India has surpassed Japan to become the fourth-largest economy(dw.com)
dw.com
India has surpassed Japan to become the fourth-largest economy
https://www.dw.com/en/india-overtakes-japan-as-4th-largest-economy-report-says/a-75341063
63 comments
Nominal GDP is very important for geopolitics.
What matters for most humans is quality of life, health and safety.
Per capita is more relevant to people overall.
Per capita is more relevant to people overall.
Nuclear weapons even more, which India does have.
Japan reportedly can build those weapons any time they feel like it...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_latency#Nuclear-thresh...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_latency#Nuclear-thresh...
Non-per-capita is more meaningful for comparing military strength, in the unlikely event that India should one day decide to invade Japan.
Considering India's' military procurement, nominal is more meaningful if they fancied invading Japan.
edit: ah, i should have read the article, it is nominal.
edit: ah, i should have read the article, it is nominal.
PPP what matters
About 70 years ago India decided to adopt Western style Democracy but Soviet style Command economy whereas China adopted Soviet style everything.
Then China started market reforms and liberalization in 1978 whereas India actually started 13 years later in 1991. Both cpuntries have seen massive growth, but the rate of growth in India has simply not kept up with China, and there is also the compounding effect of having starting earlier with more government support in China.
We really should expect to see India continue to improve, but the thing folks tend to not see is that by mere virtue of being closer to the equator, India will suffer massively massively more from Climate Change. The projections are pretty extreme. Unless you live at higher altitudes like Uttar Pradesh in India, you will be screwed
Then China started market reforms and liberalization in 1978 whereas India actually started 13 years later in 1991. Both cpuntries have seen massive growth, but the rate of growth in India has simply not kept up with China, and there is also the compounding effect of having starting earlier with more government support in China.
We really should expect to see India continue to improve, but the thing folks tend to not see is that by mere virtue of being closer to the equator, India will suffer massively massively more from Climate Change. The projections are pretty extreme. Unless you live at higher altitudes like Uttar Pradesh in India, you will be screwed
All due respect, not only do you seem to know very little about Indian economy, you're also confusing altitude and latitude. Uttar Pradesh for instance is literally a flood plain.
I think that boasting about GDP numbers, with a spice of nationalistic impulse, does not really look good in this case. One can feel proud of the upward trajectory but with a population of 1.4 billion people, a natural competitor of India would be China, which is approaching $20 trillion, and not the 120 million people of Japan. Of course, there will be marginal improvements in relation to the rise of GDP but one needs to look at the quality of life of an average citizen. GDP per capita is something to look at but still very flawed and skewed, not in favor of most of the citizens. A lot of the hardships that the "normal" citizen faces are difficult to just take out of these numbers.
Popular media likes to take this very simplistic view and turns the nations' economies into competition, forgetting that economies should work for the people, not vice versa. If it was a competition, then eventually someone would have to win (what is the definition of winning is unclear to me either) which so far doesn't seem possible. What actually matters is what a country does with the economy it has. Whether it translates into better lives, stability, and opportunity for its citizens. By that measure, "4th largest" tells us almost nothing. The more useful question isn't "how big" but "for whom".
On one hand this is one of early signs of upcoming human capita importance - as automation becomes much more equally distributed, it's the human amount that becomes relevant first and foremost. India needed to increase GDP/cap only a little bit to get big result
On the other... this is showcasing the general failure of Japan in general and its moral defeat to US in the late 80s. Plaza accord was a mistake and Japan keeps riding that decision as a US puppet and against personal interests to this day - including recent turn to militarization
On the other... this is showcasing the general failure of Japan in general and its moral defeat to US in the late 80s. Plaza accord was a mistake and Japan keeps riding that decision as a US puppet and against personal interests to this day - including recent turn to militarization
This is great news. With a stronger economy, Indians could stay in India instead of having to immigrate elsewhere (anywhere).
Unfortunately, this metric is only relevant for geopolitics. The people of India still live in a country full of corruption at every political level, with basic hygienic and health needs unmet, an almost toxic air pollution level in big cities, very poor infrastructure, etc...
It's a beautiful place, but I wouldn't want to live there.
It's a beautiful place, but I wouldn't want to live there.
Health isn't that bad IMO.
India's capital is like a wasteland and this is for ex-middle class (which is now upper class, no middle class exists, its a chasm between upper and lower)
How much of it was stolen from American senior citizens?
You can stop worshipping growth any time you like.
Capitalism and democratic systems don't work without growth. Just look at the consequences of the economy stagnating in western Europe and what that is causing on a societal and political level.
No growth means no jobs for new grads, no growth means workers have no negotiating power with their employers, no growth means young people remain poor and cannot afford families. No growth means young people with bad economic prospects seek political alternatives, and newsflash, they far-right with their magic-grift-politics are far more appealing than the far-left with their estorectic utopian far-fetched plans.
