India will win by outlasting China.

[neverfail]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demograph ... %20of%2035.

India is the second most populated country in the world with nearly a fifth of the world's population. According to the 2019 revision of the World Population Prospects[6][7] the population stood at 1,352,642,280.

Between 1975 and 2010, the population doubled to 1.2 billion, reaching the billion mark in 1998. India is projected to surpass China to become the world's most populous country by 2024.[8] It is expected to become the first country to be home to more than 1.5 billion people by 2030, and its population is set to reach 1.7 billion by 2050.[9][10] Its population growth rate is 1.13%, ranking 112th in the world in 2017.[11]

India has more than 50% of its population below the age of 25 and more than 65% below the age of 35. It is expected that, in 2020, the average age of an Indian will be 29 years, compared to 37 for China...

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.10 ... population.

China has a rapidly ageing population, both numerically and structurally. The number of people aged 60 and over is increasing by about 6.2 million people per annum. Using this definition of the elderly, China is projected to have 280 million elderly by 2025. They will represent about one-fifth of the total population. An ageing population has become one of China’s basic national features. This chapter provides a statistical overview of China’s elderly at the national and regional levels, using 2010 Census data. Drawing on a review of the literature, we outline the issues that arise due to having an ageing population in modern China. We consider old age dependency, health and sources of income. We conclude that China is not well prepared to respond to issues arising from its ageing population.

As you can see, all India needs to do is avoid going to war against China for a few decades and it will end up superceding China as the great power of Asia.

[cassowary]

India is a democracy. It may prove to be its saviour. But it has a long way to go to catch up with China. The key number to watch is not population but GDP. China’s gdp is more than 4 times that of India. By the way, Indian historians claim that India, not Greece, is the birth place of democracy.

India vs China is a good study on the strength and weaknesses of democracy and dictatorship. In a dictatorship, the decisions are made by one man. If the guy at the top makes good decisions, the country progresses faster. So China’s growth was much faster than India’s in the past 40 years.

But we must not forget what happened during the Great Leap Forward when we had an idiot in charge, who tried to implement Socialism. 50 million Chinese starved to death. India never had that. Democracy produces mediocre governments. But dictatorships are a gamble. It can produce brilliant leaders or disasters.

To save democracy, the Democratic world must form an alliance of democracies. NATO should expand its membership to include Japan, Australia and India. NATO should not be simply a military alliance but also an economic one. Each country must pledge to erect tariffs on China, withdraw research cooperation with China and give incentives to their companies to remove their factories from China.

India must get its act in order to make it attractive for companies to move there. I know it’s difficult to do in a democracy.

[neverfail]

The key number to watch[/url] is not population but GDP. China’s gdp is more than 4 times that of India.

Indisputebly so Cass;: but that is now. With an ageing population do you think that China's enlarged GDP will do it much good? You need only look at Japan; already caught up in that trap to find your answer. By comparison as long as I(ndia with a presently young and vital population can avoid a turnaround in their vital statistics though it may take decades I anticipate this country will eventually overtake and surpass China.

By the way, Indian historians claim that India, not Greece, is the birth place of democracy.

I do not see that it matters as Athenian "democracy" did not outlast even the generation that created it. But do these Indian historians have credible proof that it was so or is this just more of their nationalist wishful thinking?

NATO should expand its membership to include Japan, Australia and India.

Absurd! An expanded NATO such as you visualise would be unwieldly to work. Even as a pact centered on North America and most of Europe it now arguably superceded.

NATO should not be simply a military alliance but also an economic one.
Each country must pledge to erect tariffs on China, withdraw research cooperation with China and give incentives to their companies to remove their factories from China.

Pie in the sky! You cannot push water uphill Cass. Trade goes where supply and demand come into allignment. For instance friction between China and Australia did not stop us enjoying our biggest ever trade surplus with the PRC ever. By comparison our trade pattern with the USA was of record defecit - and with the EU likewise. The point is that there is no demand for our coal and iron ore in North America or Europe. You will never persuade any Australian government to comply with such a set of rules.

You will find upon examination that other counturies with trade links to China including Japan are in a like situation.

Things have proceeded too far and China has already become such a global power that I believe that the notion that trade sanctions by the West would derail their continued grpwth is a delusion.

[neverfail]

Cass, you amaze me.

You give me the impression that you still hold on to the belief that the Western powers are collectively stronger than the PRC. That the PRC needs trade with the West more than vice versa? Well, I am sorry to have to inform you that the World has moved on since the days of the Treaty Ports when Western powers like Britain could impose whatever terms, conditions and rules they wanted to on a then inherently weak China.

Today it is China that is strong: so strong that arguably its trading partners abroad need its custom to remain solvent rather than vice versa.

Conversely, the West has become weak. I more and more get the impression that the USA is surviving , maintaining the image of still being a formidable world power much as Britain did in the inter-World War decades via the diplomacy of bluff. Is it not even that the USA lacks the military might to pack a real punch: It is that it has lost the willpower at home to fight for what it believes in.

US public opinion is sending a clear, unequivocal message to their representatives in Washington DC: do not involve the USA in any more wars. It has not occurred to these well meaning members of the US public (of course) that some wars are both necessary and unavoidable (not good, just necessary). Presently the Biden administration, advised by wiser, more knowledgeable heads in the Federal bureaucracy, has pulled back from that policy course inagurated by the Trump administration but I believe that it is only a matter of time before another president in the mould of Donald Trump: disdainful of sage advice and craving only cheap popularity from his supporters, is elcted.

From which point on the China-Russia alliance will be unbound to sate their ambitions unchallenged and uncontained.

Dread that day when it arrives.

[cassowary]

The key number to watch[/url] is not population but GDP. China’s gdp is more than 4 times that of India.

Indisputebly so Cass;: but that is now. With an ageing population do you think that China's enlarged GDP will do it much good? You need only look at Japan; already caught up in that trap to find your answer. By comparison as long as I(ndia with a presently young and vital population can avoid a turnaround in their vital statistics though it may take decades I anticipate this country will eventually overtake and surpass China.

Yes. It will do China good. Military power is a function of GDP. Wars are not won on the battlefield but on the factory floor. The side that can produce the most warplanes, warships, tanks, missiles etc will win. GDP also gives China the money to buy over foreign companies and governments - like Australia's.

By the way, Indian historians claim that India, not Greece, is the birth place of democracy.

I do not see that it matters as Athenian "democracy" did not outlast even the generation that created it. But do these Indian historians have credible proof that it was so or is this just more of their nationalist wishful thinking?

This is an interesting topic which we should discuss in another thread.

NATO should expand its membership to include Japan, Australia and India.

Absurd! An expanded NATO such as you visualise would be unwieldly to work. Even as a pact centered on North America and most of Europe it now arguably superceded.

NATO should not be simply a military alliance but also an economic one.
Each country must pledge to erect tariffs on China, withdraw research cooperation with China and give incentives to their companies to remove their factories from China.

Pie in the sky! You cannot push water uphill Cass. Trade goes where supply and demand come into allignment. For instance friction between China and Australia did not stop us enjoying our biggest ever trade surplus with the PRC ever. By comparison our trade pattern with the USA was of record defecit - and with the EU likewise. The point is that there is no demand for our coal and iron ore in North America or Europe. You will never persuade any Australian government to comply with such a set of rules.

You will find upon examination that other counturies with trade links to China including Japan are in a like situation.

Things have proceeded too far and China has already become such a global power that I believe that the notion that trade sanctions by the West would derail their continued grpwth is a delusion.

You (and I assume your attitude is typical in western demcracies) are the reason why western democracies are losing the long war against totalitarian CCP. You are very short sighted. Democracies have this weakness - they are unable to think ahead. This means implementing policies that may cause short term pain but brings long term gains. But right off the starting gate, you surrender to the CCP.

The right strategy to preserve democracy is to move your factories out of China into places like India, Latin America etc. This means erecting tariffs on Chinese goods. Yes, it will cause short term pain for places like Australia which will suffer from a Chinese boycott. But India will pick up the slack within ten years. As you said, no Australian government will agree because they will be voted out by people like you. So Chinese GDP has bought over the Australian government even though they don't realise it.

You will be boiled slowly like a frog by the CCP and you will become a vassal.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.......................................................

On the other hand, the CCP's totalitarian system also has its weaknesses. Yay. China's demographic problem is a manifestation of that. For decades, China had a one child policy. Nobody dared to tell the dictators at the top that it is a mistake. This inability to deliver bad news may cause its downfall. Let's see. We live in interesting times.

[neverfail]

You (and I assume your attitude is typical in western demcracies) are the reason why western democracies are losing the long war against totalitarian CCP. You are very short sighted. Democracies have this weakness - they are unable to think ahead. This means implementing policies that may cause short term pain but brings long term gains. But right off the starting gate, you surrender to the CCP.

Don't personalise this Cassowary - nothing to do with me at all. I am merely the bearer of bad tidings. Shooting the messenger does not change the content of the news.

Just because it is not the sort of news you would rather hear is not reason to throw a hissy fit and hurl accusations around.

The right strategy to preserve democracy is to move your factories out of China into places like India, Latin America etc. This means erecting tariffs on Chinese goods. Yes, it will cause short term pain for places like Australia which will suffer from a Chinese boycott.

It could bring our economy crashing to the ground with no gains to show thereafter. We are not siucudal out here.

By the way, it is easy enough to demand that others make all of the sacrifices. What would Singapore be willing to sacrifice in your quixotic quest of bringing the PRC undone? Or are Singapore policy makers resigned that the PRC is here to stay?

As you said, no Australian government will agree because they will be voted out by people like you.

No Cassowary: they will be voted out once the current government has lost the respect of the Australian voting public. The surent way to do this is to let our national economy slump due to causes that can be directly related to government policy - including rash foreign policy moves.

So Chinese GDP has bought over the Australian government even though they don't realise it.

If that were true then the PRC government would not now be continuing to impose selective tasriffs on Australian exports to their country in retalliati9on for our Prime Minister upsetting them by pushing for a WTO inquiry into the cause of the Covid-19 epidemic at Wuhan.


,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.......................................................

On the other hand, the CCP's totalitarian system also has its weaknesses. Yay. China's demographic problem is a manifestation of that. For decades, China had a one child policy. Nobody dared to tell the dictators at the top that it is a mistake. This inability to deliver bad news may cause its downfall. Let's see. We live in interesting times.

To my understanding there was no one child restrictions placed on Chinese parents in Mao's time - you could have as many kids as you liked then.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl ... developing

The Chinese State Council launched the policy in 1979, “so the rate of population growth may be brought under control as soon as possible.” However, the root cause of the policy lay back in the 1960s with Mao Zedong's belief that “the more people, the stronger we are”—an ideology that prevented China from developing the highly successful voluntary family planning programmes that countries such as South Korea and Taiwan had put in place in the 1960s.

It dates from Deng's time and was not a dictate imposed by Deng unilaterally but a collective decision made by what the link refers to as the Chinese State Council. The move was clearly intended to stop China's spiraling population growth from overpowering the carrying capacity of the land: creating future conditions for mass starvation which had these been allowed to happen would have pushed Mao's post Great leap foreward famine into the shadows.

Where China's government went wrong was in not having the wit to get rid of this policy once it has acheived its objective of stabilising Chinas population size.

I am just glad that I live in a country where we have never had to resort to such draconian measures to9 curb population growth as a matter of national survival.

[cassowary]

You (and I assume your attitude is typical in western demcracies) are the reason why western democracies are losing the long war against totalitarian CCP. You are very short sighted. Democracies have this weakness - they are unable to think ahead. This means implementing policies that may cause short term pain but brings long term gains. But right off the starting gate, you surrender to the CCP.

