India Vs China

Why is India less developed and more poor than China?
Is it cultural?
Both have big populations and landmass.
China has indoor plumbing though...

Other urls found in this thread:

economist.com/node/3219418
newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-cost-of-the-cultural-revolution-fifty-years-later
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonialism
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Communism

Because China has more natural resources, more living space, and China is much more culturally homogenous than India, which means less instability and conflict.

Reminder that the china pakistan alliance will be the most important thing in geopolitics in like 20 years

China was India tier poor in the 90s, senpai. Big difference is China built megacity projects. Just give India like 15 years

j-jesus?

Hm. The Chinese are probably smarter, but Indians have +15 racial resistance buff to foodborne illness. I'd call it a toss up t b h

>Indian father slits daughters throat because she fell in love with a lower-caste man and cremated her remains to get rid of any evidence of foul play

silly caste system

Literally, 49.5% of the positions are reserved in the parliament and universities for Dalits and minorities

Chinks assemble wealth to the coastal cities and make their land the 1st and 3rd worlds welded, that works well for their overall economy, while India doesn't take such policy resulting in regional unfairness.

In 20th century, India was actually ahead of China for most of the 100 years in terms of national GDP/per capita GDP. Even as back as the 1990s, the average Indian had a higher GDP per capita than the average Chinese person.

Now today in 2017, it isnt even a close contest between the 2 of them.

Yes, my son?

IDK why but it may have to do with most parties being rabidly leftist and playing with identity politics

the truth
meanwhile people still getting brainwashed about communism

The real answer is superior IQ. After a small century of warfare (inb4 humiliation) the Chinese are going to go back to their rightful place as one of the most advanced places in the world and Pajeet will always shit in the streets like the subhuman he is.

why did china skyrocket so fast in the 90s?
is it because the japanese tech boom wore off?

Brain drain.

1. Central planning works.
Notice I didnt say communism but central planning. If the Chinese government wants something done for the 'greater good', it gets done and doesnt get bogged down in politics where opposing sides complain and it never gets done.
2. Capitalism.
China embraced 'capitalism with chinese characteristics' in the 1980s
3. High IQ.
When allowed to flourish and without restraints, people will higher IQs will do better than those with lower IQs.
4. Return to the norm.
For most of human history, China was the #1 nation on the planet. China just returning back to that position it held previously.

It's not communism, and it's not really some superior IQ.
The Chinese government is really pragmatic from a development/economic standpoint, and it's been a really good model for them.
State Capitalism can work. Still not a fan of living under it though.

Hello Chang. How's the West treating you so far?

>Why is India less developed and more poor than China?
China is a police state, we are only allowed to see the good parts, china intercities and countryside are poor af

To make things worse a Chinese born on a shithole can't even emigrate to a nice place.

>To make things worse a Chinese born on a shithole can't even emigrate to a nice place.
That can't be true

>why did china skyrocket so fast in the 90s?
Deng Xiaoping in 1978 introduced market capitalism in select cities mostly along the coasts. From there everything just took over like a rocket,

>China was the #1 nation on the planet
>gets rekt by Mongols
>gets rekt by Brits
>gets rekt by Russkies
>gets rekt by Nips

Have a (You)

Most of China are still dirt poor. Besides, India has already taken over China has a faster growing market.

Chinese economy is now in a period transformation from production into a service based economy. This goes in hand with Chinese city megaprojects. China wants to get a better and healthier economy, not just to manufacture cheap shit in the era of automation.

India on the other hand still has massive problems with poverty, malnutrition and population growth. Economical development doesn't matter that much if you have more and more poor dumb fucks sharing it.

"In fact, China was the largest economy for much of recorded history. Until the 15th century, China had the highest income per head and was the technological leader. But then it suddenly turned its back on the world. Its rulers imposed strict limits on international trade and tightened their control on new technology. Measured by GDP per person it was overtaken by Europe by 1500, but it remained the world's biggest economy for long thereafter. In 1820 it still accounted for 30% of world GDP."

economist.com/node/3219418

Chinese have internal migration restrictions didn't you know?

