China's population is projected to decline to 800 million, while US goes to 450 million.

[beijingwalker]

That Japan can't make that happen doesn't mean China (with much more money and technological know how in the near future) won't. But no need to worry anyway, look at the Chinese history, the last thing that Chinese people are not be able to do is to produce more people if needed.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

That Japan can't make that happen doesn't mean China (with much more money and technological know how in the near future) won't. But no need to worry anyway, look at the Chinese history, the last thing that Chinese people are not be able to do is to produce more people if needed.

History has no bearing on the future. We are in totally different times than in history, where basically resources determined human population. Here, there are more societal issues at play.

Also, yes technology will advance, so will robotics, but it is still not coming anywhere near to humans in capability.

 

[Mista]

Robotic revolution is another alternative
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/1dbd8c60-0cc6-11e6-ad80-67655613c2d6.html

Thanks. Quite a good read.

Also, yes technology will advance, so will robotics, but it is still not coming anywhere near to humans in capability.

Like what the article said: There are things that humans can do better than robots, but they are getting less and less.

Quantity is undeniably important but as time goes by, quality will rise in importance. It already is and will continue to be even more important. Look, with an economy of $2.5 trillion California with 40 million people has a larger economy than India with 1.2 billion people. Singapore with 5 million people have an economy larger than Bangladesh/Pakistan with 200 million people. Of course the latter countries will eventually surpass the former state/country in total GDP, but it just shows how important quality is.

Cheap labour today just isn't as competitive as it as in the 1980s. Lower income countries will find it increasingly difficult to receive FDI just relying on cheap labour. I find the article's example on Indonesia quite interesting, considering it has the 4th largest population and a vast amount of cheap labour.

Tom Lembong, Indonesia’s 45-year-old trade minister, and a leading voice for liberalisation and reform within the government of Southeast Asia’s biggest economy, is aware of the risks. “Many people don’t realise we’re seeing a quantum leap in robotics,” he says. “It’s a huge concern and we need to acknowledge the looming threat of this new industrial revolution. But as a political and business elite, we’re still stuck on debates about industrialisation that were settled in the 20th and even 19th centuries.”

Countries such as Indonesia are already suffering from something that the Harvard economist Dani Rodrik has dubbed “premature de-industrialisation”. This describes a trend where emerging economies see their manufacturing sector begin to shrink long before the countries have reached income levels comparable to the developed world. Despite rapid economic growth over the past 15 years, Indonesia saw its manufacturing industry’s share of the economy peak in 2002. Analysts believe this is partly because of a failure to invest in infrastructure, and the country’s uncompetitive trade and investment policy, and partly due to globalisation.

Rodrik believes the country will never be able to grow at the kind of rapid rate experienced by China or South Korea. “Traditionally, manufacturing required very few skills and employed a lot of people,” he says. “Because of automation, the skills required have increased significantly and many fewer people are employed to run factories. What do you do with these extra workers? They won’t turn into IT entrepreneurs or entertainers; and, if they become restaurant workers, they will be paid much less than in a factory.”

The spread of robots makes it much harder for developing countries to get on the “escalator” of economic growth, he argues. That is bad news for the estimated two million young people who enter the workforce every year in Indonesia, a nation of 255 million, where 40 per cent live on $3 a day or less. Mahami Jaya Lumbanraja, a 22-year-old job-seeker on the Indonesian industrial island of Batam, is feeling the effects of the premature de-industrialisation phenomenon. For seven months he has been looking for a factory job in Batam, which sits just 20 miles from prosperous Singapore, but he has had no luck. Wearing faded jeans, a grey hoodie and an endearing smile, Lumbanraja says that although he has one year of experience working for Shimano, the Japanese manufacturer of bicycle gears and fishing tackle, he is not experienced enough to secure anything more than an entry-level position, and that there are many more job hunters than openings. “I can survive on the little money I get from busking and helping friends with construction work but I must get a proper factory job to save enough money so I can set up my own small shop later,” he says. Wages in Batam — around $230 per month — are double what Lumbanraja could earn in his home city of Medan, on the island of Sumatra. So he feels he must stay until he finds work.

