超级军网商业周刊 为何说印度可以胜过中国
来源：百度文库 编辑：超级军网 时间：2024/04/30 04:03:56
专制政权往往可以在短期内取得令人印象深刻的经济成果，例如三十年代的德国、五十年代的苏联、六十年代巴西以及九十年代的中国。没有财产权、法律追索、公众辩论这些障碍物，专制政权可以利用重要的经济和政治资源创造令人印象深刻的工业和经济壮举。
反之，民主政权往往要应对公众的不满、活跃的媒体、顽固的土地所有者以及无数种公民自由。政府往往不能集合经济资源，常常必须担任监管者。结果就是很少政府主持的大项目。而市场无形的手却驱动私营领域的无数主动。尽管有人羡慕专制政权，但从长期来看，这种社会经济模式往往会导致经济和社会的扭曲。
这就是中国如今面临的困境。自八十年代以来，中国政府把重点放在发展出口主导型经济，并以人为低估的货币作支持。外国直接投资受到鼓励，而国内消费有限。开启大规模的基础设施项目，不断增长的贸易盈余助长了基础设施建设，城市在内地萌芽，宛如神话中的凤凰。多年来，中国经济从这些政策中获得经济好处，GDP呈双位数增长，拥有巨大的外汇储备，以及不断增长的资金流。
但如今经济与社会扭曲已经开始伴随着通胀现形：无数的资产泡沫，迫近的生产力过剩，以及猖獗的制度腐败。中国政府发现自己身处困境。如果政府允许它的货币迅速升值以减少通胀，出口将放缓，失业率上升。如果它每年制服通胀，社会不稳定回迅速呈现。
但即使这只野兔撞上自己造成的障碍物，印度会否因此获得竞争优势？优势来自于确立的、充满活力的民主，印度最终可以在社会上和经济上胜过中国。表面上看来，印度的民主一团糟。但如果你深入观察，你很快就会发现这只乌龟为何终将赢得这场比赛的原因：
财产权：在印度城市化的过程中，很多家庭将选择出售或者抵押土地，以便开始创业，买公寓，或者给子女提供教育机会。高端制造业和其他朝阳产业的发展需要大量半熟练和熟练的劳动力，驱动印度开始渐进的移民。移民将创造一个越来越城市化的印度，预计到2025年，将吸引超过两亿农村居民到城市中心。
这个转变将推动大约3000万农民以及其他1.7亿跟农业有间接关系的个人出售土地所有权。所有权的出手到2025年将产生超过1万亿美元的资本。这些资本对印度经济回产生多层效应。抵押支持的政权和资产支持的政权市场将创造解放资本所需要的流动性。
而中国没有农村财产权。中国的7.5亿农村居民租用土地，当他们的土地因开发而被征用，他们得到的赔偿要看地方和地区政府的脸色。而且他们的租约无法抵押，这样他们就没有资产。结果呢，2005年报告超过8.7万起群体事件，比2003年增长50%。
法治：法治是任何现代社会的基石。印度的法律体系已经到位超过一百年。这个法律体系受到国际尊重，而且包括保护知识产权以及物质财产的法律。法治创造了可预言性以及稳定性，让企业蓬勃发展。在印度，有超过6000家公司上市，而中国只有大约2000家。更惊人的是，印度6000家上市公司中只有大约100家是国有的。中国与之形成鲜明对比，2000家上市公司中有超过1200家是国有的。
哪里可以创造下一个微软或因特尔（Intel）？肯定不是中国。
当法治得到投资者和外国企业的认可，它就可以推动额外的研发投资。
中国的法律体系没有为保护知识产权和物质财产权做多少事情，在2007年国际财产权索引（International Property Rights Index）上，中国在保护知识产权方面和尼日利亚同列。
当一个民主社会均等公正地应用法治，也有助于确保财富的积累不偏向于那些有政治权力或与政治权力有个人关系的个人。（作者 William Nobrega）专制政权往往可以在短期内取得令人印象深刻的经济成果，例如三十年代的德国、五十年代的苏联、六十年代巴西以及九十年代的中国。没有财产权、法律追索、公众辩论这些障碍物，专制政权可以利用重要的经济和政治资源创造令人印象深刻的工业和经济壮举。
反之，民主政权往往要应对公众的不满、活跃的媒体、顽固的土地所有者以及无数种公民自由。政府往往不能集合经济资源，常常必须担任监管者。结果就是很少政府主持的大项目。而市场无形的手却驱动私营领域的无数主动。尽管有人羡慕专制政权，但从长期来看，这种社会经济模式往往会导致经济和社会的扭曲。
这就是中国如今面临的困境。自八十年代以来，中国政府把重点放在发展出口主导型经济，并以人为低估的货币作支持。外国直接投资受到鼓励，而国内消费有限。开启大规模的基础设施项目，不断增长的贸易盈余助长了基础设施建设，城市在内地萌芽，宛如神话中的凤凰。多年来，中国经济从这些政策中获得经济好处，GDP呈双位数增长，拥有巨大的外汇储备，以及不断增长的资金流。
但如今经济与社会扭曲已经开始伴随着通胀现形：无数的资产泡沫，迫近的生产力过剩，以及猖獗的制度腐败。中国政府发现自己身处困境。如果政府允许它的货币迅速升值以减少通胀，出口将放缓，失业率上升。如果它每年制服通胀，社会不稳定回迅速呈现。
但即使这只野兔撞上自己造成的障碍物，印度会否因此获得竞争优势？优势来自于确立的、充满活力的民主，印度最终可以在社会上和经济上胜过中国。表面上看来，印度的民主一团糟。但如果你深入观察，你很快就会发现这只乌龟为何终将赢得这场比赛的原因：
财产权：在印度城市化的过程中，很多家庭将选择出售或者抵押土地，以便开始创业，买公寓，或者给子女提供教育机会。高端制造业和其他朝阳产业的发展需要大量半熟练和熟练的劳动力，驱动印度开始渐进的移民。移民将创造一个越来越城市化的印度，预计到2025年，将吸引超过两亿农村居民到城市中心。
