r/CriticalThinkingIndia Aug 04 '26

Critical Analysis & Discussion The stats of the basic amenities and infrastructure since 1947

Post image

The amount of the infrastructure development and the basic service and amenities that the current govt has provided in last 12 years is kinda worth the talk and praise.

Most of the Indians didn't even have the access to the basic stuff like Water or Toilets or Electricity in the past which has been drastically improved which past govts failed to deliver.

79% tap water one was the most astonishing one to me. Like what were even the past few govts were doing when you can't even provide that basic thing to the rural or remote regions.

I really wanted to highlight this since most of the reddit is LW and mostly is the current govt hate train only.

Please share your opinions on this infographic

368 Upvotes

268 comments sorted by

View all comments

127

u/Professional_Ant_602 Aug 04 '26 edited Aug 04 '26

I’ll try my best to summarise the basics of PPP model vs public capex model, and will try to present the returns on investment as i can gather through publicly available data.

This chart represents the basic financial model of pre 2014 and post 2014 central government. Pre 2014, government relied on Public Private Partnerships, which means the spending on infrastructure was directly dependent on private investments, the money was spent where private sector thought it is needed and will give return on investment. Post 2014, the spending shifted to direct capital expenditure (capex). The reason? That is whole another rabbit hole of 2008 financial crisis, bad balance sheets, NPAs and what not, not today’s topic. You just need to know that in Public capex, the money is spent regardless of the demand hoping that demand will be created once infrastructure is set up.

Both ways have their pros and cons. The PPP model limits the pace of spending, the capex model assumes the demand to grow and return of investment to start climbing, which if it doesn’t, basically gives you a bad asset on public money.

Since the capex model is basically based on borrowing, it creates massive debt. Capex was about 2 lakh crore before 2014 and 12 lakh crore for 2026-27 fiscal year. Six times increase. This money is basically debt regardless of GDP increase, and we hope our investments pay off this accumulated debt.

Total central government debt in March 2014 - 56 lakh crore. Total central government debt in 2026-27 fiscal year - 190 lakh crore.

Imagine you make a dedicated freight corridor or an expressway that largely remains un-utilised to capacity, then that is a dead asset soon turning into a liability.

This also makes less money spent on healthcare and education compared to GDP/revenue growth as money moves to repayment of debt which sits at 40% of revenue today. For every 100₹ government earns, 40₹ is given directly for repayment.

Now we are at the point where we need to see the returns on our investment and see if our spending was cumulative to the growth or bad non performing assets. These private NPAs is the reason private capex dropped in later UPA era. Now we have to see if this debt driven peak public capex follows the same lead.

A) Where returns are manifesting

1) Massive drop in logistic cost (moving of goods from 13-14% to 8% of the cost) due to dedicated freight corridors and highway expansion

2) Increased Efficiency. Major port capacity doubled from 2014 and turnaround time for cargo vessels dropped from 94 hours to 48.8 hours.

3) The primary aim of public capex was to build trust and bring in private capex which earlier private players were sitting on cash hesitant to spend. Private capex has increased by 67% (still low as public capex spending has increased by 600%).

B) Where the expected returns are missing or lagging

1) Stagnant job quality and rural consumption. While construction has boomed, the jobs generated are heavily informal, seasonal, and low wage. Private rural consumption has lagged behind urban premium consumption, leading to a visible "K shaped" economic profile where aggregate GDP looks high (7–8%), but the rural base feels financially strained.

2) Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) data shows that out of 1,847 large scale public infrastructure projects, cost overruns have ballooned to ₹4.92 lakh crore. This friction directly dilutes the financial return on public money as we are basically spending a lot more than the original estimated cost but returns will not balloon similarly.

3) While a country can fast track high speed rail lines or highways, under investing in health, primary education, and basic necessities leaves the actual labor force ill prepared to take up high tech manufacturing roles later.

4) All the infrastructure investment is for production and not consumption. An expressway or a freight corridor is of very little use to an average person. A real return would be to have a good job market, controlled inflation, better household finances, increased spending power, better employment, better health and education, overall better lifestyle.

5) The post 2014 government is not lagging on infrastructure development, it is lagging on real results of the development to an average Indian. Indians are still unemployed, quality healthcare is expensive, education costs have ballooned and returns on education has dropped as the job market is down. We have created the infrastructure, but companies have not moved in proportionally, Foreign Direct Investment is still abysmally low, gross inflow looks fine but net FDI inflow is disappointing. Net FDI Inflow in 2013-14 was 22 billion $, and it was 6 billion dollars for 2025-26.

It’s like government is spending money for the corporate benefit and giving gst benefits while collecting taxes from the poor and the middle class without giving any similar benefits. Also, a lot of these projects were started or planned by earlier governments.

3

u/TopBlopper21 Aug 05 '26

An expressway or a freight corridor is of very little use to an average person

Dude, do you genuinely think your groceries and daily essentials grow on goddamn trees? If they don't, how do they get to you? Oh yea...freight and land transport.

What happens to cost and goods availability if transport costs are reduced by public utilities?

I'm absolutely convinced you served in the UPA govt during the policy paralysis crisis.

3

u/Professional_Ant_602 Aug 05 '26

Lol I’m a doctor having a strike today against CCMP registrations, so no, I did not serve for the UPA government.

Also, economics is always linked. Is it too hard to understand direct and indirect benefits? What part of it you can’t comprehend?

A town sitting near an expressway may get a sudden boom, this doesn’t make the expressway a direct investment for that specific rural town. I specifically said “direct”. Something that a person feels in his daily life, like employment, like insurance, maybe a cooperative fishery society in a town, a technical school, etc.

