[jarsj]

I guess you have no idea what this is really about.

All we are asking our Govt. is to adopt same Net Neutrality standards that exist in US and other EU countries.

Companies like Uber/Amazon are already pumping huge money in India because they need us, not vice-versa. Just because we are open, unlike China, doesn't mean you can play unfair.

[mahranch]

> All we are asking our Govt. is to adopt same Net Neutrality standards that exist in US and other EU countries.

I understand that, and support it 100%. I am 100% pro-net neutrality.

> Just because we are open, unlike China, doesn't mean you can play unfair.

My issue is that India will play unfair. They have a history of it.

Say what you will about all the people who have their own anecdotal bad experiences with Indian companies & professionals over the last 5-10 years (dozens of accounts that I've read here, on our very own hackernews), but the simple fact of the matter is that even India's government has a track record of reneging on deals. And these weren't small deals, these were deals years in the making.

That's not good for India. Investors will (and are) balking at the idea of entering the Indian market because who knows when India will pull the rug out from under them when the mood strikes. There's also very little legal recourse when that does happen. It doesn't help when your country is among the most corrupt countries on the planet; they ranked 94th in Transparency International's corruption index. There are 93 countries less corrupt than India. Source: http://www.transparency.org/cpi2013/results

[jeevand]

> India has a long history of reneging on deals. Once a deal is struck with most nations, that's it. Done deal. With India, they don't care - they'll do whatever is convenient for them.

Most nations will do whatever is convenient for them. ex: If you are from US, GOP says they will cancel the Iran nuclear deal

> Hell, even Russia and China won't back out of deals once struck. They'll piss and moan if it turns out they got the short end of the stick, but they'll still honor the deal.

Not tue, ex: Hong Kong democracy

> I tell my clients to steer clear of India for this very reason - it's nearly impossible to know when a deal is "solid".

You just described all the other countries apart from developed countries where there are no severe penalties for walking out of a deal

> My issue is that India will play unfair. They have a history of it.

Every country does it. ex: Union carbide CEO lived happily in US till he died

> That's not good for India. Investors will (and are) balking at the idea of entering the Indian market because who knows when India will pull the rug out from under them when the mood strikes.

Investors know the risks, Equity Risk Premiums are higher for India (& other developing countries). If investors don't invest in India or China due to inherent risks then they might loose out in the long run given that the future returns from developed world will not be great

[mahranch]

> Most nations will do whatever is convenient for them.

Most nations do not renege on trade agreements made with other nations.

> GOP says they will cancel the Iran nuclear deal

"Says" and "do" are two different things, they won't because it's unprecedented. The U.S doesn't renege on massive trade agreements, or with the WTO.

> Not tue, ex: Hong Kong democracy

Ignoring the fact that I have no idea what you mean by this, I do know that it is not a trade agreement, nor is it a financial agreement with another nation. You're comparing apples and oranges.

> You just described all the other countries apart from developed countries

That was kind of my point?

> Every country does it.

Apples and oranges - no "big" country reneges on trade agreements, or reneges on deals with the WTO that were years in the making. Those things are completely unprecedented. I think you, and those who agree with you, fail to grasp the scope and what those deals meant. They literally ripped off the U.S. The U.S delivered on its end, then when it was time for India to live up to its end of the bargain, they ran off. Literally. (See here: http://www.ictsd.org/bridges-news/biores/news/us-launches-ne...)

> If investors don't invest in India or China due to inherent risks then they might loose out in the long run

Speculation. China's economy is slowing down and India's is pretty stagnant (relatively speaking). Other than having a lot of people (over a billion each), neither country has much going for it. There is no innovation coming out of either country. Look up any "most innovative countries" on google and see if you can find China or India among them. Those countries investors may risk losing out on - countries like South Korea.

> from developed world will not be great

Just having a lot of people (big population) doesn't mean there is money to be made. Especially when the government in question (China, for example) is about as authoritative as it gets. They can literally take your business away from you and kick you out of the country and there wouldn't be a damn thing you could do about it. That's not opportunity, that's a minefield. And it's why foreign investors are staying away anb/or pulling their funds out.

Edit: I just noticed in a prior comment you said you were from India, a farming village. Don't you think you're a little biased on the matter?

[jarsj]

Yes. A lot of things are fked up in India. That's not an argument to mess up one more. Internet is one thing we got right. Freedom of Speech, Online Censorship, Running an Internet Startup are no different than in US, even better. For starters, Our government doesn't spy. We don't get trolled for stupid patents. ETC

There are thousands of excellent Indian professionals, leading some of the top companies in the world. It's your loss if you make your opinion from the bad ones. We just have too many people.

Also, 2015 was the biggest ever in terms of VC deals 10+ Billion USD, Foreign Investments, etc.