>Most of China are still dirt poor.

It is hilarious when people say this while ignoring that China is a country of 1.4 billion people which is almost 2x the population of Europe. It is funny when people bring up northern europe as a model of propersity while ignoring that country like Finland have a population of 5 million which is the equivalent of 1/6th of the population of largest city in China which is Shanghai.

More Chinese live in Northern European-level standard of living / wealth than the population of every Nordic country combined X 100

>muh economy

Sorry, you literally can't aspire to be the greatest nation on the planet if you were ever taken over by the British

Nope.

Does that matter? Obviously they would have more rich people than the West, by sheer population, but they also have much more poorer people than the West does (by capita) as well as a massive amount of human rights abuses.

It's good to appreciate your motherland Zhang, but don't forget there's a reason your family moved over to America in the first place.

t. bao di

>Muh big economy
And it went to shit the moment it became less about population and more about having capable citizens and governments

China was never taken over by the British, i think you are confusing India with China here. And the British Empire at one point controlled almost half of the world

>if you were ever taken over by the British
The Chinese were ahead of the Brits for most of history, but then they stagnated and got taken apart by all the superpowers in the world.

There's no shame in it. Empires rise and fall.

Thanks to Deng Xiaoping's industrial and capitalistic measures that he started in the late 1970s (that and the possibility that some other advanced Asian economies were starting to slow down in their growth).
Meanwhile such measures were not taken in India until the early 1990s. As a result India is 15 to 20 years behind China. But China's growth is starting to hit a trough and eventually by the middle of this century, the same will happen to India's growth and both will level out at a similar level.

...

Chinks are terrible people. All they do is speculate on property and have 0 care for people other than themselves

>China was never taken over by the British, i think you are confusing India with China here.
It was a European colony for quite a while m8. Atleast in India's defense you can say it was easy to divide and conquer the large amount of ethnic tribal's as well as take advantage of the decline of the Mughal Empire, but China was pretty homogenous.

This is me btw

It's only natural that Chinese economical growth is starting to slow down. There's only so much cheap shit a country can produce. Now China is looking to change its economy into more service based.

Opium Wars.

>most of the history

Brits got to China. Chinese didn't get to Britain.

>It was a European colony for quite a while m8.
No it wasnt, China was never a European colony. How stupid are you?

>Opium Wars.
How does defeating an opponent in a war = controlling a country? Using this logic, Japan controlled Russia because they defeated Russia in the Russo-Japanese War

China's geographically centralized and culturally homogeneous population is completely different from India's vast decentralized sprawl.

Wouldn't that imply that Bangladesh should be doing great?

Lads which is the better Chinese colony, Finland or Canada?

Islam.

Bangladesh is the world's most densely populated city in that's basically a massive flood plain. They have no resources and no space. It's just plain unfavorable. Sri Lanka is going to be the next South Korea but Poo in Loo

Mass/forced industrialization which provided the infrastructure necessary for the onset of capitalism.

Democracy doesn't work.

India is going to have worlds largest Muslim population. /thread

>Chinese didn't get to Britain.
Because there was no need. Most of the Age of Exploration was trying to catch up to/ahead of China. China got comfy, didn't realize the world was changing and got wrecked.

>No it wasnt, China was never a European colony. How stupid are you?
In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Chinese foreign relations with most major world powers devolved into semi-colonialism of sorts.
In the aftermath of the first Opium war, China had to
-repay Britain for the ruined opium and military costs
-ceding permanent control of Hong Kong
-Five port cities (Canton, Xiamen, Fuzhou, Ningbo, and Shanghai) are open to foreign trade
-Extraterritoriality (British citizens subject to British law)

In Shanghai for example, racial segregation kept Chinese out of racetracks and parks. It remained technically independent, but had a vast number of foreigners outside of their control (which was the same for some parts of India which we let remain independent but wanted monies)

Yup. India would be a lot better off if they had a cultural revolution.

>if they had a cultural revolution.
You mean make everyone an asshole and set the country back 40 years? Stop shilling, Xi

>trying to catch up to/ahead of China

Except nobody in Europe gave a fuck about China except for a few traders.

