India: Globalization era has slowed the decline in poverty.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

The estimates of poverty in India have been an important but debatable issue among academia and policy makers.

...

If the poverty level is redefined on the basis of access to education, health, infrastructure, clean environment and empowerment of women and children, the existing numbers of poor will add up to a staggering quantum. Recently, two reports by the World Bank and the ADB have been released on poverty estimates. The World Bank revised its benchmark of extreme poverty up by 25 cents from $1 per person a day to $1.25 per person per day. The ADB has estimated an even higher benchmark of $1.35 per person per day.

The revised benchmark by the World Bank is the average of the national poverty lines of the worlds’ 15 poorest countries. The ADB’s benchmark is Asia-specific based on surveys from 16 Asian countries. When these benchmarks are used for estimating poverty levels in India, the situation becomes grave and uncomfortable. By using the first poverty line, the estimated number of poor in India during 2004-05 was 456 million or 41.6% of the total population.

According to the second poverty line, the number of poor in India was 622 million, which is 54.8% of the population.

...

A deeper probe into the poverty statistics measured by the World Bank, the ADB and the Planning Commission reflects poor achievements on inclusive growth despite attaining a growth momentum of as high as 8-10% by the country over the last few years. In the past quarter century, the poverty rate has slowly declined by somewhat less than one percentage point a year. But the number of poor have remained stubbornly large. Moreover, the decline in poverty was faster during the ’80s than during the ’90s and in recent years. Clearly, India has not experienced the spectacular declines in poverty, expected in an emerging economy with high growth.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Editor...how/3687144.cms

[rocks 494]

do you think the problems in india are related to the caste system?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

do you think the problems in india are related to the caste system?

No.

[rocks 494]

do you think the problems in india are related to the caste system?

No.

ok, just wondering.

any suggestions?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

do you think the problems in india are related to the caste system?

No.

ok, just wondering.

any suggestions?

Illiteracy.

[rocks 494]

do you think the problems in india are related to the caste system?

No.

ok, just wondering.

any suggestions?

Illiteracy.

that never helps. are the government planning on tackling this in some way?

[rebeccajo 14]

So outsourcing all those jobs hasn't helped?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

So outsourcing all those jobs hasn't helped?

Well, if one reads the article in its entirety, it becomes obvious that globalization has helped in the urban areas and has lifted many urban poor out of poverty; what the article goes on to point out, however, is that the overwhelming majority of poor are rural and that their poverty hasn't been helped by globalization at all. In fact, the rate at which the rural poor escape poverty has decreased since the 1980s (which is when India began the transition from a socialist to capitalist economy).

The moral being that socialist India was doing a better job of helping rural India, while the new capitalist India is doing a better job of helping the cities.

Edited November 10, 2008 by A.J.

[rocks 494]

So outsourcing all those jobs hasn't helped?

i guess it just drives the differences up between the literate and illiterate? those who are literate can benefit, what is there for those who are not?

[rocks 494]

So outsourcing all those jobs hasn't helped?

Well, if one reads the article in its entirety, it becomes obvious that globalization has helped in the urban areas and has lifted many urban poor out of poverty; what the article goes on to point out, however, is that the overwhelming majority of poor are rural and that their poverty hasn't been helped by globalization at all. In fact, the rate at which the rural poor escape poverty has decreased since the 1980s (which is when India began the transition from a socialist to capitalist economy).

The moral being that socialist India was doing a better job of helping rural India, while the new capitalist India is doing a better job of helping the cities.

imagine that.

is the government concerned enough to try and do something about it?

[Der Bücherwurm 1]

Don't you think overpopulation is a factor as well. The poorest people are the one's having the most children. Each child costs more money to support yet people that can't even support themselves alone are having numerous children.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

do you think the problems in india are related to the caste system?

It does contribute, but is not the decisive factor.

Don't you think overpopulation is a factor as well. The poorest people are the one's having the most children. Each child costs more money to support yet people that can't even support themselves alone are having numerous children.

Noticeable that family-size and population growth rates are highest in Bihar, UP and MP--which are by most economic/social indicators the bottom states.

The idea that "socialist India" reduced poverty more effectively than capitalist--read more correctly as "more government funds went down sinkhole to UP and Bihar"

[HAL 9000 96]

Its what I used to argue about quite a lot when we'd talk about humans emigrating illegally away from where there was no capital distribution for them. Globalization hardly benefits the little people which is why it speeds up poverty and maintains it so.