Congress vs. BJP: Unpacking India’s Economic Growth Story

India's growth in terms of economic values is often debated whenever the opportunity arises—whether it is being flattered by UPI's success story when you pay a vegetable vendor, or while watching heated political debates on news channels.

Recent remarks from Donald Trump about the “dead economy” of India have triggered a furious response from the government and its supporters, including the Godi media. On the other hand, the opposition and its supporters, along with the Lutyens' media, have welcomed his comments with support.

In our view, if someone calls our economy dead—and that too a person who is the head of a state like the USA—it should not turn into a blame game. Instead, we should unite and introspect. If something is indeed going seriously wrong, we must acknowledge and fix it. And if we are on the right path, we should continue with confidence, without being overly conscious of what is said about us.

Today, we will analyse and introspect whether Donald Trump’s remarks about a “dead economy” hold any merit, or if he made them just for the sake of saying it. We will not rely on perceptions or narratives, but only on data.

All the data used in this post is taken from the World Bank open data source. Anyone can cross-check the data points referred to here. For transparency, we will also attach the link to the raw data and the methodology through which the metrics are analysed.

So, let’s dive into the numbers and see what the data really says about India’s economy. If Modi government and his Godi media is posting doctored image of prosperity or it is other way around, Congress and Lutyans’ media lead by Trump is running their propaganda.

When we began this exercise, the idea was simple: compare the economic performance of UPA and NDA using hard numbers. But as we went deeper, from nominal GDP to real GDP, from averages to CAGR, the picture became layered and more complex. Let’s walk through the analysis step by step.

Nominal GDP and GNI:

The first step was to look at Nominal GDP, the raw, unadjusted growth data. Here, the picture for NDA was not at all encouraging. Growth under NDA appeared well below expectations. Compared to UPA’s 10-year performance, NDA’s growth fell short by more than 4 percentage points. It wasn’t just GDP, almost every nominal parameter was in the red.

Arithmetic average nominal GDP & GNI:

Government	NDA	UPA	Difference
GDP growth	10%	15%	-4.27%
GDP per capita growth	9.27%	13.00%	-3.73%
GNI growth	14.50%	12.43%	2.07%
GNI per capita growth	9.24%	12.94%	-3.70%

At this stage, it was clear that NDA’s growth was lagging. But nominal figures can be distorted by inflation, so we moved further.

Next, we checked Nominal GDP CAGR, which smooths out annual fluctuations to show consistent growth. The outcome? The numbers for NDA still did not improve much. Even when viewed through the CAGR lens, UPA outperformed NDA, and the broad conclusion remained unchanged: NDA’s growth record looked weaker, here is the comparison for you.

CAGR of nominal GDP & GNI

Government	NDA	UPA	Difference
GDP growth	9.17%	13.13%	-3.96%
GDP per capita growth	8.20%	11.69%	-3.48%
GNI growth	9.13%	13.07%	-3.94%
GNI per capita growth	8.17%	11.64%	-3.46%

Real GDP & GNI:

To take inflation out of the picture, we turned to Real GDP and GNI averages. This is where the NDA’s record looked slightly better compared to the nominal side. Once inflation was stripped out, the economy’s resilience became clearer. Still, the numbers were on a declining trajectory, suggesting the NDA years did not match the pace of UPA. For BJP the GDP growth was still down by 0.70% in comparison to Congress, other parameter was also down detailed table shared below.

Arithmetic average real GDP and GNI:

Government	NDA	UPA	Difference
GDP growth	6.06%	6.76%	-0.70%
GDP per capita growth	5.00%	5.23%	-0.23%
GNI growth	6.10%	6.66%	-0.56%
GNI per capita growth	5.04%	5.13%	-0.10%

Finally, we examined Real GDP and GNI CAGR – often the most reliable measure of long-term growth. The results were almost the same as before: NDA’s performance looked slightly stronger than the nominal side, but the overall picture still showed slower growth compared to UPA.

CAGR real GDP and GNI:

Government	NDA	UPA	Difference
GDP growth	5.16%	5.94%	-0.78%
GDP per capita growth	4.23%	4.59%	-0.36%
GNI growth	5.13%	5.83%	-0.70%
GNI per capita growth	4.20%	4.49%	-0.28%

Why the Numbers Look Better in Real Terms

So why did NDA’s numbers improve when we moved from nominal to real measures? The main reason is inflation management. Under UPA, inflation – particularly food inflation – was high in several years, which boosted nominal GDP but eroded real purchasing power. NDA, on the other hand, managed inflation better, so while nominal numbers looked weaker, the real economy was relatively more stable.

Possible causes of NDA’s slow down and UPA’s better growth:

Why slow down under NDA? The slowdown under NDA has multiple explanations:

· Investment Fatigue: Post-2008, investment momentum slowed globally, and India too felt the drag.

· Demonetisation & GST Transition: While aimed at long-term formalisation, these caused short-term disruption.

· Global Slowdown: Weak global trade and commodity cycles hurt exports.

But one question arises – why did UPA not see the same sharp slowdown, even though it too faced external shocks like the 2008 global financial crisis and Eurozone turmoil? Perhaps UPA’s cushioning came from:

Strong Pre-2008 Momentum: India was growing above 8% before the crisis, giving it a buffer.

Massive Stimulus Post-2008: Fiscal expansion and credit growth fuelled recovery.

Demographics & Consumption: Rising middle-class consumption supported growth even amid external shocks.

In contrast, NDA’s tenure coincided with a world of slower growth and weaker trade, and India’s internal reforms added friction in the short term.

Positive Reforms by NDA (Long-Term Gains)

It would be unfair to dismiss NDA’s performance purely on current numbers, because several of its reforms are aimed at long-term benefits:

· GST Implementation: Streamlined indirect taxation for the long run.

· Infrastructure Push: Record highways, airports, and digital infra expansion.

· Formalisation of Economy: Digital payments, UPI revolution, and tax compliance.

These reforms may not show immediate impact on GDP growth but could strengthen India’s economy structurally in the years to come.

Conclusion: Numbers vs the Future:

The data is clear: across nominal and real measures, arithmetic averages and CAGR, NDA’s growth record looks weaker compared to UPA. While inflation adjustment made the numbers look less alarming, the slowdown is real. Yet, it’s also true that NDA has taken big structural steps whose benefits are long-term. The risk, of course, is that the future is uncertain. Growth might accelerate as reforms bear fruit – or external shocks might again derail momentum.

For now, one thing is clear: India’s growth story has slowed, but its long-term potential remains intact.

Thank you for reading the post throughout, please do share your thought if you agree or disagree. Also let us know in case you have any doubt/questions on any numbers, arguments or anything else that is shared in this post.

Resources:

Data source: World bank open data

What is GDP (Gross domestic product): read here

What is GNI (Gross national income): Read here

Raw data and analysis methodology: Attached is Google drive link

Search This Blog

PolEcho