‘80% of TV components come from China': Rahul Gandhi says, ‘Make in India is just assembly, not manufacturing'; calls for 'ground-level change'
on Saturday called for a "ground-level change" to make India a true manufacturing power. He said under the name of '
', the country is merely assembling products and not actually manufacturing them.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
In a post on X, formerly known as Twitter, he said, 'Do you know that 80% of the components of most TVs made in India come from China? In the name of 'Make in India', we are merely assembling, not truly manufacturing. From iPhones to TVs – the parts come from abroad; we just put them together."
The Congress leader also pointed out at the structural issues and said, 'Small entrepreneurs want to manufacture, but there's neither policy nor support.
On the contrary, heavy taxes and the monopoly of select corporates – which have gripped the country's industry.'
Gandhi also focused on the fact that unless India becomes self-reliant in production, discussions around jobs, growth, and 'Make in India' will remain 'mere speeches.' He said, 'Ground-level change is needed so that India moves beyond the assembly line to become a true manufacturing power and can compete with China on equal footing.'
In his earlier speeches, Gandhi had cited government data to argue that 'Make in India' has failed to revive the manufacturing sector, noting, 'India's manufacturing share in GDP has fallen from 15.3% in 2014 to 12.6%, the lowest in 60 years.'
Highlighting the urgency for policy overhaul, Gandhi had earlier said, 'China has been working on batteries, robots, motors, and optics for the last ten years, and it has at least a ten-year lead on India in this space.'
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
'As the world stands on the brink of a technological and economic revolution, India needs a new vision for growth, production, and participation, one that directly addresses our two biggest challenges: the job crisis and the lack of opportunity for 90% of Indians.'
'Jobs come from production, which Make In India has failed to revive. But we have an opportunity with the revolution in energy and mobility, with renewable energy, batteries, electric motors and optics, and AI to bring these together. India must master a central role in this revolution, and boost production to give our youth hope for the future,' he had said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
25 minutes ago
- Time of India
Jagdeep Dhankhar resigns after nearly 3 years: A look back at his explosive face-offs with Mamata Banerjee as Bengal Governor
Before stepping down as Vice President citing health reasons, Jagdeep Dhankhar made headlines during his three-year stint as West Bengal Governor largely due to a highly publicised and persistent feud with Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee. While Dhankhar urged political harmony shortly before his resignation, his earlier tenure was marked by one of the most visible Governor-Chief Minister confrontations in recent Indian politics. Social media clashes and a blocked handle Tensions between Dhankhar and Banerjee escalated publicly when the Chief Minister blocked the Governor on Twitter. Dhankhar responded with a series of tweets criticising the state government's conduct. The editorial in the TMC's mouthpiece Jago Bangla, titled 'Ter Paben' (He Will Face the Consequence), reflected that the standoff was far from over. Dhankhar had actively used his official Twitter handle since assuming office in July 2019 to comment on various state matters, especially targeting the ruling TMC government. Letters, accusations, and constitutional sparring The strained relationship reached a critical point in November 2019 when both leaders exchanged official letters. Mamata Banerjee accused the Governor of provoking unrest and overstepping constitutional boundaries. Dhankhar countered, stating he had faced 'indignities' and verbal attacks from ministers. Banerjee urged the Governor to help maintain peace instead of 'aggravating' the situation through press briefings and tweets. The correspondence highlighted the power tussle between Raj Bhavan and Nabanna. Administrative deadlocks and the call for removal Banerjee had long called for Dhankhar's removal, citing difficulties caused by him in routine administrative functions—be it delayed file clearances or repeated summoning of top bureaucrats. The Chief Minister alleged that these actions were aimed at undermining her authority. Despite these tensions, Dhankhar was elevated to the Vice President's office in 2022, ending his truncated three-year governorship that typically spans five years. Political