Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe you are indian, which is why you think relationship with India is a big deal.
India is like 40 years behind China now but it pretends to be a real competitor. Compete when there are no humans hanging on the outside of the train.
You know why India won't be compete with China any time soon? Because it is a f*cking "democracy" before it is ready for that sh*t.
What I meant was a lot of potential investments into India's severely underdeveloped infrastructure will go to Japan rather than china which is the basis of economic influence.
As for your democracy statement I'll point out that countries have different forms of Governance based off of their history. China has always been a unitary country with an emperor and tightly controlled borders. India was made up more of city-states which divided cultures within its country by regions and created a population less inclined to follow their central government.
If India were to have the same system of governance as China it would not come with the same results because the merchant class and the different tribal groups within India wouldn't cooperate as easily as the Chinese did (and do) under communist rule.
A similar case can be made with my country (the US) which has a political culture of big buisness interest in our government. They were the ones in the 1800s who developed our railroads and general infrastructure (post FDR there was some influence of big government but the general mind set of America has remained the former).
Speaking of democracies they are not all the same, some are more authoritarian and have power centralized heavily within the government and give the people little control over the major decisions and some (like Iceland) are incredibly open to the input of its people.
I know you didn't accuse me of it but I will say even as an American I don't criticize China's form of politics.
What I meant was a lot of potential investments into India's severely underdeveloped infrastructure will go to Japan rather than china which is the basis of economic influence.
As for your democracy statement I'll point out that countries have different forms of Governance based off of their history. China has always been a unitary country with an emperor and tightly controlled borders. India was made up more of city-states which divided cultures within its country by regions and created a population less inclined to follow their central government.
If India were to have the same system of governance as China it would not come with the same results because the merchant class and the different tribal groups within India wouldn't cooperate as easily as the Chinese did (and do) under communist rule.
A similar case can be made with my country (the US) which has a political culture of big buisness interest in our government. They were the ones in the 1800s who developed our railroads and general infrastructure (post FDR there was some influence of big government but the general mind set of America has remained the former).
Speaking of democracies they are not all the same, some are more authoritarian and have power centralized heavily within the government and give the people little control over the major decisions and some (like Iceland) are incredibly open to the input of its people.
I know you didn't accuse me of it but I will say even as an American I don't criticize China's form of politics.
Great, I apologize for being snarky.
However, Japan is a very mature society and a very reserved culture. I think Japan has peaked a long time ago and will not go back to its previous glory. Yeah, Japan maybe investing in India, but China is investing (or "exploiting" according to many westerners) massively in central Asia, Africa and S America. I don't see any advantage enjoyed by Japan in that respect. Japan will remain very wealthy of course, something China on an average level may find very hard to match, but in terms of "economic influence", one would be naive to think Japan has the edge (just because western countries like it more? No, it is profit that talks eventually).
As to India, they can't even erase tariff among different regions, something China successfully did a few months after establishment of the country. And the fragmentation, religion conflict. They should wish they had an authoritarian government.
I think he lives in France atm, but your point still stands.
does it?
France of course has a higher quality of life than China today, but its wealth was not accumulated during the time it was "democratic", was it? You need to be careful about the underlying logic here. If China had democracy, it would be a lot poorer and less advanced today and that is my point (although on paper it would be part of the "free world") Whether I choose to live has nothing to do with under what government a country can grow faster.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.