1/ Just because I drive a car and have driven it for a long time does not give me any particular insight on how to build one. Building requires a conscious process of learning and mastery and takes years, decades.

This is a fundamental difference that economists often ignore.

2/ Just because India consumes hundreds of millions of smart phones does not by itself create the know-how on how to build the phones or the networks.

At best, it is a *signal* that demand exists but that signal does not magically transform into know-how and capability.

3/ Flawed economic doctrine is why India has not acquired the know-how after decades of reform and during that period America has *lost* the know-how in many key industries.

That doctrine can be summarised as "Eating causes food to be produced" or "consumption drives GDP".

4/ Eating does not magically cause food to grow and there is conscious agency involved. Most economists abstract that away in their mathematical models.

Why is Taiwan the foremost producer of semiconductors in the world? Causal agency or the will to excel among the Taiwanese!

5/ We cannot mathematically model that will to excel, that conscious agency, that drove Taiwan to become the global powerhouse in semiconductors. Academic economists have that conceit that they can.

Taiwan has no natural advantages that would predict this - only will power!

6/ Can India marhall that will power to invent and produce? That's the most critical question and it goes beyond this policy or that tax incentive.

It is a question for the private sector and the elite citizens first and foremost and the government can only play a catalyst role