now graduates and working in top companies. Just last week I was talking a guy, who used to be our farm hand, his mom too was our farm hand, but his daughter is a MBA. As a rural employer for 16 years, I used to hire plenty of graduates who were kids of blue collar workers.

Considering we have so few white collar jobs compared blue collared jobs (1:20 ratio), even if 1 crore kids of 40 crore blue collar workers enter the white collar market (and they will), there will be very high unemployment. Hopefully, many blue collar jobs will vanish and there will be many more white collar jobs. It happened in the 90s when India entered IT revolution.

This is already happening for the past few years ( or close to a decade). Instead of every engineer or a graduate getting a job, now only those from good colleges get white collar jobs barring few exceptions.

[V.Narayan]

Q1 GDP growth 13.5%::Finance Secretary states, on track for a growth of 7%+ this year

Morgan Stanley revises GDP growth for FY23 to 7.2%pa

https://www.business-standard.com/ar...3100703_1.html
https://www.business-standard.com/ar...1800442_1.html

At 13.5% growth in Q1 (April to June) the signs for the economy look heartening even after we factor in the fact that Q1 FY21-22 witnessed the horrid second wave of covid19. At even a 6% growth for few years we should get past Germany and in a decade Japan. Of course there are many risks of stability and consistency of economic good sense and global geo-political stability. I was never particularly enamoured by Late Rakesh Jhunjhunwala but one thing he used to say stuck in my head that if you have to invest for the best long term growth invest in the Indian stock market.

Chart below showing GDP of top ten economies in 2021. In FY2023-24 India is expected to be around $3.65 trillion depending on whom we listen to. It gives me great pride to observe this journey from the runaway inflation of the 1970s, to the IMF bail out in 1981 to the bankruptcy of 1991 to where we are today.

[am1m]

With reference to this piece of news:

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com...w/94085289.cms


"Yes Bank will soon declare JC Flowers ARC as the winner and will transfer its distressed loans to the firm, making it a virtually zero bad loans bank"

"The private bank, which received an offer of ₹11,183 crore for its distressed loan portfolio from JC Flowers ARC,"


Now I can get that an asset reconstruction company probably has more tricks up its sleeve to recover or re-balance bad debt. And I guess picking up 48k Cr worth of loans (can they be called assets, considering they are bad loans?) at about 11k Cr might be a good deal.

But what can the company do that Yes Bank hasn't already tried to get the money back? And how does this work for the bank? It's still a loss isn't it? They were supposed to get back 48k cr but are getting 11k Cr.

(Thanks in advance for any explanations!)

[Linuskm]

Originally Posted by am1m

But what can the company do that Yes Bank hasn't already tried to get the money back? And how does this work for the bank? It's still a loss isn't it? They were supposed to get back 48k cr but are getting 11k Cr.

(Thanks in advance for any explanations!)

Let me take a stab at it , Yes Bank core competencies is banking, recovery is not their core operations and is fraught with legal and compliance risks, so worst case they will write off and claim insurance if they have any on these losses.

For the other company even if they are able to recover 50c in a dollar still they end up with profit, worst case they can lease out the premises and get monthly income.

Hopefully experts in this forum will have more insights

[Chetan_Rao]

Originally Posted by Linuskm

...Yes Bank core competencies is banking, recovery is not their core operations and is fraught with legal and compliance risks...

Needing to recover a high volume of NPAs, surely points to their lack of competence in core banking too, i.e. the ability to lend in a reasonably secure, recoverable manner to begin with?

[Gsynch]

By 2027, India will be a very comfortable #3 Globally. Aim should be to go to #2 and #1 by 2042/2047 or earlier and that would be really ambitious, not impossible but ambitious.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by Gsynch

By 2027, India will be a very comfortable #3 Globally. Aim should be to go to #2 and #1 by 2042/2047 or earlier and that would be really ambitious, not impossible but ambitious.

I am waiting for India to enter the top 100 countries in per capita income PPP. Hopefully that will happen in the next 15 years or so. I think we are somewhere like 125-130 rank in the world now.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by carboy

I am waiting for India to enter the top 100 countries in per capita income PPP. Hopefully that will happen in the next 15 years or so. I think we are somewhere like 125-130 rank in the world now.

Ah, I thought India was already ranked 3rd in PPP. What are you talking about?

[carboy]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Ah, I thought India was already ranked 3rd in PPP. What are you talking about?

Per capita Income PPP (i.e. per capita GDP). Not GDP itself.

More population means more GDP. GDP records are meaningless. Per Capita is the relevant data to check.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by carboy

Per capita Income PPP (i.e. per capita GDP).

Oh, you are referring to this table.

This is a list where the first 10 countries have less population than Bangalore. The richest country in the history of the world is not in the top 10. Where the 2nd richest country China is in 79th place.

This ranking is pointless for a highly populated country like India. These are number games and don't indicate much about how most people live. India has to increase its GDP by 50% to reach the 100 club, and became 3rd richest nation. It still doesn't mean much to common people.

I rather focus on Gini index, which refers to inequity within a country. In that list, USA is almost at the same level at India. That is shameful for USA, actually. Lowering the Gini index will actually mean something to most people in the country.

https://www.gfmag.com/global-data/ec...uality-ranking

[carboy]

Originally Posted by Samurai

This is a list where the first 10 countries have less population than Bangalore.

How is it relevant? Per Capita Data is normalized for population - i.e. you can ignore the population.

