2) "I proudly say it, India inherited everything". <b>False</b>, industries like software, pharma etc. did not exist during British times.
Inheriting an industrial economy in 1947 gave India a head start. The fact India in 1950 (3 years after independence) was the 6th largest economy proves that. This doesn't take a rocket science to figure out what happened. You inherited an entire semi-industrialized economy from Britain, therein giving you a head start on Pakistan which didn't inherit any industry whatsoever.
I already posted this once before highlighting where British India ranked in terms of economies in the world. Here it is again.
Largest Economies In The World
1870
1. China
2. British India
3. United Kingdom
4. United States
5. Russia
1880
1. China
2. British India
3. United Kingdom
4. United States
5. Russia
1890
1. United States
2. China
3. British India
4. United Kingdom
5. Russia
1900
1. United States
2. China
3. United Kingdom
4. British India
5. Germany
1910
1. United States
2. China
3. Germany
4. British India
5. United Kingdom
1920
1. United States
2. China
3. United Kingdom
4. British India
5. Germany
1930
1. United States
2. China
3. Germany
4. Soviet Union
5. United Kingdom
6. British India
1940
1. United States
2. Soviet Union
3. Germany
4. United Kingdom
5. China
6. British India
Source:
https://www.rug.nl/ggdc/historicaldevelopment/maddison/
Source:
http://www.ggdc.net/maddison/oriindex.htm
3) "Nigeria has a higher GDP per capita than India, calm down" <b>False</b>, data provided to show this is false.
And again, you're wrong. I already provided you the GDP Per Capita (Nominal) of Nigeria and India. Here it is again.
I'm referring to GDP (nominal) per capita, which is what most people use to rank national economies worldwide.
139 Djibouti $2085
140 São Tomé and Príncipe $2063
141 Nigeria $2049
142 India $2036
143 Kenya $1857
144 Bangladesh $1745
145 Zimbabwe $1712
146 Côte d'Ivoire $1680
147 Kiribati $1641
148 Pakistan $1555
149 Cameroon $1548
150 Cambodia $1509
151 Senegal $1474
152 Zambia $1417
Source:
https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/f...82,941,474,446,754,666,698&s=NGDPDPC&grp=0&a=
Surprisingly, Bangladesh has made huge leaps forward...I wouldn't be surprised if they raced ahead of India in the next 2 years. That being said, ranking 142, 144 and 148 is hardly anything to celebrate.
<b>When presented with data showing your claims are false, you simply ignore the data and move on to making the next ridiculous statement. </b>You are the sort of poster Mark Twain advised against arguing with. Let's see if you produce any data to support the above 3 statements?
No, you made the claim, and I debunked it. In response, you had a hissy fit and pretended as if I didn't reply to you. Well, I've written it again for you. Try and read it this time.
Given that <b>Pakistan has an infant mortality rate of 5.2% compared to India's 3.9%,</b> and for <b>Karachi "82% of all the drinking water samples were positive for E.Coli which is a marker of fecal contamination"</b> you should not be discussing the state of Indian hygiene.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4e29/a7c0802458ac5f581ab240553ce19e691ca4.pdf
Literally in the quote above you wrote "When presented with data showing your claims are false, you simply ignore the data and move on to making the next ridiculous statement". What exactly are you doing here? This is called deflection. What does any of this have to do with the the export discussion we were talking about earlier? What's the matter? Bolti band ho chuki hai aab?
Secondly, 3.2% or 5.2% is disgusting any which way you look at it. The fact you're trying to have a d**k measuring contest over deaths of infants is just sad. Having a infant mortality rate of 0.9 or 1.1 is something to gloat about.
India started buying Mig-21s in 1961, and around 290 have crashed. You think shooting down 2 with American made missiles is an achievement?
I'm not sure what I should feel about this? The fact 290 of your fighter jets crashed by themselves, or the fact you pretend having 2 MiGs shot down and a pilot captured somehow doesn't bother you. But hey, you do you.
It is not a random website. It is among the top Google results if you search for "India's top exports" and documents its sources.
So what is India's Ministry of Commerce Export Data Bank then?
