India - 1.4 billion people

[Cobra Arbok]

@Cobra Arbok


For 60-62 years of total 71 years of independence, Pakistan was ahead of India in all human development indices, in fact Pakistan per capita GDP was twice that of India in the 60's...later on bad planning, policies, WOT took that impetus away and the growth curve from Pakistan..it is just a matter of time Pakistan catches up, has all the parameters, resources and need just the right road map ahead, seems things are falling in Places now.

BTW India per capita income ranks it at 131st spot and Pakistan is just slightly behind at 140th or something in the world and per capita income of India is ahead in a minuscule proportion, about 18-20% higher than Pakistan.

The HDI indices, the economy, per capita economy difference between India and Pakistan is small and can easily be bridged the difference between China and India with almost the same population is glaring and big. China economy is about 5 times that of India and their exports are about 10 times that of India...

India need to start comparing and competing with China as the two countries are equal in population sizes, Pakistan is just 15% of India population, yes Pakistan comparing itself with India makes sense as India is a bigger country with bigger economy w.r.t population and size.

I agree that India should start comparing with China, but the fact is China got a 30 year headstart on India. The gap may narrow as China's growth slows and India's rises, but the truth is that the chances of India catching up to China are about the same as Paksitan catching up to India.

I have already explained the reasons for India's stagnation. And as the diagram I posted shows, it was only under Zia Ul-Haq that Pakistan surpassed India, Before that, the two countries were about equal.

The gap between India and Pakistan may appear small on paper, but it is still substantial. The gap between India and Pak on HDI is even bigger, because Pakistan ranks barely in the medium developed category.

Anyway, I do not see how it is mathematically possible for Pak to catch up to India as long as the trend of India growing 7 to 8% continues, while pak barely gets 5.

And if you want to talk about exports and trade, the percentage of Pakistan's trade is miniscule compared to India's.
India currently has 25.770 billion USD in exports, whereas Pakistan has just over 1.6 billion. that is a pretty big gap.
https://tradingeconomics.com/india/exports
https://tradingeconomics.com/pakistan/exports
Also, India is the largest import partner of 5 countries, wheras there is not one country with which Pakistan is the biggest trading partner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_India
Look, I am not saying everything is perfect in India, but overall it is still doing better developmentally than Pakistan. The important thing though, is that India is rapidly improving both in economically and socially, whereas Pakistan is stagnating. With that being said, it looks like IK has the right ideas about what Pakistan needs to improve economically and developmentally. Whether he delivers on those ideas is yet to be seen.

Thank you for debating in a civil and respectful manner.

Land reforms was a complete failure in India and looks good only on paper, Pakistan has land reforms started in 1958, much successful...again started under Bhutto, not very effective and restarted under Zia as well.



India has the largest number of rural poor as well as landless households in the world. Landlessness is a strong indicator of rural poverty in the country. Land is most valuable (for) ...economic independence, social status and a modest and permanent means of livelihood ...identity and dignity and ...opportunities for realising social equality.


IMPACT ON LANDLESSNESS
It is hardly surprising therefore that the cumulative impact of all these measures of land reform on rural landlessness has been negligible. The Draft Land Reforms Policy, using National Sample Survey Office (nsso) data (2003-04), notes that while one-third of all rural households are landless, those near to landlessness (less than 0.4 hectares) add up one-third more. The next 20% hold less than 1 hectare. In other words, 60% of the country’s population has rights over only 5% of the country’s land, whereas 10% of the population has control over 55% of the land (DLRP 2013). Even admitting that the data from 2003-04 is not strictly comparable to NSSO 1992, Rawal (2008) suggests that it shows an increase of as much as 6 percentage points in landlessness, while inequality in landownership also increased.

To the small extent that land reforms have actually been implemented on the ground, what has been its impact on the lives of those who received land allotments ? Many field studies show that while the possession of land added to their social standing and self-confidence, very often they were unable to cultivate it because supporting credit or grants were not available for land development and input costs (Iyer 1997).

This depressing history of the nearly failed project of land reforms in India and its negligible impact on rural poverty and landlessness is familiar both to scholars and administrators. In the light of this, what optimism can there be about the new Draft Land Reform Policy ?

