Make in India vs Made in India
Make in India vs Made in India: The Make in India initiative openly acknowledges India’s shortcomings in manufacturing goods to meet our requirements. The Make in India slogan encourages international manufacturers to produce their products in India. Evidently, lacking any technology transfer. It showcases the shortcomings of our private manufacturing firms in the realm of patents. Manufactured in India is distinct. The Made in India brand arises when Indians and Indian firms create products using their own patents. Therefore, there is no reason to rejoice regarding the Make in India initiative
The irony lies in the fact that the Mascot of Make in India is sourced from China. This is the dire state of Indian manufacturing. The harsh truth is that the collapse of economic reforms started and was executed in India since 1994.
The above comment was made by me in Times of India in response to a news item entitled, ” PM Narendra Modi unveils key labour reforms to end ‘inspector raj’ Looking to create an environment conducive to industrial development while also ensuring transparency in labour sector, Modi launched a host of schemes today. Times of India”
responses to my comment are as follows:
- Replies: Agree, Disagree (8), Recommend, Offensive
(I am happy to tell you that I have another website named: Hindu Religion its cultural heritage which have articles on Sanatana Dharma, Hindu culture, Veda Suktas, Devi devata stuti path, Vedas, etc. Make a visit to this website also and read the articles and express your opinion.)
“I want to tell the people of the whole world: Come, make in India. Come and manufacture in India. Go and sell in any country of the world, but manufacture here. We have skill, talent, discipline and the desire to do something. We want to give the world an opportunity that come make in India,” The initiative was formally introduced on September 25, 2014 by Mr Modi at Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi, in the presence of business giants from India.
comments from several readers are given as hereunder :
Yogesh730: If Nehru and Indira would have developed India ,what was the need of make in india???
JP’s response to the above comment of Yogesh: Development is merely addressing the demands of a growing population. Nehru worked hard to nourish India’s population by building river training projects such as dams and barrages throughout the country. He supplied us with the facilities, such as steel production plants. Indira worked tirelessly to ensure that India was self-sufficient in defense matters
Neither Mangalyaan nor Pokhran II could have happened without Indira’s presence. Since Indira, India has declined in every aspect. Currently, India has turned into a submissive nation. When the then Prime Minister Chandra Sekhar sold gold to repay debts, there was a commotion over the matter. However, from Manmohan to Modi, prime ministers are commodifying the nation – approval of Walmart, rise in FDI in insurance, strategic partnerships, and similar actions suggest this.
“Name” responded with, “Embrace the truth… “India is not a dominant force in manufacturing.” Uttam Jaiswal: Discussing FDI, investing in India through FDI is preferable to imports, whether in defense or other sectors. For products made in India, it is up to you and me to take action instead of relying on the government. The government can merely support entrepreneurs, not generate them.
JP’s response to the above comment of Jaiswal: We take pride in our economic reforms, yet do little to promote the country’s industrialization. Industrialists are viewed as merchants. Government policies do not support industrial enterprises. Any activity taking place now is due to the perks we receive, as the government provides advantages to foreign companies. The only companies that thrive are those that obtain capital without interest.
To be clear, large corporations that offer stocks do not have to distribute dividends right away. Large corporations are offered loans at an interest rate of 5 to 6%. In contrast, the government-owned banks impose a 14% interest rate on a small entrepreneur. The manufacturing and transportation expenses in India are so substantial that competing with imported products is unfeasible. In China, electricity is remarkably inexpensive, and banks offer loans at interest rates between 2 to 5%. During an economic decline in the US, interest rates are occasionally reduced by up to 0.50%. In India, during an economic crisis, interest rates are raised. Therefore, kindly inform us that the Indian Government takes action against Indian entrepreneurs and supports foreign individuals instead.
Uttam Jaiswal: Made in India needs individuals to innovate while also investing capital. Make in India would attract investments, which would tackle significant unemployment, along with new technologies, which could inspire concepts in the minds of aspiring entrepreneurs.
JP’s response to the above comment of Jaiswal: Make in India does not introduce technology to India. Only the foreign manufacturer would continue to possess the technology. Goods would be manufactured by the foreign company to be sold in India and maybe abroad. The capital introduced into the Indian investment sector generates minimal jobs as high-tech manufacturing is not labor-intensive. Furthermore, the Government utilizes capital in dollars for the purpose of repaying debts (Balance of Payments). The inability of Governments over the past twenty years to bolster the Indian economy in all sectors – both agriculture and industry
Vivek A responded in this manner, “Follow the examples of Nehru and Indira, who would lead us to this level.” Let’s go, dude!! Make in India is a strategy aimed at enhancing our position in the manufacturing sector, which has consistently been underdeveloped. I believe this is the most effective approach to progress, and in addition, it will create employment for many, making it the quickest method to leverage the vast Indian workforce. “God Bless You!!”
Pkekade responded with, “You’ve struck the nail on the head. Absolutely true!!! However, it’s essential to recognize that what ‘Made in India’ failed to accomplish (job creation) is at least aimed for and attempted through the ‘Make in India’ initiative. If obtaining the entire ‘Thali’ at once isn’t possible, let’s begin with ‘Dal-Rice’ first, through various methods. “Next, we can create a revised plan to obtain the ‘Dessert’.”
kumarskanda‘s response to my comments:
Kindly refrain from commenting merely for the purpose of commenting. Make in India complements Made in India, thus providing us with the opportunity to create additional jobs and promote the growth of local sector economies. Just because we launched our satellites sooner from an overseas rocket facility, it didn’t imply that eventually we could achieve it on our own land. Cynics and Negative thinkers, feel free to keep your mindset. INDIA is progressing. Mangalyan has already been launched.
