Indus-ian

Indus-ian t1_j6nf9fe wrote

I didn’t claim an immediate prosperity from a colonial rule.
I can’t really fault the economic policies from independence to around 60’s. What caused the slow growth was a bunch of economic policies that included nationalisation in the 70s. That crippled the economy and almost went bankrupt in late eighties and nineties.

7

Indus-ian t1_j6mnw75 wrote

There are charts which plot how many people were pulled out of poverty, it has consistently been on the increase over the years. Way more than when india was wallowing in socialist policies.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_India

> India has achieved annual growth exceeding 7 percent over the last 15 years and continues to pull millions of people out of poverty, according to the World Bank. The country has halved its poverty rate over the past three decades and has seen strong improvements in most human development outcomes, a report by the international financial institution has found. Growth is expected to continue and the elimination of extreme poverty in the next decade is within reach, said the bank, which warned that the country's development trajectory faces considerable challenges.[1

15

Indus-ian t1_j6mk7vv wrote

India experienced a socialist system for its first five decades which made people poor. With the opening up of economy, lot of people were pulled out of poverty.
But here the focus seems to be wondering why the rich got richer rather than thinking did the poor got better in the same time? The answer is yes.

28

Indus-ian t1_j6her5a wrote

Perhaps. So I wouldn’t be so keen on putting my nation’s security in the hands of some guy who represents 50000 people who may not be able to locate india on a map.
If India has to shop around because of them, so be it.
Edit: forgot to add, there is no welcoming here. India has been a democracy for quite a while

58