Correct, India's land reforms failed. India is just one of many examples of how socialism fails to develop a country. And yet there are idiots running for office who want to bring socialism to the US.

 

[N.Siddiqui]

The gap between India and Pakistan may appear small on paper, but it is still substantial. The gap between India and Pak on HDI is even bigger, because Pakistan ranks barely in the medium developed category.

The gap looks bigger because India is a country of 1.35 billion people and Pakistan has a population of 207 million, just 15% of India population, India in absolute terms will always have bigger economy than Pakistan, bigger resources. But a per capita and percentile w.r.t population gives a better perspective.

-As mentioned earlier India per capita income rank is 131st in the world and for Pakistan it is around 140th, and this is a very small difference...the difference between China and India is huge. HDI figures are also similar, Pakistan was doing bad in the last 10 years, there is improvement in 1 province where PTI has a govt, more will follow under the current govt.

- And since India has reforms lately and was earlier a closed economy, the sudden riches, rag-to-riches, new development/new cars/new gadgets has made people starry-eyed, over confident, a bit snobbish and chest-thumpers as well...call it bragging or extra boastful. I see it on all the forums...not just here.

Look, I am not saying everything is perfect in India, but overall it is still doing better developmentally than Pakistan. The important thing though, is that India is rapidly improving both in economically and socially, whereas Pakistan is stagnating. With that being said, it looks like IK has the right ideas about what Pakistan needs to improve economically and developmentally.

And there is the crux, the gist of the discussion and the anomalies and fault lines in India and Pakistan.


-India development model is lopsided, too few getting the best of it, and a sea of people marginalized and nowhere to be seen in the economic upturn in India.

-India has a practical, functional reservation system, the positive discrimination, a well entrenched caste system where the equality/pluralism/holistic model is almost impossible to follow as humanity is divided between castes, the high and low, the SC/SC/OBC caste, Dalits, being lowest of the low, Brahmins barely 2% of the population as ruling class and rich segment.

- Any reservation system for lower castes works against the universal concept of meritocracy, equality also and fraught with anomaly and failure. India introduced the reservation system to alleviate the poor Dalits and lower castes and provide them education and jobs, this itself is an anomaly, a false system...reason you see falling education standards, uneducated/undeserving people in high positions in govt. Jobs in India.

- Reason higher caste pattidar Patels are asking for reservation in jobs and education as they feel left out due to a false reservation system in India.

And this in India is the major fault line....will remain there, no escaping from it...the dreaded Caste System....till the end of civilizations...end of times.



20% of the entire population in India belong to the Schedule castes. This means that nearly 26 crore people in India belong to SC community. That's why they are given 15% reservation in government sector.

9% of the entire population belongs to Scheduled Tribes. This means they are nearly 11.7 crore in population. They are provided with 7.5% reservation in government sector.

41% of the entire population belongs to Other backward Caste. This means that they are nearly 53.3 crore in population. 27% reservation is provided to them in government sector.

At last remaining 30% are general category people being 39 crore out of the whole.

This is how the entire population in India could be distributed.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

The gap looks bigger because India is a country of 1.35 billion people and Pakistan has a population of 207 million, just 15% of India population, India in absolute terms will always have bigger economy than Pakistan, bigger resources. But a per capita and percentile w.r.t population gives a better perspective.

-As mentioned earlier India per capita income rank is 131st in the world and for Pakistan it is around 140th, and this is a very small difference...the difference between China and India is huge. HDI figures are also similar, Pakistan was doing bad in the last 10 years, there is improvement in 1 province where PTI has a govt, more will follow under the current govt.

- And since India has reforms lately and was earlier a closed economy, the sudden riches, rag-to-riches, new development/new cars/new gadgets has made people starry-eyed, over confident, a bit snobbish and chest-thumpers as well...call it bragging or extra boastful. I see it on all the forums...not just here.




And there is the crux, the gist of the discussion and the anomalies and fault lines in India and Pakistan.


-India development model is lopsided, too few getting the best of it, and a sea of people marginalized and nowhere to be seen in the economic upturn in India.

-India has a practical, functional reservation system, the positive discrimination, a well entrenched caste system where the equality/pluralism/holistic model is almost impossible to follow as humanity is divided between castes, the high and low, the SC/SC/OBC caste, Dalits, being lowest of the low, Brahmins barely 2% of the population as ruling class and rich segment.

