Back to India?

[bigbadwolf]

I was reading this story in the NYT today:

It was five years ago that I left America to come live and work in India. Now, in our family and among our Indian-American friends, other children of immigrants are exploring motherland opportunities. As economies convulse in the West and jobs dry up, the idea is spreading virally in émigré homes.

"In the U.S., there's a crisis of confidence," said Nandan Nilekani, co-chairman of Infosys Technologies, the Indian software giant. "In India," he added, "for the first time after decades or centuries, there is a sense of optimism about the future, a sense that our children's futures can be better than ours if we try hard enough."


Exact data on émigrés working in India or spending more time here are scarce. But this is one indicator: India unveiled an Overseas Citizen of India card in 2006, offering foreign citizens of Indian origin visa-free entry for life and making it easier to work in the country. By this July, more than 280,000 émigrés had signed up, according to The Economic Times, a business daily, including 120,000 from the United States.

And then, coincidentally, I came across this letter at vdare.com:

A Pennsylvania Reader Has A Two-Step Plan To Encourage Immigrants To Take Their Skills Back Home; etc.

Burns has raised an important issue: the economic downturn is hammering immigrants. They're starting to realize that the American myth dangled in front of them while they slaved away in corporate dungeons is a bold-faced lie.

I know at least one Indian in the hedge fund industry who's hanging on by a thread. If he loses his job—and he will—he's going to be unemployed with little hope of assimilating into the broader US job marketInstead of watching his life's savings evaporate to zero, his best option is to return to India, where his modest life savings will buy a mansion, servants and the chance to start a business in a place where he's in the cultural majority.

... Second, to report on VDARE.COM anecdotes and examples of immigrants who are doing just that. This, hopefully, would spark a self-deportation trend by getting immigrants to think and talk among themselves that it's better to ditch their US fantasy and move on to greener pastures. Today, home must look better to many immigrants than they could possibly have imagined five years ago.

 

[Uncle Max]

Instead of watching his life's savings evaporate to zero, his best option is to return to India, where his modest life savings will buy a mansion, servants and the chance to start a business in a place where he's in the cultural majority.

Well, the question: why he is still in the US waiting to be fired from his hedge fund while he has enough money already to buy all that beautiful life back in India? I don't think situation is that simple...

 

[bigbadwolf]

Well, the question: why he is still in the US waiting to be fired from his hedge fund while he has enough money already to buy all that beautiful life back in India? I don't think situation is that simple...

This is an American's opinionated fantasy about what life must be like in India. Of course in India the competition for good jobs is at least as ferocious as in the USA (if not more by a degree of magnitude), and the Indian's life savings would not go that far in a major city like Mumbai.

However, the current crisis is forcing a lot of skilled immigrants to re-evaluate their prospects in the USA vis-a-vis what India (or, say, China) has to offer. The "American dream" has lost some of its lustre. Or it comes with too high a price tag if one factors in stress, long hours,, uncertainty of various kinds, stagnant or declining salaries, and living and working in an alien milieu.

 

[bigbadwolf]

Or back to Israel:

Israelis in US desperate to return home



Consulates in North America report of flux of Israelis asking for help getting back to Jewish state after losing money in financial crisis; Absorption, Foreign ministries mulling forming possible airfare aid fund.

According to the report, dozens of Israelis who have lost their money in the financial crisis sweeping through the US have been pleading with the local Israeli bureaus to help them pay for a plane ticket back to the Jewish state.

Eli Yifrach, an Israeli consul in Florida, said that the Miami office gets several calls to that effect every day: "We've had cases of Israelis telling us they were being evicted from their homes, after faltering on their mortgage payments."

Another official with a different consulate said that his offices has had Israelis call in and ask for financial help to buy food. "In one case, I gave an Israeli $100 for food, and I know many contact Chabad centers and synagogues for food," he said.

 

[Andy Nguyen]

It seems like every few months or so, I read about a bombing attack there, the latest occurred in Mumbai days ago. We are talking about "New York of India", finance capital of India, not some lawless town in Mexico. I'm not sure what is going on there.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Terrorists_strike_Mumbai_80_dead_900_hurt/articleshow/3761410.cms

 

[Aditya Chitral]

Being an Indian could not refrain myself commenting upon it.

"This cowardly act is deeply condemned. Its high time India should be acting strong and taking actions against people responsible for it. I would certainly not want a terrorist being caught and kept in prison for 2 years and ultimately be released on bail. The judiciary system has to be bold enough to take tough decisions."


