• Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Arvind Subramanian's research paper on India's GDP has Indian economists honking like startled geese

prasad1

Active member
Once, in the early 1970s, I asked a very learned uncle why India had fallen off the knowledge map after the Gupta Empire declined. He thought for so long that I was about to repeat my question when he replied.

“Because,” he said, “Indian intellect busied itself with the arcane, which as it became even more arcane became even more irrelevant. The method was tarka-vitarka – argument and counter-argument – which had but one purpose: vanquishing your rival’s point of view by debate.”

He went on to explain how the Brahmins, who had a near-complete monopoly on knowledge, busied themselves with increasingly esoteric questions about the cosmos, epistemology, teleology and suchlike. “It was useless knowledge from society’s point of view and left us in a weakened state.”

I am recalling this conversation -- which I have summarised hugely -- because of the research paper the former Chief Economic Adviser to the Finance Ministry, Arvind Subramanian, has written for Harvard University. In it, he says two things: One, that India’s GDP growth rate was massively over-estimated between 2011-17 and, two that this calls for a thorough overhaul of the Indian statistical system.

On the latter, everyone is agreed and indeed that is why the Indian Statistical Commission was set up about a decade ago. It has been trying as hard as any such body can. Its path has been strewn with administrative difficulties and turf wars within the small ecosystem of Indian statistics.

But it is the claim, and not the exhortation, that has caught the world’s attention. It is like when the American singer Madonna when she posed in the nude. Her intent was to startle. Mr Subramanian has had exactly the same effect. Not surprisingly India’s economists are honking like startled geese.

At the eye of the storm is not the issue but Mr Subramanian.

 
Mr Subramanian says GDP grew at best at the rate of 4-5 per cent between 2011-2017. Official statistics say it grew it by over 7 per cent.

Pronab Sen, former chief statistician and head of the statistical commission, has told The Hindu that Mr Subramanian’s method is flawed and that therefore he has arrived at a flawed conclusion.

“If you think about GDP growth, it can come from three distinct factors,” Dr. Sen told The Hindu. “One is growth in volumes, the amount that is produced. The second is growth in productivity, and the third is improvement in product quality. What Arvind has done is that the indicators he has used are all volume indicators, and having done that, he has said they were very strongly correlated prior to 2011 but not after that period.”

He went to pick many more technical holes in Mr Subramanian’s paper. For example, what happens to the Indian GDP growth rate when the price of imported crude oil increases? It declines – and vice versa. But what’s the use of econometrics to find out what any shopkeeper can tell you for free?

Doubtless there will be an inconclusive war of words now. The question is to what end.

 
Here’s a hard fact: Indian GDP data barely covers half the transactions or level of economic activity in the country. The other half, or perhaps 60 per cent, is in the so-called informal sector about which whatever is known is mostly wild guesswork. Is it any wonder that we keep having these debates?

The other thing is about methodology of which there are two – GDP at factor cost and GDP at market prices. At factor cost, it excludes taxes; at market prices, taxes are included. If you think this is complex, try this: GDP at market prices excludes subsidies, which means it is net government revenue that you are concerned with. The more rapidly this revenue grows, the faster GDP will grow.

This is what has happened after 2011 when the government started raising indirect tax rates back to the pre-2009 level. The new method — GDP at market prices — has merely captured that increase.

But that’s not all. GDP growth rates also measure the changes in value addition in production of manufacturing and services. Thus, if you spent Rs 100 on inputs and sold the output at Rs 120, value addition is Rs 20. If the next year you spent only Rs 95 and sold at the same price, the growth rate will go up.

And here lies a paradox, as Mr Sen points out: if global prices start rising, say of oil, India’s GDP growth rate will come down! It is high now because global prices of all commodities are low.

To this I can add my own puzzle: can an economy that produces no goods or services but is nevertheless taxed by the government, grow? The answer is yes it can.

Suppose you go into a restaurant to eat but before entering you have to pay an entry tax levied by the government. However, you find that the restaurant has run out of food, which means no output has been produced, and you come out having spent nothing. Yet, the government has collected Rs 100.

Now if it raises the tax to Rs 110 the next year and the same thing happened — no food, no bill — the economy would have grown at 10 per cent without producing anything at all.

 
But why is this all coming up after 70 yrs when these govt nos were accepted by all local and international agencies without any questions?

1. What was the need to change growth calculation methods ? Why waste so much effort and time on such wasteful exercise when the govt should be focused on development, Sabka sath ..??

2. When the GDP calculation method was changed, why were independent agencies not called to vet the revised process ?

3. Why was the 45 yr high nasso jobless report not released on time before elections ? Same was released after elections ? What happen to all the criticism by the govt spokespersons that the reports are wrong etc.. ?

4. Why was the white paper on demo impact not released even after 2 yrs ?

So the gobt mucked up the economy and then wasted enormous effort and time to hide the pushnikai in Thayir Sadam ?

The issue is not Mr. Subramaniam, it is the govt !!
 

Latest ads

Back
Top