- Any reservation system for lower castes works against the universal concept of meritocracy, equality also and fraught with anomaly and failure. India introduced the reservation system to alleviate the poor Dalits and lower castes and provide them education and jobs, this itself is an anomaly, a false system...reason you see falling education standards, uneducated/undeserving people in high positions in govt. Jobs in India.

- Reason higher caste pattidar Patels are asking for reservation in jobs and education as they feel left out due to a false reservation system in India.

And this in India is the major fault line....will remain there, no escaping from it...the dreaded Caste System....till the end of civilizations...end of times.



20% of the entire population in India belong to the Schedule castes. This means that nearly 26 crore people in India belong to SC community. That's why they are given 15% reservation in government sector.

9% of the entire population belongs to Scheduled Tribes. This means they are nearly 11.7 crore in population. They are provided with 7.5% reservation in government sector.

41% of the entire population belongs to Other backward Caste. This means that they are nearly 53.3 crore in population. 27% reservation is provided to them in government sector.

At last remaining 30% are general category people being 39 crore out of the whole.

This is how the entire population in India could be distributed.

i agree the reservation system is counterproductive in the long run. That does not change the fact that india overall is still ahead of Pakistan in moat social indices, including hdi adjusted for inequality. You seek to think that is temporary due to the wot. I think the facts show the gap is too large and ia growing too fast for pakiatan to close

and i agree with you, I despise snobbishness of all kinds

 

[itsanufy]

CPEC started in 2015. There is no time limit on CPEC. It is a continuous, pervasive economic idea, not a set finite economic program. It involves every part of the Pakistani state. CPEC will ultimately amalgamate the Pakistan economy with that of China. This is all but set to grow as Pakistan's relationship/alliance with China gets stronger with the passage of time.

PS if the Chinese were concerned with profit from trade with india, they would not have assisted in Pakistan becoming a nuclear weapons state. That is a false dichotomy.

I believe Mr. Zardari and Mr. Li signed the memorandum on 2013. First phase investment of 62B aimed at 2020 then. But now it getting extended to 2022. There will be a second phase for CEPEC.
Yes you are right China assisted to certain extent. A question they are our neighbors, having atomic power but they choose you.
Simple reason, they don't want India to get more powerful. A stronger enemy in West as well will force India to spend more on military than infrastructure, by which they could have tried to compete with china on their own field.
But now having a trade deficit in favour of China around 50B/year (almost the value of your CEPEC), they will be the last person to have a war in India.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

I believe Mr. Zardari and Mr. Li signed the memorandum on 2013. First phase investment of 62B aimed at 2020 then. But now it getting extended to 2022. There will be a second phase for CEPEC.
Yes you are right China assisted to certain extent. A question they are our neighbors, having atomic power but they choose you.
Simple reason, they don't want India to get more powerful. A stronger enemy in West as well will force India to spend more on military than infrastructure, by which they could have tried to compete with china on their own field.
But now having a trade deficit in favour of China around 50B/year (almost the value of your CEPEC), they will be the last person to have a war in India.

They've actually done way more than that. China has given Pakistan the capability to produce H-bombs/thermonuclear weapons since at least early 2011:

http://isis-online.org/isis-reports...g-nuclear-weapons-time-for-pakistan-to-rever/

 

[MultaniGuy]

@Iqbal Ali Look man, I have gone through our debate. Perhaps I appeared overly confrontational. I want to extend an olive branch. I looked at the Cabinet Mission Plan, and it looks like if India adopted it, Balochistan, SIndh, and KP would have heavy autonomy. Here are the main points:

1. Frontier Province, Sind and Baluchistan in the North-West of India, namely Pakistan, zones where the Muslims are in a dominant majority, be constituted into a sovereign independent State and that an unequivocal undertaking be given to implement the establishment of Pakistan without delay.
2. The two separate constitution-making bodies be set up by the people of Pakistan and Hindustan for the purpose of framing their respective Constitutions.
3. That the acceptance of the Muslim League demand of Pakistan and its implementation without delay are the sine qua non for Muslim League cooperation and participation in the formation of an Interim Government at the Center.
4. That any attempt to impose a Constitution on a united-India basis or to force any interim arrangement at the Center contrary to the Muslim League demand will leave the Muslims no alternative but to resist any such imposition by all possible means for their survival and national existence.

