Re: Development Race: China and India

On May 5, 5:23 am, pg <pen...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 5, 1:26 am, RichAsianKid <richasian...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > On May 4, 11:10 pm, PaPaPeng <PaPaP...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > This post, this article, is almost disingenuous knowing where
> > PaPaPeng's loyalties lie, but let's get some facts straight, if
> > RichAsianKid would take the bait (perhaps that's the real intent of
> > this post?) ever so masochistically (shut up!) and repost old old old
> > very old counter-evidence (never mind if PaPaPeng cunningly plays
> > hidden dragon or whatever):
> >    http://i14.tinypic.com/5yv4x1u.jpg
>
> But the graph stops at 2002 !!
>
> By then, India may (keyword, MAY) have quicken its pace.
>
> Part of my investment are in India, in the field of embedded
> programming, and I can tell you that in electronic fields, India has
> surpassed China by a wide margin. My investment in China are not in
> developing, rather, in production.
>
> If the development is crucial, I'll place them in USA and Japan. But
> if I'm in a rush, and I need to start something yesterday, India has a
> lot to offer me.
>
> China has the capacity too, but they can't act as fast as their
> counterpart in India. Trust me in this.
>
>

A lot of what I will post below is what I posted before, but I think
it's worth reposting because it makes a point.

First, in reply to your post, of course of course you can find *some*
areas that India is doing better than China. Even Hispanics, for
instance, in a Darwinian sense, actually do better than whites or
Asians in reproducing babies. Blacks are adept at welfare, for
instance, as in milking the system getting others to sup****t their own
babies. That should not be frowned upon, no?

But really, on a technical note, that graph stops at 2004, not 2002.
And also keep in mind the y-axis - that graph was on a log axis, not a
linear one. So....what do we see on a linear axis on another
independent re****t of China vs India?

   http://i32.tinypic.com/2nut6iw.jpg

Nope, the India-China is not closing is it? In fact it's widening. The
gap is widening.

So what's the latest in 2007? Let's check out some latest data.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29

Above is the list of countries by GDP.

According to the 2007 IMF, China's economy's worth 3.3 trillion,
India's only 1.1. That's
a 3 times difference. TRIPLE!

According to the World Bank, China's 2.7 trillion, India's 0.90.
Again, 3 times difference.

According to the CIA Factbook, China's 3.2 trillion, India's 1.1.
Again, almost 3 times differences.

Well, I think the data speaks for itself. The results converge that
China is not just a few percent ahead. And China's not just 30 or 40
percent ahead of India, no sir!! Economically China is 3 times 3 times
3 times (!!) the economy of India -- as population counts and sizes
are roughly comparable. No, there's just no comparison. Which is why
you actually don't see this nonsense about India vs China anymore. It
was probably way cool a few years back, that India vs China "race" was
especially credible perhaps a decade ago (?1991, see chart posted),
hmmm, who would go forwards, who wouldn't, it was all betting man's
game! Yet now it's so clear-cut and no contest and no longer funny.


>
> > Notice how China is surging way ahead of India *even after* 1991 when
> > India supposedly opened its markets. That is a very im****tant point
> > and people often don't realize that. Yeah, the market matters, and
> > yeah oh sure too just ignore the role of human capital.  Sure sure
> > sure go argue with numbers. If you don't like them, they're fudged or
> > forged and they disappear. If the numbers are what I don't like they
> > go away. But again, I don't quite see narrowing or convergence of the
> > two giga-economies here in spite of all the conditions favoring India.
>
> > Now here's another data point:
>
> >    http://in.rediff.com/money/2005/sep/27china.htm
>
> > I quote:
>
> > "Even more remarkable, the increase in China's merchandise ex****ts in
> > each of the last three years was greater than total Indian ex****ts for
> > that year! At a more qualitative level, you have only to compare the
> > hundreds of cranes deployed in adding to the thousands of gleaming
> > skyscrapers in Shanghai with the handful dotting Mumbai's skyline.
>
> > "During the last five years while we have debated the new Bangalore
> > air****t, China has built quite a few new ones! Finally, how can we
> > hope to close the economic gap with China when almost every second
> > Indian child is malnourished?
>
> > "Let me put this bluntly: as an economy, we are simply not in China's
> > league."
>
> > And that's coming from the horse's mouth, from the Honorary Professor
> > at Icrier and former Chief Economic Adviser to the Government of
> > India.
>
> If you read my reply above, you'll see that I have my production in
> China, development in India. Many others are doing that as well.
> Result? China's ex****t are made of tangible things --- boxes of goods.
> While India's ex****t are mostly Ideas, IP (Intellectual Properties),
> talents, and experience they've gained from many world class R&D
> programs.

I've quoted Tom Friedman a while ago who let it slip that the
linguistic advantage of India will be arbitraged out in this Japanese
newspaper interview:

   
http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2005/09/thomas-friedman-brains-vs-language.php

Make sure you read the above **in total**.

And I did say let it slip, let it slip....

