Haarkarjeetgaye Posted June 15, 2019 Author Share Posted June 15, 2019 13 hours ago, YUSER_ said: Because these days youth can atleast pay EMI of education loans it was not the case during UPA days There must be some other reason for NPAs increasing then. Which sector do you see giving jobs to youths. Why do you think the GDP is less by 2.5% and unemployment rate is highest in 45 years. mishra 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkt.india Posted June 19, 2019 Share Posted June 19, 2019 Quote https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/pms-panels-point-by-point-rebuttal-to-arvind-subramanians-claim-on-gdp-2055961 PM's Panel's Point-By-Point Rebuttal To Arvind Subramanian's Claim On GDP The Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister (EAC-PM) on Wednesday rejected the claims of former Chief Economic Adviser Arvind Subramanian regarding over-estimation of GDP growth after 2011, saying his analysis ignores data on services and agriculture and shows blind trust in a private firm CMIE. In a paper released by EAC-PM, India's GDP estimation methodology stands at par with its global standing as a major and responsible economy. Primary contributors of the paper are economists Bibek Debroy, Rathin Roy, Surjit Bhalla, Charan Singh, Arvind Virmani. Last week, the advisory body had said it would issue a point-to-point rebuttal of Mr Subramanian's research paper. In a research paper, Mr Subramanian, who stepped down last year, said India's economic growth rate has been overestimated by around 2.5 percentage points between 2011-12 and 2016-17 due to a change in methodology for calculating GDP. Mr Subramanian's paper titled ''India's GDP Mis-estimation: Likelihood, Magnitudes, Mechanisms, and Implications'', published at Harvard University, also comes at a time when concerns have been raised in various quarters about the official economic growth numbers. Mr Subramanian was the CEA in the finance ministry for nearly four years from October 2014. Observing that Chief Economic Adviser (CEA) Subramanian seems to have made a "hurried attempt to draw conclusions" about India's complex economy and its evolution, the paper said he has used 17 high frequency indicators, but ignores the representation of ''services sector (60 per cent in GDP) and ''agriculture sector'' (18 per cent of GDP) in the analysis. The paper notes that Mr Subramanian used 17 indicators to express his skepticism about the growth rates after 2011-12. Majority of the 17 indicators have been taken directly from the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE), a private agency that is not a primary source of information but collects it from different sources, it said. "For anyone who reads Dr Subramanian's paper, it is evident that he trusts CMIE but distrusts CSO (Central Statistics Office)... This blind trust in a private agency (CMIE) and blind distrust in a government institution that has served India (CSO) appears unwarranted for a neutral academic," it said. The paper further said the former CEA has overlooked the tax data. The EAC-PM paper said Mr Subramanian chooses to overlook tax data arguing that "we do not use tax indicators because of the major changes in direct and indirect taxes in the post-2011 period which render the tax-to-GDP relationship different and unstable, and hence make the indicators unreliable proxies for GDP growth". Unlike many indicators, it said tax data is not collected through surveys or by agencies through arcane techniques, these are hard numbers and should be an important indicator of growth. "Further, there have been no major changes in tax laws until the end period in the author's analysis (March 31, 2017). GST was introduced on July 1, 2017. The author's logic of not using tax data appears to be a convenient argument meant to avoid inconvenient conclusions based on hard facts," it said. The EAC-PM paper also noted that India's GDP estimation is by no means a perfect exercise. "Is it better than before? Yes. "Is the process to further improve it in place? Yes," it added. It further said Mr Subramanian, in the capacity of CEA in the Ministry of Finance, has presided over the army of government economists and statisticians and is aware of the enormous magnitude and complexity of the exercise to compute GDP of the continent-size highly diverse emerging economy of India. "To consider attempting to approximate GDP (gross domestic product) of such a country on the basis of some correlations and four variables using simplistic econometric techniques and challenging the existing edifice of data collection is not only demoralising to those dedicated personnel but also technically inappropriate," it added. COMMENT The government had earlier said the base year of the GDP series was revised from 2004-05 to 2011-12 and released on January 30, 2015, after adaptation of the sources and methods in line with the System of National Accounts 2008. Stan AF 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sukhoi Posted June 20, 2019 Share Posted June 20, 2019 On 6/12/2019 at 10:16 AM, Haarkarjeetgaye said: https://www.livemint.com/news/india/india-s-gdp-growth-overestimated-by-2-5-during-2011-2017-arvind-subramanian-1560239804132.html India’s statistics may have been painting a far rosier picture of economic growth than the more modest reality of the past decade. The nation has held the crown of the world’s fastest-growing major economy until recently, but a new study by former Chief Economic Adviser Arvind Subramanian says the expansion was overestimated between 2011 and 2017. Rather than growing at about 7% a year in that period, growth was about 4.5%, according to the research paper, published by the Center for International Development at Harvard University. The overestimation occurred after the previous Congress-led government changed the methodology in calculating gross domestic product in 2012. One of the key adjustments was a shift to financial accounts-based data compiled by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, from volume-based data previously. This made GDP estimates more sensitive to price changes, in a period of lower oil prices, according to the research paper. Rather than deflate input values by input prices, the new methodology deflated these values by output prices, which could have overstated manufacturing growth. Pakistani fauji kid what about the Pakistani deficit .... any comment Pakistan's current account deficit contracts 29.5% to $9.6b https://tribune.com.pk/story/1954073/2-current-account-deficit-contracts-29-5-9-6b/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishra Posted June 20, 2019 Share Posted June 20, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, sukhoi said: Pakistani fauji kid what about the Pakistani deficit .... any comment Pakistan's current account deficit contracts 29.5% to $9.6b https://tribune.com.pk/story/1954073/2-current-account-deficit-contracts-29-5-9-6b/ Calm down. Bangladesh Economy has already overtaken Pakistan (not just in terms of GDP but various other human measures too). And they dont have CPEC or nuclear bombs or Saudis nor they have Sharia or that many ultras and Jihadist. In few years times, Most of Indian states will have GDP comparable to Pakistan Edited June 20, 2019 by mishra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts