In 2001, Jim O’Neil of Goldman Sachs coined BRIC, the acronym that represents the emerging markets of Brazil, Russia, India and China. The term has symbolized the shifting of economic power away from the previously stalwart developed nations of the G7 towards new markets where financial returns are bountiful and the potential for growth outwardly limitless.
The first chapter titled “The Myth of the Long Run” illustrates that all developing markets are different. A mass approaching to invest in the developing markets is much riskier rather than each market being analyzed individually. Another point that this chapter depicts is that long term forecast are fundamentally random. A lot can occur in next 10 years even, so any predictions about 2050 or 2060 are essentially necessary. The author states that 2003-2007 was the period in which monetary assets were flowing into the developing market. The stock market development of the period occurred more due to the capital inflow rather than the structural reforms of discussed economies. In conclusion, …show more content…
The chapter describes that socialist ideologies and plans might lead India to the path of the welfare state of Brazil in 1970. India being a highly versatile society can be misleading for mainly people. The lack of infrastructure can be derailing for India as it lead to many other problems for the supply side of commodities which leads to higher levels of inflation, thus less capital for investment. Therefore, causing a damaging change of issues for the economy. With the population being divided into different ethnic groups, it divide seems to be overrated. While emphasizing the importance of seeing beyond the numerical implications, Sharma states that while 2011 GDP may not depict anything about India’s development in ten years, it does depict the where the top 1% may be. Thus, defining the upcoming differences that might be occurring due to income
The first chapter titled “The Myth of the Long Run” illustrates that all developing markets are different. A mass approaching to invest in the developing markets is much riskier rather than each market being analyzed individually. Another point that this chapter depicts is that long term forecast are fundamentally random. A lot can occur in next 10 years even, so any predictions about 2050 or 2060 are essentially necessary. The author states that 2003-2007 was the period in which monetary assets were flowing into the developing market. The stock market development of the period occurred more due to the capital inflow rather than the structural reforms of discussed economies. In conclusion, …show more content…
The chapter describes that socialist ideologies and plans might lead India to the path of the welfare state of Brazil in 1970. India being a highly versatile society can be misleading for mainly people. The lack of infrastructure can be derailing for India as it lead to many other problems for the supply side of commodities which leads to higher levels of inflation, thus less capital for investment. Therefore, causing a damaging change of issues for the economy. With the population being divided into different ethnic groups, it divide seems to be overrated. While emphasizing the importance of seeing beyond the numerical implications, Sharma states that while 2011 GDP may not depict anything about India’s development in ten years, it does depict the where the top 1% may be. Thus, defining the upcoming differences that might be occurring due to income