这个转变将推动大约3000万农民以及其他1.7亿跟农业有间接关系的个人出售土地所有权。所有权的出手到2025年将产生超过1万亿美元的资本。这些资本对印度经济回产生多层效应。抵押支持的政权和资产支持的政权市场将创造解放资本所需要的流动性。
而中国没有农村财产权。中国的7.5亿农村居民租用土地，当他们的土地因开发而被征用，他们得到的赔偿要看地方和地区政府的脸色。而且他们的租约无法抵押，这样他们就没有资产。结果呢，2005年报告超过8.7万起群体事件，比2003年增长50%。
法治：法治是任何现代社会的基石。印度的法律体系已经到位超过一百年。这个法律体系受到国际尊重，而且包括保护知识产权以及物质财产的法律。法治创造了可预言性以及稳定性，让企业蓬勃发展。在印度，有超过6000家公司上市，而中国只有大约2000家。更惊人的是，印度6000家上市公司中只有大约100家是国有的。中国与之形成鲜明对比，2000家上市公司中有超过1200家是国有的。
哪里可以创造下一个微软或因特尔（Intel）？肯定不是中国。
当法治得到投资者和外国企业的认可，它就可以推动额外的研发投资。
中国的法律体系没有为保护知识产权和物质财产权做多少事情，在2007年国际财产权索引（International Property Rights Index）上，中国在保护知识产权方面和尼日利亚同列。
当一个民主社会均等公正地应用法治，也有助于确保财富的积累不偏向于那些有政治权力或与政治权力有个人关系的个人。（作者 William Nobrega）
反之，民主政权往往要应对公众的不满、活跃的媒体、顽固的土地所有者以及无数种公民自由。政府往往不能集合经济资源，常常必须担任监管者。结果就是很少政府主持的大项目。而市场无形的手却驱动私营领域的无数主动。尽管有人羡慕专制政权，但从长期来看，这种社会经济模式往往会导致经济和社会的扭曲。
这就是中国如今面临的困境。自八十年代以来，中国政府把重点放在发展出口主导型经济，并以人为低估的货币作支持。外国直接投资受到鼓励，而国内消费有限。开启大规模的基础设施项目，不断增长的贸易盈余助长了基础设施建设，城市在内地萌芽，宛如神话中的凤凰。多年来，中国经济从这些政策中获得经济好处，GDP呈双位数增长，拥有巨大的外汇储备，以及不断增长的资金流。
但如今经济与社会扭曲已经开始伴随着通胀现形：无数的资产泡沫，迫近的生产力过剩，以及猖獗的制度腐败。中国政府发现自己身处困境。如果政府允许它的货币迅速升值以减少通胀，出口将放缓，失业率上升。如果它每年制服通胀，社会不稳定回迅速呈现。
但即使这只野兔撞上自己造成的障碍物，印度会否因此获得竞争优势？优势来自于确立的、充满活力的民主，印度最终可以在社会上和经济上胜过中国。表面上看来，印度的民主一团糟。但如果你深入观察，你很快就会发现这只乌龟为何终将赢得这场比赛的原因：
财产权：在印度城市化的过程中，很多家庭将选择出售或者抵押土地，以便开始创业，买公寓，或者给子女提供教育机会。高端制造业和其他朝阳产业的发展需要大量半熟练和熟练的劳动力，驱动印度开始渐进的移民。移民将创造一个越来越城市化的印度，预计到2025年，将吸引超过两亿农村居民到城市中心。
这个转变将推动大约3000万农民以及其他1.7亿跟农业有间接关系的个人出售土地所有权。所有权的出手到2025年将产生超过1万亿美元的资本。这些资本对印度经济回产生多层效应。抵押支持的政权和资产支持的政权市场将创造解放资本所需要的流动性。
而中国没有农村财产权。中国的7.5亿农村居民租用土地，当他们的土地因开发而被征用，他们得到的赔偿要看地方和地区政府的脸色。而且他们的租约无法抵押，这样他们就没有资产。结果呢，2005年报告超过8.7万起群体事件，比2003年增长50%。
法治：法治是任何现代社会的基石。印度的法律体系已经到位超过一百年。这个法律体系受到国际尊重，而且包括保护知识产权以及物质财产的法律。法治创造了可预言性以及稳定性，让企业蓬勃发展。在印度，有超过6000家公司上市，而中国只有大约2000家。更惊人的是，印度6000家上市公司中只有大约100家是国有的。中国与之形成鲜明对比，2000家上市公司中有超过1200家是国有的。
哪里可以创造下一个微软或因特尔（Intel）？肯定不是中国。
当法治得到投资者和外国企业的认可，它就可以推动额外的研发投资。
中国的法律体系没有为保护知识产权和物质财产权做多少事情，在2007年国际财产权索引（International Property Rights Index）上，中国在保护知识产权方面和尼日利亚同列。
当一个民主社会均等公正地应用法治，也有助于确保财富的积累不偏向于那些有政治权力或与政治权力有个人关系的个人。（作者 William Nobrega）专制政权往往可以在短期内取得令人印象深刻的经济成果，例如三十年代的德国、五十年代的苏联、六十年代巴西以及九十年代的中国。没有财产权、法律追索、公众辩论这些障碍物，专制政权可以利用重要的经济和政治资源创造令人印象深刻的工业和经济壮举。
反之，民主政权往往要应对公众的不满、活跃的媒体、顽固的土地所有者以及无数种公民自由。政府往往不能集合经济资源，常常必须担任监管者。结果就是很少政府主持的大项目。而市场无形的手却驱动私营领域的无数主动。尽管有人羡慕专制政权，但从长期来看，这种社会经济模式往往会导致经济和社会的扭曲。
