India: another China or another Brazil?

It’s five years since the right-wing nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), led by Narendra Modi swept back to power in India’s Lok Sabha (parliament) elections.  Now in the world’s third largest economy (in PPP terms), over 800m Indians have voted in elections lasting six weeks to re-elect its leaders.

The BJP ruled before, from 1998 to 2004. But the BJP then proved to be an unreliable tool for Indian capital, riddled as it is with former members of what is basically a Hindu religious fascist party, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), an organisation modelled on Mussolini’s Black Brigades. Modi was a long time member of the RSS who then moved seamlessly into the BJP.  But in the last five years, Modi is now seen as leading a ‘business-friendly’ government with what he likes to call Modinomics.

Modinomics boils down to neoliberal economic policies aiming to raise the rate of exploitation of labour so that the profitability of capital is boosted and thus provide an incentive to invest.  To do this, Modi has introduced new sales taxes on the population and abolished high-denomination banknotes in an attempt to ‘demonetise’ the economy and put the banks more firmly in control of credit.

In the first years of Modinomics it seemed that India was leaping forward, with real GDP growth even faster than in China and with rising incomes for the rural workers and farmers that the BJP relies on principally for its votes, while being backed by big business and Indian capital.  But those early years have given way to increasing problems.  The world’s fastest growing major economy is now headed for a slowdown.  The official economic growth figures slowed to 6.6% in the three months to December, the slowest in six quarters and now the same rate as in China.

And these GDP figures are dubious anyway. Back in 2015, India’s statistical office suddenly announced revised figures for GDP.  That boosted GDP growth by over 2% pts a year overnight.  Nominal growth in national output was now being ‘deflated’ into real terms by a price deflator based on wholesale production prices and not on consumer prices in the shops, so that the real GDP figure rose by some way. Moreover, this revision was not applied to the whole economic series, so nobody knows how the current growth figure compares with before 2015. Also the GDP figures are not ‘seasonally adjusted’ to take into account any changes in the number of days in a month or quarter or weather etc. Seasonal adjustment would have shown India’s real GDP growth well below the official figure.  A better gauge of growth may be found in the industrial production data.  And that has just hit zero.

Sales of cars and SUVs have slumped to a seven-year-low. Tractors and two-wheelers sales are down. Net profits for 334 companies (excluding banks and financials) are down 18% year-on-year, according to the Financial Express newspaper.  The vehicle industry’s rapid expansion under the Modi government had prompted predictions that India would soon overtake Japan and Germany to become the world’s third-biggest motor market. But last month, passenger vehicle sales were 17.7% lower than a year before.

The car sector has become one of the most prominent victims of a debt market crunch that began in the ‘shadow banking’ market in India last September, when defaults by infrastructure and finance group IL&FS triggered sharp outflows from mutual funds. That drained money from the commercial paper market, a major source of funding for nonbank financial companies that had driven the growth of loans as they took market share from the ailing state-controlled banks. The so-called NBFCs were particularly active in areas such as vehicle loans and lending to small businesses.

That’s not all. In March, passenger growth in the world’s fastest growing aviation market expanded at the slowest pace in nearly six years. Demand for bank credit has spluttered. Hindustan Unilever, India’s leading maker of fast moving consumer goods, has reported March quarter revenue growth of just 7%, its weakest in 18 months.

It seems that middle-class ‘consumer boom’ initiated by Modi has burnt itself out.  There is a fall in both urban and rural incomes. A crop glut has seen farm incomes drop. Kaushik Basu, former chief economist of the World Bank and professor of economics at Cornell University, believes the slowdown is “much more serious” than he initially believed. Export growth has been close to zero for the last five years. And now the domestic consumer boom is weakening.

Unlike China, India seems to be heading into what the World Bank has called a ‘middle-income’ trap, where the vast majority of population remain in poverty while the top 10% live well and spend, but there is no investment or drive to deliver employment, training, education and housing for the rest.  India will end up like Brazil, not China, Korea or Japan – just going nowhere.  Under Modi, unemployment is at an all-time high. The “Make in India” plan seems to have flopped. And no Boeing, Airbus or Apple has come to invest in factories in India.

Two-thirds of Indian workers are employed in small businesses with less than ten workers, where labour rights are ignored – indeed most are paid on a casual basis and in cash rupees, the so-called ‘informal’ sector that avoids taxes and regulations. India has the largest ‘informal’ sector among the main so-called emerging economies.  But small businesses are not very productive.

Indeed, India has the lowest productivity levels in Asia.  Between 1950 and 1980, labour productivity growth averaged a meagre 1.7%. The two decades to the turn of the millennium saw that average more than double to 3.8%. This was the period when India’s manufacturing and services sectors took off, leaching labour from the lower productivity agricultural sector. Labour productivity growth peaked at 10.2% in 2010 and has been on the decline since.  In 2016, it stood at 4.75%. This does not bode well for achieving the growth targets that are needed to raise living standards.

