论文部分内容阅读
对J·R·D·塔塔这个以本人姓名命名的私营工业帝国的董事长来说,什么也不如批评独立33年以来领导印度经济的方式能使他高兴。这并不是因为他反对尼赫鲁和议会从五十年代起为反对贫困和经济落后而选中的某种社会主义。但是,他感到遗憾的是国家干预的无效及其所造成的物质损失。他喜欢重复地说:“限制私人的积极性没有减少贫因,没有减少不平等,也没有减少地区之间的不平衡。”印度迷恋按苏联模式实行的计划化,使他反感。回答这个著名的工业家是很容易的:因为三十年来国家对动力、钢铁、运输、电信等部门的巨额投资使私营部门得到了很大的好处。在很多情况下,私营部门由于缺乏足够的资金(塔塔也同意这一点)以及不能相当迅速地获得利润而不会投机冒险。工业增长率相当高的原因就在于此(1950-1977年期间年增长率为5.2%)。
For J.DRT, the chairman of the private industrial empire named after him, nothing is as delightful as the way he led the Indian economy since he criticized independence for 33 years. This is not because he opposes Nehru and some kind of socialism selected by the parliament since the 1950s to fight poverty and economic backwardness. However, he regretted the inefficiency of state intervention and the material damage it caused. He likes to repeat: “Limiting private initiative did not reduce poverty, did not reduce inequality, nor did it reduce regional imbalances.” India obsessed with planning under the Soviet model displeased him. Answering this famous industrialist is easy: the private sector has benefited greatly from the country’s massive investment in power, steel, transport, telecommunications and other sectors for three decades. In many cases, the private sector will not be opportunistic because of a lack of adequate funding (Tata also agrees) and not being able to profit quite quickly. The reason for the relatively high rate of industrial growth lies in this (annual growth rate of 5.2% during 1950-1977).