(An Eyewitness Account)

 

[bigbadwolf]

We are talking about "New York of India", finance capital of India, not some lawless town in Mexico. I'm not sure what is going on there.

They can be one and the same thing. The cities of the Global South -- Mexico City, Sao Paolo, Mumbai -- are a mix of seeming contradictions: on the one hand the surface glitz and glamor of high-tech, of billionaires like Ambani, Tata, and Mittal; and on the other, just beneath the surface sheen, the simmering tensions and ferocious struggles for bare existence that characterise the lives of most Indians. Propagandists for the New World Order like Thomas Freedman deliberately cover only the former, being careful not to step outside the narrow and exclusive world of five-star hotels and manicured golf courses.

Other than terrorism, look at the crumbling physical infrastructure of Mumbai; for example the havoc that floods exacted on the city three years ago (BBC NEWS | South Asia | Indian monsoon death toll soars), where you had the incongruous sight of office workers holding their laptops above their heads as they waded through waist-deep water.

 

[Aditya Chitral]

They can be one and the same thing. The cities of the Global South -- Mexico City, Sao Paolo, Mumbai -- are a mix of seeming contradictions: on the one hand the surface glitz and glamor of high-tech, of billionaires like Ambani, Tata, and Mittal; and on the other, just beneath the surface sheen, the simmering tensions and ferocious struggles for bare existence that characterise the lives of most Indians.

Other than terrorism, look at the crumbling physical infrastructure of Mumbai; for example the havoc that floods exacted on the city three years ago (BBC NEWS | South Asia | Indian monsoon death toll soars), where you had the incongruous sight of office workers holding their laptops above their heads as they waded through waist-deep water.

1. No one is insulated by terrorism today. Gone are the days when India used to complain about terrorism in Kashmir and no one would care about it. Several incidents have shown that even the MOST DEVELOPED countries find it difficult when they have to encounter the enemy with no face called terrorism. Struggle for bare existence can be any and everywhere.

2. All the countries, whose cities you mentioned are developing nations. They are in a transition phase and such differences of glamor and poverty are bound to arise. Everyone goes through this phase. A child is not born a scientist. Yes, its a different story that some graduate earlier and some take a while.

The important point is that this difference gives these countries a chance of rapid development.

 

[doug reich]

1. While terrorism is everywhere, it is more prevalent in some places.

2. Do you necessarily want to be in the country during that phase? Do you want to leave a developed country to partake in the upheaval? This should be part of the consideration.

 

[Aditya Chitral]

1. While terrorism is everywhere, it is more prevalent in some places.

2. Do you necessarily want to be in the country during that phase? Do you want to leave a developed country to partake in the upheaval? This should be part of the consideration.

1. Why is it more prevalent at some places has many reasons.
Geographical location of that place.
History of the place
Enemies and Allies
The philosophy of the country.
(Few of the many reasons)

India is not one of those countries who would be engaged in wars often. Sometimes the enemies take the silence as a sign of weakness, but that is not certainly true. Importantly its not what others think about the country. But what the people think about their own country.

2. If I am not part of the upheaval, I would not condemn it too. Criticism is good only when you are capable and ready to do something about the problem.

 

[bigbadwolf]

1. While terrorism is everywhere, it is more prevalent in some places.

Correct. Terrorism is political struggle by another name and it's more prevalent in the Third World than the First because the disparities are greater and because the struggle for resources among various ethnic groups is more ferocious. This will remain so: the megacities of the South -- leaving aside downtown high-rises and small guarded enclaves for the privileged, are really super-slums. Cities like Cairo, Karachi, Mumbai, Sao Paulo, Lagos, and Mexico City are what I have in mind. For more on this interesting subject, take a look at Mike Davis's "Planet of Slums."

As for the idea that these (Nigeria, Egypt, Pakistan, India, etc.) are "developing countries," the very idea is a riot. Only a propagandist like Thomas Friedman would say this. Or the World Bank. These countries are not going through any trajectory that can be defined as development the way the West understands it. Indeed, in India, inequality is being exacerbated. Average calorific intake has actually gone down in the last decade -- ah, the miracles of neoliberal "growth." India, with roughly half the GDP of China, has twice the number of billionaires. A nation of billionaires and beggars, with a relatively small and insecure middle-class component (middle-class in the Indian sense, that is). And this is throughout the Third World, not unique to India in any way. It's from this perspective that terrorism needs to be understood.

2. Do you necessarily want to be in the country during that phase? Do you want to leave a developed country to partake in the upheaval? This should be part of the consideration.

