India warns Dhaka of assassination plot: report

[Nemesis]

Not all states but most states. This is possible because of the huge disparities within India. It is only 5 or 6 states of India that account for India's overall economic performance. Also some states have such a minuscule population that their per capita income is magnified even if it has a tiny economy. If this was not the case how does India have worse nutrition statistics than Pakistan and Bangladesh and why do 200 000 farmers commit suicide.

Firstly i thought it was just Maharashtra? Now it's some states? Good, we're getting somewhere.

So, what you're saying is that because of the inequalities in income in India, the per capita of India is higher than Bangladesh? Let us look at this inequality of income then.

Inequality of income in a country is measured by the Gini Coefficient.
Gini Coefficient - The Gini coefficient is a measure of statistical dispersion, commonly used as a measure of inequality of income distribution or inequality of wealth distribution. It is defined as a ratio with values between 0 and 1: A low Gini coefficient indicates more equal income or wealth distribution, while a high Gini coefficient indicates more unequal distribution. 0 corresponds to perfect equality.

In Bangladesh - 33.4
In India - 36.8

Clearly, the difference between India and Bangladesh is negligible, so your point that skewed income inequality in India results in a higher Per Capita Income is incorrect.

You do not even see the absurdity of the figures you are presenting. India has an economy 10 times that of Bangladesh but is placed only 15 places above it on the HDI. The last census in Bangladesh was done in 2001 and I have no idea when they were done in India so your comparisons do not make any sense. You could be comparing figures almost a decade apart. My comment on Indian poverty therefore still stands.

The last census in India was also in 2001. My poverty figures on India are from that census.

Once again, GDP - Economy multiplied by Population, so it is irrelevant if India is 10 times bigger than India. What matters is the life of the average citizen in India is better than in Bangladesh.

However, the reason why India is only 15 places better than Bangladesh is because of it's over population which skews the Human development indicator. For example, a statement will be thrown out to suggest that India has as many poor people as Sub-Saharan Africa, this is true, but China also has 200 million poor people, does that mean China and Sub Saharan Africa can be equated? No.

Hence your statement on Indian poverty does not stand. Anything else?

 

[BanglaBhoot]

Firstly i thought it was just Maharashtra? Now it's some states? Good, we're getting somewhere.

If GDP (OER) than yes only Maharastra is ahead. How many states are ahead of Bangladesh in terms of per income (PPP) no one knows because India doesn't release the figures for individual states since 2004. Even then only a handful were ahead of Bangladesh even at that time. If the figures remain consistent than I doubt that this would have changed. Why doesn't India release up-to-date figures?

In this respect then my point still stands.

In Bangladesh - 33.4
In India - 36.8

All this indicates to me is that there are probably two large groups in India. The very poor and the very rich with the latter being very tiny compared to the rest of the population.

a statement will be thrown out to suggest that India has as many poor people as Sub-Saharan Africa, this is true, but China also has 200 million poor people, does that mean China and Sub Saharan Africa can be equated? No.

You are still prepared to argue that a country of 150 million (Bangladesh) can be compared with a population of 1.2 billion (India). India's poor is probably 3 times the size of Bangladesh's entire population. Is that more indicative?

 

[Nemesis]

If GDP (OER) than yes only Maharastra is ahead. How many states are ahead of Bangladesh in terms of per income (PPP) no one knows because India doesn't release the figures for individual states since 2004. Even then only a handful were ahead of Bangladesh even at that time. If the figures remain consistent than I doubt that this would have changed. Why doesn't India release up-to-date figures?

Once again, GDP depends on Population. As Bangladesh's population is greater than every Indian state except UP, having a greater GDP than Indian states is no achievement. Let me quantify this by an example so that you get what i'm trying to say. China has a greater GDP than Sweden, but the quality of an average Swede is better than an average Chinese.

I maybe wrong, but you could technically get state wide per capita figures by invoking the R.T.I, but i don't know whether we still calculate per capita on a state level.

In this respect then my point still stands.

No it doesnt.

All this indicates to me is that there are probably two large groups in India. The very poor and the very rich with the latter being very tiny compared to the rest of the population.

What it indicates is that the levels of Income inequality in India and Bangladesh is relatively the same. So your point that inequality in income skews per capita figures in favour of India is inaccurate.

You are still prepared to argue that a country of 150 million (Bangladesh) can be compared with a population of 1.2 billion (India).

I did not argue that India needs to be compared with Bangladesh. In fact, my stated position is the opposite, India being bigger, larger, richer cannot be compared with Bangladesh. So instead of talking of unleashing war on India, Bangladesh would be better served in cooperation, for the mutual benefit of all.

India's poor is probably 3 times the size of Bangladesh's entire population. Is that more indicative?

The number of poor in China would also be more than Bangladesh's population, your point being what then? China and Bangladesh can be equated?

 

[haawk]

MBI-you just wont accept , wont you , why should we give state wise figures.... so that you can compare your country to an indian state , is that all that bangladesh is according to you ? - a country that can only compare itself to another country's state, i pity your inferiority complex

nemesis - there is no point arguing with a guy who chooses to be blind

 

[haawk]

why is the GDP discussion going on in this thread anyway?

 

[toxic_pus]

Btw, Mr Munshi, what are the respective figures for the 6 divisions of Bangladesh?

Also, why are you trying to compare Bangladesh's GDP, which includes import/export figures to Indian states' GSDP, which doesn't include import export figures? Do you know that if you add up all the GSDP figures of all the states, it will still fall short of India's GDP figure? Do you know why?

You say you are comparing state GDP(?)(OER). Fine. But, state GSDP figures are always stated in INR. How are you converting the figures into dollars? Which exchange rate are you considering? Closing? Opening? Mean? Weighted Average?

More importantly, can you please provide direct links to those figures and also, please enlighten us about your calculations.

 

[toxic_pus]

why is the GDP discussion going on in this thread anyway?

Because Mr Munshi thinks he is on to something. Its is another thing that, that something is bug sh!t.

 

[Gabbar]

MBI-you just wont accept , wont you , why should we give state wise figures.... so that you can compare your country to an indian state , is that all that bangladesh is according to you ? - a country that can only compare itself to another country's state, i pity your inferiority complex

nemesis - there is no point arguing with a guy who chooses to be blind

You know some one said once that "If some one's salary depends on not understanding, how would you make him understand?"

This can be applied to MBI

 

[BanglaBhoot]

I did not argue that India needs to be compared with Bangladesh. In fact, my stated position is the opposite, India being bigger, larger, richer cannot be compared with Bangladesh. So instead of talking of unleashing war on India, Bangladesh would be better served in cooperation, for the mutual benefit of all.

This is where we differ and is the crux of the issue. India is a sum of its many parts and not all the parts are equal. These parts would be better off separate from the Indian union to make their own political and economic decision. It is just unfortunate that India does not release all the economic figures so that we could make sense of the debate. The United States provides detailed economic information on each of its states but India cannot do the same otherwise the real scale of its poverty and disparities would become obvious.

 

[Jako]

This is where we differ and is the crux of the issue. India is a sum of its many parts and not all the parts are equal. These parts would be better off separate from the Indian union to make their own political and economic decision. It is just unfortunate that India does not release all the economic figures so that we could make sense of the debate. The United States provides detailed economic information on each of its states but India cannot do the same otherwise the real scale of its poverty and disparities would become obvious.

thats why we are india AND WE ARE UNITED........BTW ANSWER THIS,DOES INDIA BEING POOR MAKES BD RICH??? we are good as we are,we do not produce state figures ,so?? Other than you nobody cares to compare a state to a country.....