But really it's something that most people know at heart. Some factors
(e.g. language facility) are intragenerational. It's easily learned.
Others are way more entrenched, as in, say, cognitive capital. Most
people just can't face the idea of fatalism, and they just can't bring
themselves to admit it. In other words, some qualities are concrete,
others are more fluid. Guess which is which?

And realistically China is now India's obsession, not vice-versa.
Mumbai does not even begin to register on a typical Shanghai'ers
mental map. What, India? Where? Indian children suffer from more
malnutrition compared to Africa for crying out loud. No, the Chinese
don't want to become India. They want to be the next America, and
perhaps hate Japan for a reason.  But India? Hey, take a number.

No, I think people deep deep down know the score. And that's why it's
socially incorrect, politically incorrect, and even bad manners
perhaps to point this out.

Privately, Europeans agree:

     http://groups.google.ca/group/soc.culture.china/msg/0f1b4261a94a7373?

Or South Koreans too (albeit written by one 'honest' "Ranjit"?):

    
http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?at_code=412947

>
> > Guess you can say that's some virtue of humility, perhaps, well,
> > socially conditioned. (I'm not trying to be mean)
>
> > So is there hope for the future? Well, here's what psychometrics tells
> > us.
>
> >    http://www.vdare.com/images/042306_ss_pic2.jpg
>
> Please do not confuse yourself.
>
> What propels a nation forward is not the "average" IQ, rather, it's
> the creme-de-la-creme that lead the country upwards (or downwards).
>
> The average Indians may not be smart, but those smart Indians are much
> smarter than smart Chinese !!!
>
> Trust me in this. I'm an ethnic Chinese, I know a lot of very smart
> Chinese. But when I compare those very smart Chinese that I know, with
> very smart Indians that I know, the Indians win !!
>
> I'm an ethnic Chinese, and if I have any bias, my bias ought to be on
> the Chinese side. But I try to be as fair as I can be, and when I do
> that, I'd find that 9 times out of 10, the Indians win.
>
> Why?
>
> Because the Indians can think OUT OF THE BOX, while the average
> Chinese, because of being poisoned by the 5,000 years of Con****ius
> thoughts, DARE NOT to think out of the box !!!
>
> And I kid you not !!!!!
>
> Even the most intelligent Chinese have reservations in taking risk, in
> doing the impossible, in taking a leap out of the logical process. The
> Indians, on the other hand,  have none of those psychological
> baggages !!!
>
> Please open your eyes to the truth.
>
> Thank you !

Have you gone nuts? If average IQ does not matter, well then, maybe
the im****tation of Mexcians or Muslims will not and does not matter
either for the West. America (like Brazil which perhaps should be the
Indian model) will still likely have an elite no matter what happens
and so who cares if the general population goes to ****? Does it
really matter if the population's IQ plummets down to the African
mental retardation level of 70? Does it really matter if your
population score 3 or 4 or 5 standard deviations below the (for
instance, Korean) mean?

Now, I certainly wouldn't go so far as to say that India has no ideas
or talents, or that that subcontinent is just teeming with brown and
sizzling retards fresh off your 30" wide 15,000 BTU self-cleaning
stove or BBQ.  I'm just hypothesizing that perhaps, just perhaps,
their talent pool is razor-thin at best. And in fact if you look at
the international Math Olympiad (IMO) which is a surrogate marker for
intelligence (as the verbal component is played down) and which I
posted elsewhere before, if India is really so smart at the very top
levels, I find it very difficult to believe that year after year after
year after year they still fail so spectacularly not just compared to
China but even to South Korea which is only 1/20th their
population!!!!! I mean, are they trying to win an oscar here to
pretend to be dumb? And I got lots more data showing how your average
Indian is stupid at the population level (they never admit this, the
euphemism is lack of education, get it)?

Surely if Indians are so intelligent they would have churned out
smarter people by now if they at least have some semblance of some
capacity for self-introspection, capacity for reflecting on their
record, belittled I'm so sure, no?

So let's review some hard facts I posted before in the rankings of the
IMO, international math Olympiad - numbers below are rankings:

    http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/imo-scores/

China
8       2=      1       1       2       1       1       1
6       1               1=      1       1       1       2
1       1       1       2

India
25      17      10      21      15=     14      14      15
7       18      14      7       9       15      14      36
35      25

Need I say more?

And and and and and.....Korea, Japan, Taiwan -- way way way smaller
countries
-- these still beat India hollow.

South Korea
22      28      32      17      18      15=     7       8
11      12      7       4       4=      6       6       12
5       3       3=

Japan
20      12      8=      20      9       11=     12      14
13      15      13      16=     9       8       8       7       6=

Taiwan
17      5       12      20      14      5       9       8
9       7       16      6       7       10      9=

One more thing. North Korea is desperately poor and participates only
occasionally. Guess what we find?

North Korea
19
16
8

The data speaks for itself. If you're interested there's data from the
IPO (physics) as well which I can post, but I don't find a single site
that summarizes figures as well longitudinally.