← Back to Library

I think India can do it

Noah Smith cuts through the noise of global economic pessimism with a bold, data-driven thesis: India is not just growing, but is on a credible trajectory to become a developed nation within a single generation. While much of the financial press fixates on bureaucratic gridlock or demographic headwinds, Smith marshals historical parallels and recent manufacturing shifts to argue that India's structural reforms are finally unlocking a 'growth miracle' comparable to the rise of the Four Asian Tigers. This is not wishful thinking; it is a recalibration of expectations based on the reality that India has already overtaken China as the world's fastest-growing major economy.

The Math of Catch-Up

Smith anchors his optimism in the raw arithmetic of per capita growth, challenging the narrative that India's progress is too slow to matter. He notes that while India's population growth dilutes total GDP gains, the per capita trajectory is staggering. "Thirteen years of growth at 7.2% would bring that to $29,878 — a little higher than where China is today," Smith writes, illustrating a future where a child born in India today could graduate college into a developed economy. This projection relies on the assumption that the current 7.2% per capita growth rate is sustainable, a figure that, while lower than China's historic 9.4% peak, is still transformative.

I think India can do it

The author draws a sharp distinction between total GDP and living standards, a nuance often lost in macroeconomic headlines. He points out that India's reforms in 1991 came twelve years after China's, yet the gap is closing rapidly. "If India keeps growing as fast as it's growing right now, it will be a developed country before kids born today are out of college," he asserts. This framing is powerful because it shifts the timeline from abstract decades to the lifespan of the current generation. However, critics might argue that this linear projection ignores the inevitable slowdown that accompanies rising wealth, a phenomenon known as the convergence trap. Smith anticipates this, noting that growth is rarely a smooth deceleration, citing China's own acceleration in the 2000s after joining the World Trade Organization.

"Growth is not always a smooth deceleration; sometimes it goes up for a while. And if Indian policy improves, it could see growth accelerate — or at least remain high as the country gets richer."

The Labor and Manufacturing Pivot

The core of Smith's argument rests on recent policy shifts that address India's historical bottlenecks: rigid labor laws and a lack of manufacturing depth. He highlights the recent overhaul of labor codes as a critical inflection point, replacing archaic federal and state regulations with a unified system. "India implemented overhauled labor laws that aim to attract investments and make it easier for companies to do business in the South Asian nation," Smith observes, noting that these changes specifically allow women to work night shifts. This is a pivotal detail, as Smith connects it to a broader historical pattern: "Most manufacturing miracles in history started with women migrating from farms to cities to work in labor-intensive light industry."

By unlocking the female labor force, India could replicate the industrial ascent of nations like South Korea. Smith argues that this reform signals a government willing to push through pro-growth measures despite resistance from incumbent stakeholders. He invokes economist A.O. Hirschman's theory that economic development creates its own political support, suggesting that once Indians experience rising living standards, they will demand further reforms rather than settling for the status quo. "Basically, this is the idea that Indians are not going to look back at two decades of fairly rapid growth... and conclude that this was enough," he writes. This psychological shift is just as important as the policy itself, creating a feedback loop of ambition.

Yet, the path is not without friction. Smith acknowledges that labor law reform alone won't guarantee two decades of 7% growth. The financial system remains a hurdle, with a high cost of capital stifling corporate scaling. "The country currently has a very high cost of capital, meaning it's hard for companies to borrow and grow," he notes, suggesting that fixing bond markets and relying on bank finance—similar to the models of past miracle economies—is essential. Despite these challenges, the momentum in manufacturing is undeniable, with corporate investment announcements hitting a decade high.

Breaking the Stereotypes

Perhaps the most provocative part of Smith's commentary is his dismantling of the cultural and racial biases that underpin skepticism about India's rise. He confronts the uncomfortable reality that much of the doubt stems from a belief that non-European or non-East Asian nations cannot build high-tech societies. "A lot of people just don't believe that Indians, as a people, have what it takes to build a modern high-tech economy," Smith writes, directly addressing the toxic rhetoric surrounding national IQ studies. He reframes the debate, arguing that cognitive ability and economic success are mutually reinforcing: as countries get richer, they get better nutrition, schooling, and infrastructure, which in turn boosts cognitive performance.