>In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries

Do you even know what the fuck 'colonialism' is? How does all the concessions you mentioned = the British Empire taking over the entire country of China like how it did in India? What are you are saying is like in the Mexican/US War, where the US beat Mexico and took Texas & California is them colonizing Mexico or taking over Mexico.

Seriously again, HOW STUPID are you?

>a fucking leaf
If you want to progress as fast as China did then it's necessary.

>Except nobody in Europe gave a fuck about China except for a few traders.
lol

Leave Lee alone. He has the misery of being a shill even though his parents moved out of China because it sucked

Because they took over their trade, their law and anything else worth having.

In 1492, China was the world's superpower, the center of world trade which nations far and wide were dying to get to. China had already explored half the world (at least as far as South Africa) almost a century before Columbus (the voyages of Zheng He). At the same time, Europe was a second-rate, fringe civilization on the periphery of a rich and advanced Eastern Trading Bloc. No one in Asia took Europeans as anything but minor peddlers who didn't bathe but frothed at the mouth about their religious fanaticism. China looked down on Europe as backwards people, obsessed with slavery and superstition (China has been atheist for a long time).

China's approach to globalization was the Silk Road of trade and ideas. In total contrast, Europeans' / Americans' approach was The Atlantic Slave Trade, Indigenous Genocide, vicious racism, and invading world nations like a host of locusts.

>China was never a European colony. How stupid are you?
not saying that they treated Chinese like slaves but still each region of your China was controlled by foreign cunt

>By the time the Cultural Revolution sputtered to a halt, there were many ways to tally its effects: about two hundred million people in the countryside suffered from chronic malnutrition, because the economy had been crippled; up to twenty million people had been uprooted and sent to the countryside; and up to one and a half million had been executed or driven to suicide. The taint of foreign ideas, real or imagined, was often the basis for an accusation; libraries of foreign texts were destroyed, and the British embassy was burned.

Fuck off shill chink. At least have the fucking presence of mind to goggle before you shill

newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-cost-of-the-cultural-revolution-fifty-years-later

1. Controlling a few ports
2. Taking over an island - Hong Kong
3. Favorable trade concessions

Is the same as taking over a country, its government, and its people. Literally nobody in the entire world thinks China was ever a colony of the British. Keep digging that hole in deeper with your stupidity,.

see
"What are you are saying is like in the Mexican/US War, where the US beat Mexico and took Texas & California is them colonizing Mexico or taking over Mexico."

When was the government of China ever overthrown?

r/asianmasculinity
Columbus discovered America in 1492
Chinkia isn't even fully athiest today and was only because of communism

Wew. No need to be so angry friend.

>Do you even know what the fuck 'colonialism' is? How does all the concessions you mentioned = the British Empire taking over the entire country of China like how it did in India?
First off I said it was soft colonialism. And it's how you define colonialism.

Official colonialism of India began when the British Empire took control of India from the BEI Company in 1858 but a bit before that, many European nations were trying to carve out their slice in the subcontinent.

If you agree that India pre-1858 was being colonized, then you could say the same for China because that's virtually what happened. If not then it wasn't.

And there was no need for full colonialism in the country. We just needed the trade ports.

Why do you think 1492 was used? What was Columbus trying to do in 1492? What were ALL the European explorers trying to do when they sailed the oceans?

>When was the government of China ever overthrown?

>It remained technically independent, but had a vast number of foreigners outside of their control (which was the same for some parts of India which we let remain independent but wanted monies)

>taking over a country, its government, and its people

Falls under "not worth having". Chinese got cucked by the Brits. Not as cucked as India but still enough to count.

Get to India

You keep arguing 1+1 = 3. Nobody in the world thinks China was every a colony of the British Empire.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonialism

>Why do you think 1492 was used? What was Columbus trying to do in 1492? What were ALL the European explorers trying to do when they sailed the oceans?
They were trying to find trade routes because the Ottomans were cucking us out of trade routes by land.
Then the Spaniards found America and walah. Age of Exploration began.

