Their wages aren’t actually the lowest, even in their region, Bangladesh beats them in that department.
The reason is that for one the cost of living is way lower than in western countries, which makes sense, considering india is a large scale producer of a lot of things. On the other hand the country has been struggling with not only implementing regulations, but also enforcing them, making it relatively easy for companies to exploit people there.
Then you have of course the toll that the british occupation had on india, which probably influenced that as well. (I’m not sure in what way or how much though)
GDP per capita is the relevant thing. India has like a billion people in it; that’s like over 14 times as many people as the UK, so if their GDP was the same, that’d mean the average Indian represented one-fourteenth as much GDP as the average Brit.
Comments
India has well over a billion people living there. Compare GDP per capita
Those two things are only mildly related. Luxembourg has very high wages, yet they have a tiny GDP.
Aye. It’s the huge population.
Their wages aren’t actually the lowest, even in their region, Bangladesh beats them in that department.
The reason is that for one the cost of living is way lower than in western countries, which makes sense, considering india is a large scale producer of a lot of things. On the other hand the country has been struggling with not only implementing regulations, but also enforcing them, making it relatively easy for companies to exploit people there.
Then you have of course the toll that the british occupation had on india, which probably influenced that as well. (I’m not sure in what way or how much though)
> Everyone is out sourcing to them so why are there wages so low?
Everyone is outsourcing to them because their wages are low.
Gdp per capital and it looks broke af
Per capita income. So GDP divided by working population.
I thought California had the 4th largest GDP in the world
GDP is only high because there are so many people. Almost 1.5bn and GDP is similar to Germany, but India has almost 20x the number of people.
If you buy a pizza the size of the house, but you have to share it with 100,000 people, how much pizza are you really eating?
GDP per capita is the relevant thing. India has like a billion people in it; that’s like over 14 times as many people as the UK, so if their GDP was the same, that’d mean the average Indian represented one-fourteenth as much GDP as the average Brit.
Supply vs demand for labor
If their wages weren’t low, the outsourcing wouldn’t be happening.
jobs are outsourced there bacause wage is low.
How do you think a nation makes money, by giving it to workers? Lol no. Look at Germany, same principle
(1) GDP per capita is the relevant metric and on that India is in about the bottom quarter of countries and
(2) India has one of the highest levels of inequality in the world – so even the GDP per capita is much higher than what the low earners are receiving
Supply and demand. There’s a huge supply of laborers in India. That keeps the price down.
Gdp doesn’t equate to the pay people make.
America has the highest GDP in the world but healthcare is ridiculously expensive. What’s your point?
Population. People are ready to work for less. Population also makes human life worth less.
Because there are so many Indians.
The GDP per person is a better figure for determining how rich a country is unless you are a government wanting to pay for your military budget.
GDP is the total output of all workers. Highly valued work or a vast population of low-skilled work will both lead to a high GDP.
GDP per capita is a better metric. India is #136 by that metric, UK is #18, Luxembourg is #1.