Latest news with #WorldInequalityLab
The Wire
a day ago
- Business
- The Wire
Tryst with Destiny, Yet Unfulfilled
Independence is not a trophy but a foundation – one that requires building roads and rights, protecting the vulnerable, and ensuring every citizen finds belonging in this republic. At the stroke of midnight on August 14-15, 1947, Jawaharlal Nehru stood before the Constituent Assembly and spoke words that would resonate through time: 'Long years ago we made a tryst with destiny…and at the stroke of the midnight hour…India will awake to life and freedom.' These were not just words of triumph but a clarion call to transform a nation scarred by centuries of colonial oppression into a republic of dignity, justice, and opportunity. As India celebrates its Independence Day in 2025, nearing the centenary of that historic moment, Nehru's vision remains a lodestar – yet the pledge to redeem that tryst 'not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially' stands at a crossroads. India's ascent as a global power is undeniable. Still, the chasm between macroeconomic triumphs and individual welfare, coupled with strains on democratic institutions, demands a renewed commitment to the ideals of 1947. India's economic rise is a testament to its resilience. With a nominal GDP exceeding US $ 4 trillion in 2025, India has surpassed Japan to become the fourth-largest economy, trailing only the United States, China, and Germany. Forecasts project real GDP growth of 6.2% in 2025 and 6.3% in 2026, outpacing the global average of 2.8%. This growth reflects the ambition Nehru envisioned—a nation seizing opportunity from the ashes of colonial exploitation. The Green Revolution transformed India from a famine-prone land into a global food exporter, while missions like Chandrayaan-3 and Mangalyaan have positioned India among the space-faring elite. Digital infrastructure, from UPI's global-standard payment systems to widespread internet penetration, underscores India's technological leap. These achievements embody the 'flushing of the dawn' Nehru foresaw, where a nation's suppressed soul finds expression. Yet, this aggregate success masks a profound paradox. India's per capita GDP, estimated at US $ 2,754 to 2,880, ranks in the 140s globally, revealing a stark disconnect between national wealth and individual prosperity. The World Inequality Lab notes that the top 1% capture nearly 23% of national income, while the bottom 50% share just 13%. The Human Development Index (HDI) for 2023 placed India at 0.685 (130th globally), with an inequality-adjusted HDI of 0.475. While only 5.25% of the population lives below US $ 3 per day, 82% survive on less than USD 8.30 daily. These figures expose a nation where economic might has not translated into inclusive welfare. Rural areas, in particular, lag in access to quality education, healthcare, and livelihoods, while caste, gender, and regional disparities persist. Nehru's tryst was not just with power but with equity—a promise yet to be fully redeemed. The colonial legacy Nehru spoke against set the stage for these challenges. As Shashi Tharoor details in Inglorious Empire, India's global GDP share plummeted from 23–27% in the early 18th century to 3–4% by 1947 due to systematic British exploitation. Land revenue systems and commercial cropping triggered chronic famines, claiming millions of lives. Artisans were crushed by cheap European imports, and forests vital to indigenous communities were ravaged by colonial policies. Partition's communal violence and mass migration – displacing up to 10 million – left a fractured society and economy. Against this backdrop, India's nation-building was a Herculean feat. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel's unification of over 560 princely states reshaped the subcontinent's map, while the Constituent Assembly, under leaders like B.R. Ambedkar, crafted a Constitution that enshrined universal adult suffrage and reservations for marginalized communities. Institutions like the Indian Institutes of Technology, the Planning Commission, and the All India Institute of Medical Sciences laid the foundation for progress, embodying Nehru's call for a republic that dreams big. Today, however, such institutions face mounting pressures, from politicised appointments and budgetary constraints to ideological interference, as the Modi government increasingly seeks to align their functioning with its own narratives, often at the cost of academic freedom, autonomy, and long-term vision. Further, the democratic institutions that were the bedrock of this vision are now under strain. The 2025 electoral cycle in Bihar has ignited a firestorm, with the Election Commission of India (ECI) removing 6.5 million names —8.3% of the electorate—during a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists. Opposition leaders, including Rahul Gandhi, have accused the ECI of voter manipulation, alleging the inclusion of fake names and the deletion of valid voters, with claims of dual EPIC numbers issued to BJP leaders. In Mahadevapura, protests erupted over alleged voter suppression, while nationwide torch marches, signature campaigns, and rallies demanded electoral transparency. In Delhi, approximately 300 opposition leaders were detained during a march to the ECI office. Analysts have warned of 'thermonuclear fallout' for democratic trust, urging the ECI to publish voter roll data and address allegations decisively. These concerns extend beyond Bihar. In Rajasthan, former chief minister Ashok Gehlot criticised amendments to the ECI appointment process – replacing the Chief Justice of India with the Union home minister on the selection panel – as