http://historypak.com/cabinet-mission-plan-1946/
You have the view that India could have technically ruled over Balochistan and Sindh as one union. I however, believe that there is no way India could have adopted that union and still be strong and prosperous. I do not think Hindus could have "dominated" those provinces considering they would have had autonomy. It looks like that's something we will have to agree to disagree on
You think that Hindus lost west Punjab and east Bengal. I disagree, because according to the Lahore resolution, the entirety of those provinces were supposed to go to Pakistan. I also think that West Punjab, East Bengal, and Azad Kashmir are small compared to the combined size of East Punjab, West Bengal, Assam and Northeast India, and IOk, as well as the princely states. It looks like we interpret that differently, so we will have to agree to disagree.
It also looks like you think because SIndh, Balochistan, and KP converted to Islam in strong numbers, that land was taken from Hindus. I disagree, because that land was not controlled by Indian Hindus since the Guptas, and you can make a counter argument that Pakistan is small compared to the Mughal Empire, which means Muslims lost territory. Looks like we will have to agree to disagree there.

Overall, I still do not see how Hindus lost any territory on August 15 47 that they had controlled a year before. Of course, there are radicals on both sides, but the fact is the majority of people have accepted that. Those who did not will have to understand that AKhand Bharat will never happen and could not have happened(unless you call semi-sovereign states as "United"). Similarly, some people will have to accept that the Mughal Empire will never be recreated, and that Muslims will never rule any part of India again, including Kashmir.

Hope you have a good evening.

@Iqbal Ali Look man, I have gone through our debate. Perhaps I appeared overly confrontational. I want to extend an olive branch. I looked at the Cabinet Mission Plan, and it looks like if India adopted it, Balochistan, SIndh, and KP would have heavy autonomy. Here are the main points:

1. Frontier Province, Sind and Baluchistan in the North-West of India, namely Pakistan, zones where the Muslims are in a dominant majority, be constituted into a sovereign independent State and that an unequivocal undertaking be given to implement the establishment of Pakistan without delay.
2. The two separate constitution-making bodies be set up by the people of Pakistan and Hindustan for the purpose of framing their respective Constitutions.
3. That the acceptance of the Muslim League demand of Pakistan and its implementation without delay are the sine qua non for Muslim League cooperation and participation in the formation of an Interim Government at the Center.
4. That any attempt to impose a Constitution on a united-India basis or to force any interim arrangement at the Center contrary to the Muslim League demand will leave the Muslims no alternative but to resist any such imposition by all possible means for their survival and national existence.

http://historypak.com/cabinet-mission-plan-1946/
You have the view that India could have technically ruled over Balochistan and Sindh as one union. I however, believe that there is no way India could have adopted that union and still be strong and prosperous. I do not think Hindus could have "dominated" those provinces considering they would have had autonomy. It looks like that's something we will have to agree to disagree on
You think that Hindus lost west Punjab and east Bengal. I disagree, because according to the Lahore resolution, the entirety of those provinces were supposed to go to Pakistan. I also think that West Punjab, East Bengal, and Azad Kashmir are small compared to the combined size of East Punjab, West Bengal, Assam and Northeast India, and IOk, as well as the princely states. It looks like we interpret that differently, so we will have to agree to disagree.
It also looks like you think because SIndh, Balochistan, and KP converted to Islam in strong numbers, that land was taken from Hindus. I disagree, because that land was not controlled by Indian Hindus since the Guptas, and you can make a counter argument that Pakistan is small compared to the Mughal Empire, which means Muslims lost territory. Looks like we will have to agree to disagree there.

Overall, I still do not see how Hindus lost any territory on August 15 47 that they had controlled a year before. Of course, there are radicals on both sides, but the fact is the majority of people have accepted that. Those who did not will have to understand that AKhand Bharat will never happen and could not have happened(unless you call semi-sovereign states as "United"). Similarly, some people will have to accept that the Mughal Empire will never be recreated, and that Muslims will never rule any part of India again, including Kashmir.

Hope you have a good evening.