Lumbanraja is one of about 700 Indonesians in their late teens and early twenties who visit the community centre at the Batamindo industrial park every day looking for work. In February, 3,000 people applied in person for just 80 positions at a Japanese-owned wiring factory there, a gathering so large that executives initially feared it was a labour protest.

Batamindo is a joint venture between Singaporean and Indonesian investors that was backed by Presidents Lee Kuan Yew and Suharto — the two nations’ respective rulers — when it opened in 1990. Intended as the showpiece of Indonesia’s industrialisation strategy, it has become a symbol of everything that is wrong with it. In recent times, an average of five factories a year have left the industrial park for other countries and the number of people employed there has dropped to just 46,000, from a peak of 80,000 in 2000. That is despite the fact that wages today are between one-third and one-half of the level paid in China’s Guangdong province.

Lembong, a Harvard graduate who ran his own Singapore-based private equity firm before he was appointed trade minister in August, says the government is determined to tackle the twin problems at the heart of Indonesia’s economic malaise: weak infrastructure and over-regulation.

But some argue that reform will come too late. During its period of rapid industrialisation, China invested in the modern highways, railways and ports necessary to support its manufacturing sector. In contrast, the physical infrastructure in Batam and much of Indonesia has “not changed much since the 1970s,” says Mook Sooi Wah, general manager of Batamindo.

I think China even at this stage of development still has a huge ton of cheap labour as only 55% of the population is urbanized. Her challenge will be to educate them and equip them with necessary skills so they can compete with automation in another 15 years.

 

[Tiger Genie]

India would have 1.6 billion people by 2100 and China might have 1 billion.

These are all projections however. We don't know for real what's gonna happen.

There are two ways you can have population growth for a sustain period of time.


1- Extreme, extreme poverty (mainly the case in sub-saharan Africa only)
2- Superior cultural traits and discipline (Sexual discipline, strong family structure, decent marriage rates, and so on---this is most visible in Islamic World where average income is $11,000 per capita (PPP) but healthy population growth still happening due to superior cultural traits and discipline).

In real world, both of the above factors are at play however.

As china is achieving material strength--it's losing its traditional cultural traits due to extreme competition, young people wanting to enjoy their new found wealth, and increased Westernization etc. Plus, the one child policy is now showing it's trade offs. In case of India, there's a lot of poverty and traditional culture is still present to a certain extent--driving its population growth.

Islamic Civilization has been the largest, most global, and one of most influential civilization of human history. Going forward, the gap between Islamic World and others will only increase as Islamic World is on path to have around 30% of total humanity living within its rule/borders.

Your premise is completely wrong. There is no healthy population growth in the so called islamic world - Whether you take Africa, Asia, or Europe, the muslim communities are all in dire straits with ingrown ghetto attitudes, inability to stem islamic radicalism, and spread of barbaric practices. Very inferior cultural traits and utter and complete lack of any adherence to any kind of civilized behavior. In the middle-east things are even worse in spite of enormous oil wealth that has been completely squandered. In other words, your cradle of islamic 'civilisation' has proved beyond doubt that even if by blind luck they come by enormous wealth, their indiscipline and barbaric attitudes will ensure their own ruin.

In the past yes they were influential spreading like weeds across the world. Now the very indiscipline and lack of institutionalize moral campus has set the islamic world in the past of infamy and assured self destruction.

China is a different story. They have discipline better than anyone else. They have an open mind when it comes to absorbing best practices. They absorbed industrialization from Europe, market economy (partially) from the US, Bhuddhism from India etc. They did not encapsulate themselves into 6th and 7th century cultural practices. Yes they have lost enormous cultural history in the so called 'revolution' but have woken up a bit. They have proven more than anyother people in Asia that once they set a goal they will accomplish - by hook or by crook. In that they are only second to the US.

 

[TeesraIndiotHunter]

Yeah sure, saying I'm not educated just because I don't agree with you is certainly a 'superior cultural trait' of your civilization. I have just shown you those 'Islamic countries' are rich simply because of oil, and there examples of Islamic countries having TFR below 2.1.

You aren't educated in particular field of history and anthropology. That's obvious from your posts.