Yes, this is part of the consideration. People may leave for India but have to factor in increased stress, uncertainties about say, floods, sewage, traffic, water supply, electricity supply, senseless government bureaucracy, and so on. That they may still choose to go to India may then reflect a recognition of greater opportunities there than in North America and Europe (for them).

 

[Aditya Chitral]

For more on this interesting subject, take a look at Mike Davis's "Planet of Slums."

I do not think that is a very encouraging way to address it. Some things might look interesting when only read. The real world is very different though.

If a person thinks there is something going on wrong or not appropriate, do not be a talker, be an action doer.

When during elections it is said that if you do not vote(dont do your actions) then you have no right to complain about the goverment.(DO NOT COMPlAIN)

You get your rights only when you do your duties. Its not about what a difference one person could make. Its about even one person can make a difference.

One should remember, west is not the entire world but just a part of it.

To pass judgments without the proper investigation only reflects the near sightedness of the person who is judging the matter. Again there are many more reasons as mentioned before that reflect the past, current and future situation of a country.

 

[ramnik]

As for the idea that these (Nigeria, Egypt, Pakistan, India, etc.) are "developing countries," the very idea is a riot. Only a propagandist like Thomas Friedman would say this. Or the World Bank. These countries are not going through any trajectory that can be defined as development the way the West understands it. Indeed, in India, inequality is being exacerbated. Average calorific intake has actually gone down in the last decade -- ah, the miracles of neoliberal "growth." India, with roughly half the GDP of China, has twice the number of billionaires. A nation of billionaires and beggars, with a relatively small and insecure middle-class component (middle-class in the Indian sense, that is). And this is throughout the Third World, not unique to India in any way. It's from this perspective that terrorism needs to be understood.

I must confess that I was surprised to see that indeed the average calorific intake has decreased in India over the past decades...

Yet, there is hope. As my parents put it, for the first time in centuries, Indians truly believe that the future could be brighter than the past, and we will inherit a land of opportunity(much in line with the 'american dream'). Now over a billion self assured, motivated, technically and linguistically competent individuals is one deadly workforce. Furthermore, India is a very young country with 42% of the population below 18 years of age (source is 2 years ol'). Well I see the above as sufficient reasons to truly believe that India is on the road to development, do you?

Ah...and incase my words don't seem to make much sense read 'Mckinsey's Global Institute report on India'[focus on the paragraph on the 'great Indian middle-class'].

 

[bigbadwolf]

I must confess that I was surprised to see that indeed the average calorific intake has decreased in India over the past decades...

My source was something in print. I looked for something online and here is something:

Economists C P Chandrasekhar and Jayati Ghosh call this phenomenon the “calorie consumption puzzle”. Delving into the data released by the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSS) on nutritional intake in India — data pertaining to the 55th round of survey for 1999-2000 — they conclude that the report reveals unmistakable proof of a decline, over time, in per capita calorie consumption on average. The decline is “especially marked” in rural India. “Average calorie consumption in India,” they write, “was already low by international standards. That it has actually declined despite apparently high aggregate economic growth rates is clearly something that merits much more attention”.

...

Clearly, India is eating less. People are increasingly becoming poor and marginalised, which directly tells upon their their food intake and so the nutrition their bodies receive, But, even worse, what India is eating is also bad. Its nutritional deficiency understands neither poverty nor wealth; the deficiency affects all.

Yet, there is hope. As my parents put it, for the first time in centuries, Indians truly believe that the future could be brighter than the past, and we will inherit a land of opportunity(much in line with the 'american dream'). Now over a billion self assured, motivated, technically and linguistically competent individuals is one deadly workforce. Furthermore, India is a very young country with 42% of the population below 18 years of age (source is 2 years ol'). Well I see the above as sufficient reasons to truly believe that India is on the road to development, do you?

Ah...and in case my words don't seem to make much sense read 'Mckinsey's Global Institute report on India'[focus on the paragraph on the 'great Indian middle-class'].

I don't share your sanguine prognosis. Look, first, at India's population density, with over 1bn people. If the USA had the same density, it would have 3bn people. Just this itself indicates Indian people -- on average -- are never going to have the same trajectory of "development" and exploitation of natural resources: the environment and land won't allow it.

The Indians have followed the neoliberal route over the past several years. A corollary of this is increasing inequality -- which, inter alia, makes for lower calorific consumption on average. Neoliberal propagandists in the West are eager to trumpet Indian "success" in the same manner they trumpeted Chile's "success" in the past or the "success" of Iran during the time of the Shah. Yet the ground reality may be very different from what is portrayed by the WSJ, NYT, BusinessWeek, Time, Newsweek, and Tom Friedman.

