बहुत दिया देने वाले ने तुझको आन्चल हि न समाये तो क्या किजे

(Kindly excuse spelling errors that may be the mischief of converters)

Any one, and more importantly when that one is no less a person than Dr. Dipak Kumar Lal, is free to admire as well as to condemn, as opinions are free whereas facts are sacred. 
Instead of just one liners, why not engage in data compilation. India can be evaluated, bearing its contemporary China in mind, as also Japan, Germany, Singapore, Korea and like instances.
It may be convenient to dismiss a view, by adjudging something admirable as disgusting. But when it comes to fact compilation, an opinion may collapse as a castle of cards must.
 I am not a social scientist, nor a political analyst, nor ........  , nor ............, nor ....... (One is free to fill in the blanks, to denigrate these writings to have emanated from a non-expert of non-experts, but I assert to be one which few would dare to vie with. I am that great entity of that small denomination , bearing the nomenclature, 'citizen of India' .
Statistics may show me in the wrong, but at the micro level, I have my own experience as a cultivator. The per acre yield of grain has trebled. Which means I have multiplied my income 2/3 fold. Sorry. I as a farmer has been duped, the nation might have gained if statistics would so justify.
Earlier, I grew traditional varieties of paddy, involving expenditure equal to or in terms of paddy. I would spend 1 mound of paddy and would harvest 14/16 mounds an acre, thereby netting a profit of 13-15 mounds an acre. All I needed was protection against the vagaries of nature, but even the rain-fed areas would endure erratic rains or even inundations caused by torrential showers. Now the position has changed. The high yielding varieties require high investment levels which raise the break even to a point where crop failure incite suicidal trends. What has made the nation self sufficient on grains has equally made the farmers losers in terms of value. I am unsure if there are comparative statistics of the fluctuating fortunes of the farmers of this self sufficient nation on grains.   
Now, again, the above lines are my opinion which statistics can disprove, but who or what can efface that fact of mine that Nehru was indeed great who made the Birlas taller than sky, by making us endure Fiats, Ambassadors and Standards, when the world, especially you enjoying the technological advancements of the west, was standing confused with a vast choice while we were paying premium for a fiat premier. 
If you excuse me for this unkind cut, I may ask you one stupid question. Do an action replay. You had suffered a near fatal infection. Visualise yourself lying in PMCH of which you are a proud product. And then say where you stand in such visualised action replay. You might conjure up a heaven for yourself, as  argument for argument sake is all permissive and all pervasive. But I ,for one, can not conjure up anything better than a veritable hell for which, i don't know, whom to thank, Gandhi? Who gifted a true Gandhian to the people of India in the shape of a Nehru; or an Indira who might justify all her actions as long as people of India had yet to give her massive mandate; or a Rajiv Gandhi who proved to be a block buster pilot that brought out a magnificent crash for India on nearly all fronts, paving way for the lesser mortals to grow all around the country in the form of Lalus, Mulayams, Mayawatis, Jailalitas, Mamtas, Nitishes, so on and so forth. 
Shall continue, in different genres though, detesting absence of sensitivity on the part of those who carry India's glories while leaving its ordeals to be shared by the victims of those very greats whom you, from a distance, take pride in revering mindlessly.