a blow to democratic integrity. In Tripura, former chief minister Manik Sarkar accused the BJP of tampering with voter rolls, undermining institutional trust. In Kerala's Thrissur, allegations of mass fake voting prompted calls for a repoll, with the education minister labelling it a 'democratic massacre.' Reports also suggest that 6.5 million citizens, particularly migrant labourers and marginalised communities, face disenfranchisement due to documentation issues, threatening the inclusive democracy Nehru championed. These incidents highlight the fragility of India's democratic scaffolding and the urgent need for institutional reform. Nehru's speech was not mere rhetoric but a blueprint for responsibility. His call to 'be brave, wise, and ready to grasp opportunity' shaped early governance, from the Panchayati Raj system that decentralised power to the establishment of nuclear and space programs under Homi Bhabha and Vikram Sarabhai. Secularism and pluralism, central to the republic's identity, helped sustain unity despite Partition's wounds. Yet, Nehru's caution that 'as long as there are tears and suffering, so long our work will not be over' remains prescient. Inequalities across caste, gender, region, and class persist, with access to quality education, healthcare, and livelihoods unevenly distributed. The political culture, too, has shifted. Nehru's warning against 'petty and destructive criticism' or 'ill will' resonates in an era of polarised discourse and image-driven politics, where credit-grabbing often overshadows institutional commitment. India's global vision, rooted in Nehru's Non-Aligned Movement, continues to inspire. By offering an alternative path for post-colonial nations, India championed a world where freedom was a universal right, not a privilege tied to superpower allegiance. This legacy endures as India supports democratic institution-building across Asia and Africa, from sharing electoral expertise to aiding infrastructure development. Yet, domestically, the nation must confront its own democratic deficits. The ECI's credibility hinges on transparent action – publishing voter data, investigating allegations, and restoring public trust. Economic policies must prioritise per capita prosperity, ensuring growth benefits the many, not just the few. Civil liberties – freedom to dissent, question, and protest—must be safeguarded as fiercely as economic targets. Pluralism, India's greatest strength, must be nurtured, not tokenised. As India celebrates yet another year of independence, the grandeur of 1947 still propels us. The nation's successes; economic, scientific, and democratic, are remarkable, yet they must be matched by renewed commitment to equality, justice, and institutional integrity. The path forward demands humility and urgency. The ECI must act decisively to restore trust, while economic policymaking must bridge the gap between national ambition and social uplift. Education and healthcare must reach the marginalised, and democracy must remain a lived reality, not a procedural formality. Nehru's 'Tryst with Destiny' was not a moment of closure but a call to perpetual action. He spoke of a future glimpsed 'in the flushing of the dawn,' urging resolve and self-awareness. In 2025, that dawn demands vigilance. Independence is not a trophy but a foundation – one that requires building roads and rights, protecting the vulnerable, and ensuring every citizen finds belonging in this republic. The noble mansion of Free India, as Nehru envisioned, is not constructed with bricks of power alone but with the steadfast labor of inclusion, the scaffolding of institutions, and the open door of opportunity. The tryst with destiny, far from redeemed, beckons us to act—not with nostalgia, but with the courage to forge a nation where liberty is real in every life, not just in every ledger. Let us step forward, as Nehru urged, with humility and ardor, to fulfil the pledge made long years ago. Amal Chandra is an author, political analyst and columnist. He posts on X @ens_socialis Thirunavukarasu S. is a Junior Research Fellow, Doctoral Research Scholar at University of Madras. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments. Advertisement
Roya News
5 days ago
- Business
- Roya News
India sends over 20,000 workers to 'Israel' as Palestinian labor ban deepens
India has confirmed that more than 20,000 of its citizens have relocated to 'Israel' to fill jobs once held by Palestinians, following the outbreak of the war on Gaza. Minister of State for External Affairs Kirti Vardhan Singh told parliament last week that between November 2023 and July 2025, 20,000 Indian nationals had taken up roles in the country. He said 6,730 construction workers and 44 caregivers were sent under a bilateral labor agreement signed in November 2023. An additional 7,000 caregivers and 6,400 construction workers entered 'Israel' through 'private channels,' Singh noted. The figures mark the most detailed disclosure yet of India's role in providing manpower to 'Israel', highlighting how New Delhi has become a key player in sustaining the 'Israeli' economy despite mounting calls from the international community to isolate the country over its ongoing war on Gaza. 