China wants 'BRICS plus' to include 'friendly' countries, plan might hurt India's interests

[Radio Mirchi]

Russia wants to bring Greece into BRICS.
China wants to bring Pakistan into BRICS.
India wants to bring Argentina into BRICS.

What is the problem?

I think India would want Vietnam in BRICS not Argentina.

 

[EndangeredSpecies]

I think India would want Vietnam in BRICS not Argentina.

I will ask Taiwan in a consultant position just for shizzles.

UNSC really has nothing to do with growth, exclusive or inclusive. India was not part of independent WWII allied force, UK represented you.

These things are reciprocatory in nature, you take care of my horse, I will feed your cat. That way. Narrative is news fodder.

 

[ashok321]

I think India would want Vietnam in BRICS not Argentina.

Not my problem if you are current affairs defunct dude, one who comes running to contradict me despite the obvious.

http://www.clarin.com/politica/India-quiere-Argentina-BRICS-emergentes_0_SyFwaOT5w7x.html

 

[Radio Mirchi]

Not my problem if you are current affairs defunct dude, one who comes running to contradict me despite the obvious.

http://www.clarin.com/politica/India-quiere-Argentina-BRICS-emergentes_0_SyFwaOT5w7x.html

Well defunct is too strong a word to use when there was no personal targeting in my post. I agree I did not come across this news item. I thank you for sharing the link but my knowledge of language is limited to hindi, urdu, punjabi, marathi and english only. Perhaps I am linguistically defunct too.

 

[SBUS-CXK]

Here is the kicker.

India's forex reserve of 368 billion can service more than 3/4th of her external debt of 485 billion. Pakistan's 22 billion forex reserve can service less 1/3rd of her 74 billion dollar external debt. This is the reason why Pakistan when it comes to debt is more like a family living from pay cheques to pay cheques and taking more loans to service her old loans.

Sources
https://www.dawn.com/news/1312365
http://herald.dawn.com/news/1153618


India will agree, for China's considerate support for India's membership in NSG.

Okay, waiting for me to become Chinese president, I will allow India to enter NSG.

 

[neem456]

For letting india into NSG, china will itself want something in return for them that is entry into MTCR. Why would they want to throw away this opportunity for pakistan ?

Pakistan will just keep watching for MTCR, NSG, BRICS.

 

[ashok321]

Well defunct is too strong a word to use when there was no personal targeting in my post. I agree I did not come across this news item. I thank you for sharing the link but my knowledge of language is limited to hindi, urdu, punjabi, marathi and english only. Perhaps I am linguistically defunct too.

You had an option to be neutral, which you were not.
If you were not sure, why tag me and more, go against the fact?
This is brazen & audacious behavior!
Now if you listen some from me, take it to the chin instead of being crying baby.
You can not be a villain & a victim simultaneously.
So stop pretending.

 

[Radio Mirchi]

You had an option to be neutral, which you were not.
If you were not sure, why tag me and more, go against the fact?
This is brazen & audacious behavior!
Now if you listen some from me, take it to the chin instead of being crying baby.
You can not be a villain & a victim simultaneously.
So stop pretending.

Read again what I wrote.
"I think India would want Vietnam in BRICS not Argentina."
What is so brazen and audacious about it? And how does it appear partial?
And I still standby what I wrote. As an Indian I am used to giving my opinion and don't forget to be polite. I think I represent the collective conscience of Indians and that's why I believe India would prefer Vietnam over Argentina. Take a poll and ask Indians I am sure 90% will favor Vietnam and as an Indian I also know there will some who will favor Pakistan and China too. But that's the beauty of our democracy.

 

[ashok321]

Read again what I wrote.
"I think India would want Vietnam in BRICS not Argentina."

What was the need to add NOT Argentina?
Thats your folly.

 

[Radio Mirchi]

What was the need to add NOT Argentina?
Thats your folly.

Its not folly, it was on purpose. Argentina along with Italy and Pakistan opposes India's and other nations' bid for inclusion in UNSC. I don't say Argentina is not a friend but at the moment their strategic interests don't match with ours. But this is not the case with Vietnam.

 

[ashok321]

Its not folly, it was on purpose. Argentina along with Italy and Pakistan opposes India's and other nations' bid for inclusion in UNSC. I don't say Argentina is not a friend but at the moment their strategic interests don't match with ours. But this is not the case with Vietnam.

