On the 3rd of December, Anil Swarup, a former IAS officer and Founder Chairman of Nexus of Good wrote a social media post that stirred criticism for its inaccurate depiction of wealth distribution in India. His ‘analysis’, which aimed to show inequities in wealth concentration, was echoed by financial writer Sucheta Dalal, who eventually deleted her post to escape criticism.
Anil Swarup estimated that India’s GDP in 2024 is around Rs 4 trillion (Rs 330 lakh crore), with a per capita income of Rs 2,800 for a population of 1.4 billion. The former IAS officer claimed that when wealth concentration among the wealthiest people is taken into account, this figure becomes misleading.
In his ‘analysis’ Swarup further claimed that Mukesh Ambani and Gautam Adani together hold Rs 200 billion in wealth and that the top 10 wealthiest individuals account for Rs 420 billion. He further stated that the top 200 people own Rs 1 trillion, while the top 1% of the population has $1.6 trillion and the top 5% own $2.5 trillion. Based on these claims, Swarup concluded that removing these groups would significantly reduce India’s per capita wealth.
Sawrup, in his now-deleted post, listed certain examples to put things in perspective. “Excluding Ambani and Adani reduces per capita wealth to $2,700. Excluding the top 10 wealthiest individuals lowers it to $2,500. Removing the top 1% brings it to $1,730. Excluding the top 5% reduces it further to $1,130, which Swarup compared to the per capita income of Sub-Saharan African countries,” the former IAS officer said.
Wealth and income conflation, pointless wealth exclusions, sensationalised wealth inequality and fallacious wealth distribution argument: Anil Swarup’s analysis
Anil Swarup’s analysis confused GDP per capita, an income measure of economic activity per person, with wealth, which refers to accumulated assets over time. This sort of conflation is a fundamental flaw that invalidates Swarup’s claims.
It was statistically and conceptually erroneous to exclude the wealth of individuals like Ambani and Adani from GDP per capita calculations. GDP is the total value of all products and services generated in a country. Individual wealth has no effect on GDP per capita estimates.
In his rebuttal to Anil Swarup’s flawed analysis, BJP IT Cell head Amit Malviya said: “Wealth inequality exists in every economy to some extent. Highlighting the wealth of the top 1% or 5% without considering median or average wealth skews the perspective and exaggerates inequality, ignoring broader metrics that better reflect overall societal well-being.”
I would have dismissed this analysis as a joke till someone pointed out that the author is @anilswarup58, former secretary in GoI. His post is flawed for the following reasons:
— Amit Malviya (@amitmalviya) December 4, 2024
1.Confusing Wealth and Income
•GDP per capita measures income (the economic output per person), not… pic.twitter.com/pxg6r13tFY
The contention that removing the wealthiest individuals will result in an even redistribution of wealth across the population is also flawed given that wealth distribution is determined by complicated economic forces including productivity and investments.
Amidst the backlash, Anil Swarup acknowledged that he copy-pasted his ‘analysis’ from social media and decided to publish it “as the conclusions were revealing.”
“I had picked up a quote from social media & tweeted despite flawed income & wealth connect as the conclusions were revealing. The response made me research & convinced me that inequities in the country are stark. We can condemn the messenger or improve the state of affairs,” Swarup posted on X on Thursday morning.
Responding to Amit Malviya’s post, Swarup wrote, “Yes, wealth and income are admittedly different concepts but related. However, there is no denying the ground reality of accumulation of wealth amongst select few and disparities of incomes. Not recognizing these facts will prevent us from taking corrective measures.”
Yes, wealth and income are admittedly different concepts but related. However, there is no denying the ground reality of accumulation of wealth amongst select few and disparities of incomes. Not recognizing these facts will prevent us from taking corrective measures. https://t.co/2sdjKffds6
— @anilswarup (@anilswarup58) December 4, 2024
Sucheta Dalal amplifies Anil Swarup’s senseless ‘analysis’, deletes post after backlash
The flawed ‘analysis’ by Anil Swarup was amplified by veteran business journalist Sucheta Dalal who in an X post published on 4th December said, “Some perspective for those wearing saffron tinted glasses. Try thinking when you cheer a govt that kills faith in institutions/regulators (SEBI), makes it hard to reclaim your own money (@authorityiepf @socialepfo @RBI), extracts 18% GST on essentials!”
Dalal’s statement sparked outrage, with netizens accusing her of supporting a flawed analysis that conflates key economic metrics. Amusingly, despite being a senior finance journalist herself, Sucheta Dalal failed to distinguish between wealth and GDP. Amidst the backlash, Dalal deleted her controversial post.
The level of economic illiteracy among leading Indian financial journalists and former bureaucrats is astounding. No wonder quackary reigns supreme in Indian economic policy making https://t.co/2oUJ2BbeWy
— Rupak Chattopadhyay (@RupakChatto) December 4, 2024
Many questioned Dalal for quietly deleting her post without even acknowledging her mistake, being a finance journalist.
Dear @suchetadalal you are a veteran journalist. Wouldn't it have been good journalistic ethics if you had clarified to your followers that you deleted the post on India's per capita GDP because it was factually wrong? So many people who liked/RT'ed it taking your word would…
— Sai (@Saiarav) December 5, 2024
This episode has left netizens baffled over the apparent financial illiteracy demonstrated by Anil Swarup, the former Education Secretary in the Government of India and Sucheta Dalal, who is a veteran finance journalist and author. The fact that Swarup picked up the arguments of his ‘analysis’ from social media wherein he conflated concepts like wealth and income using a flawed methodology and relying on unrealistic assumptions, compounded by Dalal’s quick amplification of the erroneous analysis has called their credibility into question.