'Israel's' assault on Gaza has killed more than 61,000 Palestinians, including over 18,430 children. The bombardment, recognised by several governments, rights organisations, and legal experts as genocide, has also left hundreds of thousands injured and pushed the entire population toward famine under 'Israel's' continued blockade. - labor crisis in 'Israel' - The war has triggered severe economic disruption in 'Israel', compounded by the cancellation of work permits for over 70,000 Palestinians. The construction industry was among the hardest hit, facing delays and rising costs. In November 2023, the Israel Builders Association publicly urged the government to recruit labor from India. Within months, thousands of Indian men queued for hours outside recruitment centres across multiple states, hoping for a position. Economists said these scenes exposed the deep inequality in India's economic growth, with many citizens desperate for stable employment despite the country's reputation as one of the fastest-growing economies. A 2024 World Inequality Lab report ranked India among the most unequal nations in terms of income, with full-time work increasingly scarce. The mass recruitment drive drew criticism from labor advocates. The All India Central Council of Trade Unions (AICCTU) urged citizens to refuse the jobs, warning, 'We call upon all workers to reject such 'suicidal projects' that would befall immense hardship and risk to their life!' Recruitment agency Dynamic Staffing Services, which says it has facilitated thousands of hires, promoted the positions as offering wages up to three times higher than in India. It described India's contribution to 'Israel's' rebuilding efforts as 'crucial,' adding, 'In the past, Israel had depended on Palestinian and migrant workers from other nations, but the political situation has left a big vacuum. As a result of this urgent requirement, Israel has sought help from India, and this relationship is steadily forming the basis of the nation's reconstruction process."
The Print
13-07-2025
- Business
- The Print
As Trump targets trade imbalances, economists' data traces over 200 yrs of global wealth flows
A trade deficit occurs when a country imports more goods and services than it exports while balance of payments is a record of all economic transactions between residents of a country and the rest of the world during a specific period. To bring new answers to these core questions, two economists, Gaston Nievas and Thomas Piketty, have pieced together a new database on global trade flows and the world balance of payments covering the period 1800 to 2025. Singapore: When US President Donald Trump talks about the need for a 'big, beautiful trade deal' because of the nation's trade deficits with many countries, and alleges that the US faces unfair trade, the question that needs to be asked is whether today's trade imbalances are unique in history. How do current patterns of global surpluses or deficits and foreign wealth accumulation compare with those of the past? Their research, based on the historical balance of payments constructed from various data sources, aims at understanding the historical pattern of trade and financial imbalances over the years, and was published as a working paper in May this year by World Inequality Lab, a Paris-based research centre dedicated to studying inequality and its impact on public policies. In it, the economists examine the patterns of global imbalances from 1800 to 1914 as one globalisation period and 1970 to 2025 as the other, and find some striking similarities and unique differences as well. Between 1800 and 1914, Europe owned a good chunk of the rest of the world without having a trade surplus. On the eve of World War I, its foreign wealth, i.e., net foreign assets owned by European residents in the rest of the world, reached about 70 percent of Europe's GDP (30 percent of world GDP), while all other parts of the world had a net foreign debt. Interestingly, between 1914 and 1950, Europe's foreign assets vanished and were replaced by foreign assets owned by the US between 1920 and 1970, and later by oil countries, and especially by East Asia (China and Japan), since the 1970s-1980s. By 2025, the magnitude of foreign wealth ownership seems to resemble a level comparable to that observed in 1914, but with a very different geography of lender and borrower regions. The two peaks (1914 peak and 2025 peak) in foreign wealth positions, i.e., countries owning assets in other countries, are also different in many ways. The magnitude of the 1914 peak was much larger than the 2025 peak, especially if we consider the fact that only a subset of the core European powers (Britain, France, Germany, Netherlands) held substantial positive foreign wealth, while the rest of Europe owed money. 'An even more striking difference between the two peaks is that Europe was able to build a very large foreign wealth without ever running trade surpluses over the entire 1800-1914 period,' the authors note in their paper. For Europe, there was rather an enormous trade deficit for primary commodities like agricultural products, minerals etc. (as large as 3.5-4 percent of world GDP each year between 1860 and 1914), and a large but insufficient trade surplus for manufacturing goods (about 2-2.5 percent of world GDP on average over the same period). This indicates that while Europe was the manufacturing powerhouse in the 19th century and early 20th century, making large trade surpluses by exporting its manufacturing products (e.g. British textiles), these trade surpluses were a lot smaller than the deficits in the primary commodities. This means Europe was importing a lot of primary commodities for its consumption (such as foodstuff) and that a large part of its manufacturing output, using primary imports from the rest of the world such as cotton, wood, minerals, etc, was devoted to domestic consumption and investment. So, how did Europe have a large and permanent trade deficit in primary commodities over the 1800-1914 period yet built large foreign wealth. The answer lies in observing the invisible flows of Europe's balance of payments–trade in services, foreign income, and foreign transfers, which all show a positive European surplus. To quote from the paper: 'The main European powers are receiving during this period enormous flows of dividends, interest, royalties and profits from the rest of the world, and these are the flows which allow them not only to pay for their trade deficits but also to generate large current account surpluses and to keep accumulating foreign wealth in the rest of the world.' 