I have read your post, and believe me you are lucky you are not dealing with an admin or a mod.

Even if the Muslim majority provinces had autonomy, the Hindus still would have had their empire and dominated in a parliamentary democracy, beating the Muslims to a 6:3 ratio. Hindus would make 66% and Muslims would make 33% of the South Asia Union.

The Muslim League may have demanded for undivided Punjab, and Bengal, but Punjab and Bengal were going to be partitioned because the Indian National Congress and British were saying that Punjab and Bengal provinces were half Hindu. It was inevitable.

Don't try to confuse people here, Punjab and Bengal were almost half Hindu, thus partitioning was inevitable. The Muslim league may have demanded, but the British said the land had to be a partitioned.

Yes the Hindus lost last land. The Muslims lost land too, but the Hindus lost more.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

I have read your post, and believe me you are lucky you are not dealing with an admin or a mod.

Even if the Muslim majority provinces had autonomy, the Hindus still would have had their empire and dominated in a parliamentary democracy, beating the Muslims to a 6:3 ratio. Hindus would make 66% and Muslims would make 33% of the South Asia Union.

The Muslim League may have demanded for undivided Punjab, and Bengal, but Punjab and Bengal were going to be partitioned because the Indian National Congress and British were saying that Punjab and Bengal provinces were half Hindu. It was inevitable.

Don't try to confuse people here, Punjab and Bengal were almost half Hindu, thus partitioning was inevitable. The Muslim league may have demanded, but the British said the land had to be a partitioned.

Yes the Hindus lost last land. The Muslims lost land too, but the Hindus lost more.

Yes partitioning Bengal and Punjab were inevitable, but so was partition in general. At best, India could have ahd a situation where Balochistan Sindh, KP, etc. were autonomous states within the republic. So basically a South Asian Soviet Union, and you know how long the Soviet Union lasted. Also the Cabinet Mission Plan would have prevented India from enforcing laws in that region without the majority of the population there approving. That does not look like dominating to me. Plus there is the fact that If India had those territories, it would get caught up in the soviet Afghan War and the WOT and everything that harmed Pak economically. Look, there is such thing as speculative history, but some things are just inevitable, and partition was one of them. As I explained before, Akhand Bharat is a radical dream that would never be feasible, just like dreams of recreating the Mughal Empire(which SOME Paksitanis had and still have). You your self admitted it was inevitable to partition Bengal and Punjab, despite the fact Muslims were majority. Well the ratio of Muslims to non-Muslims in SA at the time was similar to undivided Punjab and Bengal, and not too different from Assam. If it was inevitable for those to be partitioned, then obviously it would be inevitable for the subcontinent to be partitioned. I do not know why you are so desperate to show that partition was taking land from Hindus, when the whole subcontinent was administered by the British. Anyway, none of that changes the fact that according to the Lahore Resolution, ALL of PUnjab, ALL of Bengal, and ALL of Assam. That was what Jinnah wanted. Now I would not go out and say Muslims lost land, because the whole subcontinent was ruled by the British. I am simply countering your point by correctly pointing out that land that was majority muslim at the time was not given to Pakistan, which meant Muslims lost land. Something I forgot to mention was that the 2NT did not call for merely an exchange of PEOPLE, but land. Land that was majority Muslim would go to Pakistan, land that was majority Hindu would go to India. Punjab, Bengal, Assam, were majority Muslim at the time, so they should have gone to Pak but they did not. Remember, I am talking about Jinnah's plan. However, no land that was majority Hindu at the time went to Pakistan. If you still have doubts, calculate the size of West Punjab, East Bengal, and Azad Kashmir with IOk, East Punjab, West Bengal, and Assam.

BTW, I fail to see why the Mods would have an issue with me, as I am using nothing but facts and logic. I even posted some links to show what Jinnah wanted vs. what he got, as well as that Cabinet Mission Plan you think would have benefited India.

 

[Zhukov]

Middle class 1-2 and poor 2-3..explain why you guys have almost 1.6 times the birth rate of india.. Bulk of the population growth is due to states like UP, Bihar, Bengal etc..

