Joint rise of India, China irreversible: Chinese envoy

[Chinese-Dragon]

Still you could not answer, how this made China ahead of India by 4 decades.

Do you know the difference between 2012 and 1970?

Comparing India and China: Chasing the dragon | The Economist

The lag in social progress is much longer. A child's odds of surviving past their fifth birthday are as bad in India today as they were in China in the 1970s.

Moreover, the chart does not necessarily imply that India in nine years' time will be as rich as China is today. That is because China grew faster in the last nine years than India is likely to grow over the next nine.

Your growth rate is now 5.3%, and plummeting like a rock. How can you possibly assume that you will grow as fast as we did in the last decade, which was in the double-digits?

If you want to make the same leaps as we did in the last decade, then you need a minimum of sustained double-digit growth.

 

[DARIUS]

Stop trying to piggyback on our success. India as a country is a massive failure with shameful power outages, starving children, poverty, etc.

Don't kid yourselves trying to put your country in the same sentence as us and claim you are as successful as us. India is atleast 40-50 years behind china.

India is still 3rd world.

Yes and China is a first World country with a very high Human rights(not to mention Animal Rights!!)record,a free press,absolutely nooooo poverty,Democracy and a sustainable growth!!

 

[Jade]

Ask anarchy 99, though this Economist article will help:

Comparing India and China: Chasing the dragon | The Economist



Like I said, even the USA adds more to its economy every year than India does.

Since even 1% of $15 trillion.... is FAR more than 5.3% of 1.5 trillion. Not even in the same league.

I agree with you that comparison is Bull$hit, but saying India is 40 years behind China is incorrect. What was the size of Chinese economy a decade ago

As regarding '1% of $15 trillion.... is FAR more than 5.3% of 1.5 trillion', you are simply discounting the power of compound interest.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

As regarding '1% of $15 trillion.... is FAR more than 5.3% of 1.5 trillion', you are simply discounting the power of compound interest.

Compound interest is important no doubt, but you can do a simple calculation to figure it out.

Let's say over a period of 10 years. Or 20 years.

You'll find that the results are quite disappointing. If you don't want to calculate, you can use some IMF charts:

List of countries by past and future GDP (nominal) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The IMF estimates show that by 2017, India will pretty much be in the same place compared to other large economies. I.e. Even in 2017 India will still have a smaller economy than Russia, UK, Brazil, France, etc.

And that's even without taking into account the recent drop in Indian growth rate, to 5.3%.

 

[Jade]

Do you know the difference between 2012 and 1970?

Comparing India and China: Chasing the dragon | The Economist



Your growth rate is now 5.3%, and plummeting like a rock. How can you possibly assume that you will grow as fast as we did in the last decade, which was in the double-digits?

If you want to make the same leaps as we did in the last decade, then you need a minimum of sustained double-digit growth.

Now don't say that Chinese economy is growing like a star. Even Chinese economy growth rate has been downgraded to around 7%

China's Stocks Dip
Investment in China Slides as Wen Sees Room for Easing: Economy - SFGate
China's slowing economy sparks retail price war | Reuters

If you don't read the international news, then I don't blame you. Such is the power of you media.

 

[JohnyD]

Yes and China is a first World country with a very high Human rights(not to mention Animal Rights!!)record,a free press,absolutely nooooo poverty,Democracy and a sustainable growth!!

right..lol....and that guy appears to be a frustrated chindi born out of human rights violation...also, sounds high on alcohol typing only non-sense.....

 

[Jade]

Compound interest is important no doubt, but you can do a simple calculation to figure it out.

Let's say over a period of 10 years. Or 20 years.

You'll find that the results are quite disappointing. If you don't want to calculate, you can use some IMF charts:

List of countries by past and future GDP (nominal) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The IMF estimates show that by 2017, India will pretty much be in the same place compared to other large economies, and below Russia, UK, Brazil, etc.

But you forgot that, the growth rates are real, and not nominal. Inflation has to be added to get the size of the economy, let us say a decade hence. Why do you think the Chinese economy of $1 T a decade ago is now $7 T even counting a 10% growth rate on an average?

