The ruling government has destroyed the Indian economy with its arbitrary decisions. And sometimes the get the judiciary to chip in as well.

The first real disaster to the Indian economy was the billions in retroactive taxes that were applied to telecoms. And then the attempt made by the government to break through the corporate firewalls and extract that money from foreign parents. That hit FDI immediately.

That was followed by demonetization, extremely poor rollout of GST, a terribly executed lockdown and subsequent reopening, and now the arbitrary control over Chinese companies when China is probably the largest private investor in India right now. All these things are hurting India with little benefit to show for, other than jingoistic support for the ruling party.

India is yet another example of “<Country> First” parties coming in and taking actions which undermine the absolute fundamentals of what the country is and damaging it and its citizens in so many ways.

Make life terrible for your citizens and blame China while looting your citizens left right and center is apparently a winning strategy in multiple countries.

Retroactive taxes was from previous gov. After recently launched PLI scheme, India has record high FDI inflows[1]. FDI was flat in 18 and 19, started increasing last year after corporate tax cut and further after PLI scheme.

Of course, India still has long way to go regarding Ease of Doing Business, with byzantine land and permit laws, capital crunch for MSME etc.. Some states like UP, Gujarat are trying to get around byzantine laws by abolishing them for few years. And of course GDP will contract after complete lockdown for a quarter.

1. https://www.financialexpress.com/economy/modis-incentive-sch...

2. https://www.financialexpress.com/economy/modis-incentive-sch...

> and now the arbitrary control over Chinese companies when China is probably the largest private investor in India right now

I do not fully agree with some of the other points made, but this I completely disagree. There are many reasons the banning of Chinese money and influence in India is a long term strategic security issue.

For the immediate short-term, there are Chinese tanks, fighter planes, artillery and soldiers gathering across the border with India, with multiple incidents and provocations. India still has the debacle of 1962 Sino-Chinese war fresh in it's mind. Couple that with the recent aggressive posturing, land grabs and general disregard for the rights of other countries displayed by China, it is obvious why Chinese capital and companies have to be banned or reduced.

You cannot have trade / exchanges with a country that is on the verge of attacking you. The very fact that China chose a military display of power to provoke India, very clearly shows that China does not respect India and it's sovereignty.

Now you may couple this with other aspects of Indian domestic and foreign policies, but those have to be solved through other channels. Not by military force.

Perhaps you are from the US, and believe that global flow of capital is more important and sacred than other issues, but I would encourage you to have a look from a different perspective.

Investments by Chinese companies in various countries around the world makes it clear that China is trying to influence internal politics of other nations through it's money and loans.

Please read how Chinese companies have wreaked havoc in Africa and South-east Asia.

At this point of time, China simply cannot be trusted by India and Indians. Neither should other countries. Because, in the long term, China has plans for world domination and being a super power. But that is not based on sound values, like that in the US constitution, but based on authoritarian diktats and a world view where Chinese usually see no one is their equal or even close to being one.

Clearly you lack the faith to trust in the wisdom of malicious demagogues supported by hysterical crowds

Please cite your sources, exactly and to the point. Lockdown if executed in any way would have been abused by the people.

People went on a rampage in *religious ( Taliban linked)" gatherings, India didn't had much cases but these bunch of people made sure the cases spread.

It's the people to he blamed for the lockdown spread

The Aurangabad branch of the Bombay High Court has quashed cases against members of the Tablighi Jamaat (which parent seems to be confusing with the Taliban) and said that they were made "scapegoats". [1]

In any case, large gatherings in both religious and political contexts have continued during lockdown. The lockdown has had no apparent success in reducing the rate of new infections. [2]

[1] https://indianexpress.com/article/india/tablighi-jamaat-case...

[2] https://www.ft.com/content/53d946cf-d4c2-4cc4-9411-1d5bb3566...

And what was the Ayodhya temple inauguration but a superspreader event endorsed by the highest political power in the land, disguised as a religious gathering?

Dont know why this is being downvoted. Sounds like a reasonable argument

Asking people to cite their sources without presuming good faith is not very welcome here.

No, it's totally welcome AFAIK.

But the comment made an inaccurate claim regarding the Taliban (which is not relevant in any way related to Covid infections in India) and neglected to provide any sources for their own claim while demanding sources from their parent.

Asking people to cite their sources in good faith is very welcome. Asking people to cite their sources in bad faith is not welcome because commenting in bad faith is not welcome. It says so in the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

My comment was about asking for sources, which is not mentioned in the guidelines specifically. "Assume good faith" is about how comments are to be interpreted, presumably when there is ambiguity. I don't see that it applies in this case.