The Rural Areas is the problem. Specially the poor and Uneducated class of rural areas. They live very basic life. Have plenty of fertile land to grow their own food. Don't care much about Education of their children. So in their logic they can AFFORD to have as many as 7 8 children as long as they have enough food to feed them and Cloths to cover them.
Plus the stupid madness of having a BOY. they wont stop until they have more boys then girls in their family. Seen it my self.
And its also considered a matter of great pride to have more and more children. Specially rural Women think it is some sort of wealth.

And lastly when government tries to educate this section of society with nation wide awareness campaigns then Mullahs come out of no where to defend the "Grow more Babies" Logic. Even if these Mullahs cannot fight the government, People still consider them more credible then Health Workers and Authorities.

As more and more People from rural areas getting educated the trends are reversing. In cities the situation is much better. But the issue is awareness and education is spreading too slow in rural areas.

Hope it explains.

 

[Nilgiri]

India's fertility rate is not 2.5....it's almost 2.1 now.

@Nilgiri right?

Yes its around 2.3 as of 2016 and dropping by around 0.1 every 3 years or so. It should be around 2.1 by 2020.

There is still quite large variance inside India, some states are approaching 1.5 fertility rate, some are just starting to get under 3 etc.

 

[MultaniGuy]

Yes partitioning Bengal and Punjab were inevitable, but so was partition in general. At best, India could have ahd a situation where Balochistan Sindh, KP, etc. were autonomous states within the republic. So basically a South Asian Soviet Union, and you know how long the Soviet Union lasted. Also the Cabinet Mission Plan would have prevented India from enforcing laws in that region without the majority of the population there approving. That does not look like dominating to me. Plus there is the fact that If India had those territories, it would get caught up in the soviet Afghan War and the WOT and everything that harmed Pak economically. Look, there is such thing as speculative history, but some things are just inevitable, and partition was one of them. As I explained before, Akhand Bharat is a radical dream that would never be feasible, just like dreams of recreating the Mughal Empire(which SOME Paksitanis had and still have). You your self admitted it was inevitable to partition Bengal and Punjab, despite the fact Muslims were majority. Well the ratio of Muslims to non-Muslims in SA at the time was similar to undivided Punjab and Bengal, and not too different from Assam. If it was inevitable for those to be partitioned, then obviously it would be inevitable for the subcontinent to be partitioned. I do not know why you are so desperate to show that partition was taking land from Hindus, when the whole subcontinent was administered by the British. Anyway, none of that changes the fact that according to the Lahore Resolution, ALL of PUnjab, ALL of Bengal, and ALL of Assam. That was what Jinnah wanted. Now I would not go out and say Muslims lost land, because the whole subcontinent was ruled by the British. I am simply countering your point by correctly pointing out that land that was majority muslim at the time was not given to Pakistan, which meant Muslims lost land. Something I forgot to mention was that the 2NT did not call for merely an exchange of PEOPLE, but land. Land that was majority Muslim would go to Pakistan, land that was majority Hindu would go to India. Punjab, Bengal, Assam, were majority Muslim at the time, so they should have gone to Pak but they did not. Remember, I am talking about Jinnah's plan. However, no land that was majority Hindu at the time went to Pakistan. If you still have doubts, calculate the size of West Punjab, East Bengal, and Azad Kashmir with IOk, East Punjab, West Bengal, and Assam.

BTW, I fail to see why the Mods would have an issue with me, as I am using nothing but facts and logic. I even posted some links to show what Jinnah wanted vs. what he got, as well as that Cabinet Mission Plan you think would have benefited India.

No, it is because you have the lost the debate, and the mods think your points are stupid and based more on opinion than on facts.

