ok chota..we will wait for another 10 years. Until then..learn from Bangladesh..they can set a nice example for you guys.
So that’s a 45% increase from 1970 to 2001 for Pakistan
and only 42% for India 
Go Pakistan!! 
Thanks for the stats 
^ still lower..seem slike Pakistan is headed towards the South Asian equivalent of N Korea…
Good so pakistan is near where India was in 1985. Hopefully by 2058, Pakistan can be where India is now…
The News International [Pakistan]
January 12, 2003
Why are we poor?
by Dr Farrukh Saleem
India plus Pakistan is 20 percent of humanity. India plus Pakistan is
a mere 5 percent of world income. India plus Pakistan have 45 percent
of the world’s illiterates. India plus Pakistan have 50 percent of all
malnourished children. India just by itself has the world’s largest
number of poor people in a single country. In absolute terms, at
least 50 million Pakistanis and 350 million Indians live in extreme
poverty (must earn during the day to eat dinner).
Some 60 years ago, Mahatma Gandhi, the Bapu of all Indians, had said,
“Poverty is but the worst form of violence.”
Look at present-day Bombay. The city has ten million people and is the
financial capital of India. Four million of the ten million live in
rough-and-tumble fabrications of bamboo, plastic, wood and tin.
At least a million live and sleep on footpaths. For the rest of India,
poverty remains a Himalayan problem. Which one of the 14 prime
ministers has done anything to save Indians from the worst form of violence?
On 9 August 1947, Quaid-i-Azam, the father of our country, delivered
a speech at the Karachi Club. The Quaid asserted that it is the
“sacred duty of the Sovereign State of Pakistan to solve the problem
of poverty of the people.”
Which one of our 11 presidents or 19 prime ministers has paid any
attention to the Quaid’s pledge?
Look at present-day Rojhan Jamali, the birthplace of our Prime Minister
Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali. Out of all of PM’s constituents the lifetime
goal of at least 90% is to own a Rs2,000 goat.
What really is poverty? According to the World Bank, “Poverty is
hunger. Poverty is lack of shelter. Poverty is being sick and not
being able to see a doctor. Poverty is not being able to go to school
and not knowing how to read. Poverty is not having a job, is fear for
the future, living one day at a time. Poverty is losing a child to
illness brought about by unclean water. Poverty is powerlessness,
lack of representation and freedom.” Both India and Pakistan have all
these forms of poverty. Why are we so poor?
Over the last 5 years, India has spent $4.2 billion and Pakistan $2.6
billion on the importation of major conventional weapons. For India
that converts to $4 on a per capita basis and $19 for every Pakistani
man, woman and child. India and Pakistan remained the poorest of all
countries but India is now the 5th largest importer of major
conventional weapons while Pakistan is the 12th largest.
Pakistan is poor because we have purchased billions of dollars of
weapons from China Metallurgical Equipment Corporation,
Lockheed Martin (a billion dollars for F-16s, P-3 Orion, etc) and
Raytheon (Stingers, side-winders and TOW missiles).
Over the past 5 years, we have deposited $1.024 billion
into Chinese coffers, $650 million has gone to Ukraine, $400 million
to France and $250 million each to the UK and the US.
India is poor because she has been enriching Rosoboronexport,
Russia’s arms exporting corporation. Most of India’s defence kitty
has gone to Russia; $3 billion over the past 5 years alone. The
Netherlands took in $350 million and Germany another $210 million.
We shall continue to be poor.
Under the long-term Indo-Russian military technical cooperation
programme there are some 350 new defence deals in the pipeline -
including the production of Lada class diesel submarines, Gorshkov
aircraft carrier, TU-22M long-range bombers, Akula-II class nuclear
submarines and AWACS. Total tab: $4 billion.
Then there is the BAE Systems Hawk jet deal with the UK.
These 60 Hawks have a price tag of a billion pound sterling which is
the equivalent of nearly ten years of India-UK bilateral trade.
India’s neighbour has billion dollar Agostas, so India must also buy
Scorpene ‘killer submarines’. France wins, both in India and in
Pakistan.
More recently, Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) signed a two billion
dollar weapons contract with Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL). The
contract covers $280 million for surface-to-surface naval Barak
missiles, $300 million for pilot-less planes, $250 million for Green
Pine radar systems, Phalcon early-warning aircraft and towed howitzer
for the Indian army.