Productivity would rise if generally underemployed peasants could move to the cities and get manufacturing jobs in the cities. This is how China has transformed its workforce, of course, to be exploited more by capital, but also to raise productivity and wages. China has done this through state planning of labour migration and huge infrastructure building. India cannot, so its rate of urbanisation is way behind that of China. Indian and foreign capital are still not fully exploiting the huge reserves of mainly youthful labour for profit. As a result, employment growth is pathetically slow. An estimated 10-12m young Indian people are entering the workforce each year but many cannot find jobs due to their paucity or because they lack the right skills.

Already, India is one of the most unequal societies in the world.  The richest 1% of Indians now own 52% of the country’s wealth, according to the latest data on global wealth from Credit Suisse Group. The richest 10% of Indians have increased their share of the pie from 68.8% in 2010 to 77% by 2018.  In sharp contrast, the bottom half of the Indian people own a mere 4% of the country’s wealth.

The Gini coefficient is one way of measuring inequality, with a reading of 100% denoting perfect inequality and zero indicating perfect equality. According to Credit Suisse, the Gini wealth coefficient in India has gone up from 81.3% in 2013 to 85.4% in 2018, which shows inequality of income is very high and rising.

As the Credit Suisse report says: “While wealth has been rising in India, not everyone has shared in this growth. There is still considerable wealth poverty, reflected in the fact that 91% of the adult population has wealth below $10,000. At the other extreme, a small fraction of the population (0.6% of adults) has a net worth over $100,000.”

And there is the issue of basic resources for India’s 1.2 billion people. Mechanically pumped groundwater now provides 85% of India’s drinking water and is the main water source for all uses. North India’s groundwater is declining at one of the fastest rates in the world and many areas may have already passed “peak water”. The World Bank predicts that a majority of India’s underground water resources will reach a critical state within 20 years.

The big demand from Indian capital is to cut back the size of the state. Bureaucratic and inefficient as it is, India’s central and state government, as well as state enterprises set up in the early days of ‘socialist’ India, have provided some solidity to India’s economy. But the multi-nationals and large Indian capitalists want this to go. Central and state government run up significant annual budget deficits because they subsidise food and fuel for the millions of poorer Indians. Those deficits are funded by borrowing and the cost of that borrowing has steadily eaten into the available revenue from taxes, leaving little for education, health or transport.

Government tax revenues are low because Indian companies pay little tax and rich individuals even less. Inequality of income in India is not as high as in China, Brazil or South Africa, but it is probably higher than the official gini index because of huge hidden income among the rich and it has been rising.  According to the OECD, income inequality has doubled in India since the early 1990s. The richest 10% of Indians earn more than 12 times as much money as the poorest 10%, compared to roughly six times in 1990.

This inequality is not down to the Modi government alone.  Previous Congress-led governments perpetuated this inequality too – indeed, under the corrupt Gandhi dynasty, made it worse.  That’s why the BJP is probably going to stay in power if with a reduced number of seats.

The real problem for Indian capitalism is the falling profitability of its business sector.  The rate of profit is high by international standards, like many ‘emerging economies that have masses of cheap labour brought in from rural areas.  But, over the decades, rising investment in capital equipment relative to labour has started to create a reserve army of labour alongside falling profitability.

Indian capital’s profitability had been falling steadily (if from a high ‘emerging market’ level) even before the global economic slump started. It has fallen further since and is now some 20% below levels in the 1980s. The boom double-digit growth years of the early 2000s, when all the talk was about India’s software outsourcing industry and new auto companies, seem unlikely to return without drastic reductions in the share of value going to labour.

Source: Extended Penn World tables and Penn World Tables 9.0, author’s calculations.

The answer for Indian capital and endorsed by Modi is privatisation, cuts in food and fuel subsidies and a new sales tax, a tax that is the most regressive way to get revenue as it hits the poor the most.  The aim here, as it always is with neoliberal economic policy, is to raise the rate of exploitation of labour so that the profitability of capital is boosted and thus provide an incentive to invest, something Indian capital is refusing to do right now.

Just as in 2014, India’s electorate are faced with a choice between a corrupt, family-run party backed by big business and landholder interests and an extreme nationalist party (with increasing backing from big business and foreign investors).  For the moment, Modi wins their vote (just).

18 thoughts on “India: another China or another Brazil?

  1. About China, we are told it prospered “through state planning of labour migration.” The plan, if any, was that the state broke social welfare guarantees in the countryside (the so-called iron rice bowl); allowed migration by unplanned individual choice into cities but denied immigrants city residency rights and housing purchase; excluded their children access from the public schools; and suppressed labor actions when employers withheld immigrant wages for months at a time then closed down without paying. If this is state planning of labor migration, what would unfettered capitalist treatment of migrant labor be?

    1. What we have is a ruthless and fullgrown capitalist policy against the working class and the people. So much for the socialist jargon (in China).

    2. You’re probably referring about the hukou system.The system is being gradually lifted. And there were no “social welfare guarantees” in China before the Revolution: you’re extrapolating your Western European reality to a completely different nation.

      It is a myth there are no labor rights in China. There are a lot of strikes too. And, if there are less strikes than you expect, then it is because the Chinese working class doesn’t need it: per capita income has been steadily increasing in real terms over the last decades. Whatever the Chinese working class is doing, it doing it right.

