Comments on: I was wrong. Nehruvian penalty is valid.

By: V Krishna

V Krishna — Tue, 07 Jun 2005 18:36:21 +0000

We have to be honest about Nehru, he was a jerk regarding foreign
policy and economics. Never has one so naieve ever held such a
high office. He had no understanding of sovreignty as he sent
the Kashmir question to the UN. Nehru let down Tibet as an
alliance with the US could have saved that country. He admired
communism and adpoted its suicidal economic policy.
His non aligned movement produced nothing except conferences and
pompus dinners. How many Africans were pulled out of poverty
because of NAM ? zero
at the same time he had a Soviet tilt which was a stategic shoot
one self in the foot as Pakistan fell into the American orbit.

You tell me what is so moral about aligning with Stalin and
the Soviet Union ? whats so moral about appeasing red china ?

Why is this important ? many Indians consider decendents of Nehru
to have a god given right to rule ! how backward !
This really harms the nation.

PS I am not a RSS fan , anti-muslim, or anti democratic.

By: WMD

WMD — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

At least those cyber-coolies who are from IITs and now toil for the white man and contribute to christian GDPs should stop talking ill of Nehru.

By: WMD

WMD — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Dont u get bored bashing Nehru all the time? How about wrting on what would have happened to India if RSS/Hindu Mahasabha came to power in 1947 and ruled india for 50+ years?

By: JK

JK — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Moral: Listen to what Mallus say.

By: seven_times_six

seven_times_six — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Ravikiran: You have to eat even more crow.
Here’s why:

Suppose a model gives the function GDP(v1,v2,p)
where v1, v2 are some arbit parameters
and p is a “policy” parameter.

Assume that for p = 1 (good policy), GDP predicts “accurately” i.e. for test inputs with p = 1, the predicted values are close to actual values.
For p = 0, the prediction is bad, off by a huge margin.

Now, for some PARTICULAR values of v1,v2; cant we compare GDP(v1,v2, p = 1) and “actual GDP with p = 0″? And argue if the former is larger;
that p = 0 is a bad policy?

I concede that it is logical.

By: Ravikiran Rao

Ravikiran Rao — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

No WMD. I don’t get bored of bashing Nehru all the time.

No 7*6 I won’t eat crow on that. You are badly twisting the meaning of “prediction” Let’s see the implications of what you are saying.

Suppose that GDP(v1, v2, 1.0) returns the predicted value of 8.5 which is close to the actual value of 8.2. But if GDP (v1, v2, 0.0) returns 2.5 and it turns out that the actual value is 8.5, i.e. “off by a large margin”. What does it prove? Does it prove anything other than the inaccuracy of the model?

Now suppose that in another case, GDP(v1, v2, 0.0) returns 7.5, while the actual value turns out to be 3.5 . How can you possibly claim that the difference was due to the low value of p? It simply means that the model was inaccurate in this instance.

By: Ravikiran Rao

Ravikiran Rao — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Or to put it another way 7*6, remember that my misunderstanding of the model was that
GDP(v1,v2,0.0) for India returned 7.5 while actually it was 3.5. Now given this result, a Nehru-defender could have said “See? The model conclusively proves that it was not Nehru’s policies, but something else that caused India to lag behind. The model clearly predicts that even with Nehru’s policies, which you call ‘bad’, India should have grown at 7.5% a year. But in fact it actually grew at 3.5. This clearly indicates that it was something else that held us back.” What could you have said to him? We wouldn’t know what caused the deficit of 4 points. It could be other policies, not covered under the model, or it could be non-policy factors like culture, social rigidity, etc.

By: RR

RR — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

how about this argument: even with Nehru’s policies we must have clocked a 7% growth because the model says so; that we haven’t been able to achive it
means that they must really have sucked, beyond the
comprehension even of the model.

of course, this would mean that the Nehruvian Penalty is larger then 3.

By: Ravikiran Rao

Ravikiran Rao — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

You can make the argument, but it wouldn’t be backed by any proof.

By: seven_times_six

seven_times_six — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

remember that my misunderstanding of the model was that
GDP(v1,v2,0.0) for India returned 7.5 while actually it was 3.5.

Indeed. I was just saying that even with a model GDP(v1,v2,p) which depends on policy, and which predicts badly for p = 0 (bad policy), it can still be used to derive a Nehruvian penalty,
by comparing GDP(v1,v2,p = 1) and actual GDP.

But you are right that this doesn’t entail your eating more crow since this wasn’t your misunderstanding at all.
I just thought that since you were already eating crow, and there were so many crows, I should…