Past Trade of India
Trade and Commerce of India was the Commerce of the World, said Peter the Great of Russia about 3 centuries back. Adam Smith wrote that ‘The discovery of America and the Cape route to India’ were the two greatest and most important events in the history of mankind. And Peter the Great, of Russia, exclaimed at the dawn of the 18th Century, ‘The commerce of India is the commerce of the world, and he who controls it is the dictator of Europe.
And in 1760 a lady in London was fined 200 Pounds for possessing an Indian made Kerchief. That was the glory and greatness of India and it’s commanding trade with the world in the past.
Now, we must deal in business like manner without falling prey to the multi-national corporations ( MNC ). The Government must stop going in the Lemming’s way in opening Indian markets and in dealing with Dunkel proposals.
A comprehensive plan should be made on-our-own, appraising the probable capital and technology inflow and capital outgo due to the opening up of India. And the policy makers should first recognize the inherent potential that Indians possess. Emphasis should be to compete in global markets with goods manufactured based on Indian technology.
Lee’s Singapore model for India!
We shall not draw comparisons between Singapore and India. Singapore is a city-state that had a population of 200,000 in 1970 and currently has 5.3 million. India has a population of 1.27 billion people. Singapore can be likened to a specific Indian city of comparable population rather than to India as a whole. Is the author of this news piece (TOI) implying that India should transform into a country similar to Singapore? From 1950 to 1984, India was an independent Nation. It relishes independence.
The world celebrated Nehru as Asia’s beacon of hope and light of Asia. Singapore remains a persistent colony similar to Australia or Canada. Singapore never had and still lacks freedom. Under Lee’s dictatorship, he was effectively a puppet controlled by the US. It serves as a base for the US Navy and Air Force. Maybe India’s decline began with the advent of Rajiv Gandhi. The BJP, under Vajpayee, completed the process of US hegemony over India.
shortcomings? Nehru departedfrom this life in 1964. Indira’s timecametoanabruptend in 1984. Subsequently, Rajiv assumedleadership,reversing the situationtobenefit capitalism. Rajiv broughtanendto the so-called License Raj.
Rajiv streamlined Indian governance by implementing the Panchayat Raj Act. His Anti-Defection Law turned all MPs and MLAs intopuppets of the leadersin Delhi. Thus, the governance of India was focused in the control of the rulers in Delhi
Vajapayee
Subsequently, the BJP took power under Vajpayee’s leadership. He had 7 years to change India and turn it into another Singapore on the planet. What he accomplished. He has exploded nuclear bombs created by Indira and sought to claim credit for the bomb. And he was accountable for India’s domination by the US as a result. He had to start the process of the Indo-US nuclear agreement
Manmohan
Eventually, Manmohan completed the task. Nearly 30 years have gone by since Indira’s tenure and 50 years since Nehru’s. Why blame Nehru and Indira for the shortcomings of PMs since 1984? Who stopped any Ruler of Delhi from transforming India into another Singapore post-1984? Economic reforms truly started in 1985 under Rajiv. After 1991, reforms became chaotic.
Manmohan, who studied economics at Harvard, governed India for a decade. Currently, humble Modi has been in power for nearly a year. What has India accomplished since 1991? India is traveling globally with an outstretched hand for aid. The U.S. military took over India. Modi is traveling across Europe to get India ready for NATO membership.
Can someone provide an instance of a nation that failed to achieve industrial development or maintain its identity within the global community? Nehru and Indira transformed India into a self-reliant nation in food grains, steel manufacturing, satellite building, satellite launching, etc.
What troubles India post-Indira (1984) is the absence of National spirit among its leaders. No isms
The comment I made in The Times of India was in reply to a news articletitled,
“Industry leaders state that theSingapore model is replicable in India.” 21.11.2014 in Times of India. Industry leaders here believe that the Singapore development model can be effectively replicatedin India by eliminating outdated regulations such as labor laws and leveraging its current strengths. The Times of India.
My letter to Indian express on 25.8.99 on the occassion of Bill Clinton’s visit.
(Watch my Videos on River Saraswati, सरस्वती नदी, Birth place of Hanuman, Location of Brahmavarta, ब्रह्मावर्त and of course truth about Aryanism, आर्याजाती वाद in my YouTube Channel. )
Bill Clinton’s visit
Your editorial “Bill mange more” (Aug 21) regarding Bill Clinton’s trip to India is engagingly rhythmic. Our thinkers align with their biases and preconceptions. They either oppose or support matters based on their biased beliefs. Discussing Indian national interest diminishes their perspective, as they consider global matters! They possess no boundaries!
“America is aninsanenation.”Indeed,Americansareobsessedwithvarioustopics:cuisine,intimacy,freedom,conflict,dominance,andmore.
However,” the American President cares for his nation more than he does for India or any other ally.”The mutual friendship reflects American self-interest.
Nothing wrong about that.
Certainly – Firstly, Americans admire India as it is an incredible nation. Secondly, India boasts a middle class of 250 million individuals, making it a great market for their products. Three, the American President developed a newfound respect for Indians in the US. Most importantly, they relish the Indian dilemma in Kashmir, as it benefits the American military-industrial complex.
Consequently, these conflicts help maintain unemployment levels in the US. “There’s nothing unjust about that,” as it all aligns with their National interests. And “it deserves to be replicated.”
National interest must be nurtured primarily among our misguided intellectuals, as our society and the powers that be, including politicians, tend to imitate them. “Therefore, when you engage with President Clinton, keep this in mind: Don’t capitulate completely at the initial gesture.”He will ask for more for himself and his nation.