Comparison of Governmental Policies of India and China Regarding Economic Progress and Social Wellbeing - Essay Example

Compare the Government of India and China from 1950s s In Terms of Economic Progress and Social Wellbeing The government is an institution that plays myriads towards the success of its subject state. The power that the members of the state delegate to the leaders of this institution remains bestowed in their arms until their terms of the leadership reach dock. In most cases, some of the governments always strive to establish new policies and entities successfully within their respective countries that will earn the state long-term benefits. Efforts to improve the social, economic and political systems in the countries around the world lies on the hands of the political leaders representing these sovereign states. However, this responsibility does not lie solely on one specific regime of leadership. Instead, it depends on the historical context of issues and policies that a series of governments in the countries put into place. The most successful economies around the globe affiliate their economic stability with the strategic devoted participation of the past government institutions in the countries’ history. Perfect examples of countries that attribute their improved economic status are China and India. However, the extents and strategies employed in these states differ. Similarly, the social well-being of the citizens of each of the named countries differ substantially. This essay explores the role played by the government of China against that of India in defining the economies between the 1950s and 2010s. China and India have long economic histories. A series of challenges posed by the international economic forces may have played a paramount role in the development of counter-strategies in the two countries. However, the governments ought to have played the center roles in the improvement of the economic prosperity, as well as, the social wellbeing. India, in the 1950s, was a victim of poor government strategies in terms of addressing economic drawbacks (“Riches”682). For instance, the government was strongly opposed to influencing the development of the state through the private sector. According to the famous economist, Shroff of the 1950s, the idea of free enterprise was essential in redefining the economic sector. The idea was also vital in developing the social well-being of the individual citizens of the state (Harris 129). However, the government failed to show amicable support to the idea. Instead. It dwelt on dormant policies that could not facilitate any radicalization and change in the state of industrialization of the government (“Riches”682). Ideally, the government failed the Indian people by slowing down the rate of industrialization in the 1950s. This is because retained ancient policies that dragged the economy behind substantially. The government’s ignorance failed to indicate an expected economic dynamism in the 1950s. Precisely, it failed to offer any chance for free marketer to establish their economic influence to the Indian market (“Riches”683). Accordingly, history depicts that the cause of action by the Indian government towards accepting freeing trade was due to depleted level of the country’s currency. Reduced value of the domestic currency occurs whenever the specific state is not actively competitive with the international society. 1969 was the commencement golden time that India expected free trade to get endorsed (Riches, 684). The government, in the 1960s and 1970 made new frantic efforts to reinstate the economy of the state. Some of the steps that the government made included the nationalization of industries. Substantial autarky gets dated in this era (“Riches”685). The state of the economy being self-sufficient was an achievement for the Indians. However, nationalization was not the best strategy that the country ought to have taken at that time in economic history. It was faulty that the government of the time decided to divest the rights of ownership from the Indians citizens. Ultimately, the citizens suffered from low social and economic wellbeing (Harris 131). A lime right of free trading in India dates back to the 1980s. Sufficient business policies were put place to ensure that the industrial sector of India gained an affirmative momentum towards achieving desired goals. The 1980s and 1990s comprised of myriad economic reformed facilitated by the government. The business-oriented reforms in the 1980s elevated the economy’s growth rate (Hindu growth rate) (“Riches”687). The government improvise a new industry policy in the 1990s that licensed the most of upcoming small sector firms. However, the government retained custody of some of the crucial economic sectors and industries. These are industries that can get threatened by international community at the expense of the country’s status. The government also encouraged prominent international firms such as IBM, Wipro, and TCS among other firms (“Riches”686). The broad step that the government took to incorporate these competitive firms in the country was a boost to the economy’s state. The immediate impact that this form of economic adjustment can do is to raise the value of the country’s reserves account. Accordingly, the government meddled with the social amenities with an aim of reestablishing the sector. For instance, the government managed to develop high-quality engineering schools. The health care sector also grew to the currently renowned status. It is in India that most of the medical solutions get accessed. Resultantly, the affirmatively growing economy of the Indian society facilitates the increased population of the middle-class income earners. In addition, the