Also no growth means a worsening wealth inequality over time.
No growth means no jobs for new grads, no growth means workers have no negotiating power with their employers, no growth means young people remain poor and cannot afford families. No growth means young people with bad economic prospects seek political alternatives, and newsflash, they far-right with their magic-grift-politics are far more appealing than the far-left with their estorectic utopian far-fetched plans.
Also no growth means a worsening wealth inequality over time.
The alternative is stagnation. And if you think that zero sum economy would favor you over corporations and billionaires, I have a bridge to sell you.
And if you think humanity is making it past ~2100, I have some carbon credits to sell you: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001632871...
Growth über Alles / the race to consume everything we can in our spherical petri dish with the same level of awareness as mindless bacteria, will be the end of human civilisation, regardless of anyone's economic beliefs.
Growth über Alles / the race to consume everything we can in our spherical petri dish with the same level of awareness as mindless bacteria, will be the end of human civilisation, regardless of anyone's economic beliefs.
Turns out love your neighbor was incredibly valuable advice.
Climate change is simply not an extinction threat. Despite all the fearmongering, the worst case scenarios top out at "WW2" levels of devastation and loss of life.
The only credible extinction threat to humankind so far is an ASI oopise, and that's because it's an intelligent threat.
The only credible extinction threat to humankind so far is an ASI oopise, and that's because it's an intelligent threat.
Assuming positive real return on their investments, a zero growth (or low growth) economy means the rich will own an ever growing proportion of wealth - its simple arithmetic.
That electric train is a nice image. India has plenty of opportunity to take advantage of cheap solar power and push cargo around the state with it. They are adding more electric vehicles by the day, which will help places like Delhi become more breathable, though the last time I was there, farmers were still burning the fields, causing a lot of air pollution in Delhi during the burns. The manufacturing base is improving, so you can buy relatively cheap vehicles.
Your money goes further in India. Their tax collection is pretty weak, so they print money to fund government spending which usually means higher inflation than we're used to in the US, but they're starting to get a better return on their infra spending as the country is lifted up via the use of the most recent tech (trains, smartphones, fiber, solar, battery, etc...).
It's been fun watching the country and region develop over the years. They still have a ways to go, and in some ways I think I'll miss the old chaotic India. You don't find cows wearing decorative garlands in downtown Chicago or New York. I bet whatever India transforms into, it'll hold some of it's unique charm. That's my hope anyway.
Your money goes further in India. Their tax collection is pretty weak, so they print money to fund government spending which usually means higher inflation than we're used to in the US, but they're starting to get a better return on their infra spending as the country is lifted up via the use of the most recent tech (trains, smartphones, fiber, solar, battery, etc...).
It's been fun watching the country and region develop over the years. They still have a ways to go, and in some ways I think I'll miss the old chaotic India. You don't find cows wearing decorative garlands in downtown Chicago or New York. I bet whatever India transforms into, it'll hold some of it's unique charm. That's my hope anyway.
[deleted]
India overtakes Japan as 4th-largest economy, also California's economy too
California has a population of 40M people, India 1.4B+, so surpassing California shouldn’t be surprising as India rapidly develops.
California wasn't colonised but india was for 200 years by Europeans
And they managed to end slavery and the caste system while they were there (that unfortunately came back as soon as India got independent again).
No need to thank the “Europeans”. You’re welcome.
No need to thank the “Europeans”. You’re welcome.
> And they managed to end slavery and the caste system while they were there (that unfortunately came back as soon as India got independent again).
1. Did they really end slavery if you rename it to something else? [0]
2. You didn't end caste system. If anything you made it more rigid
> No need to thank the “Europeans”. You’re welcome.
Thank you for all the massacres and famines Europeans. [1] [2]
[0]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_indenture_system
[1]. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/12/britai...
[2]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943
I didn't even scrape the surface of the atrocities you did.
1. Did they really end slavery if you rename it to something else? [0]
2. You didn't end caste system. If anything you made it more rigid
> No need to thank the “Europeans”. You’re welcome.
Thank you for all the massacres and famines Europeans. [1] [2]
[0]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_indenture_system
[1]. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/12/britai...
[2]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943
I didn't even scrape the surface of the atrocities you did.
Slavery by whom? Whites and Muslims?
No, by Indians.
That’s why, still today, India is the country with the most slaves in the world, continuing their long tradition of the practice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_India
That’s why, still today, India is the country with the most slaves in the world, continuing their long tradition of the practice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_India
Who do you think named it "California?" It sure wasn't the natives.
> California wasn't colonised
Yes it was.
Yes it was.
Rapidly?
For trajectory note that the Indian population is growing while japans population is shrinking. So taking all that into account per capita it’s about 50 years before India catches up with Japan if current rates stay the same.
I can guarantee rates will not stay the same.