interpretation and the central government's role TMC saw Dhankhar's transfer to Delhi as a partial victory, although some leaders felt retaining him till the next assembly elections could have been politically useful to showcase BJP's alleged constitutional overreach. The central government, particularly Home Minister Amit Shah, reportedly informed Banerjee about Dhankhar's nomination without prior consultation—a move that the TMC criticised for bypassing established democratic protocols. A new political chapter, but lingering questions Hon'ble Vice-President & Chairman, Rajya Sabha, Shri Jagdeep Dhankhar paid tributes in the House today to former Members of Rajya Sabha:Shri C. PerumalDr. K. KasturiranganShri Ronald Sapa TlauShri Nepaldev BhattacharjeeSardar Sukhdev Singh DhindsaShri Thennala G.… While Dhankhar has since engaged with opposition forces as Vice President, the unresolved friction with the Bengal government remains a case study in Centre-state relations. TMC's decision on whether to support his nomination reportedly hinged on Mamata Banerjee's strategy following her annual July 21 Shaheed Divas rally. Ultimately, Dhankhar's nomination sailed through without a strong opposition challenge. Jagdeep Dhankhar's years in West Bengal redefined the visibility and voice of a Governor in India's political structure moving from a ceremonial role to an outspoken participant in governance. His feud with Mamata Banerjee was not just personal or political—it became emblematic of deeper federal tensions.
India Today
25 minutes ago
- India Today
Why U.S. military power is trapped in a loop of its own making
They say history repeats itself — but in America's case, it sometimes refuses to end. From the trenches of Europe to the deserts of the Middle East, the United States has fought, and continues to fight, wars that blur the lines between defence and domination, justice and justification. A century after entering the First World War, American troops are still deployed in more than 80 countries. Some conflicts fade from the headlines — yet they never truly This is the story of America's forever wars — open-ended military operations with no clear victory, no fixed timeline, and too often, no meaningful public debate. From World War to World PoliceThe United States entered World War to 'make the world safe for democracy'. The century that followed tested that promise repeatedly. In the post-1945 world, America fought in Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Panama, and beyond. Since 1945, the U.S. has used military force in over 100 foreign interventions — with wildly varying wars lasted weeks. Others spanned decades. The Korean War never ended — it merely paused with an armistice in 1953. U.S. troops are still stationed on the Korean peninsula, 70 years on. The Vietnam War left nearly 60,000 Americans and over 2 million Vietnamese dead, ending in scenes of chaos rather than Without EndThe Cold War may have ended in the 1990s, but the interventions did not. In 1989, the U.S. invaded Panama. In 1991, it launched Operation Desert Storm in Iraq. In 1993, American forces intervened in Somalia. In 1999, they bombed Yugoslavia. And then came the so-called War on the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. invaded Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003. The justifications varied — from dismantling al-Qaeda to eliminating Saddam Hussein's alleged weapons of mass destruction. But those WMDs were never found. Instead, war became a permanent fixture of U.S. foreign became America's longest war — 20 years, 2,400 U.S. soldiers killed, and over 170,000 Afghan lives lost. Even after the death of Osama bin Laden in 2011, the war continued for another decade. In Iraq, over 4,500 U.S. troops died, alongside up to 500,000 Iraqis. The power vacuum after Saddam's fall enabled the rise of Syria, U.S. forces have operated since 2015 with no formal declaration of war. In Yemen, the U.S. has supported the Saudi-led coalition, supplying weapons and intelligence despite mounting civilian casualties and a deepening humanitarian Machinery of Perpetual WarWhy can't America stop fighting?advertisementCritics point to a blend of policy, politics, and profit. A crucial legal mechanism is the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) — passed in 2001, just days after 9/11. It has since been used by successive presidents to launch operations in 19 countries, bypassing Congress and public scrutiny. There is no geographic limit, no expiry date, no oversight. In effect, it's a blank cheque for numbers are staggering. Since 2001, the U.S. has spent over $8 trillion on its post-9/11 wars — including $2.3 trillion in Afghanistan and $1.9 