Islamic World...as a whole..is a middle-income economic sphere with $11,000 GDP per capita based on purchasing power parity. Total fertility rate of Muslims is 3 kids per woman on average.

And offcourse, there are Muslim countries with less than 2.1 TFR and there are Muslim countries with more than 4 TFR. What is your point? You are being an idiot here.

And no, Islamic countries who are rich aren't rich mainly because of oil. Take for example UAE. Oil and gas sector contributes only 25% to its total GDP. UAE is a global transportation and trade hub with some of the largest sea ports and some of the best airlines (Emirates, Eithad etc). Then, there's services sector and offcourse tourism. UAE used oil revenues to develop itself into a totally developed economy based on trade, tourism, and services sector competing in global markets. Some of the largest construction companies on Earth are based in UAE.

Same goes for Muslim-majority countries like Malaysia or Turkey. Both of them are industrialized, developed countries and they did it without any oil.

High tech exports of Malaysia surpass many European nations.

See, when I said you are uneducated..I meant it. You have no clue what are you talking but just writing same old generalized gibberish

Can I see the statistics that the average Muslims are at least educated as the average American and that they have higher TFR?

I talked about Muslim-Americans and they are are more educated, more urbanized, and more richer than average Americans (or average Chinese or Koreans or Singaporeans). Yet, the TFR for Muslims in America is still ~3 kids per woman due to the superior cultural traits that your people lack and which I've described in my last post (namely:Traits such as strict family values, premarital sexual discipline, higher marriage rates, and so on etc are directly correlated with healthy fertility rates).

Source: http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/

I can provide further links if you want--but these are pretty well known things. But then again, you barely have any command in cultural studies or anthropological dissection of history and historical civilizations--So you wouldn't know much what we are talking about.

The Arab world have been in strife for centuries. They can't even unite to take down a small Israel.

And your point is?

You do realize that Europe had been in strife for centuries, and centuries...and it continued as recently as WWII. Didn't take away the fact that Europe was a civilization of its own with its own identity

What does it mean to be an Islamic civilization anyway? Do they have the similar language, culture, or under the same political entity? Or do you simply judge base on religion? By the same standard, can I say Japan and Myanmar are in the same Buddhist civilization just because they share the same religion?

Ok, I'll give you some insight as to why Islamic World has been regarded as a civilization by scholars and academics in the field.

Islam is not a creedal religion, it is a legalistic religion-- a civilizational force of itself. If you had studied "Religion" or "Anthropology" in some elite university of West (I have), you would know what I'm talking about and what's the difference between a creedal and legalistic religious construction. But lets explain it in a simple way..

Islam is not just a religion but a cultural, civilizational force in itself. It has its own laws, personal behavioral code of conduct, its political principles and mechanisms, and even certain parameters for dress-code for individual. It explicitly organizes the interaction of individual and society. All of this makes Muslims not just random followers of a religion, but also "a specific people" with their own unique identity no matter where they are on planet Earth.

For example, Muslims have a universal greeting for interacting with other Muslims- "Asslam-o-Alaikum". No matter who you are, and where you are, you will know this greeting. Muslims, no matter where they are, follow same rules about divorce, inheritance, food and diet, and heck!, even personal hygiene. They have a same and very codified structure of Islamic rituals that each Muslim know by heart..no matter if he is Nigerian or Indonesian..It has is own universal language of prayer and religious studies (Arabic)..and all Muslim kids irrespective of their geographic location and country learn Arabic recitation and acquire basic skills in Arabic reading etc. All of this creates a unique super-culture across Islamic World. It is kind of like in military..soldiers have their own "soldier culture", distinct from outside world and easily identifiable with. Turkish girls, Iranian girls, Indonesian girls, Indian girls, and Central Asian girls etc couldn't be further in terms of behavior, geography etc...but they all wear Hijab, in its own unique manifestations. Or take ramadan for example. Muslims, no matter in what part of the globe, refrain from eating or drinking anything from sun set to sun rise and they do it for a month! Such structured observance creates a very strong connection between different humans undergoing this type of practice at the same time without the restraint of geography or nationality. This connection is something akin to "connection" one feels being a part of a national level team--where its "us" and "them" (not in a negative way so to speak). Or take Islamic doctrine of Adhan and five prayers a day. In Islamic countries and communities, the time itself is structured in a similar fashion. Whether you are a Muslim living in Indonesia or a Muslim living in Kazakhstan, you will hear five calls to prayer (in same language irrespective of geography) designated to be delivered at particular times of day. This itself divides your day into 5 sections and no matter where you live--your experience of time is standardized. Again--this type of structure makes the people experiencing it more than just "nominal followers"..it makes them an identity of their of own. A single, universal identity. To put it simply, Islam makes its followers a specific/unique "peoples" sharing one overlapping universal identity (kind of like how "europeans/Americans" have an identity of being "westerners" even though they have different cultures, different languages, and have been fighting each other for centuries as well).

