The latest budget of the UPA government cannot be faulted for trying fuel growth through lower taxes in the hands of individuals. At a time when private capital formation has been weak, and most of the growth of the current fiscal has been achieved through higher government spend, lower planned spend by the government has to be replaced by private consumption to keep the wheels of commerce moving.
Pranab da however gives the game away when he says that the budget is a political document. In a world where it has become acceptable for governments to fudge figures on a large scale, a la Greece, India is following suit. An example would clarify. Forecast for GDP growth for FY2009-10 estimates that "real growth" in agriculture is -0.2%. The economic survey states that Kharif crop production is lower by 15% over previous year, sugarcane by 9%, oilseeds by 15% and pulses 8%. To get to a 0.2% de-growth, we not only have to assume that the Rabi crop is normal, but that it is also 15% higher in terms of output. The survey also says "the index of area under rice shows negative growth (sic)". So where is the growth coming from?
Another way to look at this is the computation of "real GDP". The "real" growth is calculated by taking the nominal output and applying the GDP deflator. The deflator is supposed to have the advantage of reflecting the actual consumption basket in the economy (as opposed to a fixed basket used in calculating WPI or CPI). While the CPI in the current year is in double digits, the WPI is less than 2%. The survey uses 3.6% as the deflator.
Now the growth in agri prices is upwards of 18% on an average. However, if one uses 3.6% as the deflator, then a 15% de-growth in real terms, would show up only at a 0.2% de-growth since the price rise would take care of the rest. It appears that we are significantly over-stating the real growth in the economy.
On most parameters except growth, India is no different from Greece. With a fiscal deficit figure in double digits, an internal debt burden of over 80% and unemployment near double digit, the only reason India is not bracketed with the 'PIIGS" and "STUPID"'s is the supposedly higher growth the economy continues to register. When the growth itself is chimera, the consequences may be disastrous. SS Tarapore made the point in his column here.
We should ignore the warnings at our own peril.
2 comments:
J.M. Keynes considered excessively mathematical economics very limiting. In The General Theory he wrote:
It is a great fault of symbolic pseudo-mathematical methods of formalising a system of economic analysis … that they expressly assume strict independence between the factors involved and lose their cogency and authority if this hypothesis is disallowed; whereas, in ordinary discourse, where we are not blindly manipulating and know all the time what we are doing and what the words mean, we can keep ‘at the back of our heads’ the necessary reserves and qualifications and the adjustments which we shall have to make later on, in a way in which we cannot keep complicated partial differentials ‘at the back’ of several pages of algebra which assume they all vanish. Too large a proportion of recent ‘mathematical’ economics are merely concoctions, as imprecise as the initial assumptions they rest on, which allow the author to lose sight of the complexities and interdependencies of the real world in a maze of pretentious and unhelpful symbols.
Too Big to Fail?!!
Post a Comment