Yes partitioning Bengal and Punjab were inevitable, but so was partition in general. At best, India could have ahd a situation where Balochistan Sindh, KP, etc. were autonomous states within the republic. So basically a South Asian Soviet Union, and you know how long the Soviet Union lasted. Also the Cabinet Mission Plan would have prevented India from enforcing laws in that region without the majority of the population there approving. That does not look like dominating to me. Plus there is the fact that If India had those territories, it would get caught up in the soviet Afghan War and the WOT and everything that harmed Pak economically. Look, there is such thing as speculative history, but some things are just inevitable, and partition was one of them. As I explained before, Akhand Bharat is a radical dream that would never be feasible, just like dreams of recreating the Mughal Empire(which SOME Paksitanis had and still have). You your self admitted it was inevitable to partition Bengal and Punjab, despite the fact Muslims were majority. Well the ratio of Muslims to non-Muslims in SA at the time was similar to undivided Punjab and Bengal, and not too different from Assam. If it was inevitable for those to be partitioned, then obviously it would be inevitable for the subcontinent to be partitioned. I do not know why you are so desperate to show that partition was taking land from Hindus, when the whole subcontinent was administered by the British. Anyway, none of that changes the fact that according to the Lahore Resolution, ALL of PUnjab, ALL of Bengal, and ALL of Assam. That was what Jinnah wanted. Now I would not go out and say Muslims lost land, because the whole subcontinent was ruled by the British. I am simply countering your point by correctly pointing out that land that was majority muslim at the time was not given to Pakistan, which meant Muslims lost land. Something I forgot to mention was that the 2NT did not call for merely an exchange of PEOPLE, but land. Land that was majority Muslim would go to Pakistan, land that was majority Hindu would go to India. Punjab, Bengal, Assam, were majority Muslim at the time, so they should have gone to Pak but they did not. Remember, I am talking about Jinnah's plan. However, no land that was majority Hindu at the time went to Pakistan. If you still have doubts, calculate the size of West Punjab, East Bengal, and Azad Kashmir with IOk, East Punjab, West Bengal, and Assam.

BTW, I fail to see why the Mods would have an issue with me, as I am using nothing but facts and logic. I even posted some links to show what Jinnah wanted vs. what he got, as well as that Cabinet Mission Plan you think would have benefited India.

Now I know why the mods banned you. You are an idiot. Muslims only made a slight majority in United Punjab and United Bengal, thus United Punjab and United Bengal were partitioned.

Yes partitioning Bengal and Punjab were inevitable, but so was partition in general. At best, India could have ahd a situation where Balochistan Sindh, KP, etc. were autonomous states within the republic. So basically a South Asian Soviet Union, and you know how long the Soviet Union lasted. Also the Cabinet Mission Plan would have prevented India from enforcing laws in that region without the majority of the population there approving. That does not look like dominating to me. Plus there is the fact that If India had those territories, it would get caught up in the soviet Afghan War and the WOT and everything that harmed Pak economically. Look, there is such thing as speculative history, but some things are just inevitable, and partition was one of them. As I explained before, Akhand Bharat is a radical dream that would never be feasible, just like dreams of recreating the Mughal Empire(which SOME Paksitanis had and still have). You your self admitted it was inevitable to partition Bengal and Punjab, despite the fact Muslims were majority. Well the ratio of Muslims to non-Muslims in SA at the time was similar to undivided Punjab and Bengal, and not too different from Assam. If it was inevitable for those to be partitioned, then obviously it would be inevitable for the subcontinent to be partitioned. I do not know why you are so desperate to show that partition was taking land from Hindus, when the whole subcontinent was administered by the British. Anyway, none of that changes the fact that according to the Lahore Resolution, ALL of PUnjab, ALL of Bengal, and ALL of Assam. That was what Jinnah wanted. Now I would not go out and say Muslims lost land, because the whole subcontinent was ruled by the British. I am simply countering your point by correctly pointing out that land that was majority muslim at the time was not given to Pakistan, which meant Muslims lost land. Something I forgot to mention was that the 2NT did not call for merely an exchange of PEOPLE, but land. Land that was majority Muslim would go to Pakistan, land that was majority Hindu would go to India. Punjab, Bengal, Assam, were majority Muslim at the time, so they should have gone to Pak but they did not. Remember, I am talking about Jinnah's plan. However, no land that was majority Hindu at the time went to Pakistan. If you still have doubts, calculate the size of West Punjab, East Bengal, and Azad Kashmir with IOk, East Punjab, West Bengal, and Assam.

BTW, I fail to see why the Mods would have an issue with me, as I am using nothing but facts and logic. I even posted some links to show what Jinnah wanted vs. what he got, as well as that Cabinet Mission Plan you think would have benefited India.

You are stupid. It's not about what Jinnah wanted or what the Muslim league wanted. It was about being realistic about how the land was going to be distributed.

Do you honestly think Pakistan would get East Punjab and West Bengal which were Hindu majority areas. You conveniently forget to mention that United Punjab and United Bengal were half Hindu and half Muslim.