> Please cite your sources, exactly and to the point.

This isn't a polite way to ask someone to provide evidence for their claim, it's a demand dressed up as a courteous request with the implication that the comment it was replying to was not "exactly and to the point" and that the author has some sort of onus to improve the quality of their conversation. But in fact it's really just a lazy comment because it costs almost nothing to post and yet puts significantly higher burden on the other side, especially because it is picky. Doing this is a classic example of engaging in bad faith.

(Good ways of asking for a citation might include "I don't agree with that, in fact I don't really think that I can find any examples of this occurring the way you have laid out. Would you mind giving some examples to show this actually happening?" This allows the author to provide sources without being left open to an immediate response that those sources are not "exactly and to the point" and is actually a deferential want rather than an imposition.)

Fair enough, thanks for clarifying.

India has all the right to protect its economy and people from chinese spying and tech dependency . Is nt that what US is doing with tariffs and bringing back jobs?? "Do they really want to start a trade war with China?" why not?? It already too late to stop china. India needs to protect its borders and economy from chinese incursions

It is, but for PRC, US is a major export partner, they can't really cut them off without themselves suffering too. So, US can afford to go on offensive there. Also, US does have technological capability to build the things they import themselves.

This might not be that true for India. Related subthread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24355659

India and China aren't exactly friends, I think its pretty reasonable to limit business ties of any kind. A sovereign nation has the right to ban any import, are you disputing that?

I'm struggling to understand the intent of your comment. In no way is it about "not having the right". I took it to mean the implications of a souring relationship - which certainly isn't the "right direction" to see relationships evolve.

China and India are economic giants - it'd would be preferable that they not see each other as not friends.

Is a video game, or any digital file, "an import" anymore? There's nothing physical to be imported so what the government is really "banning" here is access to information. That makes me a little uncomfortable, especially given India's reason: "they are engaged in activities which is prejudicial to sovereignty and integrity of India, defence of India, security of state and public order".

I'm not even sure what that means but I suspect that's intentional. From my reading though it doesn't sound like India is doing this as economic sanctions or for the health/safety/welfare of citizens (which would be the typical reasons for a democracy to ban an import). Instead it seems the government has decided that allowing citizens to access this information presents some sort of national security threat.

Wait a minute. What about China banning Facebook and Google? I mean Chinese government may be evil, but let's not keep double standards here.

I don’t understand the argument you are trying to make. Yes, China bans Google and Facebook, and it’s legitimate as they are a sovereign nation. Are you in fact advocating for those two companies to be allowed in China? If I recall correctly Google even banned itself from there because they didn’t wanted to comply with local regulations.

I keep hearing people saying it's wrong that China bans Google and Facebook. But why it's OK for India to ban Chinese apps? What is the difference here?

Google ceased operations AND was banned too.

Just because a nation has the right to do something, it doesn't make it a good idea, or even in their best interest to do so.

They have already started the trade war.

Has PRC also started it? It would be interesting if they go after critical components like semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, machinery etc.

Why would PRC start a trade war with anybody when they're all largely customers.

China barely imports anything from India so there's not even a place to start.

Not import restrictions, more like export restrictions, just to make the other suffer.

Wiki infobox suggests that they just have 3% exports to India, they can choose to take that hit. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_China

Why would the PRC follow India’s lead in foot shooting when they can simply not and come out better?

It’s like the US which is currently undermining itself in some sort of nonsensical effort to match China in the very things we don’t like about China and ends up hurting China.

Why impose export restriction when the other party is doing it with import restrictions to the same effect

India's economy won't be affected by the loss of PUBG. But it will without certain critical parts of the manufacturing supply chain. I don't know what those parts are, but the Chinese govt will know. A good example of this in action is banning exports of rare earth metals to Japan in 2010, affecting Japan's electronics industry.

> India's economy won't be affected by the loss of PUBG.

It maybe be improved by the loss of PUBG due to the gain in productivity /s

There are no jobs for the youth. 13 Cr people who have various degrees are unemployed.

More than 1.25 Cr have lost jobs this quarter.

India is imposing import restrictions on things they could make themselves, like software. Export restrictions would comprise things India can't make alternatives for, like electronics and pharmaceutical chemicals. The effect is closer to the US banning export of chips and foundry services to Huawei.

Unlike the US's tech export restrictions though, anything China makes India could probably find an alternative supplier for, just at a higher cost and lower volume. It'll still hurt, just not as much as being pressured by the US.

Does app ban really have any material impact on citizens?

Not having access to medicines or say equipment used in your power plants will.

PRC is happy annexing Indian land without open declarations.

The ban is most likely due to chinese encroachment on indian border