'It should be noted that no country or region in the world has ever received foreign income inflows approaching this magnitude since then.' Also Read: Trump extends deadlines for trade deals to 1 August, takes swipe at allies Japan & South Korea Colonial extraction During the 1800-1914 period, foreign transfers flowed from south and north and mostly consisted of colonial transfers towards Europe, one example being the debt imposed by France on Haiti in 1825, and most importantly, permanent public and private transfers of tax revenue from colonies to the metropolis (especially from India to Britain and Indonesia to the Netherlands). Haiti in 1825 agreed to pay an indemnity of 150 million gold francs to the European power which was meant to compensate French plantation owners for 'lost property' following independence, but the amount far exceeded actual losses. A large part of Europe's total foreign income inflow over this period corresponds to what is identified as 'excess yield', i.e., wealth accumulated due to the differential between rate of return on gross foreign assets and gross foreign liabilities. This means that the countries that control the dominant currency and the leading financial institutions of the time can borrow at lower rates and obtain high returns on their foreign investments. Although these patterns of 'excess yield', positive and negative incomes play a very important role, the point is that they are not large enough to reverse the trade patterns in the current scenario. This is the key difference between the 'Pax Britannica' of the 1800-1914 period and the 'Pax Americana' of the 1970-2025 period. The first refers to a period of relative peace and stability in Europe and the world, primarily during the 19th century when the British empire was the dominant global power. The second refers to a period of relative peace, particularly in the western hemisphere and globally, following World War II, largely influenced by US dominance as a global superpower. In the first period, Europe could appropriate large foreign transfers and income flows from the rest of the world, to be able to transform large trade deficits and accumulate massive foreign wealth. In the second period, while the US, through its financial dominance, appropriated sizable 'excess yield', this wasn't enough to offset the trade deficit. The researchers say this explains the 'nervousness and aggression' of the US administration in 2025, in which Trump seems to believe that the global public good provided by 'Pax Americana' should be better rewarded by the rest of the world, through financial transfer by allies in compensation for military spending or direct appropriation of mineral resources and other assets in Greenland, Ukraine or elsewhere. The challenge they face is that the rest of the world does not appear to be entering a new colonial era compared to that observed during the 1800-1914 period. Another part of the economists' research looks at alternative development trajectories by running certain simulations. These simulations illustrate the role of power relations and bargaining power in global imbalances: relatively small changes in terms of exchange can make enormous differences in long-run outcomes. 'In effect, without the colonial transfers, and in particular without the colonial transfers of the early 19th century, the geography of wealth would be radically different in 1914: South & South-East Asia – and to a lesser extent Latin America – would own large assets in Europe rather than the opposite. In particular, India and Indonesia would own large parts of Britain and the Netherlands,' note the economists. Akshaya Prakash is an intern with ThePrint (Edited by Nida Fatima Siddiqui) Also Read: BRICS leaders slam Trump tariffs & unilateral sanctions, US President promises additional tariffs
Indian Express
10-07-2025
- Business
- Indian Express
Measuring inequality
A government release over the weekend claimed that 'India is not only the world's fourth largest economy, it is also one of the most equal societies today'. Using data from the World Bank's latest Poverty and Equity Brief, it said India's Gini Index was at 25.5, which made it the world's 'fourth most equal country…after the Slovak Republic, Slovenia and Belarus', reflecting how fruits of economic progress were being shared 'more evenly across its population'. The Gini Index or Gini coefficient, named after the early 20th century Italian statistician Corrado Gini, has historically been the most commonly used measure of inequality. It measures inequality on a scale from 0 to 1 (or 0% to 100%), with higher values indicating higher inequality. The government's claim has been contested both by academics who study inequality, as well as observers who see India as a country with high and rising inequality. An incomplete picture The paragraph in the World Bank's Poverty and Equity Brief referenced by the government includes important qualifiers that the release did not mention: 'India's consumption-based Gini index improved from 28.8 in 2011-12 to 25.5 in 2022-23, though inequality may be underestimated due to data limitations… The World Inequality Database shows income inequality rising