That shows your intellectual dishonesty.

You are going around in circles.

I have proven my point.

Hindus made the majority of South Asia, and thus should have gotten most of the land in partition (which they did), and if there was to be no partition, Hindus should have gotten everything with a significant Muslim minority concentrated in certain areas.

Hindus lost a golden opportunity to save the country, but foolishly rejected the Cabinet Mission Plan.

And if you were right, why did the Muslim League accept the Pakistan being given to them? Are you dumb or something?

Its because the Muslim League got a pretty good deal out of partition.

Good Night!

 

[DarkPrince]

You Indians need Communism

 

[Novice09]

You Indians need Communism

Let the Venezuelan to keep ENJOYING it...

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

Must be because after 70 years Pakistan controlled Kashmir still has not been taken by India. Now india has the numbers advantage. So what gives? I guess Gangadesh does not have testicular strength. Or what they say "has the numbers but lacks the balls".

Instead it appears that the dwarf Pakistan is the one eying Indian occupied Kashmir. Bizzare !

Did Nehru realize this way back in 1949-50? Things were hotting up in J&K since 1948. Did reports start pouring in that the Pathans and Punjabis (not Sindhis) were hard to fight? And then Nehru asked for No War pact?

 

[Great Brahmin]

We said that for six decades. How about you just wait for one decade. And see Pakistan bolt past you. A thoroughbred will always win against a aboriginal nightmare. You just don't have enough Brahmins, Parsees in a 1.4 billion genetic disaster.

I still remember how shocked people were when we first heard that Imdia will replace in might of population by 2050... Majority dont even know that new timeline is 2023...

Is somebody actively hiding or censoring this ? I don't know.

One thing for sure is, of we fall you guys will get fu kd really bad. You see, we are the ozone layer that protects you we are the one who is stopping this kinetic energy from hitting you because after this they will completely dominate this country and 2 one up to us Ucs they will convert to Islam and after that to purify the their Bloodline they will go after gori Pakistani girls.

Even even easier now for them with 8% being theor blood brothers, bhayyya languageas your nantional language and ummah brotherhood.

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

In less then 4 years India will overtake China as the most populous country and cross the 1.4 billion mark. Will the shear numbers in Gangadesh pose a threat to Pakistan? Discuss.


Population forecastsThe world’s biggest country
Print edition | Asia
Aug 13th 2015

That India will overtake China as the world’s most populous country is not in question. But the date has just moved closer. The UN now reckons India will surpass China in 2022 rather than in 2028, as it thought two years ago. The new estimates put China’s fertility rate a bit lower, at 1.6 children per woman. India’s higher fertility rate (2.5 children per woman) and younger population mean it will swell faster, reaching 1.4 billion in 2022, when China’s population will peak. China’s working-age population is already shrinking as the country greys. India will eventually follow. By 2050 about 500m Chinese will be over 60, and 330m Indians.


https://www.economist.com/asia/2015/08/13/the-worlds-biggest-country

Smartphone has defused the bomb of population explosion the world over

Smartphone has defused the bomb of population explosion the world over. Be it China, be it Pakistan, be it Bangladesh, be it India or be it Africa.

Information for the unacquainted: Time that the rural people used to spend procreating is now being spent watching youtube videos. Indian television shows are crap but majority of the population like it and youtube gives access. Internet also gives the simple rural folks constructive ideas about education and employment. Smartphone also gives access to Facebook and WhatsApp. And I forgot to mention IPL. All this keeps them busy and prevents them from copulating more.

Finally something that works. Television didn't work. Till smartphones arrived in 2010, it seemed coercive methods were the only way to control population explosion.

Smartphone has done a miracle.

Edit-Add: Internet also has p0rn but that won't affect the effectiveness of Smartphone in controlling the population. Earlier, rural folks would indulge in sex because of complete absence of any other pastime. Indian culture is conservative. Given a choice between clean entertainment and p0rn, most Indians would choose the former. Complete absence of option is worse than a choice between p0rn and clean entertainment. Even if Indians watch a bit of p0rn, they would get over it and switch to other channels like drama shows or even political news.

@sinait @Retired Troll @pakistanipower