The US, in the meanwhile, has established a tourist-cum-investor ‘no
fly zone’ over Pakistan, while our armament wish-list remains heavier
than our GDP. Short-range ballistic missiles, intermediate-range
ballistic missiles, F-16 fighters, surveillance aircraft, Harpoon
missiles, long-range weapon-locating radars, rocket fuel, anti-tank
missiles and combat helicopters. Additional Main Battle Tanks (MBT)
are going to cost $1.5 billion. The PAF wants a multi-billion dollar
package covering Mirage 2000-5s and then there’s F7-P4 aircraft from
China and gunship helicopters. Spare parts from the US are also high
on our wish list.
Just who is profiting from the sale of all these machines of death
and destruction?
The top ten exporters of conventional weapons are USA, Russia, France,
UK, Germany, Netherlands, Ukraine, Italy, China and Belarus.
The top corporate merchants of death are Lockheed Martin
(USA), Boeing (USA), BAE Systems (UK), Raytheon (USA), Northrop
Grumman (USA), General Dynamics (USA) and Thomson-CSF (France).
When the poverty-ridden East fills West’s craving for drugs there is
talk of ‘supply control’. The West remains the chief pretender of
virtue but is the largest seller of arms to the East. The US, for
instance, accounts for a full 50% of the world trade in arms.
Conflict and poverty are the closest of relatives. Look at Ethiopia,
Sierra Leone, Afghanistan, Cambodia, Somalia, Nigeria, Pakistan,
Haiti, Mozambique, Mali, India or Angola. They are all in
conflict - either within or with their neighbours - and they are all
poor. Peace is an essential prerequisite to prosperity. Without peace,
there can’t be any poverty alleviation.
**India’s economy is 800% the size of ours. On a per capita basis, we
have a record of spending 500% more on arms imports than does India.
Which country is likely to run out of resources first? Just who is
most likely to win without firing a shot? There certainly are no
prizes for getting these riddles right. **
Chota - If you think that Pakistan is a Developed nation and everything is great there, then good for you. I am happy for you.
Matsui - Leave him alone yaar, Let him be happy for a while.
matsui if you don’t understand the rudiments of trend analysis it’s time for you join cabbing along with Asif_bay
AB,
You’re right my hindu friend, both Pakistan and ind are in a similar economic position except one has 400 million people living in extreme poverty and the other around 20 million, ind has to work 20 times harder to achieve the same as Pakistan in this respect (matsui I can draw you a ratio percent chart :)).
So in answer to the original question:
** Can India be the next big thing?**
If we’re talking poverty strcken super-populated quagmire then yes certainly, hell it’s already there. 
Great can you get me a coffee too after drawing me the chart. I like it black like my Pakistani beauty queens.
Vaisey, did you hear Bank of America is offshoring 500 jobs to India. Man…this is so exciting…the only thing being sent to Pak is the loans to keep that basketcase economy afloat.
WHoa… the elephant is on a stampede..
http://www.forbes.com/global/2003/1027/040_2.html
excerpt:
One striking thing is how well Indian companies have performed. There are 18 this year, up from 13 a year ago and 10 in 2001. Now India is a special case; it has some pretty big fish swimming in these waters because their sales are modest–for now. Two: software titans Infosys (nasdaq: INFY - news - people ) and Wipro (nyse: WIT - news - people ) qualified for our big-company A-List earlier this year, thanks to market capitalizations in excess of $5 billion.
Look beyond those behemoths and you will see companies like Zee Telefilms, which runs a Bollywood studio and a cable TV operation. Its films may have the higher profile internationally, but T. Rowe Price’s Thomson says to keep an eye on the other half of the company. It will benefit from an expanding middle class on the subcontinent and is branching out to serve expatriates with its increasingly global brand. Thomson often sees Indians watch Zee in London, where he is based.
**Interestingly, China’s results were less auspicious, with only the toll-road operator Zhejiang Expressway making the list. While China’s economic growth has been slightly ahead of India’s in recent years (both are among the world’s leaders), India seems more capable of producing entrepreneurial companies with publicly traded shares. The exceptional Zhejiang Expressway was recommended to FORBES GLOBAL readers two years ago and has returned nearly 150% to investors since. **
The Indian contingent covers a broad industrial range, from the aforementioned software and entertainment industries to widgetmakers like Bharat Forge, Essel Propack and Graphite India, pharmaceuticals that include Dr. Reddy’s Labs (nyse: RDY - news - people ) and financials such as HDFC Bank (nyse: HDB - news - people ).
Here’s some trend analysis for you cabbie
At India’s current population growth rate (CIA fact book 1.47%), by 2058 it will have a population of a billion people living in extreme poverty.
Hope you didn’t spit your coffee out on the dashboard
Well aint that a pisser…if a billion people avg a per capita GDP of $15k a year it is a great thing…see you in a few years…who are the laggards here… Hmmmm.. :hehe:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_gdp_gro_199
Map & Graph: Economy: Top 100 GDP growth (1990-2000)
â Scroll down for more information â Show map full screen
Country Description Amount
-
Equatorial Guinea 18.9%
-
China 9.2%
-
Ireland 6.5%
-
Vietnam 6.0%
-
Sudan 5.6%
-
Maldives 5.4%
-
Chile 5.2%
-
Guyana 5.0%
-
Burma 4.8%
-
Korea, South 4.7%
-
Saint Kitts and Nevis 4.7%
-
Singapore 4.7%
-
Poland 4.5%
-
Malaysia 4.4%
-
Dominican Republic 4.2%
-
Lebanon 4.2%
17.India 4.1% -
Luxembourg 4.1%
-
Mauritius 4.0%
-
Malta 4.0%
-
Sri Lanka 3.9%
-
Laos 3.9%
-
Mozambique 3.9%
-
Uganda 3.8%
-
Cuba 3.7%
-
Bhutan 3.4%
-
Cape Verde 3.3%
-
Thailand 3.3%
-
Cyprus 3.1%
-
Norway 3.1%
-
Argentina 3.0%
-
Bangladesh 3.0%
-
Costa Rica 3.0%
-
Suriname 3.0%
-
Tunisia 3.0%
-
Australia 2.9%
-
Grenada 2.9%
-
Peru 2.9%
-
Antigua and Barbuda 2.8%
-
Slovenia 2.8%
-
Syria 2.8%
-
Albania 2.7%
-
El Salvador 2.6%
-
Uruguay 2.6%
-
Egypt 2.5%
-
Indonesia 2.5%
-
Portugal 2.5%
-
Ethiopia 2.4%
-
Finland 2.4%
-
Nepal 2.4%
-
Burkina Faso 2.4%
-
Botswana 2.3%
-
Panama 2.3%
-
Spain 2.3%
-
Trinidad and Tobago 2.3%
-
Yemen 2.3%
-
Israel 2.2%
-
Netherlands 2.2%
-
United Kingdom 2.2%
-
United States 2.2%
-
Denmark 2.1%
-
Lesotho 2.1%
-
Turkey 2.1%
-
Cambodia 2.0%
-
Canada 1.9%
-
Hong Kong 1.9%
-
Hungary 1.9%
-
Iran 1.9%
-
Slovakia 1.9%
-
Belgium 1.8%
-
Benin 1.8%
-
Ghana 1.8%
-
Greece 1.8%
-
Croatia 1.8%
-
Iceland 1.8%
-
Malawi 1.8%
-
New Zealand 1.8%
-
Namibia 1.8%
-
Austria 1.7%
-
Bahrain 1.7%
-
Barbados 1.7%
-
Guinea 1.7%
-
Belize 1.6%
-
Bolivia 1.6%
-
Sweden 1.6%
-
Brazil 1.5%
-
Guatemala 1.4%
-
Italy 1.4%
-
Mexico 1.4%
-
Papua New Guinea 1.4%
-
France 1.3%
-
Mali 1.3%
-
Germany 1.2%
-
Mauritania 1.2%
-
Pakistan 1.2%
-
Colombia 1.1%
-
Eritrea 1.1%
-
Japan 1.1%
-
Philippines 1.1%
-
Seychelles 1.1%
Average 2.91 %
Here are your population growth rates..hehe…So with that kind of growth..better feed the peeps some poppies… :hehe:
Map & Graph: Asia: People: Population growth rate
â Scroll down for more information â Show map full screen
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/peo_pop_gro_rat/ASI
Country Description Amount
- Afghanistan 3.43%
- Maldives 2.95% (2002 est.)
- Nepal 2.29% (2002 est.)
- Bhutan 2.15% (2002 est.)
- Tajikistan 2.12% (2002 est.)
- Pakistan 2.06% (2002 est.)
- Turkmenistan 1.84% (2002 est.)
- Uzbekistan 1.62% (2002 est.)
- Bangladesh 1.59% (2002 est.)
- India 1.51% (2002 est.)
- Mongolia 1.48% (2002 est.)
- Kyrgyzstan 1.45% (2002 est.)
- Korea, North 1.1% (2002 est.)
- China 0.87% (2002 est.)
- Korea, South 0.85% (2002 est.)
- Sri Lanka 0.85% (2002 est.)
- Azerbaijan 0.38% (2002 est.)
- Japan 0.15% (2002 est.)
- Kazakhstan 0.1% (2002 est.)
- Armenia -0.15% (2002 est.)
- Russia -0.33% (2002 est.)
- Georgia -0.55% (2002 est.)
- Ukraine -0.72% (2002 est.)
Average 1.18 %
Economic Freedom ranks don’t look to rosey for troubled india.
They rank several points below even Pakistan!
india is at 119, whereas pakistan a healthier 99.
But they're in the top 5 for another notable trouble area for india:
Murder rankings
- India 37,170 (1999)
- Russia 28,904 (2000)
- Colombia 26,539 (2000)
- South Africa 21,995 (2000)
- Mexico 13,829 (2000)
- United States 12,658 (1999)
- Venezuela
- etc
Rape rankings
- United States 89,110 (1999)
- South Africa 53,008 (2000)
- Canada 24,049 (2000)
- Australia 15,630 (2000)
- India 15,468 (1999)
- etc
Assault rankings
1. United States 2,238,480 (1999)
2. South Africa 535,461 (2000)
3. United Kingdom 450,865 (2000)
4. Mexico 255,179 (2000)
5. India 236,313 (1999
6. etc
HIV deaths ranking
- India 310,000 (1999 est.)
- South Africa 300,000 (2000 est.)
- Ethiopia 280,000 (1999 est.)
- Nigeria 250,000 (1999 est.)
- Kenya 180,000 (1999 est.)
- etc
To summarise, India is a hugely troubled country, all aspects of a nations shortfalls have a bearing on quality of life. Statistics on GDP and jingoism don't take away the beggars from the street or buy more hospital beds.
From all unbiased views and opinions India is a train crash in progress, to compare its dire condition with that of Pakistan is pointless.
This is so very true though not the sole reason. India did miss the industrial revolution because of the brits. Plus it took us (and the job is still not fully done) a couple of generations before coming out of slave / subjects mentality.
But when the Information Revolution started, had it not been the foresight and luck of educational infrastructure we couldn't have capitalized on the opportunity. Somehow in spite of the poverty, corruption and pakistan, we managed to do this one thing right. Makes you want to say Jai Hind.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by TomSawyer: *
Somehow in spite of the poverty, corruption and pakistan, we managed to do this one thing right. Makes you want to say Jai Hind.
[/QUOTE]
Very well said. It is amazing that India has reached this stage inspite of the fact that Indian politics is still a cesspool of Laloos, Rabris and Mayawatis.
1…2…3 Indian companies shoulder to shoulder with top 5
The Indian juggernaut keeps on rollin! Hurray!
**Indian tech trio’s dollar march **
Excerpts:
Gartner estimates that in the next two years, three or four Indian companies will make it to the global top 10 IT outsourcers list.
In many cases, the resurgent Indian IT biggies are even snatching orders from the incumbent top 5.Analysts expect this trend to accelerate further. Small wonder then that the $81-billion IBM Global Services has identified Wipro as one of its biggest global competitors
Wipro bought Boston-based American Management Systems for $24 million, and in May this year bought out NerveWire, a financial consultant firm in the US , for $19 million.
the MNC IT firms are baffled by the ability of Indian companies to scale up operations and hire large numbers. TCS, the largest IT exporter from India , recruited over 10,000 professionals over the last 12 months. Infosys will complete this fiscal year with a net addition of 7,000 employees. Wipro recruited around 3,000 professionals over the last half year.
US, China and India economic leaders by 2050
Check out today’s Wall Street Journal …
India expected to become economic leader
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EJ29Df07.html
WASHINGTON - By the year 2050, India is projected to become the third largest economy in the world, behind China and the United States, according to a recent report by Goldman Sachs, a US-based global investment firm.
China, India, Russia and Brazil could outrank the combined economic might of today’s Group of Six - the US, Japan, Germany, France, Italy and the United Kingdom - by the middle of this century, says the report.
“The implication is that the economic and financial power is going to shift away from us,” says Dominic Wilson, a senior Goldman economist and one of the authors of the report, which sees the US as number two by the year 2050, sandwiched between China and number three India.
In making its forecasts, Goldman doesn’t focus on the four developing nations’ current economic-growth rates, even though these certainly haven’t been too shabby. Instead, using demographic projections and a model of capital accumulation and productivity trends, it calculates likely gains in gross domestic product (GDP) and income per capita, and currency movements.
Over the next 50 years, the model assumes that GDP will rise at an average annual clip of 3.8 percent in Brazil, nearly 6 percent in India, 4.7 percent in China, and 3.2 percent in Russia, versus the US projected 1.7 percent. It also assumes that the value of the four nations’ currencies will rise.
Yeah???But what such resource does India have to become such a major power...human resource or.....??
