Offer a substantice critique of the following article: Barbiero, Thomas, and Haiwen Zhou. "Culture and Economic Development in Late Comers: Comparing China and India." The Chinese economy. (2024): 1-16. Web. Thomas Barbiero, Department of Economics, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, ON, and Haiwen Zhou, Department of Economics, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia, compare and contrast the economic growth of two of the world's most populous countries. They analyze why China's individual Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is 5 times more than that of India, even though both countries engage in international trade. In this article, they define what state capacity is, and how it contributes to economic growth of a country. Barbiero and Zhou argue that the state capacity, history, and homogenous culture of China contributed greatly to its economic performance. China embarked on large scale infrastructure projects, focusing on technology building, opening to foreign trade in the 1970's. In contrast, for India, Barbiero and Zhou outline several factors to support the notion that India did not have as strong a state capacity, contributing to the slower growth of GDP. They state such factors as the heterogenous aspects of India's culture, the impacts of the Hindu religion, and the caste system fragmented it's markets, resulting in its state capacity as a hinder to economic growth. For India, because of a weaker state capacity, Barbiero and Zhou describe how the service sec