When the founder of one of India's greatest industrial empires was audacious enough to think of building a steel plant in the late 19th century, it drew derision from a senior British colonial official.

Chief Commissioner for Indian Railways Frederick Upcott was reportedly provoked enough to have asked: "Do you mean to say that Tatas propose to make steel rails to British specifications? Why, I will undertake to eat every pound of steel rail they succeed in making."

I have not heard if Upcott had the stomach for it. Jamsetji Tata certainly did go ahead to make plenty of steel, among other things. And also built India's finest hotel (later developing into a chain) because as legend has it he felt slighted at the whites-only policy of then Bombay's (now Mumbai) poshest.

I'm not privy to afterlife behavior, but will safely assume that Jamsetji is sporting a beatific smile, and Upcott, not, at this week's announcement that the Tata group had bought Corus, formerly British Steel and a national icon.

A will of steel is not a uniquely Tata phenomenon. Fellow Indian Lakshmi Mittal has forged the world's biggest steel empire mainly through acquisitions and interests in China.

China, of course, is no stranger to such tales of corporate success with a British twist. Unlisted car manufacturer Nanjing Automobile Group is starting production soon on the iconic MG sports car. It bought the MG label and manufacturing assets for around 50 million pounds ($95 million) in 2005.

A British colleague who was editing the Tata Steel story on Wednesday turned to me and said: Who would have believed this 20 years ago?

Indeed, who would have believed even 10 years ago that IBM would be a Chinese company? That China would be the biggest car-owning nation in a matter of years? That it would have the highest number of mobile phone buyers (and soon) Internet users? That it would become the biggest economy in the world some time, sooner than later, this century.

A Chinese friend never tires of telling me that China and India together accounted for 75 percent of the global economy around the 16th century before they slipped into the obscurity of poverty.

Yes, their time has come again, and Asia's two giants are juggernauts that will brook no stopping.

Yet, the faster they move forward, the more both countries' poor seem to be left behind in their trail. Sure, a great many have been lifted out of poverty but the difference in income levels has become even more glaring.

The Gini coefficient which measures a country's wealth gap - has reached alarming levels in China; and India is only slightly ahead.

(Of course, the Gini coefficient looks better when everyone is poor but that is, presumably, not the point of the exercise for either country.)

As I travel around China (and India, on holiday) I find that gap is yawning to the point of lockjaw. And the governments have to find a key to unlock it.

There is no lack of intention or effort: China's vision of a "harmonious society" and a "socialist countryside" are ample testimony; as are India's endeavors to improve rural employment and social equity.

But in an era where less government is better, a little outside help would not be amiss: Why not let the Lenovos and the Tatas pitch in?

They have the global experience of tackling multi-faceted challenges and could bring new thinking into addressing social issues.

After all, if they are world beaters, a little computing and building in their own backyards shouldn't be that difficult. Or is it?

E-mail: ravi@chinadaily.com.cn

(China Daily 02/02/2007 page10)