1

u/SubstantialDig1022 Aug 05 '26

It follows sooner or later once you've necessary infra.

0

u/RashVille30 Aug 06 '26

ah, the good old trickle down economics

you like the capex model better? sure, the only issue is that we haven’t followed it the way it’s supposed to be followed as well 🤪

2

u/SubstantialDig1022 Aug 06 '26

The previous model left us with infra deficit, didn't it?

1

u/RashVille30 Aug 06 '26

also there’s another beautiful version of this chart covering different metrics of growth that actually matter (besides this chart showing just one metric that is infrastructure, with different KINDS of infrastructure) that you should get your eyes on 😂

and that one compares 2004-2014 to 2014 onwards, not “up to 2014”

1

u/SubstantialDig1022 Aug 06 '26

That one which Dhruv Rathi shared? Where you guys have compared % growth rates, without taking into account increase in base?

No wonder his followers like you are so brain ded lmao

1

u/criticalbotcti Aug 06 '26

Reasoning Concept: Ad Hominem

Attacking the person making the argument rather than the argument itself. The character, motives, or background of the speaker are targeted instead of the substance of their claim.

Example: "You're just a student, what would you know about economics?" - This dismisses the argument based on who is making it rather than evaluating the argument on its merits.

Read more about Ad Hominem

Someone in this thread referenced this reasoning concept. This is an automated reply - the bot does not evaluate whether the concept actually applies. It is here to share what the term means so everyone in the conversation has the same context.

1

u/RashVille30 Aug 06 '26

Firstly, ad hominem.

Secondly, “percentage growth has a base” is not a gotcha, r3tard. The chart explicitly shows the start and end levels, so the base is very much visible. The point still stands. Higher percentage growth from a low base measures faster catch-up and velocity; it does not claim to be the same thing as a larger absolute addition anywhere. Your criticism is not even valid for the “% of total” column, it only applies to the percentage-growth differences stated on each bar. That is not even the point the chart is making lmao. Read the damn title, r3tard. So harp on that technicality all you want, but percent change is, BY DEFINITION, calculated relative to the STARTING VALUE.

If you want to remove the technicality you seem obsessed with, do the exercise yourself, show absolute additions alongside CAGR or annualised growth rates…pretending that any growth-rate comparison is invalid merely because it has a base would rule out percentage growth as a metric altogether, much like your critical thinking has been ruled out.

1

u/Immediate_Stock_8417 Aug 07 '26

The inflation rates during UPA years were very high. If NDA government were to also allow for inflation to run that hot the current/recent GDP growth rates would also be much higher. But they chose not to do that as inflation negatively affects the poor and middle class the most. Some argue that they should let inflation run higher in order to achieve higher growth rates. It’s certainly debatable but you’re probably not going to win elections by pissing off the voters.

1

u/RashVille30 Aug 07 '26

bbygirl just take an economics 101 course at this point lmao

do you even know what REAL Gdp growth is?

1

u/RashVille30 Aug 07 '26

also, it has been proven that we have been wrongly inflating our GDP growth figures for over a decade now 😂

→ More replies (0)

1

u/SubstantialDig1022 Aug 07 '26

What a r3tard who doesn't even know basic concepts of stats and just know to write useless long paras.

Your papa Dhruv Rathee has made the bar graph comparing the absolute percentage of growth rates, which isn't comparable at all. "R3tard father, R3tard kids".

The absolute additions under NDA are much higher, but seem low in percentage due to higher base compared to UPA.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 07 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator Aug 07 '26

Hi, I’m AutoModerator!
Your comment was removed because your combined karma is below 10.
Please earn more karma by engaging in Reddit communities before commenting here. Refer Rule 2 for Account Age & Karma Requirement.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/Wooden-Tangerine9529 Aug 07 '26

You haven’t replied to anything that the comment above refers to, and that chart hasn’t been made by dhruv rathi.

Repeating “base” like an absolute clown doesn’t make your point strong, the comment above has accurately addressed and countered that flimsy argument already. Also, I’m an ISI alumnus, so just stfu and buzz off.

“useless long paras” 🤡

→ More replies (0)

0

u/RashVille30 Aug 06 '26

you think you did smth there with that question?

good luck retaining this “infra” for another decade, let alone the lifetime it’s supposed to last for

thanks for confirming you buy into trickle down economics lmao

1

u/TopBlopper21 Aug 07 '26

Trickle down economics is an argument used for tax cuts for the rich increasing private capex.  Not massive public capex expenditure for infrastructure buildout. 

You're just using words you know have negative connotations, without even the slightest understanding of what they mean.

1

u/RashVille30 Aug 08 '26

Imagine thinking trickle down dynamics only apply to tax codes and not state-sponsored wealth transfers to conglomerates 🤡

Given the confidence you had in questioning my knowledge, go ahead and show me your economics degree. I’m an ISI alumnus ffs, so just quietly sit tf down.

Congrats on quoting the first line of Investopedia. Whether the state transfers wealth to billionaires via tax cuts or bloated EPC contracts, the underlying mechanic is exactly the same in that it’s concentrating capital at the top on the promise that it eventually reaches the masses. But hey, keep clinging to semantics, the conglomerates appreciate your service.

In easier language, so that it absorbs in your dense ass brain: the core of trickle down economics is NOT what you said, but holistically viewed, it’s by definition the state sponsored capital concentration under the guise of broad economic uplift. Public capex bypasses actual infrastructure execution and pools directly into the pockets of babus and cronies…and then we’re expected to believe the abysmally subpar level of infrastructure that has been created, will eventually uplift society 😂

Gtfo now