Your reply was directly and squarely relative to my following statement:

India wants to bring Argentina into BRICS.

To which you said:

not Argentina

Now you are trying to stretch the arguments to look better and save your face.

I can lead the horse to the water but cant make it drink.

Now do not tag me anymore otherwise I push my ignore button on you.

 

[Radio Mirchi]

Your reply was directly and squarely relative to my following statement:


To which you said:


Now you are trying to stretch the arguments to look better and save your face.

I can lead the horse to the water but cant make it drink.

Now do not tag me anymore otherwise I push my ignore button on you.

You are quoting only a fraction of my statement. I am sure you are an expert in language so you will appreciate that reading a part of sentence can change the whole meaning.
I don't go out of the way to tag you, I just hit the reply button. And trust me I wont mind at all if you push the ignore button on me because everyone on this forum can exercise that option. Its a personal choice and I value personal freedom.

 

[ashok321]

You are quoting only a fraction of my statement. I am sure you are an expert in language so you will appreciate that reading a part of sentence can change the whole meaning.
I don't go out of the way to tag you, I just hit the reply button. And trust me I wont mind at all if you push the ignore button on me because everyone on this forum can exercise that option. Its a personal choice and I value personal freedom.

IGNORED!

I do not like posters who piss on my legs and claim it was raining.
And you fit the situation in this case.

You can't see me - John Cena

 

[Radio Mirchi]

IGNORED!

I do not like posters who piss on my legs and claim it was raining.
And you fit the situation in this case.

You can't see me - John Cena

Good. But I am happy that you have learnt a lesson today.

 

[Jacob Martin]

Fair enough, let me be more specific, the actual figure for percentage of external borrowing for servicing debt is 73%. So my figure wasn't off by much. With 73% of your new external loans going to the payment of interest for the loans you already have, you are in no position to ask me

Hmm...So you won't relent and will make me do some work.

You think that a nation's financial health is encapsulated in one statistic such as % of debt servicing? Here is a snapshot of the Indian external debt that may help you understand in case you are not trolling:

- As of end of 2016, only 17% of India's external debt was owed to IMF, multilateral and bilateral agencies. So this is the real extent of India's sovereign debt.
- The rest of the debt is export credit, ECBs and NRI deposits, which have nothing to do with the government. These borrowings are either by private entities in the course of trade and investment, or in the case of NRI deposits is the money deposited by NRIs living abroad.
- In other words, whatever you included in order to come up with the figure of $485.6 b, most of it is not owed by the government but by the economy in the normal course for business. Common sense will tell you that the bigger the economic footprint of the nation, the bigger this liability. Only 17% of it is owed by the government, and the figure is coming down each quarter.
- Now coming to debt servicing. In 2015-16, only $4.771 b of India's debt servicing out of the total of $44.331 b was in lieu of external assistance received. The rest of it was, once again, primarily for either ECBs and NRI deposits.
- Which means that just over 1/10th of what you are attributing as India's debt servicing is relevant for the purposes of this discussion. The rest of it is either not owed by the government at all, or is an obligation incurred in a commercial transaction guaranteed by government, like in all such cases worldwide. So the job of servicing that debt is upon the companies, banks etc. that have incurred this liability.
- To summarize, only 17% of what you claim to be India's external debt is owed by the government, and only 1/10 of what you claim to be India's debt servicing payments are incurred by the government. It is not our concern as to how private entities service their debt.

And finally, before you start delving into Pakistan's statistics to find some kind of false equivalence (if that is your intention), please remember this - the Pakistan government was so desperate to receive an IMF tranche that the zero quarterly limit was adjusted for a 24 hr period to meet the ceiling. Such a government can manipulate anything to get hold of money to stay afloat.

So why does the IMF keep giving money to an insolvent state? The reason, as in most such cases, is obvious. One particular tranche of $500 million from the IMF, $200 million were tunneled directly into a Swiss project for water supply. So either the money is used to service debt, or is handed over to IMF approved companies, thereby ending up back in the pockets of the same country giving the debt.

So you give a loan with one hand, and take it away with another, while the debtor's obligation remains the same. Instead of trolling PDF to save your country's pride, maybe you should consider petitioning your government to stop this open loot.