Originally Posted by Samurai

The richest country in the history of the world is not in the top 10. Where the 2nd richest country China is in 79th place.

That's because the countries you consider "richest" aren't the richest.
If you have a family of 10 people each of them earning 100 Rs per month, there by having a family income of Rs 1000.
And you have another family of 1 person earning 700 Rs per month.
Which is the richer family?

Originally Posted by Samurai

This ranking is pointless for a highly populated country like India.

It's the only ranking which matters. GDP is a pointless ranking because it keeps growing with population. Where people are rich or poor depends on per capita. India has 10x GDP of Portugal. Would the average person prefer to live in India or Portugal? Hey, I just checked & even Pakistan has a higher GDP than Portugal.

Originally Posted by Samurai

India has to increase its GDP by 50% to reach the 100 club]

Exactly! That shows how poor we are.

Originally Posted by Samurai

It still doesn't mean much to common people.

GDP is what is meaningless to the common man.

Originally Posted by Samurai

I rather focus on Gini index, which refers to inequity within a country. In that list, USA is almost at the same level at India.

Let's again take an example.
2 countries
In one country - the richest earns Rs 1 Lakh, the poorest earns 10K.
2nd country - the richest earns Rs 10K & the poorest earns 1K
Inequity is the same (Richest is 10x of poor) but where would you prefer to be?

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by carboy

How is it relevant? Per Capita Data is normalized for population - i.e. you can ignore the population.

You are truly getting lost in numbers. You are using statistics without understanding what those numbers mean.

You can't ignore population. Lots of information is skewed by population. When you consider any dataset, the distribution of data across population has to be considered.

If you are considering the heights of all students in a class, the difference between the tallest and the shortest will be less than 50%. Here the difference between mean and median will be negligible. However, if you take the family income of all students in a class, the variation between wealthiest and the poorest could be 100 times or more. The difference between mean and median will be very wide. In fact, median is a much better indication of family wealth of most students. It removes the impact of outliers who skew the data. This is usually the case with small populations.

However, when you consider much higher population, the effect of outliers will diminish, mean and median will be close. Therefore, when you compare two datasets with very different populations, you should compare median rather than average. Therefore, when I see comparison of average income between countries 10-1000 times difference in population, I take it with a bucket of salt.

Originally Posted by carboy

Let's again take an example.
2 countries
In one country - the richest earns Rs 1 Lakh, the poorest earns 10K.
2nd country - the richest earns Rs 10K & the poorest earns 1K
Inequity is the same (Richest is 10x of poor) but where would you prefer to be?

Is that how inequity is calculated in your world? You are only considering outliers, which is meaningless indication of the income of most. Also it says nothing about purchasing power. If the second country has 10x times PPP than the first country, while having 1/10th median income, then they are similar in lifestyle.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by Samurai

You are truly getting lost in numbers. You are using statistics without understanding what those numbers mean.

No, you are.

Originally Posted by Samurai

If you are considering the heights of all students in a class, the difference between the tallest and the shortest will be less than 50%.

When you are comparing GDP to see who is richest, what you are doing is adding up heights of all people in each class & comparing different classes one with 10 people, one with 100 people, one with a 1000 people & one with 10000 people. And claiming the class with 10000 people is the "tallest" class because sum of heights is maximum.

__[re other stuff]__
Median income of India is 2 Lakh per year. I am not sure what argument you are trying to make with median. It's one of the poorest there also. Not in top 100 richest.

Re PPP, I am not sure what your argument is - is the average Indian or Pakistani richer PPP than Portugal inspite of having higher GDP than Portugal?

I am stopping here - I have made my point - people can make their own conclusions.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by Gsynch

By 2027, India will be a very comfortable #3 Globally. Aim should be to go to #2 and #1 by 2042/2047 or earlier and that would be really ambitious, not impossible but ambitious.

Genuine Question: Can the experts throw light on how much of our jump from 2014 to 2022 come from the changes that were made in the way our GDP is counted? It is not as if our growth in 2012 to 2020 was earth shattering. It was good but not outstanding. France, UK and Italy faltering and Brazil & Russia sinking has contributed to our ranking more than our economic policies. Regardless of what the much manipulated 'ease of doing business' index might say my experience indicates that the bureaucracy on all economic interface with the Govt has increased by a degree in the last 10 years. And our Govt debt is climbing dangerously such that tax revenues in future years will struggle to service the debt.

The chart indicates we were 10th placed in 2012. Fact is we have often reached the 10th spot in the last 50 years and then slipped. We were 10th in nominal GDP in 1970 too. So while I'm happy that we are now 5th in the GDP rankings I'll keep my fingers crossed for another 2 years till we truly get past France & the UK. India, France & the UK have been exchanging spots in the 5th, 6th & 7th place with each other for the past 4 years.

Very roughly 50% of our households (note not per capita, but households) have an income below Rs 200,000 a year or Rs 17,000 a month. To this category all the arguments in the posts above of what to measure and how to measure means little. Only the two square meals a day counts, little else. We the upper classes in the cities {everyone on team BHP for example} have stopped meeting or seeing this 50% so like in USA we presume they don't exist. When I was a child 50 to 55 years ago poverty was on the streets that reminded us we were a poor country. Now it is easy to forget. The poorest person most of us deal with most of the time is our maid or a peon/runner in our offices. They are not in that bottom 50%. The GINI index is some indicator of distribution of equality/inequality of income. But in a country as vast and complex as India really GINI state wise makes more sense.