All of this shows that Islam, other than being a spiritual religion, is a civilization of its own. It makes many different identities into one super nation that can be called as 'Islamic People'. Religions like Christianity, Buddhism, or Hinduism don't. They have trillion of different doctrines, practices, and many different 'holy' books etc, no singular language of prayer, no explicitly political aspect within their doctrinal construction. To understand Islam, Judaism and Jews are a good example. Other than nationalities, Jews are also a specific 'people' or define themselves as such. You know why? Because Judaism is also a 'legalistic' religion and not a creedal one. It is just that Islam is the only creedal religion that "won" in historical terms and went global--While Jews were oppressed and subjugated and hence couldn't have a history of establishing states and empires on Judaic laws and cultural domains. (Israel is too young to comment here).

All of the above doesn't mean that Muslims are one state and that Iran and Turkey will not compete with each other. But on mass level, Muslims are a part of a one global civilization with similar culture, dress code, personal behaviors, laws, societal norms, and so on.

There are tens of nations that have Islam as the basis of their constitutions. Islamic law directly inspires law-codes of various nation-states and even global inter-governmental institutions like OIC (which is the second largest international institution of the world after UN). Furthermore, Islam shapes the daily lives (personal and public) of literally billions of people across the globe. Islam plays central role in societies, politics, and cultures of god knows how many countries/societies on global scale. It shapes the behaviors of billions of people across the world when it comes to sexuality, dress-codes, public behavior, gender-relations, and even personal cleanliness. No other socio-cultural force even comes close in terms of scale and influence that Islam has been exerting on humanity for over a thousand years now. Even in secular countries like Turkey--Islam is at the center of society and thriving. Even in Western World--Muslims are thriving, hijabs are common, halal food is everywhere, and thousands of new mosques build over the years.

You think Buddhism or Christianity or Hinduism etc are even comparable? lol.. No.

Islam is a civilizational force that is the basis/center of the largest and most global civilization ever seen by human kind.

I think I should just stop.

Smart move. Otherwise I'd have schooled you even here.

 

[beijingwalker]

Rate of population growth and level of development are almost always on inverse proportion everywhere in the world.

 

[Mista]

Your premise is completely wrong. There is no healthy population growth in the so called islamic world - Whether you take Africa, Asia, or Europe, the muslim communities are all in dire straits with ingrown ghetto attitudes, inability to stem islamic radicalism, and spread of barbaric practices. Very inferior cultural traits and utter and complete lack of any adherence to any kind of civilized behavior. In the middle-east things are even worse in spite of enormous oil wealth that has been completely squandered. In other words, your cradle of islamic 'civilisation' has proved beyond doubt that even if by blind luck they come by enormous wealth, their indiscipline and barbaric attitudes will ensure their own ruin.

How dare you say those cultural traits are inferior !?!? According to someone, they have strict sexual discipline (rape in Europe is okay though) and decent marriage rate (probably 4 wives per man) and these are the superior cultural traits that allowed the Islamic civilization to be the largest and the most global civilization that humanity has ever witnessed! I mean, they dominated the planet for around 1000+ years out of its 1400 years of existence! How dare you put down such a glorious civilization!? What an uneducated person you are! It's time for you to get schooled!