Smith draws a powerful historical parallel to Japan, noting that before its victory over Russia in 1905, Europeans dismissed East Asian potential. "Before Japan beat Russia in a war in 1905, Europeans didn't think East Asian countries could become modern industrialized powers," he reminds readers. India, he argues, is now in the position to be the first in its region to shatter similar stereotypes. The rise of the electronics sector, driven by Apple's supply chain diversification, serves as tangible proof. "Apple, the world's best electronics company, is steadily moving more iPhone production to India," Smith points out, highlighting a shift from simple assembly to higher-value component packaging and testing.

This diversification is crucial. While China seeks to monopolize global manufacturing, Smith argues that India has alternative sources of expertise from South Korea, Japan, and the West. "My guess is that the most important reason for widespread skepticism about India's growth prospects is something that most people are too polite to say," he concludes, identifying prejudice as the primary barrier. He also touches on the geopolitical reality that China is unlikely to be as accommodating to India as the West was to China, yet he remains confident that India's democratic openness and engineering talent will attract the necessary global capital.

"Some country always has to be the first in its region to break the old stereotypes and wow the world."

Bottom Line

Noah Smith's analysis is a compelling corrective to the prevailing gloom, successfully arguing that India's growth is not a statistical fluke but the result of structural reforms and a shifting global supply chain. The piece's greatest strength is its refusal to accept cultural determinism as an economic constraint, grounding its optimism in the tangible success of the electronics sector and labor reforms. However, the argument's vulnerability lies in its reliance on the political will to continue these difficult reforms amidst potential social fragmentation and external geopolitical pressure. The next decade will test whether India can sustain this momentum and truly become the first South Asian nation to join the ranks of the developed world.

Deep Dives

Explore these related deep dives:

  • List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita

    Linked in the article (5 min read)

  • Economic liberalisation in India

    The article references India's 'big economic reforms happened in 1991' as a pivotal moment comparable to China's 1979 reforms. This Wikipedia article details those specific liberalization policies that transformed India from a socialist planned economy to a market-oriented one, providing essential context for understanding India's growth trajectory.

  • Four Asian Tigers

    The article discusses India's potential to replicate the rapid industrialization seen in South Korea and references 'manufacturing miracles' driven by women's labor migration. The Four Asian Tigers (Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan) represent the specific economic development model India is attempting to follow, with detailed historical context on how these economies achieved rapid growth.

Sources

I think India can do it

by Noah Smith · Noahpinion · Read full article

In 2004, The Economist predicted that India’s economic growth rate would overtake China’s in two decades. In 2010, in an article called “India’s surprising growth miracle”, they shortened that timeline dramatically, declaring that India might overtake China in terms of GDP growth as early as “2013, if not before”.

In the end, it took two years longer. Since 2015, India has been the world’s fastest-growing major economy, taking the crown from China:

As The Economist noted, this is partly due to India’s more rapid population growth. If we want to look at living standards, we should look at per capita GDP (PPP). Here, India didn’t overtake China until after the pandemic:

India continues to turn in strong growth performances. In the third quarter of this year, it grew at 8.2%, up from 7.8% the previous quarter:

India’s population is growing at a little less than 1% a year, so this roughly corresponds to a per capita growth rate of around 7.2% or 7.3%.

That sort of growth rate is less than South Korea or China managed during their heydays of industrialization. From 1991 to 2013, China’s per capita GDP (PPP) grew at an annualized rate of 9.4%. But 7.2% would still be enough to utterly transform India in just a short space of time.

According to the IMF, India has a per capita GDP (PPP) of $12,101 as of 2025. Thirteen years of growth at 7.2% would bring that to $29,878 — a little higher than where China is today. That’s interesting, because India’s big economic reforms happened in 1991 — twelve years after China’s. Two decades of 7.2% growth would bring India to $48,609 — about as rich as Hungary or Portugal today.

In other words, if India keeps growing as fast as it’s growing right now, it will be a developed country before kids born today are out of college.

Consider even the more modest scenario in which India grows at the same rate it’s been growing over the past decade — about 5.4% in real per capita PPP terms. Fifteen more years of that growth rate would bring India to $26,633 — about where China and Thailand are today. Twenty years, and it would be $34,644 — about the same as Chile.

This is all a big “if”, of course. When I threw out some optimistic growth scenarios on X, I was mercilessly mocked:

But this critique ...