trillion in Iraq and Syria. According to Brown University's Costs of War project, over 929,000 people have been killed in these wars, and more than 38 million have been aren't just financial or statistical costs. They are human Invisible War at HomeBut the impact isn't limited to foreign battlefields. The domestic consequences of perpetual war are profound. War, once a national emergency, has become background noise. There's no draft. No war tax. No shared burden. A small volunteer military fights overseas, while the rest of the country scrolls past the the Pentagon's budget keeps growing — topping $860 billion in 2024, more than the next 10 countries combined. Much of this money flows to private defence contractors like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Boeing — the backbone of the military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower famously warned about in logic of these forever wars is circular: instability demands presence; presence breeds backlash; backlash justifies further presence. The treadmill keeps turning — and stepping off seems politically the ThreatSince the early 2000s, the targets have changed — from al-Qaeda to ISIS, from terrorists to great power rivals. Today, U.S. troops conduct drone operations and low-intensity combat missions in Africa, while shifting strategic focus toward Russia and China. The War on Terror may be fading, but the Forever War architecture remains firmly more alarming, the tools of war have seeped into American civil life. To combat terrorism, Washington expanded surveillance, militarised policing, justified torture, and operated secret prisons. Civil liberties eroded, often with bipartisan support — and the public barely Question No One Wants to AnswerThe media moves on. Congress rarely intervenes. And presidents, regardless of party, continue the mission. War is rebranded, relocated, resold — but not 2021, President Biden withdrew U.S. forces from Afghanistan. The chaotic exit dominated headlines. But even as troops left Kabul, they redeployed elsewhere. The war machine, critics argue, never stopped — it merely how do these wars end?Veterans, whistleblowers, and peace activists argue that endless war erodes democracy and weakens global stability. They point to the psychological toll on soldiers, the rise of authoritarian policies, and the blowback that breeds new enemies faster than old ones are warning is clear: if war becomes the default state, democracy becomes an illusion. If conflict becomes identity, then peace becomes the end, America's forever wars pose a fundamental question: What does the United States gain by fighting endlessly? And what does the world lose when it cannot stop?Until those questions are seriously addressed — not just by policymakers but by citizens — the cycle will continue. The headlines may fade. But the bombs will fall. The costs will mount. And the war will go on.- Ends
The Print
37 minutes ago
- The Print
Gold rises Rs 250 to Rs 99,020/10 g; silver climbs Rs 500 to Rs 1.11 lakh/kg
In the national capital, gold of 99.5 per cent purity advanced by Rs 250 to Rs 98,550 per 10 grams (inclusive of all taxes) on Monday. It had closed at Rs 98,300 per 10 grams in the previous market close. On Friday, the precious metal of 99.9 per cent purity had closed at Rs 98,770 per 10 grams. New Delhi, Jul 21 (PTI) Gold prices rose by Rs 250 to Rs 99,020 per 10 grams in the national capital on Monday amid a pick-up in demand by stockists, according to the All India Sarafa Association. Meanwhile, silver prices appreciated Rs 500 to Rs 1,11,000 per kilogram (inclusive of all taxes). On Friday, the white metal had ended at Rs 1,10,500 per kg. Bullion traders said that pick-up in demand helped the rally in the precious metal. Globally, spot gold rose by USD 15.16 or 0.45 per cent to USD 3,365.56 per ounce. 'Gold edged higher on Monday amid uncertainties related to US tariff policy and a pullback in the US Dollar, which provided support for precious metals prices,' Saumil Gandhi, Senior Analyst – Commodities at HDFC Securities, said. Gandhi further stated traders will closely monitor the US trade agenda alongside key US macroeconomic data, including provisional PMI figures, weekly unemployment claims, and durable goods orders. Additionally, spot silver went up 0.73 per cent to USD 38.47 per ounce in the overseas markets. 'Investors will closely track the US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's speech for further cues on interest rate direction and in turn trajectory for the bullion prices in the near term,' Jateen Trivedi, VP Research Analyst – Commodity and Currency, LKP Securities, said. PTI HG DR This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
