A tussle between good corrupt and bad corrupt.

The "climate of fear" referred to by former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh "is partially caused by a crackdown on corruption, which is choking new projects, investments and bureaucratic decisions", wrote Prof Shruti Rajagopalan. Using public office for private gain is bad for the economy but economists say that one must be careful to distinguish between "good corruption" and "bad corruption". "In countries that have burdensome and pervasive regulation, 'good corruption' -- or rather, the type that increases efficiency -- might actually help improve economic growth. India has a nightmarish regulatory system, inherited from the British Raj and subsequently from its socialist Licence Permit Raj era" The Goods and Services Tax (GST) is supposed to be a single indirect tax for the whole nation but companies are supposed to register in every state they operate in. Such is the suspicion, that GST officers from every small town are asking companies for details. There are 7,935 towns and cities in India and if companies have to answer queries from everyone they will have to spend a fortune on accountants. "In the 2000s, India produced three world-class industries -- software, automobiles and pharmaceuticals. In the 2010s, it hasn't produced a single new world-class industry, mainly because of India's lousy education system," wrote SA Aiyer. "Pending legal cases exceed 35 million, and cases go on forever, so law-breakers have an advantage over law abiders." "Compared to competitors, India has higher costs of land, labor, capital, electricity, tax rates, rail and air freight." Since GST was supposed to replace all indirect taxes and states did not want to lose out on revenue the rate of GST was "estimated by using the concept of a revenue neutral rate (RNR)", wrote Ajit Ranade. This led to multiple rates. "A plethora of rates, such as a lower rate for salted groundnuts but higher for peanut butter, makes space for discretion on the part of tax inspectors, misclassification, interpretation disputes, litigation, corruption, and worse." It is Manmohan Singh, as Finance Minister, who is credited with liberalizing the economy in 1991, but economist Paul Krugman warned that it would merely improve efficiency of utilising resources and give a "one-time economic boost", wrote Prof Ashoka Mody. "The Sensex rose from about 1,400 on the day before Singh's speech in July 1991 to 4,467 on 22 April, 1992", which gave politicians a false sense of progress. The government has reduced corporate tax, increased liquidity, given cash to the rural population and the Reserve Bank (RBI) has reduced interest rates by 135 basis points, but it has helped the stock market and has not increased  the rate of economic growth, wrote Harsha Jethmalani. "At one-year price-to-earnings multiple of 18 times, the MSCI India index is trading much higher than Asian peers." Bereft of any ideas, blaming people for corruption is the only way to divert attention. At least it divides between haves and have-nots and protects votes.