 

[Beast]

2100? By that time, I sure dropped dead and its good that China as sole superpower reign last at least 50 years

 

[pts_m_h_2016]

Quantity is undeniably important but as time goes by, quality will rise in importance. It already is and will continue to be even more important. Look, with an economy of $2.5 trillion California with 40 million people has a larger economy than India with 1.2 billion people. Singapore with 5 million people have an economy larger than Bangladesh/Pakistan with 200 million people. Of course the latter countries will eventually surpass the former state/country in total GDP, but it just shows how important quality is.

Not agreeing or disagreeing with your arguments here.

Just pointing out an erroneous fact.

American economic statistics are inflated by about 85 percentage with many statistical manipulations like imputations.

To read more, go here http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/01.12/inflation.html
Some excerpts

Shedlock has reported by means of Bureau of Economic Analysis data, that the GDP is artificially lifted by a whopping $1.635 trillion in hedonic adjustments, equal to 13% of the entire GDP. Shedlock cites the total fabrication folly was a staggering 35% of the reported US GDP in 2003!!

Means 65% of reported US Gross Domestic Product is real, the other 35% is statistical manipulation.

If you assume the same ratio in this state of California, you would derive a GDP of $1.625 billion for the state. The other 35% of $2.500 billion is hypothetical statistics.

 

[Dungeness]

China is a different story. They have discipline better than anyone else. They have an open mind when it comes to absorbing best practices. They absorbed industrialization from Europe, market economy (partially) from the US, Bhuddhism from India etc. They did not encapsulate themselves into 6th and 7th century cultural practices. Yes they have lost enormous cultural history in the so called 'revolution' but have woken up a bit. They have proven more than anyother people in Asia that once they set a goal they will accomplish - by hook or by crook. In that they are only second to the US.

This is quite a refreshing point of view about China from an Indian poster on PDF. It would be really interesting if more Indians share your level of understanding about China.

Let me add my perspective on highlighted part. Not all of "lost cultural history in the revolution" are worthy preserving today, after all, there can be no construction without destruction, and that is what a "revolution" is all about.

 

[Mista]

Not agreeing or disagreeing with your arguments here.

Just pointing out an erroneous fact.

American economic statistics are inflated by about 85 percentage with many statistical manipulations like imputations.

To read more, go here http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/01.12/inflation.html
Some excerpts


Means 65% of reported US Gross Domestic Product is real, the other 35% is statistical manipulation.

If you assume the same ratio in this state of California, you would derive a GDP of $1.625 billion for the state. The other 35% of $2.500 billion is hypothetical statistics.

40 million people with a 2.5 trillion economy will get you a per capita GDP of around $62K. Perfectly possible, considering the whole of the US's GDP per capita is $55K. 1.6 trillion gives you a GDP per capita of $40K, which is unlikely as California is more developed than a lot of other states.

Unless you're also arguing that the whole of US GDP figures are fake.

 

[pts_m_h_2016]

Islamic World...as a whole..is a middle-income economic sphere with $11,000 GDP per capita based on purchasing power parity. Total fertility rate of Muslims is 3 kids per woman on average.

And offcourse, there are Muslim countries with less than 2.1 TFR and there are Muslim countries with more than 4 TFR. What is your point? You are being an idiot here.

And no, Islamic countries who are rich aren't rich mainly because of oil. Take for example UAE. Oil and gas sector contributes only 25% to its total GDP. UAE is a global transportation and trade hub with some of the largest sea ports and some of the best airlines (Emirates, Eithad etc). Then, there's services sector and offcourse tourism. UAE used oil revenues to develop itself into a totally developed economy based on trade, tourism, and services sector competing in global markets. Some of the largest construction companies on Earth are based in UAE.

Same goes for Muslim-majority countries like Malaysia or Turkey. Both of them are industrialized, developed countries and they did it without any oil.

High tech exports of Malaysia surpass many European nations.

I talked about Muslim-Americans and they are are more educated, more urbanized, and more richer than average Americans (or average Chinese or Koreans or Singaporeans). Yet, the TFR for Muslims in America is still ~3 kids per woman due to the superior cultural traits that your people lack and which I've described in my last post (namely:Traits such as strict family values, premarital sexual discipline, higher marriage rates, and so on etc are directly correlated with healthy fertility rates).

Source: http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/

I can provide further links if you want--but these are pretty well known things. But then again, you barely have any command in cultural studies or anthropological dissection of history and historical civilizations--So you wouldn't know much what we are talking about.

Not agreeing or disagreeing with your arguments either, here I just want to correct or learn (which is applicable) the statistics and facts you have provided.

UAE is a global transportation and trade hub with some of the largest sea ports and some of the best airlines (Emirates, Eithad etc).Then, there's services sector and offcourse tourism.

1. You know that this is not an high tech or advanced economic sector?
Singapore too partakes in this sector with great success, too, may I remind you? Same as Hong Kong.

Both of them are industrialized, developed countries and they did it without any oil.

High tech exports of Malaysia surpass many European nations.

2. No, none of Malaysia or Turkey is a developed country in standard procedure.

High tech exports of Singapore surpasses Malaysia, too, despite its small size, and also that of almost all countries of world. That with only half the population of Paris (or London or Istanbul). You should have known it, there are no high tech Malaysian companies that contribute majority of these exports. These are foreign offshore companies like in case of China or Singapour that contribute these exports.

Still it's better performance than Pakistan Inde or all African or most American countries, true. Just nothing to lead the charts in world level, yet.

How about Turkish high tech exports volume? Mention that number too.

I talked about Muslim-Americans and they are are more educated, more urbanized, and more richer than average Americans (or average Chinese or Koreans or Singaporeans).

3. It is not true, either.

As you know, Singapore like Hong Kong is a 100% urbanized city or country, how would Muslim Americans be more urbanized than Singaporeans on average? So I question your other statistics too if considering that Singapore performs one of the best in world in standardized intelligence tests, academic performance indicators at secondary and tertiary levels, and also in per capita research indicators.


I guide you to stats from your fellow Muslim Iranian portal for some information.
http://statnano.com/report/s33

NUMBER OF NANO-ARTICLES PER MILLION PEOPLE (ARTICLE PER MILLION PEOPLE)
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
1 Singapore 255.83 306.89 348.40 374.97 397.65 426.71 
2 Switzerland 149.54 166.49 177.95 194.32 198.48 212.45 
3 South Korea 93.61 108.02 127.44 137.81 150.96 164.60 
4 Sweden 89.05 103.65 121.60 130.72 145.32 163.99 
5 Finland 105.08 113.55 119.70 128.36 139.17 161.98 
6 Denmark 73.69 91.75 112.74 112.33 125.76 151.96 
7 Ireland 85.45 115.99 132.19 139.25 141.45 145.03 
8 Slovenia 90.70 99.09 110.09 124.87 143.66 144.51 
9 Liechtenstein 111.82 166.52 82.44 136.40 81.25 134.43 
10 Australia 70.38 76.10 94.52 100.38 119.93 133.46

You can clearly see, Singapore performs more than twice as good as 2nd placed Switzerland and easily the leader of this list by a comfortable margin. The united states is placed only at position 23, behind France and ahead of Iran. It is doubtable that Muslims, Jewish, Hindu, Christian or Buddhist American groups alone can outperform Singapore in this area.

This is just one sample of scientific research where Singapour, per capita, defeats your country.

I don't see any Muslim country on this list inside top 10. Not much to be proud of.

Another example http://statnano.com/report/s38

H-INDEX OF NANO-ARTICLES (--)
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
1 USA 245.00 206.00 177.00 143.00 94.00 42.00 
2 China 194.00 184.00 161.00 182.00 88.00 41.00 
3 Singapore 103.00 101.00 100.00 75.00 58.00 24.00 
4 Germany 131.00 117.00 101.00 76.00 54.00 26.00 
5 UK 108.00 102.00 88.00 69.00 50.00 26.00 
6 South Korea 122.00 108.00 95.00 79.00 50.00 23.00 
7 Japan 112.00 101.00 87.00 68.00 49.00 25.00 
8 Australia 92.00 84.00 76.00 65.00 47.00 23.00 
9 Saudi Arabia 42.00 54.00 51.00 43.00 41.00 22.00 
10 France 97.00 88.00 74.00 57.00 40.00 18.00 
11 Switzerland 84.00 82.00 67.00 53.00 40.00 18.00 
12 Iran 64.00 58.00 50.00 43.00 39.00 20.00 
13 Spain 90.00 82.00 73.00 55.00 38.00 20.00

In all of these years, Singapore performs better than every Muslim country and reaches 3rd rank behind much much larger USA and China, in 2014, performing better than much larger Germany, UK, Korea, Japan, Australia, France, Sausi Arabia, Iran and Spain.