<b>What you found contradicts your own statement "Your exports are dominated by natural resources, as is ours. You act like you're exporting machinery to the world." You did not understand that "MINERALS AND PRODUCTS" is mainly refined oil, </b>thanks to the world's largest refinery in Jamnagar. I suppose you believe that Indians inherited that from the British too
Minerals and Products = mined resources = natural
The "NATURAL CULTURED STONES, PRE-METALS, JEWELRY" are mainly diamonds which are cut in Surat. <b>You do not seem to understand the difference between a gross export, and value added. Neither of the first two items you list are at the top in value added terms.</b>
Natural cultured stones, pre-metals, jewellery = mined resources = natural
<b>You fail to understand because you do not know how to do research correctly. </b>The numbers you found were for material goods, not services. India's software exports are projected to be $126 billion in FY 2018, by far larger than any other Indian export.
I do know how to research properly. I used India's Ministry of Commerce Export Data Bank as my source. It's quite evident you either didn't read my reply to you or are so triggered by my reply that you can't seem to make a coherent argument. Hence you're just repeating the claims you made earlier. For me this is simple, I'll just keep using the Ministry of Commerce's Export Data Bank as my source. Not a big deal for me.
Even taking into account that India's population is 6 times larger than Pakistan's, proportionately Pakistan's software exports should have been $126/6 billion = $21 billion, instead you are $1 billion.
Well, again software exports are not even your leading export so I don't understand the huffing and puffing. Second, software exports alone are not indicative of a "healthy economy". There are other ways to make money instead of being cursed out by angry Americans in a call center. That being said, Pakistan's software industry only really began in the mid-2000s. It's a growing industry and if it's not 21 billion so what? The fact it's been growing means it will eventually reach that point one day. That's the whole idea behind a "developing country"...it's developing.
According to you, being less than 5% of where you proportionately should be is "doing just fine", pathetic”. <b>You think "Your exports are dominated by natural resources, as is ours", delusional!</b>
The fact that it's GROWING is what I'm satisfied with. Again, reading comprehension skills would be welcomed here.
<b>Only because you are clueless about economic issues. At $126 billion, Indian IT and ITeS exports are far larger than every other Indian export.</b>
India's Ministry of Commerce Export Data Bank says otherwise.
Again, <b>clueless research,</b> no one with any idea about the economies of South Asia would believe the 3.9% number for a moment. <b>The 3.9% for Pakistan is for people who are employed. The percentage for the entire population is 24.3%.</b>
Let's try this again. I originally wrote:
Population living under $1.90 per day
Pakistan = 3.9%
India = 21.9%
Source:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY
The link you gave me says nothing about 24.3% being the entire population. Rather, it states Pakistan's own national definition of poverty would mean 24.3% of the population lives in poverty.
Furthermore, you don't help your own cause because I happened to have searched for India's ADB webpage as well and it states the same:
INDIA
21.9% of the population lives below the national poverty line in 2011.
The proportion of employed population below $1.90 purchasing power parity a day in 2011 is 21.2%.
For every 1,000 babies born in India in 2017, 39 die before their 5th birthday.
Source:
https://www.adb.org/countries/india/poverty
PAKISTAN
24.3% of the population lives below the national poverty line in 2015.
The proportion of employed population below $1.90 purchasing power parity a day in 2015 is 3.9%.
For every 1,000 babies born in India in 2017, 75 die before their 5th birthday
Source:
https://www.adb.org/countries/pakistan/poverty
No, that is not “what most people use to rank national economies worldwide”. A good economist would not use nominal GDP, which in case of Nigeria swings wildly as its exchange rate gyrates along with oil prices (Oil constitutes 95% of Nigeria's exports). <b>PPP per cap GDP measures actual goods people can buy with their income, which nominal per cap GDP does not. Nominal per cap GDP is so useless, that CIA World Factbook won't even provide that data.</b>
CIA World Factbook means nothing, since most of their statistics are based upon UN, IMF and World Bank data, so I don't understand that last argument you made.
Second, you're wrong again. GDP (nominal) is better than GDP (PPP) and most economists traditionally used it to rank national economies. Of late, a new term called "REAL GDP" is being used, but that's another issue altogether.
Here is a rule of thumb to help grasp the practical differences between GDP Nominal and GDP PPP. A rule of thumb GDP’s PPP and nominal is that PPP is how much of a local good (like real estate, labour, or locally grown produce) a person can buy in their country, and nominal is roughly how much of an internationally traded good (diamonds, DVD players, Snickers bars) a person can buy in their country. Thus, developing countries tend to have a higher (better) PPP than nominal, while developed countries have higher nominal than PPP. You can get dinner for $10 or a DVD player for $100 in the US, or you can get dinner for $2 or a DVD player for $100 in China. If you compare a Chinese person making $20 a day to an American making $150 a day, the Chinese person is slightly poorer in dinners than the American (1/10 of income versus 1/15), but is a lot poorer in DVD players than the American (5x income versus 2/3 of income). See how that works? Nominal and PPP are identical in the US, because USD is used as the benchmark. But in all of the most developed countries except the US, the nominal is higher. Another way to think about this is that, as a country’s citizens get richer and richer, they are more easily able to acquire international goods, but any good that must be provided by others of its own rich citizens, like college education, health care, taxis, etc. is going to get more expensive.