    3. Hi Charles,
      I do not think it’s worth paying attention to people who do not put forward anything they thought out for themselves, just chewing on what others have pre-chewed.

      1. So, using primary sources is now “not put(ting) forward anything they thought out for themselves”? What kind of Postmodern nonsense is this?

        All the evidence points towards: 1) China is a socialist country and 2) as such, it has shown socialism is the only viable path to the emancipation of the peoples of the Third World.

      2. I Agree.

        There has been too much demonizing of the Chinese on the (disorganized) “left”.

        The “marxist” left demonizers are as wrong in painting China as capitalist and imperialist as is the liberal bourgeois left in attributing China’s rise to its embrace of capitalism–while floating the imperial war machine in the Chinese Sea.

        It reminds me of the “anti-stalinist” left’s demonizing of the Soviet Union before WW2. We need more real knowledge and objectivity, and to guard against war.

  2. ”t is a myth there are no labor rights in China”. What then are these rights and how are they enforced? 12 hour work days are certainly enforced!

  3. Chinese labor law declares: “The State shall practice a working hour system wherein labourers shall work no more than eight hours a day no more than 44 hour a week on average.” How come then that Chinese workers are protesting over 12 hour days 6 times a week?

    1. You just used the keyword: they are “protesting”.

      More importantly, they are conquering rights and better working conditions.

      One of the most incisive critiques from the Western Left against the USSR was precisely the lack of working class protests and strikes, so there was a lack of “real time feedback” from the bottom up. Now that China has it, the problem is the inverse? I don’t get it: you’re doomed if you do, doomed if you don’t. What’s the solution then? Eurocommunism? Give me a list of the things the Eurocommunists achieved (in the real world, not in the academic one).

  4. ”More importantly, they are conquering rights and better working conditions.” In 1976 when Mao died, did the Chinese working class enjoy the 8 hour working day and was the right to strike enshrined in the Constitution, Yes or No? Why were these rights abolished? Are you really serious in advocating China as a model for socialism? It’s not even a good model for capitalism!

  5. Economic growth had come down in India, even, before the Covid-19 pandemic, but was higher than in most other countries, even after one corrects the growth rates, which got boosted artificially by Modi manipulations. I think the revised measurements of economic growth are suspect and I agree they show it higher than the real growth was before the Covid-19 shock. I agree with Roberts that Modi is selected by the big Capital to roll back whatever gains the working poor had under the Congress Party. But I don’t agree with him on corruption. Both parties have that. Corruption is rooted in the DNA of Indian social system derived from feudalism and patriarchy. But capitalist development of India is no solution for India’s vast poor – 85% of the population, whom the communists are supposed to represent and fight for, in my opinion. Ecological distress is extreme too and pollution and water table problem is also alarming in certain areas of India, Maharashtra is one of them, where the Covid-19 is most severe now, Mumbai has the largest pool of Covid-19 infected persons in India. China is ahead of India in most respects, but trying to compete with China to lure foreign capital means more misery for Indian workers. A social revolution is the only solution, though itself bloody and painful. Kerala shows how even in relative material poverty, a society can function with more richness in life. Kerala, ruled by communists for decades, has an economy dependent on money expatriate workers of Kerala send from the Gulf countries. But communists are not to be blamed for it. It is because India is a Neo-liberal capitalism economy since 1990 and capital shuns communist ruled states, while the state owned industries are being phased out. Consumerist capitalism is a dead end for humanity, East and West, of that I am sure. If Marxists start calling capitalism as socialism, is that not the complete debasement of what Marx, Lenin taught us?

    The problem with this blog is that like most bourgeois economists, Roberts treats economics as a separate thing. For Marx and Lenin workers and capitalists struggled to overcome each other in the relations of production, so it was political economy. Workers are struggling in India against capital, they just don’t as yet have a Lenin.

    1. Good points, Raj. But I take objection to being called a bourgeois economist. Have you read my stuff. Of course, economics (or political economy) is not divorced from class struggle. But in this blog I deal with the economic arguments of the bourgeois and offer Marxist value theory as an alternative. I hope you think that is worth doing.

  6. Sorry Michael, I did not intend to characterize all of your blogs, just this one – as one in which you argued similar to bourgeois economists. I agreed with you what Modi represents – said as a Marxist. But in the rest of your analysis, it is implied that what is going on in China is the best one can expect for India, which it will not achieve under Modi’s BJP or Congress Party, and I agree. But as a Marxist, I question the very model of China’s development as consistent with socialism. Exporting commodities, subjecting workers to exploitation by capital to produce them, denying benefits to migrant workers, who in numbers are about 2 times the size of migrant workers in India, pollution and environmental decay, all that is against what Marx and Lenin aimed for a socialist society.

    1. “Exporting commodities, subjecting workers to exploitation by capital to produce them, denying benefits to migrant workers, who in numbers are about 2 times the size of migrant workers in India, pollution and environmental decay, all that is against what Marx and Lenin aimed for a socialist society.”

      You should stop spreading misinformation, China now has better worker safety than Australia, India doesn’t come anywhere close:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: