A Bharati-MAToo worrying about a world called “Muslim”? Is there any hope for Hindu world? No! As long as Bihar, Urrisah, and UP are the gutter pit of the world.
Muslim world may exist on Saturn but here on earth, there is no such thing based on MAToo idiot-ology. There is no Christian world, or a Hindu world either. Heck if there was a Hindu world, it would have taken care of Bihar.
Pakistanis would love to get rid of these MAToos who talk about factitious worlds based purely on religion. Concept of such a world has been debunked many centuries ago.
No matter how hard we try, Biharai MAToos would continue bringing in stupid ideas like Muslim World, or Lallu Parshad, or Ruber-e Devi.
**
FYI! There is one world with many alliances. Alliances are based on mutual strengths and specific regions. Go ahead and lump Indonesia and Saudi Arabia and see if you get anything out of this world accept Bali terror.
**
The best hope for pakisatan and other muslim nation is to pool their hard “begged” $ and buy lotteries in europe and US. This has better odds of success than any of khilafarty economic policy.
However, pakisatan has a better prospect with their rent-an-army industry.
Anti-OBL: I didn;t include them..Goldman Sachs and McKinsey did. while I appreciate your stances which are quite akin to mine re; arabs..I will suggest you are out of your league on this one.
CM: did you read the paper? Which factors are missing? Also, trade liberalization is a boon for BRICS, not a hinderane in their growth. Read jagdish bhagwati…he makes a monkey out of Tom friedman’s World is Flat. Prof Bhagwati, a columbia univ economics guru and a CFR fellow, calls it a kaleidescope of development. comparative advantage doesn’t go away it become more relevant.
BTW here is to those who want to learn about development economic paradigms re: kaleidescope development
Re-read what i said. I said these countries benefit the most out of trade liberalization but i can't make any comments on what they say as they don't list what factors they use. Their economic model is extremely simplistic. I mean they do not take any external shocks into consideration. They use only 4 factors, which are all based on existing figures and then projected. It is extremely simplistic for what you are saying.
This is a paper which projects future growth following ceteris paribus. You can not extrapolate anything on this if one thing changes. This was published in 2003 with the current oil prices, lack of NAMA you really think the figures are the same?
Shall we go over all the external shocks that are missing or do you want to cover just the major ones?
The problem with "Papers" like this is that they take the recent past and extrapolate too far. Barring any exogeneic shock, the paper is worthy, but history has shown that various shocks to the system always occur, and seldom go 50 years without occuring in some great numbers.
The problem with all of the BRIC economies is that they are new, and the odds are that 2 of the four will fail. One of the things that Greenspan mutters every once in a while is "stress test". In this he is saying that not only the most lively of economies succeeds, but also the most durable and resiliant. Chinas growth has been spectacular, but with market economies come the winds of political change. The Chinese people are ripe for ousting the Socialists in the next 20 years. Ultimately this is good, however political turmoil can derail growth for some time, as it limits further capital investment. Russia too has a long history of political instability, which could easily limit outside capital flows.
The one thing is for certain. Any one of these economies will probably be more important in 15 years than the entirety of the Muslim world economy. Each one represents difficult competition for emerging countries who want to forcefully enter the marketplace. The political consequences of this are remarkable, as the success of this bloc will further alienate Muslim countries, and create an even larger rift in the haves and the have nots.
So out of the four, Brazil, Russia, China and India, my personal pick is India, on the basis of having a functional democracy, and less political turmoil in front of it.
Undoubtedly GS sales force is out there pushing this paper, and putting together new funds to capitalize on the opportunity. Anything that comes out of GS has a benefit to GS, so it pays to take some of their rosy projections with a grain of salt.
I actually pick Brazil. But then again if you have an anti-american agenda as President, the US won't let you get far ahead. As can be seen in generic medicines, IPRs, TK, and NAMA.
Brazils' history of hyper-inflation and bad debt managment kept it from being my pick. Also, India has the advantage of a polulation that is somewhat English speaking. English, is generally acknowledged to be the language most commonly used for International Trade. The Chinese are encouraging millions to learn English, and it is very common for Americans to be stopped on the street in China so that the Chinese can practise greetings and conversation. Small advantage, but notable. Also, China has huge infrastructure projects that are soaking up capital. Some of the largest construction projects int he world. Political instability would hamper future debt offereings that are essential for the build out of the infrastructure. Brazil on the other hand is raping every natural resource they have....
^ The biggest factor is capital and flow of capital that enforces growth rates y/y. FII flows into the US stock markets haven't stopped, US equities haven't nose dived even with a significant increase in oil prices. Also, i have been saying that all this animosity towards US because of oil is not healthy. It willlead to schizophrenia in the muslim world. The HCnese, Indians and Russians, will have one foot on the neck of the arabs and the other on the gas pedal in their hybrids.
GS and Mckinsey came later...for them to postulate and develop growth scenarios baseline fundamentals need to be in place. Go search for monies invested by Warburg Pincus, Carlyle, Apollo, Blackstone etc into these economies. WP was in INdia 2 years after liberalization.
THis is not selling snake oil.
SA is a regional tiger..not a global one.
As far as NAMA goes..it is in there. Most people outside of psuedo-diplomatic corps don't lump sectors such as financial services under one banner. IN 2050, financial services will account for more than 50% of global GDP. agro-fiends need to get a grip.
God. NAMA is Non-Agriculture Market Access. Not financial services. I mean what are you retarded?
Anyway back to the BRICS paper. It is not valid 2 years down the road because of all the external shocks the paper did not take into consideration and thus it can not be valid for the 50 years.
Here let me retype what I wrote before for your teeny tiny brain...and now re read your inane point up above. retardo!!
"Most people outside of psuedo-diplomatic corps don't lump sectors such as financial services under one banner. IN 2050, financial services will account for more than 50% of global GDP. agro-fiends need to get a grip."
BRICS has been updated every year. Go search for the 2005 edition and see if it is not indeed more rosy for India and china.
Here is a little nugget re: IPR, outside of the US the largest number of GLP and GMP certified labs are not in the UK, Aus, Japan, Netherlands or EU.....they are in India. It is not just call centers kids...it is not just IT. When hedgefunds put aside 25% of their AUM for special situations investing in emerging markets, namely China and INdia....it is not external shocks they are worried about.
You skipped the first sentence. Either way the paper's projections then change every year. So a massive earthquake could change those figures? The main fact is that the paper is simplistic. They say so themselves. Their model is also very simple and does not take into account external shocks.
^ no..that is what you don't seem to understand. A massive earthquake is a blip in economies that are moving that rapidly up the growth curve. Tsunamis, North Korea, 9/11 have very little impact on growth prospects for countries the size of these giants.
Asfar as simplicity...let me put it to you in terms you can understand. When a fortune 500 company has a board meeting about capital budget allocations, do you kno which words are now an indellible part of the discussion? Outsourcing, BRICS, global delivery, etc etc...this means that capital is being deployed not only by institutional investors like banks and PE funds but also by corporations.
Go read what IChan is doing to Time Warner...hedge funds investors are yelling at their porfolio companies about adopting BRIC strategies. Spinning off assets to chinese and INdian buyers..getting penetration in local markets. This is all being done..as we speak. external shocks or no external shocks...
While muslim world is clamoring for a swath o fland in the ME, the chinkoos and the hndus are busy signing JV's on auto parts manufcturing and setting up joint degree programs.
What is being done within the muslim world to keep up with joneses or bui jins or radhakrishnaswaminathanparsad
I am surprised you wrote the first paragraph. It has a major effect. Read what Sachs has to say on the matter.
Yadda Yadda Yadda. The simple thing is that every year the BRICS reports are re-written and re-evaluated as things change. Thus they can not be valid for 50 years. These papers aren't valid 6 months after they are written how can they be valid 50 years later?
You are becoming a little Hedge Fund-centric my friend. I just picked my copy of "When Genius Failed", and dusted it off. Hedgefunds have notoriously underestimated risk in pursuit of performance. Risk blindness is the Achilles Heal of Hedge Funds....
Did you know that budgets are also changed month/month, q/q, y/y...this is what makes the world goes around. Ofcourse we can get all blown up when Jesus returns..but until he does... we shall work with projections made by really smart people who do this for a living. Oh and if he does return, tell him to come with an economic policy not made up of silly concepts as derivative trading is haram
Why don;t you tell me what sachs has to say. Also let me know, how many sachs funds are out there focused on emerging markets, and I will show you 3 times as many focused on BRICS alone.
The report can change +/- 20%..not much more than that. All fundametals are still valid. Population growth, flow of capital, financial and economic reforms, and most imprtantly MINDSET OF THE PEOPLE in these countries.
OG, when i say special situations..it is the private equity piece within the fund portfolio structured investments with long term lock ups. Biotech funds have the returns in the tail...one hit wonder so to speak..hdgefunds primarily trade public investments. Itis the privates that are more interesting...from an emerging market perspective.
Yeah..I know I am talking a lot about this.. but everday I meet another wll street guy who wants to start a EM fund.
^ it’s ok UTD, this is endemic of the mentality within the muslim world. Apparently there is a bizarroworld right here on earth…concetrated in arabia but it’s impact stretches out to effect others quite powerfully, even against their better genetic makeup.
When your doorman wants to start one, thats a top. Oil increases will wipe out 2% of the annual growth, higher interest rates would shave another 2%. Have you recruited any Nobel Prize winners to run a fund yet? Thats when I would be short…