The ‘Brics’: Back to the future
Thirty-three years after China launched its first satellite, a high-tech boom-box called Mao 1 that broadcast a tinny version of ‘The East Is Red’ to an underwhelmed world, it has finally put a man into space. But the pace is picking up: Beijing is planning to put Chinese yuhangyuan (spacemen) on the moon in just another seven years. If it stays on course, it will soon overtake Russia to become the second biggest player in space – and around 2040, according to a study released earlier this month by investment bankers Goldman Sachs, it will overtake the United States to become the world’s largest economy.
Even then China won’t be the richest country in per capita terms, but it certainly won’t be poor any more: in terms of GDP per head, Chinese citizens will be at about the same level as the richer European countries are now by 2050, the cut-off date of the Goldman Sachs study. Other big developing countries like India and Brazil will only have reached the same income level as present-day Portugal – but that’s not so terrible either, and there will be an awful lot of Indians and Brazilians by then. The Chinese launch is telling us that the world is changing in a fundamental way.
Five centuries ago, on the eve of Europe’s rise to world empire, average incomes in China and India were about the same as average incomes in Western Europe – and average incomes in the Muslim Middle East were probably higher. Then the Europeans burst out of their continent and overran the planet. They and their overseas descendants ended up far richer than everybody else, partly because of their empires and partly because they took the scientific and industrial lead. The new status quo has been around for so long that it has come to seem natural, but it is ending now.
The Goldman Sachs paper is a sophisticated exercise in prediction that takes into account factors like population growth and changing age structures, capital accumulation and likely productivity growth, rather than just doing straight-line projections of current trends. It focusses on what it calls the ‘Brics’: four lower-middle-income countries – Brazil, Russia, India and China – that have big populations and already have significant industrial and technological skills and resources. And it tells us where it thinks we will all be in 2050.
The world’s biggest economy will be China’s, of course, with the United States in second place (although America may still be China’s equal in technological innovation). India is not too far behind in size – and then, a long way after the Big Three, come Japan, Brazil and Russia. Bringing up the rear, so far as the major players are concerned, are Britain, Germany, France and Italy. With the exception of the US and Brazil, ‘New World’ countries that were not home to mass civilizations five hundred years ago, it is a return to the same list, in almost exactly the same order, that you would have drawn up in the year 1500.
That makes a kind of sense. In a globalized society and economy where the West no longer enjoys absolute political control, you would expect the distribution of global power to return gradually to what it used to be, with the big populations on the large land masses having greater wealth and power than small Western European countries. But it will take a lot of getting used to, especially for the Western countries that have had their own way for so long.
Some of these predictions may not come true, of course, or at least they may not happen within the chosen time-frame. China has had two disastrous political adventures in the past forty years: the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, each of which cost it at least a decade of growth. What if it has another?
Brazil has been the promised land of the future for at least a hundred years now, but its present never lives up to the promise. India has an abnormally high level of corruption and a ramshackle education system (though it also has the advantage of being the only ‘Bric’ where large numbers of people speak English, the global lingua franca). Even Russia might go off the rails, though it seems least likely to. But these are essentially details: most of the Goldman Sachs predictions will come to pass, even if some do not, and the world will still be a changed place.
What conclusions should we draw from all this, apart from the obvious one that the first human beings on Mars will probably be Chinese?
One is that the real environmental crisis is coming at us even faster than the pessimists feared: four or five billion people in the ‘Brics’ and other Asian and Latin American countries who will be consuming at current European levels by 2050 will put huge additional stress on the environment. The time for emergency measures is probably now – not that there is any real hope of such a thing.
The second is that we desperately need to revive and refine the kind of multilateral global governance for which the existing United Nations system is a sketchy first draft. The prospect of a world that is highly competitive economically and under acute environmental pressure – and where there are five or six nuclear-armed major powers, no longer contained within the old bipolar system of the Cold War – absolutely requires an inclusive international system that works. Rather like the one currently being destroyed, in fact.
And the third conclusion? Westerners had better start working on their manners.
And Goldman Sachs calculates the speed of the juggernaut. Listen to this:
Superpower status awaits India
Some excerpts:
India could be the world’s third largest economy in less than 30 years from now after the United States and China
India itself could grow the fastest among all countries at an average 6 per cent, going past Italy, Germany and France in the 2015-2025 time frame and past Japan in 2032.
These are just some of the projections in a stunning new report by the investment firm Goldman Sachs that is creating a stir in economic and financial circles.
MOVE OVER, G-6. By mid-century, the economic firepower of Russia, China, India and Brazil could have you surrounded," began Monday’s Wall Street Journal story