In all of these years, Singapore never reached below 7th rank despite its small size. What does it tell you?


I will give you one last shocker to cherish.
http://statnano.com/report/s38/5

H-INDEX OF NANO-ARTICLES (--)
2011 2012 2013 2014
1 University of California System 99.00 72.00 54.00 30.00 
2 Nanyang Technological University 74.00 70.00 47.00 26.00 
3 Chinese Academy of Sciences 109.00 90.00 64.00 25.00 
4 Tsinghua University 64.00 50.00 40.00 24.00 
5 Stanford University 68.00 57.00 41.00 24.00 
6 Max Planck Society 69.00 58.00 40.00 24.00 
7 University of California Berkeley 66.00 51.00 37.00 22.00 
8 National University of Singapore 62.00 57.00 38.00 21.00 
9 École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne 54.00 39.00 33.00 21.00 
10 Zhejiang University 61.00 52.00 38.00 21.00 
11 King Abdulaziz University 25.00 23.00 20.00 
12 Fudan University 64.00 50.00 42.00 20.00 
13 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 63.00 50.00 35.00 20.00 
14 Peking University 57.00 44.00 39.00 20.00 
15 University System of Georgia 57.00 53.00 39.00 19.00

In 2014 and each of these years, Nanyang Technological University of Singapour was the first (1st) rank university in the list.

Chinese Academy of Sciences, University of California System, Max Planck Society these are no single university, rather collective research bodies or university systems with 10s of single universities.

Another Singaporean university National University of Singapour also reached within 10th rank amongst single universities in each of these years.

No Muslim or non Muslim country performs better (per capita).

So you are providing wrong information.

40 million people with a 2.5 trillion economy will get you a per capita GDP of around $62K. Perfectly possible, considering the whole of the US's GDP per capita is $55K. 1.6 trillion gives you a GDP per capita of $40K, which is unlikely as California is more developed than a lot of other states.

Unless you're also arguing that the whole of US GDP figures are fake.

I did not create an argument.

Go read that link, these argument is very clear.

 

[Mista]

I did not create an argument.

Go read that link, these argument is very clear.

Interesting to read about how Hedonic Pricing should affect GDP calculation. Well, that's one of the imperfection of GDP calculation. I don't think it is only exceptional for the US though.

Thanks for the long post anyway. I didn't even know that much of my own country.

 

[pts_m_h_2016]

Interesting to read about how Hedonic Pricing should affect GDP calculation. Well, that's one of the imperfection of GDP calculation. I don't think it is only exceptional for the US though.

Thanks for the long post anyway. I didn't even know that much of my own country.

From the same place http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/01.12/inflation.html

The United States is the only major country that hedonically adjusts its GDP, or needs to.

 

[TeesraIndiotHunter]

Not agreeing or disagreeing with your arguments either, here I just want to correct or learn (which is applicable) the statistics and facts you have provided.



1. You know that this is not an high tech or advanced economic sector?
Singapore too partakes in this sector with great success, too, may I remind you? Same as Hong Kong.



2. No, none of Malaysia or Turkey is a developed country in standard procedure.

High tech exports of Singapore surpasses Malaysia, too, despite its small size, and also that of almost all countries of world. That with only half the population of Paris (or London or Istanbul). You should have known it, there are no high tech Malaysian companies that contribute majority of these exports. These are foreign offshore companies like in case of China or Singapour that contribute these exports.

Still it's better performance than Pakistan Inde or all African or most American countries, true. Just nothing to lead the charts in world level, yet.

How about Turkish high tech exports volume? Mention that number too.