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

But you forgot that, the growth rates are real, and not nominal. Inflation has to be added to get the size of the economy, let us say a decade hence. Why do you think the Chinese economy of $1 T a decade ago is now $7 T even counting a 10% growth rate on an average?

These are IMF estimates, not my own. They of course used nominal growth rates, but you can double-check if you think otherwise.

China moved so far in 10 years, precisely because we were able to sustain-double digit growth rates.

You can't assume India will make similar gains in 10 years, considering India's much lower rate of growth.

In 2007 we even managed a real growth rate of 14.2%.

 

[INDIC]

Do you know the difference between 2012 and 1970?

Comparing India and China: Chasing the dragon | The Economist

1970?? China was movie 40 years back in the past in 1970 with cultural revolution.

 

[JohnyD]

Your maths is bad. Firstly, dollars are not worth the same today as they were in 2004, nowhere close.

Secondly, check the GDP ratios through time:

1990 - China GDP : India GDP - 1 : 1
2000 - China GDP : India GDP - 2 : 1
2010 - China GDP : India GDP - 4 : 1

So in fact the gap is WIDENING every day, which makes sense. Since we have a much larger base economy ($7.3 trillion) and are also growing much faster in percentage terms. And India is now slowing down to 5.3% growth as well.

Hell, even the USA growing at only 1% a year (with a $15 trillion economy) adds more to its economy every year than India does.

Since China’s official transformation from the Maoist planned economy to the socialist market economy. Over 150 million people have been lifted out of poverty due to China’s burgeoning economy and the quality of life has been improved for hundreds of millions more.(Chan Lecture April 8) However, this growth has come at the expense of an innumerable amount of gross human rights violations committed by the Chinese Communist Party

Source: United States' Country Reports on Human Rights

 

[Jade]

These are IMF estimates, not my own. They of course used nominal growth rates, but you can double-check if you think otherwise.

China moved so far in 10 years, precisely because we were able to sustain-double digit growth rates.

You can't assume India will make similar gains in 10 years, considering India's much lower rate of growth.

In 2007 we even managed a real growth rate of 14.2%.

Nobody use nominal growth rates, real growth rates are used to measure growth rates of economies.

If Chinese economy was $1 T a decade ego. assuming a 10% growth rate, the Chinese economy should have been $ 2.5 T and not $ 7 T. Do your calculations. And I should also add that even Indian economy did very well in the last decade.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Nobody use nominal growth rates, real growth rates are used to measure growth rates of economies.

If Chinese economy was $1 T a decade ego. assuming a 10% growth rate, the Chinese economy should have been $ 2.5 T and not $ 7 T. Do your calculations. And I should also add that even Indian economy did very well in the last decade.

Do you think the IMF is wrong in their calculations?

Feel free to point out any mistakes they made in their maths.

The estimates will be even lower if they took India's recent low growth rates into account.

 

[Jade]

Do you think the IMF is wrong in their calculations?

Feel free to point out any mistakes they made in their maths.

The estimates will be even lower if they took India's recent low growth rates into account.

Did I say IMF was wrong? The size of the economy has inflation component, hence using real growth rates to calculate the size of economies will give wrong figures, especially for developing economies where inflations can be in double figures.

Use Fisher equation to get the nominal growth rates and then calculate. Then you find how Chinese economy grew from $ 1T to $7T in a decade.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Did I say IMF was wrong? The size of the economy has inflation component, hence using real growth rates to calculate the size of economies will give wrong figures, especially for developing economies where inflations can be in double figures.

I thought everyone knew that already?

Obviously nominal GDP growth is not the same as real GDP growth.

I'm talking about the IMF figures now, they already calculated it. So unless you think their figures are wrong, we can use those figures.

 

[Jade]

I thought everyone knew that already?

Obviously nominal GDP growth is not the same as real GDP growth.

I'm talking about the IMF figures now, they already calculated it. So unless you think their figures are wrong, we can use those figures.

Use Fisher equation to get the nominal growth rates and then calculate...bang....you will find how Chinese economy grew from $ 1T to $7T in a decade.