这就是中国如今面临的困境。自八十年代以来，中国政府把重点放在发展出口主导型经济，并以人为低估的货币作支持。外国直接投资受到鼓励，而国内消费有限。开启大规模的基础设施项目，不断增长的贸易盈余助长了基础设施建设，城市在内地萌芽，宛如神话中的凤凰。多年来，中国经济从这些政策中获得经济好处，GDP呈双位数增长，拥有巨大的外汇储备，以及不断增长的资金流。
但如今经济与社会扭曲已经开始伴随着通胀现形：无数的资产泡沫，迫近的生产力过剩，以及猖獗的制度腐败。中国政府发现自己身处困境。如果政府允许它的货币迅速升值以减少通胀，出口将放缓，失业率上升。如果它每年制服通胀，社会不稳定回迅速呈现。
但即使这只野兔撞上自己造成的障碍物，印度会否因此获得竞争优势？优势来自于确立的、充满活力的民主，印度最终可以在社会上和经济上胜过中国。表面上看来，印度的民主一团糟。但如果你深入观察，你很快就会发现这只乌龟为何终将赢得这场比赛的原因：
财产权：在印度城市化的过程中，很多家庭将选择出售或者抵押土地，以便开始创业，买公寓，或者给子女提供教育机会。高端制造业和其他朝阳产业的发展需要大量半熟练和熟练的劳动力，驱动印度开始渐进的移民。移民将创造一个越来越城市化的印度，预计到2025年，将吸引超过两亿农村居民到城市中心。
这个转变将推动大约3000万农民以及其他1.7亿跟农业有间接关系的个人出售土地所有权。所有权的出手到2025年将产生超过1万亿美元的资本。这些资本对印度经济回产生多层效应。抵押支持的政权和资产支持的政权市场将创造解放资本所需要的流动性。
而中国没有农村财产权。中国的7.5亿农村居民租用土地，当他们的土地因开发而被征用，他们得到的赔偿要看地方和地区政府的脸色。而且他们的租约无法抵押，这样他们就没有资产。结果呢，2005年报告超过8.7万起群体事件，比2003年增长50%。
法治：法治是任何现代社会的基石。印度的法律体系已经到位超过一百年。这个法律体系受到国际尊重，而且包括保护知识产权以及物质财产的法律。法治创造了可预言性以及稳定性，让企业蓬勃发展。在印度，有超过6000家公司上市，而中国只有大约2000家。更惊人的是，印度6000家上市公司中只有大约100家是国有的。中国与之形成鲜明对比，2000家上市公司中有超过1200家是国有的。
哪里可以创造下一个微软或因特尔（Intel）？肯定不是中国。
当法治得到投资者和外国企业的认可，它就可以推动额外的研发投资。
中国的法律体系没有为保护知识产权和物质财产权做多少事情，在2007年国际财产权索引（International Property Rights Index）上，中国在保护知识产权方面和尼日利亚同列。
当一个民主社会均等公正地应用法治，也有助于确保财富的积累不偏向于那些有政治权力或与政治权力有个人关系的个人。（作者 William Nobrega）
Why India Will Beat China
An entrenched and vibrant democracy will ultimately drive India to outperform China socially and economically
Authoritarian regimes often yield impressive short-term economic results, as seen in Germany in the 1930s, the Soviet Union in the 1950s, Brazil in the 1960s, and China in the 1990s. Unencumbered by such things as property rights, legal recourse, and public debate, the authoritarian regime can harness significant economic and political resources to create impressive industrial and economic feats.
Conversely, democratic regimes tend to be sloppy affairs with loud public discourse, a vocal press, stubborn land owners, and a myriad of civil liberties. Far from being able to harness economic resources, the government often must act more as a regulator. The result is that there are very few grandiose government-sponsored projects. Instead, there are countless private-sector initiatives driven by the invisible hand of the market. While the authoritarian regime is envied by some, the fact is that longer term, this type of socioeconomic model has typically led to economic and social distortions.
That is the dilemma that China faces today. Since the 1980s, the Chinese government has focused on developing an export-driven economy supported by an artificially undervalued currency. Foreign direct investment was encouraged while domestic consumption was limited. Massive infrastructure projects were initiated, fueled by a growing trade surplus, with cities sprouting up in the hinterlands like some mythical phoenix. For years, the Chinese economy benefited from these policies with double-digit gross domestic product growth, vast foreign currency reserves, and ever increasing capital inflows.
Inflation Could Spark Social Unrest
But now the economic and social distortions have begun to appear with rising inflation rates, numerous asset bubbles, looming overcapacity, and rampant institutionalized corruption. The Chinese government finds itself in a quandary. If the government allows its currency to rapidly appreciate to reduce inflation it will drive down exports and fuel unemployment. If it fails to quell inflation, social unrest will quickly unfold.
But even if the hare is running into obstacles of its own design, how will it give India the competitive edge? The advantage comes in the form of an entrenched and vibrant democracy that will ultimately drive India to outperform China socially and economically. Messy, frustrating, and more often than not agonizingly slow, India's democracy would seem to be chaotic at the surface. But if you look deeper you will quickly see why the tortoise will win this race. Let's take a look at two of the major advantages that India's democracy provides:
• Property Rights: As India becomes urbanized many families will choose to sell or borrow against their land so that they can start businesses, buy apartments, or provide education opportunities for their children. India is at the beginning of a gradual migration that is being driven by the development of high-end manufacturing and other sunrise industries that will require a vast pool of semiskilled and skilled labor. This migration will create an increasingly urban India that is expected to attract more than 200 million rural inhabitants to urban centers by 2025, primarily in what are known as secondary or "B & C" cities.