from a Gini of 52 in 2004 to 62 in 2023. Wage disparity remains high, with the median earnings of the top 10 percent being 13 times higher than the bottom 10 percent in 2023-24.' The government release does not mention the 'data limitations' that the World Bank itself has flagged, and does not take into account the Gini Index value calculated by the World Inequality Database, which shows a rise in the Gini Index from 2004 to 2023. Consumption-based Gini To map income inequality, countries often conduct surveys on income data. India, however, collects data on consumption, not income. When it comes to inequality, this makes a big difference because variation in income is far more than variation in consumption. As people earn more, the bulk of their additional income is turned into savings. As such, a Gini Index of inequality using consumption data underestimates the level of inequality in a society. Also, economists such as Anmol Somanchi, who works at the World Inequality Lab (run by the Paris School of Economics and University of Berkeley, California), have pointed out that it is misleading to compare India's consumption-based Gini Index value with that of other countries, which use an income-based Gini. In short, the use of consumption-based Gini underestimates inequality and undermines comparability with other countries. Limitations of survey data It is widely acknowledged that the gap between the bottom 10% and top 10% of the population is widening, even if it is assumed that everyone in the country is becoming better off. However, the calculation of inequality is unlikely to capture the widening gap. This is because surveys, whether they are about consumption or income, typically falter in capturing the data of the richest. This is for two broad reasons. One, the rich exhibit what is technically called a 'differential non-response', Somanchi said. In other words, the rich tend to decline to participate in surveys much more than the poor do. Two, the way the sampling of these surveys works, the chances of the richest persons in the country being drawn in a random sample are pretty low. This becomes a big reason for underestimation of inequality if just a handful of the extremely rich are driving up inequality. Thus, if 90% of the population is not 'unequal' while most of the inequality is being driven by the top 1%, any survey that fails to sample the top 1% will fail to capture the real picture on inequality. Researchers have flagged this underestimation in several other countries such as the US, the UK, and many other European countries as well. A way to correct for this lapse in sampling is to use the survey data in conjunction with income tax data, which is uniquely accurate in capturing the incomes of the top earners in a country. Studies that did this in the UK, the US, and elsewhere found that relying solely on survey data underestimated inequality. The World Inequality Lab Gini Index, which shows that inequality in India has increased, uses income tax data to correct for this gap. Problems with Gini Index The Gini Index too does not capture all aspects of the inequality picture. This is because it is not 'sensitive' to changes at the extremes of a population, but is overly sensitive to changes in the middle. This has to do with the way the Gini Index is calculated — and experts have been urging for close to 50 years now that other measures should be considered. One option is the Palma Ratio, named after a Chilean economist who suggested looking at the shares of income (or wealth) at the extremes — the bottom 50% and the top 10%, for instance. When such comparisons are calculated with the use of income tax data (apart from survey data), the emerging picture is grim: it shows income inequality is now worse than in the colonial period, and the top 1% earn far more than the bottom 50%. Bigger picture on inequality The point of studying inequality is to allow governments to tailor appropriate policies to alleviate excessive inequality. However, an inaccurate reading of inequality can lead to policies that actually exacerbate existing inequalities. If high inequality is not contained, it can create social unrest and eventually militate against sustained economic growth. Relying solely on the Gini Index, that too with severe data limitations, can obscure the reality. As explained above, a given version of the Gini Index could be falling even when inequality between the two extremes of the population may be rising. Udit Misra is Deputy Associate Editor. Follow him on Twitter @ieuditmisra ... Read More
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
26-06-2025
- Business
- Business Standard
Household income survey to gauge earnings welcome, but challenging
The World Inequality Lab has estimated inequality declined in India between 1947 and the early 1980s, before reversing course and widening dramatically over the last 25 years Business Standard Editorial Comment Mumbai Listen to This Article The Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation has announced a comprehensive household income survey, tentatively scheduled to kick off next year. The findings of an all-India income distribution survey could reveal critical structural shifts in the spending capacities of the economy's most vital actors, and help derive critical metrics like poverty incidence, the extent of income inequality, and urban/rural households' general well-being. Debates about whether economic growth is lifting all boats, or whether the trickle-down effect is evident, tend to be sharp and contentious but seldom based on credible data. Instead, proxies such as Household Consumption Expenditure Survey (HCES) numbers,