Regardless, Nigeria is ahead of India in terms of GDP per capita. Sorry, just going to have to deal with it.
<b>You made the comparison “Your exports are dominated by natural resources, as is ours”. </b>Now that it has been proven false, you are trying to change the topic. As Mark Twain would say…
I could have sworn you wrote this before once in the same reply to me. Regardless, I have proven you wrong twice now. Please don't make me do it again.
One look at Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia etc. will reveal the <b>deeply delusional idea that the economies of the developing or newly developed countries are constrained by what existed 70 years ago.</b>
Taiwan, South Korea and Malaysia built themselves up to where they are now. I didn't see any of these three countries being the largest economies in the world in 1870 up until 1950. Did you? Scroll up if you missed it.
<b>Oh, for goodness sake, would you like a biscuit with your tea?</b> I have one called a “clue”. The ingredients are “software, autos, pharma, computers etc. did not exist 70 years ago; there is nothing colonial about modern India; East Asian countries have built their industries on the last 50 to 60 years”
Scroll back up and look at the largest economies in the world before between 1700 and 1950. So the math...and if you still don't get it, I can provide a flowchart for you.
The US legal system is based on the British; China mass produces cars which was first done in the US; post-war Japan’s economy was adopted from the US… I forget, what was your point?
Sorry, wrong again. British and American legal systems had a lot in common up until 1776. After the United States gained its independence, it formed its own common law based upon its own Constitution. Even how arrests are made are different. In America, following an arrest the next step is a grand jury hearing, in which a jury decides whether there is enough evidence for the court to issue an indictment (a formal accusation of a crime) which allows the criminal case to proceed to a full trial. Except in certain cases, the right to a grand jury is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In Britain, following an arrest, the Crown Prosecution Service brings its evidence before the Magistrates’ Court, where a panel of three judges or district judge issues the indictment. These are just some differences
Other differences include the fact the USA is a presidential system, with the apex of power under a President elected indirectly through an Electoral College, whereas the UK is a parliamentary system, with the Prime Minister holding office and power so long as he or she commands a majority of votes in the House of Commons.
I don't get the point of China's producing cars or Japan's economy being made by the US? Huh? Could you be a little more specific please.
<b>Having actually done my K12 and college in India, I can authoritatively say you are mistaken. </b>Our K12 textbooks were written by NCERT, and our engineering textbooks were written by Americans.
In English...a language from?
More delusions about how economic growth happens. In the real world “Until 1991, when India liberalised its economy, per capita GDP is estimated to have grown by an average of 4.7% per year, compared to an average of 7.5% every year after 1991.”
https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...ations-here/story-UEIuCPfvjOFE4U3aFHaIYI.html
And yet Nigeria still has a higher GDP per capita. Hmm.
Till at least 1980, the state of industrial development of Pakistan and India were not too different, both of them produced only low quality industrial stuff. Pakistan’s per cap GDP was actually ahead.
And it's not too different today, as I've clearly highlighted above.
Pakistan is stuck in the Indian pre-1991 mode, with the Army and other non-economic forces dominating the economy. India only started making progress when it started reducing government intervention in the economy post-1991.
Cool theory, sadly doesn't fly.
So in addition to the delusion #1 to #3 which I listed before and for which you have not produced any collaborating data, we now have additional delusions from you.
Umm, but I did.
<b>4) “Software exports are not even among India's top exports”.
It's not according to India's Ministry of Commerce Export Data Bank.
5) “Pakistan's software exports have seen an annual increase for the past 9 out of 10 years. I think we're doing just fine.”
A growing industry is a good industry. I fail to understand what's bad about that.
6) “Population living under $1.90 per day: Pakistan = 3.9%; India = 21.9%”</b>
Population living under $1.90 per day
Pakistan = 3.9%
India = 21.9%
Source:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY
I have wasted enough time on this. <b>No more replies from me unless I see something intelligent in reply.</b>
Bye. Next time don't start a fight you can't win. Ask your Abhinandan.
:
