Why BD Fares Better Than Pakistan: a Pak perspective

[UKBengali]

Firstly you said failed economy( present tense), then multiethenic state ALWAYS (future tense) fail.

Wow bro, you really need some schooling.

Dude I am not worried about my grammar, especially since typing on tablet.

Rather than worry about that, can you refute my assertion that multiethnic states do not succeed?

 

[Contrarian]

Dude I am not worried about my grammar, especially since typing on tablet.

Rather than worry about that, can you refute my assertion that multiethnic states do not succeed?

You have convinced us. You are right. They do not.

So isnt it better to focus on Bangladesh instead of India?
And hopefully Bangladesh will still do much better in the future and raise their economy because its one of the only ways to stop them from migrating to India.

 

[kaku1]

Dude I am not worried about my grammar, especially since typing on tablet.

Rather than worry about that, can you refute my assertion that multiethnic states do not succeed?

Facepalm. bro, now I know you really need schooling, I am not pointed out own your grammar, on that how often you change the topic.

Firstly, prove me India is a failed ECONOMIC state. And I am really focusing on economics.

BTW, when the India created, some westerners says the India is not gonna survive for two years, but bro we are still here. I know you cant feel like what we feel for India, and every Indian feel like that,. But sorry you cant.

 

[nForce]

Dude, how about providing 3 Square meals for your citizens for a start.

History teaches that multiethnic states always fail.

And what did you say ? "History teaches that multiethnic states always fail" ...
Always fails..so there must be lots of such examples that you can think of right now, correct ?
Okay.. lets make a quick switch to history and civics now... Some examples of failure of state for being multi-ethnic please ?And how exactly do you define failure here ? UK, for example has a rich multi-ethnic society. same with US,India, Russia, France etc etc...
Again, these are the very same countries which are flourishing in all aspects..

 

[UKBengali]

Facepalm. bro, now I know you really need schooling, I am not pointed out own your grammar, on that how often you change the topic.

Firstly, prove me India is a failed ECONOMIC state. And I am really focusing on economics.

BTW, when the India created, some westerners says the India is not gonna survive for two years, but bro we are still here. I know you cant feel like what we feel for India, and every Indian feel like that,. But sorry you cant.

1600 GDP/capita after 67 years of independence.

If that is not failed, then I don't know what is.

The Indian state spends most of its resources holding the disparate ethnicities together so I am not surprised.

If multiethnic states were normal, then the world would be full of them.

 

[kaku1]

1600 GDP/capita after 67 years of independence.

If that is not failed, then I don't know what is.

The Indian state spends most of its resources holding the disparate ethnicities together so I am not surprised.

If multiethnic states were normal, then the world would be full of them.

Now, you really need schooling. BTW, when we talk about Cost of Living in a country, and talk about facilities, we talk about PPP, not of nominal.

But leave that, we are failed country, is this create happiness in you? then good, listen to no one, happiness creates anti-oxidants, and anti-oxidants are good for your body.

 

[UKBengali]

And what did you say ? "History teaches that multiethnic states always fail" ...
Always fails..so there must be lots of such examples that you can think of right now, correct ?
Okay.. lets make a quick switch to history and civics now... Some examples of failure of state for being multi-ethnic please ?And how exactly do you define failure here ? UK, for example has a rich multi-ethnic society. same with US,India, Russia, France etc etc...
Again, these are the very same countries which are flourishing in all aspects..

You have proved my point genius.

Russia is now a unitary state as it is overwhelmingly Russian. It used to be multiethnic with Russians only comprising 50 per cent of the population of the Soviet Union, which broke up lol.

UK, France and US are still unitary states, or at the least they built their wealth lead by a single dominant ethnicity.

India has no dominant ethnicity and so has failed economically.

 

[kaku1]

You have proved my point genius.

Russia is now a unitary state as it is overwhelmingly Russian. It used to be multiethnic with Russians only comprising 50 per cent of the population of the Soviet Union, which broke up lol.

UK, France and US are still unitary states, or at the least they built their wealth lead by a single dominant ethnicity.

India has no dominant ethnicity and so has failed economically.

Bro, leave that, leave this all tension to us, we already are 1.2 bn people to take tension about India, so we dont need outsiders.

Have you suffering from Indo- Phobia?

 

[DarkElf]

You have proved my point genius.

Russia is now a unitary state as it is overwhelmingly Russian. It used to be multiethnic with Russians only comprising 50 per cent of the population of the Soviet Union, which broke up lol.

UK, France and US are still unitary states, or at the least they built their wealth lead by a single dominant ethnicity.

India has no dominant ethnicity and so has failed economically.

Imo you are confusing race with ethnic. US built by the white man, but back then when they still built their wealth they saw white German as different from white Anglo Saxon or as white Irish.

It's the same as South Asian right now, from outsider view the difference between South Asian ethnic is as big as the difference between Anglo Saxon, German, Iris, Scot, Wales or France ethnic. In other word if you think UK, France, US = unitary states, then you should realize that from outsider view, you guys also look the same.

 

[nForce]

You have proved my point genius.

Russia is now a unitary state as it is overwhelmingly Russian. It used to be multiethnic with Russians only comprising 50 per cent of the population of the Soviet Union, which broke up lol.

UK, France and US are still unitary states, or at the least they built their wealth lead by a single dominant ethnicity.

India has no dominant ethnicity and so has failed economically.

1.First you were talking about multi-ethnic society.Now you are talking about dominant ethnicity.Why exactly changing the words? Is that ignorance or lack of attention ?

2. Define ethnicity. Also, if your definition of multi-ethnic means no dominant ethnicity and thereby an equal distribution, then point out a single country on the face of the earth having that.

3. Are you stupid or are you stupid ? Russia, the present Russia, has so many different ethnicity that it will take a few pages just to name them, let alone talking about them.UK has at least 10 different major ethnic classifications and that too broadly classified ones,same is the case with France, US, even much more than that.Pick up some books, educate yourself and stop embarrassing yourself time and again.

4.What happened to your examples of history ?Forgot about them already ? Is that attention deficit disorder ?

 

[nForce]

Leave that bro, half of the BD people live in dreams.

That's how ignorant fools ruin threads, which in this case was in fact a thread praising Bangladesh's economic development.

 

[UKBengali]

Imo you are confusing race with ethnic. US built by the white man, but back then when they still built their wealth they saw white German as different from white Anglo Saxon or as white Irish.

It's the same as South Asian right now, from outsider view the difference between South Asian ethnic is as big as the difference between Anglo Saxon, German, Iris, Scot, Wales or France ethnic. In other word if you think UK, France, US = unitary states, then you should realize that from outsider view, you guys also look the same.

No, US whites accepted a common culture and language. That is the difference with India.

1.First you were talking about multi-ethnic society.Now you are talking about dominant ethnicity.Why exactly changing the words? Is that ignorance or lack of attention ?

2. Define ethnicity. Also, if your definition of multi-ethnic means no dominant ethnicity and thereby an equal distribution, then point out a single country on the face of the earth having that.

3. Are you stupid or are you stupid ? Russia, the present Russia, has so many different ethnicity that it will take a few pages just to name them, let alone talking about them.UK has at least 10 different major ethnic classifications and that too broadly classified ones,same is the case with France, US, even much more than that.Pick up some books, educate yourself and stop embarrassing yourself time and again.

4.What happened to your examples of history ?Forgot about them already ? Is that attention deficit disorder ?

Fool, stop embarrassing yourself.

A dominant ethnicity is required to push a country forward. All countries have a small percentage as minority. That does not make them into multiethnic state like India that has no dominant ethnicity.

 

[nForce]

Fool, stop embarrassing yourself.

I will leave it to other forum members to decide who is the fool.

You, started by comparing Bangladeshi textile industry with that of India, trying to demean Indian industry, which is much much bigger than that of Bangladesh to begin with.

Then you tried to prove you are some genius when it comes to economics.Too bad you had to face some cold hard facts.

There after ran towards history, about which you have little idea, squarely proved in my previous posts.A quick detour towards civics as well, definitely not your strong area, that one.

And now, you are clinging on to ethnicity.Do you really know what that word means ?

What next ? Mathematics ? With your track record over the last 3-4 posts, I have got my fingers crossed.

A dominant ethnicity is required to push a country forward. All countries have a small percentage as minority. That does not make them into multiethnic state like India that has no dominant ethnicity.

And hence the question, define ethnicity, and thereby point out its historical failures..Do you want me to quote all your posts together ?Answer my direct questions..Do you even have an iota of knowledge regarding what you are talking about ?

 

[Tangent]

...wait ...I'm confused...the article says India+Vietnam+Srilanka+etc = 50 Billion dollor, but there is another thread saying India account for 40 billion $....
Which is correct?

 

[dawn_news]

We have to take in to account last year BD minimum wage for unskilled taxtile worker was $38 compared to $100 at least in Pakistan. In some regions of Pakistan its even more then $100.