What you have is 1bn landless peasants, frantic to become wage slaves because that's the only way of making a living, many of them crowded in huge slum cities. And sine there isn't enough wage work around, many of them operate in the informal sector, as in other poor countries. A few years back, Indian Railways advertised 20,000 unskilled jobs; over 800,000 people applied, many with engineering degrees and graduate degrees in business. This is precisely why India (and China) are attractive to foreign capital: a docile, trained workforce willing to work for slave wages. And they call this "development"....

As for the BusinessWeek report you cited, I read it right now and I wonder what planet they're on. There are so many inaccuracies, and foolish and unrealisable predictions, I wouldn't know where to start. Yes, there is an Indian "middle class": this is true. But it is not "middle class" in the European or North American sense, nor is it going to balloon up to 583m. It is in fact sheer propaganda, hysterical and deceitful, in the Tom Friedman style.

There's a new sector of tourism known as "poverty tourism," where the guides take visitors to less salubrious areas, off the beaten track of the Taj Mahal and other tourist hotspots. If anyone doubts my words, they can take one of these excursions and try to reconcile it with the words of neoliberal propagandists who have never been outside 5-star hotels (if indeed they've visited the country at all). I doubt they will be able to do so.

 

[ramnik]

My source was something in print. I looked for something online and here is something:

I never doubted the accuracy of the facts pertaining to calorie intake(though I was surprised to read this) . Yet, I have a couple of simple questions:
1. Have you visited India?
2. Have you stayed in India? [if so, where and for how long]
3. Did you by any chance visit (consciously) visit pre-reform India.
4. Have you worked in India?
5. Do you have friends of Indian origin whom you have discussed this topic with?
6. Are you willing to accept alternate definition or trajectories of 'development'?

And please refrain from

What you have is 1bn landless peasants, frantic to become wage slaves because that's the only way of making a living...

type of gross generalizations cause they just weaken your argument. A detailed response later..

 

[Andy Nguyen]

Let's get back to the original topic. The first post seems to discuss the idea of some groups thinking about opportunity back in India.
The groups consist of second generation Indian immigrants, people who have worked/lived in the US for at least a few years. It does not mention one group of interest here; the group of international students that still studying here. The article does not indicate if going back to India right after graduate study in the US is high on their list.

So with all the discussion here about the collapse of US financial market, terrorism in India, is going back to India after school something members here at least consider?

 

[Prateek Bhatia]

Indian students(including me) studying here currently would not at all want to consider going back after school, but i guess they might be forced to. A masters student will be spending anywhere between $45K-65K during study. You would want to earn that back. If you work at entry level salaries in India, it will take you 4-5 years to get that back, maybe more and you will never be able to save anything if you live in a city like Mumbai. (assuming you are completely on your own and have no family support)

From the point of view of an MFE, I don't think the finance industry in India have any real quant employment. Come to think of it, I don't think finance firms in India do any sort of quantitative work. Though I would love to know if anyone has more information about this.

 

[israelrt]

I don't think finance firms in India do any sort of quantitative work. Though I would love to know if anyone has more information about this.

D.E Shaw have several branches in India.
I refuse to believe that D.E Shaw does not do quantitative work.:D:D:D

http://www.deshawindia.com/FinancialResearchandOperations.html

 

[Prateek Bhatia]

Well what I meant was that quant employment and recruitment is not nearly at the same level as in the United States. Quantitative work is not done on that scale and MFE skills have never been in any realistic demand.

In fact even in the above link, the entity is DE Shaw SOFTWARE private limited. I think they do more back end IT and quant support. I read through their job descriptions. None of them require quantitative skills at the level of an MFE or a phD in a hard science. At best they ask for an MBA or CFA certification which tells me they are not really looking for quants in the traditional sense.

 

[bigbadwolf]

At best they ask for an MBA or CFA certification which tells me they are not really looking for quants in the traditional sense.

Pretty soon, with the way things are going, no-one will be looking for quants in the "traditional sense," either in NYC or in London :-ss. The party's over. A revealing essay by Sylvain Raynes has been posted on this forum. Indian nd Chinese students who come to study quant finance in the USA usually also come with the idea of subsequently looking for work in the USA. If the work isn't there, they will stop coming -- it is expensive and cannot be justified if they return to their home countries.