I see, let's cheer him up

Glorious China Forever!

>You keep arguing 1+1 = 3. Nobody in the world thinks China was every a colony of the British Empire.
Not the British Empire lol, but by Western powers.

>Chinese got cucked by the Brits. Not as cucked as India but still enough to count.
India could have become much better with more Western influence desu. If being 'cucked' means Westernizing and throwing away stone age cultural habits, then China's on the right track.

China liberalized in 1978, India liberalized in 1990. We are just 12 years behind, nothing else.
What China was in 2004-5 is literally India right now, look at the numbers

this

>India liberalized in 1990
what

Economic liberalization/opening up to global markets

in that case it doesn't because china only liberalize on city

Mao described pre-communist China as a semi-colony. With the exception of Macau and Hong Kong most concessions were leased territories but still sovereign Chinese territory.

The irony is that now days that happens all the time in the global free market. A company in California owning industrial property in Poland is a banality. However, because of skillful negotiation entering the WTO, the Chinese dont allow foreign companies to own property in China unless its a joint venture with a Chinese company with a majority stake in the Chinese half.

one*

>Mao described pre-communist China as a semi-colony. With the exception of Macau and Hong Kong most concessions were leased territories but still sovereign Chinese territory.
M8 that's what I've been saying all along. It's the chink that was getting triggered and going full autist at me.

China has a strong centralized government and a stronger sense of national unity.

India is a federalized artificial state. Theres a small Indian intelligentsia that has a vague sense of nationalism but India as a whole is a house of cards ready to collapse should any Indian state pursue independence.

I thought Japan was the fucking dense shit pool but what the fuck are they?

>Mao described his semi-genocide as Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution

75% of mountain area, so less people live there

Youre just mad Mao's population control was more effective than 7 years of total war with Japan.

India is a democracy, and with it comes endless bureaucracy and slow change. China doesn't need to worry with the same hurdles.

Also this . Tradition and religion is still very strong in India.

The British literally turned half of China into drug addicts.

Sri Lanka is too tropical and laid back to ever be the next South Korea.

>India would be a lot better if they killed off all their culture and turned their country into a soulless, boring shell of its former self

kys Chang

China is way more urban than India. Also geography favors China with better agriculture and way more natural resources. China will lose the population game to India but India will have the largest Muslim population in the world.

Basically China will continue to grow despite having 6,8% while India struggles to develop even the basic infrastructure for it's huge population.

It's true PooPeeland

>I prefer shitting on the streets and caste system

A bunch of angry shitskin Pajeets and threatened Anglo faggots in this thread, I can see how badly they want China to fail. Quite pathetic and sad, really.

In 12 years, India will still be a caste-system plagued low IQ poverty dump. Nobody believes your fake GDP growth figures that magically increased by 3% after you "changed your accounting methods" to attract foreign direct investment.

Your country will get rekt hard by automation; after all no-one ever got rich without manufacturing for the rest of the world. India has a pretty good chance to be stuck at a low income for as long as we live. Good luck Pajeet, your people will need it.

one thing i admire about Indians is that they seem to know how to enjoy life with music, dance and other similar things.

its not wrong to say that we are soulless. we are soulless people.

authoritarian gov, one-child policy, atheists..basically everything westerners hate about China made it as it is today
on the other hand, India has democracy, no-limit child birth (population about to surpass China in 5 years), religion..everything westerners love made it as we call it land of the rape
really makes me think

eh, that's like the US blaming mexico and central america for our drug problem. there was demand for drugs in china just like there is demand in the US. and the cartels wreck up mexico and buy mexican politicians just like the British trading monopolies bought British politicians and destroyed smaller independent British businesses.

Fake news

despite calling themselves "communists", China is more market oriented. Indian policy varies pretty wildly from place to place, but in general, they are not a business friendly country. in terms of foreign direct investment, it's much easier to invest in China (although they do have a lot of BS to deal with, india is much worse).

Well, mainlanders have lots of "souls" for nationalism lately evidently. Although it seems more like "muh face" culture amplifies on a race/national level.

A Chinkano?