This transition will facilitate the sale of land holdings by an estimated 30 million farmers and 170 million other individuals indirectly tied to the agricultural sector. The sale of these holdings is expected to generate more than $1 trillion in capital by 2025. This capital will have a multiplier effect on the Indian economy that could exceed $3 trillion. The development of the mortgage-backed security and asset-backed security markets, driven by financial institutions like Citigroup (C), will create the liquidity required to free up this capital
China, by contrast, has no rural property rights. China's 750 million rural residents who lease land are at the mercy of the local and regional government as to what compensation they will receive, if any, when they are forced from the land as a result of development, infrastructure improvements, etc. Additionally they have no right to borrow against their lease, and as such they have no assets. In fact, the Chinese government's official figures state that more than 200,000 hectares of rural land are taken from rural residents every year with little or no compensation. According to some estimates, between 1992 and 2005 20 million farmers were evicted from agriculture due to land acquisition, and between 1996 and 2005 more than 21% of arable land in China has been put to non-agriculture use.
The result is not unexpected, with over 87,000 mass incidents (or riots) reported in 2005, a 50% increase from 2003. Many provincial governments in China have begun to use plainclothes policemen to beat, intimidate, or otherwise subdue any peasant that dares to oppose these land grabs. And, as would be expected, the beneficiaries from these policies are developers and corrupt government officials.
• Rule of Law: The rule of law is a fundamental cornerstone of any modern society. India has a legal system that has been in place for well over 100 years. This legal system is internationally respected and includes laws that protect intellectual property as well as physical property. The rule of law creates predictability and stability that allows entrepreneurial behavior to flourish. This is clearly evident in India, with more than 6,000 companies listed in the stock exchanges, compared to approximately 2,000 in China. More telling is the fact that of the 6,000 listed companies in India only approximately 100 are state-owned. This stands in stark contrast to China, where more than 1,200 of the 2,000 companies listed on the exchanges are state-owned.
Can there be any doubt as to where the next Microsoft (MSFT) or Intel (INTC) will be created? Certainly not China!
More than 100 Indian companies that completed initial public offerings as midcap companies now have a market capitalization of over $1 billion. Companies such as Jet Airways (JET.BO), Bharti Tele-Ventures, Infosys Technologies (INFY), Reliance Communications (RLCM.BO), Tata Motors (TTM) (which just acquired Jaguar), Wipro Technologies (WIT), and Hindalco Industries (HALC.BO) are becoming multinational competitors with globally recognized brands. China also has numerous companies that have a market capitalization of over $1 billion, but the majority of these are state-owned behemoths recognized by their sheer size and not their nimbleness.
When the rule of law is recognized by investors and foreign companies as something that is beyond question it serves to facilitate additional investments in research and development. For instance, 150 of the top global multinationals now have research and development bases in India. Additionally the U.S. Food & Drug Administration has certified more companies in India then in any other country outside the U.S., a testament to the innovation that free markets and the rule of law foster.
Little Protection for IP in China
China has a legal system that does little to protect intellectual and physical property rights, a fact highlighted in the 2007 edition of the International Property Rights Index, which ranks China with Nigeria in protecting intellectual property rights. In fact, China's illegal copying of movies, music, and software cost companies $2.2 billion in 2006 sales, according to an estimate by lobby groups representing Microsoft, Walt Disney (DIS), and Vivendi (VIV.PA). This figure may in fact be understated as it does not include pirated products that have been shipped to overseas markets by government-controlled Chinese companies.
The rule of law when applied evenly and justly in a democratic society also helps to ensure that wealth accumulation does not favor those individuals in political office or individuals connected to those in political office.
Democracy is a messy thing, especially when you have an electorate that exceeds 600 million people who are motivated to vote. However, democracy also helps to ensure that individual liberties are respected and that the government is responsive and beholden to the will of the people, rich or poor. A democracy also ensures accountability through impartial courts that help enforce and protect such things as property rights, environmental rights, human rights, and good governance.
India's democracy is far from perfect, but it is also quite young, and as incomes rise and the populace becomes more informed we can expect that India's government institutions will become more responsive and transparent.
And what about the hare? Consider this fact: A recent survey found that of the 20,000 richest men in China, more than 95% were directly related to Communist party officials. Where would you place your bet?
William Nobrega is president and founder of the Conrad Group, an emerging-market strategic planning and M&A facilitation firm based in Miami. He has more than 10 years experience in this field and is widely credited for initiating global business models in emerging geographies including Brazil, India, and China. He is co-author of the recently published book, Riding the Indian Tiger: Understanding India, the World's Fastest Growing Market.
An entrenched and vibrant democracy will ultimately drive India to outperform China socially and economically
Authoritarian regimes often yield impressive short-term economic results, as seen in Germany in the 1930s, the Soviet Union in the 1950s, Brazil in the 1960s, and China in the 1990s. Unencumbered by such things as property rights, legal recourse, and public debate, the authoritarian regime can harness significant economic and political resources to create impressive industrial and economic feats.
Conversely, democratic regimes tend to be sloppy affairs with loud public discourse, a vocal press, stubborn land owners, and a myriad of civil liberties. Far from being able to harness economic resources, the government often must act more as a regulator. The result is that there are very few grandiose government-sponsored projects. Instead, there are countless private-sector initiatives driven by the invisible hand of the market. While the authoritarian regime is envied by some, the fact is that longer term, this type of socioeconomic model has typically led to economic and social distortions.
That is the dilemma that China faces today. Since the 1980s, the Chinese government has focused on developing an export-driven economy supported by an artificially undervalued currency. Foreign direct investment was encouraged while domestic consumption was limited. Massive infrastructure projects were initiated, fueled by a growing trade surplus, with cities sprouting up in the hinterlands like some mythical phoenix. For years, the Chinese economy benefited from these policies with double-digit gross domestic product growth, vast foreign currency reserves, and ever increasing capital inflows.
Inflation Could Spark Social Unrest
But now the economic and social distortions have begun to appear with rising inflation rates, numerous asset bubbles, looming overcapacity, and rampant institutionalized corruption. The Chinese government finds itself in a quandary. If the government allows its currency to rapidly appreciate to reduce inflation it will drive down exports and fuel unemployment. If it fails to quell inflation, social unrest will quickly unfold.
But even if the hare is running into obstacles of its own design, how will it give India the competitive edge? The advantage comes in the form of an entrenched and vibrant democracy that will ultimately drive India to outperform China socially and economically. Messy, frustrating, and more often than not agonizingly slow, India's democracy would seem to be chaotic at the surface. But if you look deeper you will quickly see why the tortoise will win this race. Let's take a look at two of the major advantages that India's democracy provides:
• Property Rights: As India becomes urbanized many families will choose to sell or borrow against their land so that they can start businesses, buy apartments, or provide education opportunities for their children. India is at the beginning of a gradual migration that is being driven by the development of high-end manufacturing and other sunrise industries that will require a vast pool of semiskilled and skilled labor. This migration will create an increasingly urban India that is expected to attract more than 200 million rural inhabitants to urban centers by 2025, primarily in what are known as secondary or "B & C" cities.
This transition will facilitate the sale of land holdings by an estimated 30 million farmers and 170 million other individuals indirectly tied to the agricultural sector. The sale of these holdings is expected to generate more than $1 trillion in capital by 2025. This capital will have a multiplier effect on the Indian economy that could exceed $3 trillion. The development of the mortgage-backed security and asset-backed security markets, driven by financial institutions like Citigroup (C), will create the liquidity required to free up this capital
China, by contrast, has no rural property rights. China's 750 million rural residents who lease land are at the mercy of the local and regional government as to what compensation they will receive, if any, when they are forced from the land as a result of development, infrastructure improvements, etc. Additionally they have no right to borrow against their lease, and as such they have no assets. In fact, the Chinese government's official figures state that more than 200,000 hectares of rural land are taken from rural residents every year with little or no compensation. According to some estimates, between 1992 and 2005 20 million farmers were evicted from agriculture due to land acquisition, and between 1996 and 2005 more than 21% of arable land in China has been put to non-agriculture use.
The result is not unexpected, with over 87,000 mass incidents (or riots) reported in 2005, a 50% increase from 2003. Many provincial governments in China have begun to use plainclothes policemen to beat, intimidate, or otherwise subdue any peasant that dares to oppose these land grabs. And, as would be expected, the beneficiaries from these policies are developers and corrupt government officials.
• Rule of Law: The rule of law is a fundamental cornerstone of any modern society. India has a legal system that has been in place for well over 100 years. This legal system is internationally respected and includes laws that protect intellectual property as well as physical property. The rule of law creates predictability and stability that allows entrepreneurial behavior to flourish. This is clearly evident in India, with more than 6,000 companies listed in the stock exchanges, compared to approximately 2,000 in China. More telling is the fact that of the 6,000 listed companies in India only approximately 100 are state-owned. This stands in stark contrast to China, where more than 1,200 of the 2,000 companies listed on the exchanges are state-owned.
Can there be any doubt as to where the next Microsoft (MSFT) or Intel (INTC) will be created? Certainly not China!
More than 100 Indian companies that completed initial public offerings as midcap companies now have a market capitalization of over $1 billion. Companies such as Jet Airways (JET.BO), Bharti Tele-Ventures, Infosys Technologies (INFY), Reliance Communications (RLCM.BO), Tata Motors (TTM) (which just acquired Jaguar), Wipro Technologies (WIT), and Hindalco Industries (HALC.BO) are becoming multinational competitors with globally recognized brands. China also has numerous companies that have a market capitalization of over $1 billion, but the majority of these are state-owned behemoths recognized by their sheer size and not their nimbleness.
When the rule of law is recognized by investors and foreign companies as something that is beyond question it serves to facilitate additional investments in research and development. For instance, 150 of the top global multinationals now have research and development bases in India. Additionally the U.S. Food & Drug Administration has certified more companies in India then in any other country outside the U.S., a testament to the innovation that free markets and the rule of law foster.
Little Protection for IP in China
China has a legal system that does little to protect intellectual and physical property rights, a fact highlighted in the 2007 edition of the International Property Rights Index, which ranks China with Nigeria in protecting intellectual property rights. In fact, China's illegal copying of movies, music, and software cost companies $2.2 billion in 2006 sales, according to an estimate by lobby groups representing Microsoft, Walt Disney (DIS), and Vivendi (VIV.PA). This figure may in fact be understated as it does not include pirated products that have been shipped to overseas markets by government-controlled Chinese companies.
The rule of law when applied evenly and justly in a democratic society also helps to ensure that wealth accumulation does not favor those individuals in political office or individuals connected to those in political office.
Democracy is a messy thing, especially when you have an electorate that exceeds 600 million people who are motivated to vote. However, democracy also helps to ensure that individual liberties are respected and that the government is responsive and beholden to the will of the people, rich or poor. A democracy also ensures accountability through impartial courts that help enforce and protect such things as property rights, environmental rights, human rights, and good governance.
India's democracy is far from perfect, but it is also quite young, and as incomes rise and the populace becomes more informed we can expect that India's government institutions will become more responsive and transparent.
And what about the hare? Consider this fact: A recent survey found that of the 20,000 richest men in China, more than 95% were directly related to Communist party officials. Where would you place your bet?
William Nobrega is president and founder of the Conrad Group, an emerging-market strategic planning and M&A facilitation firm based in Miami. He has more than 10 years experience in this field and is widely credited for initiating global business models in emerging geographies including Brazil, India, and China. He is co-author of the recently published book, Riding the Indian Tiger: Understanding India, the World's Fastest Growing Market.
没想到印度经济目前如此乱的情况下，还有不开眼的为它吹捧[:a13:] [:a13:] [:a13:]
SC的捞分贴都挪移到CD来了?
哈哈哈哈
有些日子了，。。。
有些日子了，。。。
[:a5:] [:a5:] [:a5:] 2025年
]]
印度民主自由充满生机？对于一个现在还把人分为几个等级的国家。。。。。。这几个词是否恰当？而且貌似印度农民比中国农民穷得多，通货膨胀也厉害的多。
印度目前是比中国穷。
但是几百年前西欧比中国也穷，后来西欧不是把中国远远地甩到后面了吗？
但是几百年前西欧比中国也穷，后来西欧不是把中国远远地甩到后面了吗？
undefined undefined undefined
原帖由 copy8 于 2008-7-23 15:38 发表
印度目前是比中国穷。
但是几百年前西欧比中国也穷，后来西欧不是把中国远远地甩到后面了吗？
出售土地所有权？
很好，阿三离动乱不远了
很好，阿三离动乱不远了
这一刻偶[:a5:] [:a5:] [:a5:] [:a5:] [:a5:]
我怎么感觉是一个阿三在yy
有些东西看似很合逻辑，只是没用发展的眼光看问题，当然这可能是故意为之。
中国，印度对于美国都太嫩，对其言行要有警觉:hug:
中国，印度对于美国都太嫩，对其言行要有警觉:hug:
中国的目前的问题也不少
这么猛的文章应该让每一个识字的与不识字的印度人都来拜读,并大力支持和拥护:D
原帖由 copy8 于 2008-7-23 15:38 发表
印度目前是比中国穷。
但是几百年前西欧比中国也穷，后来西欧不是把中国远远地甩到后面了吗？
的确，问题在于白种人用了几个世纪，而印度人要在二十年内实现，记住是2025年欧
原帖由 zjdyxd1 于 2008-7-23 16:48 发表
中国的目前的问题也不少
不错，想比阿三来说，我们的负重要轻很多:D :D
印度永远也不可能赶上中国，你看看印度人有多懒就知道了，非暴力不合作也只有在这种国家才能实现（懒得为英国人干活、也懒得反抗英国人、英国人被活活汽走了）。
谁喜欢去谁去不就结了，有啥争的
原帖由 Jesusum1 于 2008-7-23 20:02 发表
印度永远也不可能赶上中国，你看看印度人有多懒就知道了，非暴力不合作也只有在这种国家才能实现（懒得为英国人干活、也懒得反抗英国人、英国人被活活汽走了）。
而且印度人也找不到未来能满足他们的能源，印度这种国家，到头来说不定会成为“失败的国家”。
一看题目就知道了
肯定说什么印度明猪拉 中共专制拉
懒的说了
肯定说什么印度明猪拉 中共专制拉
懒的说了
等到印度人均到达今天中国这个程度的时候，资源将会是印度继续工业化的瓶颈，而且还是盖上瓶塞的。
原帖由 copy8 于 2008-7-23 15:38 发表
印度目前是比中国穷。
但是几百年前西欧比中国也穷，后来西欧不是把中国远远地甩到后面了吗？
见过傻的，没你见过你这么傻的，如果印度人有欧洲人那么无耻，那么血腥的话他不用100年也成，可惜时代不同鸟
原帖由 yan796113 于 2008-7-23 22:01 发表
一看题目就知道了
肯定说什么印度明猪拉 中共专制拉
懒的说了
这些人相信民主制度无比优越和中国人在60年代相信社会主义制度无比优越是何其相似。
原帖由 icebluesky 于 2008-7-23 22:04 发表
见过傻的，没你见过你这么傻的，如果印度人有欧洲人那么无耻，那么血腥的话他不用100年也成，可惜时代不同鸟
这个吗，欧洲当年发展的根本动力是科学技术和工业化。掠夺只能说是锦上添花。
;funk :L :( ;P :D :')
这一刻我。。。
这一刻我。。。
印度是在搞超前民主，也就是民主大跃进，类似于老毛搞的工农业大跃进，不但不会更好，相反，恐怕祸害无穷，中印差距不但不会缩小，反而会越来越大！
万一五年后TG完成历史赋予他的责任,顺利民主化,哪么,印度怎么弥补呢?~~
原帖由 伟哥A四代 于 2008-7-23 22:43 发表
印度是在搞超前民主，也就是民主大跃进，类似于老毛搞的工农业大跃进，不但不会更好，相反，恐怕祸害无穷，中印差距不但不会缩小，反而会越来越大！
就让他们吹吧，直接把印度吹到22世纪去 :)
哦耶，民主、自由的印度居然五十年都还没解决自来水供应问题，第一大城市孟买居然只有45%的城区有自来水管道，果然很好很强大:D
写这篇文章的人估计是脑袋进水了。
这边还没怎么吵，老外自己已经吵开了，看了商务周刊原文的回复，貌似BS作者的也占了大多数
坐等民主的印度强大之日
有一句评论似乎颇幽默：
India talks; China walks. Each beats the other in different areas.
India talks; China walks. Each beats the other in different areas.
中国很可能赶上工业化的最后一班车
中国大力发展基础设施的时候，原材料还很便宜
现在印度想搞，成本已经不知道是TG当年的多少倍了
石油涨了，铁矿石涨了，由此一系列的产品价格跟着涨，代价不是一般的大
中国大力发展基础设施的时候，原材料还很便宜
现在印度想搞，成本已经不知道是TG当年的多少倍了
石油涨了，铁矿石涨了，由此一系列的产品价格跟着涨，代价不是一般的大
原帖由 copy8 于 2008-7-23 15:38 发表
印度目前是比中国穷。
但是几百年前西欧比中国也穷，后来西欧不是把中国远远地甩到后面了吗？
中国的经济领先了世界上千年，打个瞌睡生次小感冒让西方人超过了一百多年有什么大不了的，怎么还怕我们中国追不回去，还是怎么的。