Friday, March 14, 2014

Nitish Has Been The Top Performing Indian Politician

And that is why he is the best candidate for Prime Minister.

Modinomics: do Narendra Modi's economic claims add up?
Gujarat's growth rate in the 1990s was 4.8%, compared to the national average of 3.7%; in the 2000s it was 6.9% compared to the national average of 5.6%. The difference between Gujarat's growth rate and the national average increased marginally, from 1.1 percentage points to 1.3 percentage points. A good performance? Yes. Justifying the hype? No. Maharashtra, the top-ranked state in terms of per capita income in the 2000s, improved its growth rate from 4.5% in the 1990s to 6.7% in the 2000s. The difference between Maharashtra's growth rate and the national average grew from 0.8 percentage points to 1.1 percentage points. Contrast this with the performance of Bihar, the state that has been in the bottom of the rankings in terms of per capita income throughout: its growth rate was 2.7 percentage points below the national average in the 1990s, but 1.3 percentage points higher in the 2000s. So the prize for the most dramatic turnaround in the 2000s would go to Bihar.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Nitish Getting Only 5 Seats: Hard To Believe


Source: NDTV

Some theories. (1) The people of Bihar want Nitish to stay put in Patna. (2) They will give him a 60% majority in the 2015 state elections. He will get two more terms if he wants. (3) There is a upper caste bias in the media that is punishing Nitish for breaking up with the BJP. (4) Nitish has not led strongly enough. You can't become Prime Minister if you are not even running.
Enhanced by Zemanta