Indian rupee is competitive in the international stock exchange market. On the other side, the Chinese government also has a history of participating in economic matters. The Chinese government, according to history differs substantially, with that of the Indian government. Ideally, the Chinese society remains a socialist country since the early 1950s. The paramount issue worth consideration is that history provides is that the government has always played a pivotal role ever since the 1949 (Hessler 10). One of the economic sectors that the government of china played a predominant role in stabilizing since the 1950s is the industrial sector. The government ensured optimal control of the industrial sector with the intention of stabilizing it first (Hessler 7). However, the government utilized the necessary intelligence as the economy grew to let go some control over the industries. However, the government maintained some of the vital sectors such as foreign trade. Accordingly, the government of china also played a vital role in determining the price patterns for most of the major crops that got produced in China. However, there is a sense of dynamism in the history of government in China. One strategy that the government made in ensuring that china continued being competitive was the incorporation of private sector and trading. The approach of the 21st century accompanied the initiative by the Chinese government to reduce central management of the economy (Hessler 9). The introduction of the private initiative, as well as, other affiliated market forced amplified. This initiative did not relieve the government off its role in ensuring that the economic progress of the state gets protected. There is some sector that the government continually dominated. Examples of these sectors include the urban economy, as well, as the agricultural sector. The government played a pivotal role in monitoring the trends of the rural sector in terms of development and spreading of social amenities to the areas. The Chinese government considers employing specific economic bureaucrats to man the sectors. The communist form of leadership demands that a hierarchy of command serves the purpose of manning the private enterprises in the country. Hence, it is impossible for anyone to try and subject own policies in the country without the consent of the government. The Chinese government, through the communist party, makes broadened decisions with respect to the proposed economic movements within the country (Hessler 13). The historical development of some of the economic institutions is the foundation of the current policy structure. One of the unique elements of the Chinese government intervention in the economic sectors gets based on international investment policies. It is not easy to invest in the Chinese society. However, any company that wishes to invest from a different international country into china must comply with the labor rules of China. In most cases, the government maintains that the social welfare and the economic welfare of the Chinese people are its responsibility (Hessler 11). Hence, most of the resources in China do not get depleted by international investors. The government mandates the allocation of these resources when it deems necessary to do so. Another economic resource that the government of china protects includes the financial resources and raw materials. One of the strategies that the communist government utilizes in protecting its territories is the protection of the territories. This gets done through reduced freedom of communication. Most channels of communication, including the internet, prohibits leakage of information concerning the whereabouts of the country. The government of china, through the increased volume of national reserves, managed to develop numerous social amenities within the country. For instance, it takes ample responsibility for the growing population. There are numerous ways through which the government participates in reinforcing a stable China. However, it commences with the basic education and health. This is beside the economic sectors that demand national interest and protection from international competition. Conclusively, a comparative inference retrieved from the history of the two countries substantiates that the Chinese government has been very pivotal in the development of the economy. In addition, it has been very active in ensuring that the social welfare of the citizens becomes a priority. For instance, the Indian government facilitated the slow progress of the economy despite increased propositions by renowned economies. Precisely, this was during the 1950s and 1960s when the government of India refuted the idea of private trading. However, the Chinese government, from the word go, has been very instrumental in adopting policies and measure that encourage industrialization. The rate at which the two governments facilitated industrial development differs substantially. It is true that each government played a role in the improvement of the economic prosperity, as well as, social well-being. However, the Chinese communist party depicts the success in maintaining economic progress, especially towards the 21st century as compared to the Indian government. Hence, the zeal to provide better social wellbeing is better instituted with respect to the Chinese government. Works Cited Harris, J. "How far has Indias Economic Reforms being guided compassion and justice." social policy in the neoliberal era (2014): 128-139. Web. Hessler, P. "China is in the fast lane, ignoring every speed limit. Cities spread like a cartographic contagion." National Geographic Margazine 1.1 (2007): n. pag. Web. "Riches." a history of events 1.1 (2004): 682-709. Web. Read More