But this observation masks two facts. One, these expenditures have hovered around a bare 1% of GSDP. Two, and much more importantly, private expenditures on health dwarf public expenditures in Kerala: in 2004-05, the latest year for which we have data, whereas public expenditures amounted to just 0.9% of GSDP, private expenditures were a gigantic 8.2%. The corresponding India-wide figures were 0.9 and 3.6% of GDP, respectively.
…
This same pattern is obser-ved in education. NGO Pratham carries out extensive surveys of children in school up to 16 years of age in rural India. According to its latest report ASER 2010, excluding two or three tiny northeastern states, at 53% Kerala has the highest proportion of students between ages 7 and 16 in private schools in rural India. The corresponding figure for the nearest rival, Haryana, is barely 40%. No matter how we look at it, the conventional and dominant story of Kerala as a state-led success crumbles in the face of hard facts.

According the recent budget 47000 is the per capita GDP of MAH…

The numbers need to be relooked excluding the south Mumbai elite… as VIDHARBHA(11dist) is scaling with farmers sucide, MARATHWADA(8dist) always draught or famine affected and KHANDESH (NASIK DIVISION) .. is high in child deaths due to malnutrition.

PUNE AND KONKAN DIVISION (which includes mumbai) are the only money rich areas of Maharashtra!…

EVEN JUST BY EXCLUDING MUMBAI CITY ALONE.. you will find how drastically our per capita GDP CHANGES!

I have few comments on this.

Please look at the state GDP ranking during independence (1950). I do not have the exact data, but I remember having read somewhere that Bihar was among the top states. Can someone help me with teh data?

Some obvious facts –

One of the most fertile alluvial soils of the world is in Ganga valley of Bihar.
One of the most mineral rich region is chotanagpur plateau -a part of erstwhile Bihar.

The combined region has the power of being economic powerhouse of the country.

In last fifty years the state has ben divided and it has gone down from among the top states to the bottom group.

Any one can say – it is the people of the state; but, there are reasons beyond people only.

I would request the analysts and economists to provide some answers to this. I will over next few weeks try to come with some answers.

The logic of relating political representation to economic condition of states militates against the basic tenets of our constitution which promotes equity and social justice. Had the same policy been applied fifty years ago by the founders of our polity, many states on the top ranks or GDP ranking today would have never been able to get any sizeable representation.

What Kerala is to middle east, Bihar is to the rest of India – labor supplier. The only difference is color of currency. It is not up to Bihar and its political and administrative class to channelize the money and skills earned by the Non Residents Biharis.

…let us look at some objective facts. We go by the State of the States report published by India Today every year in September. The statements made below are based on the reports for 2006, 2007 and 2008. This analysis is done by Laveesh Bhandari and Bibek Debroy for India Today every year.

By 2006, over 85% of Gujarat’s villages are connected with all-weather roads – just four years ago, only 72% of the villages had such connectivity. This improved to 99% by the time the 2007 survey was done. When it comes to quality of roads, Gujarat ranks the best with 59% of the villages having roads with a width of 18 ft. or more.

A more ingenious achievement has been the Jyotirgram scheme under which every village in the State is to get 24-hour domestic power supply. Notwithstanding the government’s claim, the actual power supply is only for about 20 hours a day, which too is a boon for most people. Over 17,000 villages have been covered under the scheme.

The availability of power has triggered reversal of rural-urban migration. People are returning to villages from cities –many of them start their own small businesses. At 46.5 mega kilowatt per hour per one lakh population, Gujarat’s rural power consumption is next only to Punjab.

The State has done extremely well in port sector too. It has the maximum number of minor ports – 40 along the 1600 km coast.

At 3.91%, the annual average percentage growth in physical capital in the 1990s was the highest in Gujarat. Unsurprisingly, the % growth in the State attributable to physical capital growth (4.99%) was the highest in Gujarat among all the big States. [Physical capital index includes % growth in households electrified and % growth in road length and % growth in fixed capital spending].

At 2.66%, Gujarat was the last among big States in the annual average growth rate recorded in human potential in the 1990s. [Human capital index includes % growth in share of graduates in total population and % growth in share of 26-40 year old in population].

In the category called “Investment environment”, Gujarat held the first spot for three consecutive years from 2005 to 2007. It conceded the first place to Himachal Pradesh in the 2008 survey but the difference was marginal. [The “investment environment” category measures % of State GDP spent on administration, per capita capital expenditure, commercial bank credit, capital formation, number of factories and industrial disputes, sick small scale industries, number of industrial workers per urban population in 15-59 group].

In a category called “Infrastructure”, Gujarat was ranked 9th among 20 big States in 2006 and 2007, improving slightly to 8th position in 2008. This category measures % of households with electricity, % of villages connected with pucca roads (surfaced + unsurfaced), road length/population, no. of bank branches/population, no. of domestic LPG consumers/total households, no. of post offices/population, no. of telephone connections/population

Under a category called “Budget and Prosperity”, re-christened “Macro economy” in 2008, Gujarat was ranked no. 3 behind Punjab and Himachal Pradesh in 2007. It captured the first position in 2008. This category is based on urbanisation, 100-head count ratio (I do not know what this means), capital expenditure/population, GDP deflator (current GSDP/constant GSDP), per capita GSDP, total population/total debt, GSDP for electricity, gas and water supply (at current price)/population.

Finally and perhaps, most importantly, the annual average GDP growth in the decade of 1999-2008 in Gujarat was 8.8%, bettered only by the small States of Chandigarh (UT), Nagaland and Manipur. The comparable figure for the nation is 7.3%.
[According to the authors, these are trend growth estimates derived from the latest Central Statistical Organisation data]

U r suffering from Biharofobia………..
Consult a mental doctor…