Don't personalise this Cassowary - nothing to do with me at all. I am merely the bearer of bad tidings. Shooting the messenger does not change the content of the news.

Just because it is not the sort of news you would rather hear is not reason to throw a hissy fit and hurl accusations around.

Just pointing out the short term nature of decision making in a democracy by using you as an example.

The right strategy to preserve democracy is to move your factories out of China into places like India, Latin America etc. This means erecting tariffs on Chinese goods. Yes, it will cause short term pain for places like Australia which will suffer from a Chinese boycott.

It could bring our economy crashing to the ground with no gains to show thereafter. We are not siucudal out here.

By the way, it is easy enough to demand that others make all of the sacrifices. What would Singapore be willing to sacrifice in your quixotic quest of bringing the PRC undone? Or are Singapore policy makers resigned that the PRC is here to stay?

We should also bring our factories home or relocate elsewhere by imposing tariffs. This will provoke retaliation of course.

As you said, no Australian government will agree because they will be voted out by people like you.

No Cassowary: they will be voted out once the current government has lost the respect of the Australian voting public. The surent way to do this is to let our national economy slump due to causes that can be directly related to government policy - including rash foreign policy moves.

Short term thinking will make you lose the economic war. Be prepared to become a Chinese vassal.

So Chinese GDP has bought over the Australian government even though they don't realise it.

If that were true then the PRC government would not now be continuing to impose selective tasriffs on Australian exports to their country in retalliati9on for our Prime Minister upsetting them by pushing for a WTO inquiry into the cause of the Covid-19 epidemic at Wuhan.

After this, Australia would do China's bidding next time and keep quiet when China lies. What next? Say that the Uighurs are well treated?


,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.......................................................

On the other hand, the CCP's totalitarian system also has its weaknesses. Yay. China's demographic problem is a manifestation of that. For decades, China had a one child policy. Nobody dared to tell the dictators at the top that it is a mistake. This inability to deliver bad news may cause its downfall. Let's see. We live in interesting times.

To my understanding there was no one child restrictions placed on Chinese parents in Mao's time - you could have as many kids as you liked then.

Yes, that is true. It was his sucessor who made that mistake. The point is that in a totalitarian state, nobody dares to say the top guy or guys are wrong. So mistakes can carry on for far too long. Maybe it was the right decision at that time. But what should have been a short term emergency measure dragged on for decades.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl ... developing

The Chinese State Council launched the policy in 1979, “so the rate of population growth may be brought under control as soon as possible.” However, the root cause of the policy lay back in the 1960s with Mao Zedong's belief that “the more people, the stronger we are”—an ideology that prevented China from developing the highly successful voluntary family planning programmes that countries such as South Korea and Taiwan had put in place in the 1960s.

It dates from Deng's time and was not a dictate imposed by Deng unilaterally but a collective decision made by what the link refers to as the Chinese State Council. The move was clearly intended to stop China's spiraling population growth from overpowering the carrying capacity of the land: creating future conditions for mass starvation which had these been allowed to happen would have pushed Mao's post Great leap foreward famine into the shadows.

Where China's government went wrong was in not having the wit to get rid of this policy once it has acheived its objective of stabilising Chinas population size.

I am just glad that I live in a country where we have never had to resort to such draconian measures to9 curb population growth as a matter of national survival.

Yes, but the draconian controls can also work in their favor. Who did better in the management of the pandemic? The west in general plus democratic India or China? Apart from Australia and NZ, most of the west did worse. Australia is cut off and low in population. So that helps.

The point is that dictatorship has its strengths. (As well as weaknesses.)

[Sertorio]

Cass, you amaze me.

You give me the impression that you still hold on to the belief that the Western powers are collectively stronger than the PRC. That the PRC needs trade with the West more than vice versa? Well, I am sorry to have to inform you that the World has moved on since the days of the Treaty Ports when Western powers like Britain could impose whatever terms, conditions and rules they wanted to on a then inherently weak China.

Today it is China that is strong: so strong that arguably its trading partners abroad need its custom to remain solvent rather than vice versa.

Conversely, the West has become weak. I more and more get the impression that the USA is surviving , maintaining the image of still being a formidable world power much as Britain did in the inter-World War decades via the diplomacy of bluff. Is it not even that the USA lacks the military might to pack a real punch: It is that it has lost the willpower at home to fight for what it believes in.

US public opinion is sending a clear, unequivocal message to their representatives in Washington DC: do not involve the USA in any more wars. It has not occurred to these well meaning members of the US public (of course) that some wars are both necessary and unavoidable (not good, just necessary). Presently the Biden administration, advised by wiser, more knowledgeable heads in the Federal bureaucracy, has pulled back from that policy course inagurated by the Trump administration but I believe that it is only a matter of time before another president in the mould of Donald Trump: disdainful of sage advice and craving only cheap popularity from his supporters, is elcted.

From which point on the China-Russia alliance will be unbound to sate their ambitions unchallenged and uncontained.

Dread that day when it arrives.

The only viable counterweight to China's power is an alliance between Europe and Russia. But for that you must have European leaders who are not stupid and realize the tremendous power such an alliance would yield. As long as those dummies keep imposing sanctions on Russia because Russia accepted the referendum supported reunification of Crimea, such an alliance will not be possible. Hopefully the voters in the various European countries will elect more enlightened leaders who will realize that the US does not serve the European interests.

[neverfail]

Yes, but the draconian controls can also work in their favor. Who did better in the management of the pandemic? The west in general plus democratic India or China? Apart from Australia and NZ, most of the west did worse. Australia is cut off and low in population. So that helps.

The point is that dictatorship has its strengths. (As well as weaknesses.)

Undeniable. That was pointed out to me over half a century ago.

The examples of Australia and New Zealand should demonstrate unequivocally that you do not need an authoritarian tyranny to contain and thereby minimise the number of deaths from Covid-19. Democratically governed lands can do it just as well if the right conditions are in place.

Come to think of it: Taiwan reputedly did very well in that regard also - and Taiwan is regarded these days as democratically governed.

To this day I am not astonished by the dilligence with which our authorities (with willing support by the general public) handled the challenge of the epidemic down here - I would have expected nothing less from them. What has left me utterly flabbergasted has been the unbelievable ineptitude of the authorities both in the United States and in Europe (including the UK) in mishandling the pandemic spread (though the USA was not helped a bit by the Donald Trump factor).

Conversely Vladimir Putin's Russia is not a functioning democracy by any standard yet Covid-19 infections and deaths have reputedly spiralled out of control over there.

[Sertorio]

Yes, but the draconian controls can also work in their favor. Who did better in the management of the pandemic? The west in general plus democratic India or China? Apart from Australia and NZ, most of the west did worse. Australia is cut off and low in population. So that helps.

The point is that dictatorship has its strengths. (As well as weaknesses.)

Undeniable. That was pointed out to me over half a century ago.

The examples of Australia and New Zealand should demonstrate unequivocally that you do not need an authoritarian tyranny to contain and thereby minimise the number of deaths from Covid-19. Democratically governed lands can do it just as well if the right conditions are in place.

Come to think of it: Taiwan reputedly did very well in that regard also - and Taiwan is regarded these days as democratically governed.

To this day I am not astonished by the dilligence with which our authorities (with willing support by the general public) handled the challenge of the epidemic down here - I would have expected nothing less from them. What has left me utterly flabbergasted has been the unbelievable ineptitude of the authorities both in the United States and in Europe (including the UK) in mishandling the pandemic spread (though the USA was not helped a bit by the Donald Trump factor).

Conversely Vladimir Putin's Russia is not a functioning democracy by any standard yet Covid-19 infections and deaths have reputedly spiralled out of control over there.

Evidence, please...