3. It is not true, either.

As you know, Singapore like Hong Kong is a 100% urbanized city or country, how would Muslim Americans be more urbanized than Singaporeans on average? So I question your other statistics too if considering that Singapore performs one of the best in world in standardized intelligence tests, academic performance indicators at secondary and tertiary levels, and also in per capita research indicators.


I guide you to stats from your fellow Muslim Iranian portal for some information.
http://statnano.com/report/s33


You can clearly see, Singapore performs more than twice as good as 2nd placed Switzerland and easily the leader of this list by a comfortable margin. The united states is placed only at position 23, behind France and ahead of Iran. It is doubtable that Muslims, Jewish, Hindu, Christian or Buddhist American groups alone can outperform Singapore in this area.

This is just one sample of scientific research where Singapour, per capita, defeats your country.

I don't see any Muslim country on this list inside top 10. Not much to be proud of.

Another example http://statnano.com/report/s38



In all of these years, Singapore performs better than every Muslim country and reaches 3rd rank behind much much larger USA and China, in 2014, performing better than much larger Germany, UK, Korea, Japan, Australia, France, Sausi Arabia, Iran and Spain.

In all of these years, Singapore never reached below 7th rank despite its small size. What does it tell you?


I will give you one last shocker to cherish.
http://statnano.com/report/s38/5



In 2014 and each of these years, Nanyang Technological University of Singapour was the first (1st) rank university in the list.

Chinese Academy of Sciences, University of California System, Max Planck Society these are no single university, rather collective research bodies or university systems with 10s of single universities.

Another Singaporean university National University of Singapour also reached within 10th rank amongst single universities in each of these years.

No Muslim or non Muslim country performs better (per capita).

So you are providing wrong information.



I did not create an argument.

Go read that link, these argument is very clear.

I generally agree with your post (Although Malaysia and Turkey are regarded developed countries by worldbank, IMF etc. Any country with $20,000 per capita based on PPP is regarded as developed/high income nation).

Given you a like.

Welcome to the forum!

How dare you say those cultural traits are inferior !?!? According to someone, they have strict sexual discipline (rape in Europe is okay though) and decent marriage rate (probably 4 wives per man) and these are the superior cultural traits that allowed the Islamic civilization to be the largest and the most global civilization that humanity has ever witnessed! I mean, they dominated the planet for around 1000+ years out of its 1400 years of existence! How dare you put down such a glorious civilization!? What an uneducated person you are! It's time for you to get schooled!

Being sarcastic and misrepresenting the views of other is an easy way out...which is somewhat expected from a person who isn't very well versed in the topic we were talking about.

Rather than responding to my THIS post...you chose the path of throwing useless punchlines and that too, without quoting me but rather another person?

Well, good for you. Countering my facts is a hard ball game. Throwing shade...well, even high school drop outs can do it.

In my post, I clearly outlined and showed you how and why Islamic World is regarded as a civilization of its own--just like West. Now, if Islamic World is indeed a civilization of its own, then just by its sheer size and global presence across Asia, Africa, Europe, Middle-East etc--Islamic Civilization is the largest and most global civilization of history (1.6 billion population and expected to reach 2.7 billion by 2050). What's so hard to digest?

You seem to be under the impression that somehow I'm claiming Islamic Civilization to be "superior" or "better" than say West or China. No, its not. I never claimed that, if you are thinking that. It is inferior right now compared to say West--which is the most superior right now. Clear enough?

Islamic Civilization remained the most superior civilization of humanity in the past for centuries--but it hasn't been one for centuries now.

Lastly, between 7th to mid 17th century, Islamic World and its powers such as the Ottoman Empire, the Mughal Empire, Abbasid Caliphate, Ummayad Caliphate etc were easily the most wealthy and powerful powers of the world at various points during this time period in history. That is a recorded, undeniable fact of history. I took World History from 1350 to 1900 in college in the United States, and even there I was taught this. I wonder why you are challenging this accepted historical viewpoint?

Lay down your argument, if you can (without misrepresenting my argument). Uptil now, only I have been the one giving facts, studies, links, quoting scholars, and what not. You are just putting smileys and "LOL" signs. People with no value or knowledge do that (or just childish teenagers). I am sure you are smarter than that.