Indians to outnumber Chinese in 2025: US

[Fireurimagination]

Prepare for the invasion of million of nanga bhookas...india this its a pride to have millions and millions of people starving and fighting in a giant pool of limit resources. And thinking of this as a source of western praise is another folly...Chinese experience and growth tells us than quantity is not power when it comes to population.

Invasion where to? Instead of worrying about our bhooka nanga it's better if you people can take care of yours

ps: China is still the most populous country on the planet with top growth rate India is second most populous with second best growth rate

 

[Veeru]

Pakistan: 3.28 children born/woman (2010 est.)
India: 2.65 children born/woman (2010 est.)

Population projections can be way off but Pakistans population is expected to hit 280-290 million by 2050.

The total fertility rate (TFR) in Pakistan is still the highest in South Asia at 4.1 children per woman.

Women in urban areas have an average of 3.3 children compared to their rural counterparts, who have an average of 4.5 children. The overall fertility rate has been cut in half from about 8 children per woman in 1960s to about 4 this decade, according to a study published in 2009.

Rapid decline in total fertility rates in India has reduced population growth rate to 1.8 percent compared to 3.0 percent for Pakistan.


The most respected and credible source for pakistan"Haq's Musings":

Haq's Musings: India and Pakistan Contrasted in 2010

 

[TechLahore]

Looking at population in isolation is meaningless. Population density is what counts. China, being much larger than India, even at the same population has more land/person than India does. The story is the same in Pakistan... I believe Pakistan has 1.6 times the land resources per person as compared to India.

Bangladesh is the worst off in this regard. In fact of all sizeable nations with populations at least in the double digit millions, Bangladesh is the most densely populated and hence the most land resource poor. It is very good that they have reduced their growth rate as much as they have. But, personally, I feel they still might be at an unsustainable density. Their government has started to lease land in neighbouring countries for agriculture, etc. That's definitely a good move.

 

[TechLahore]

Rapid decline in total fertility rates in India has reduced population growth rate to 1.8 percent compared to 3.0 percent for Pakistan.


The most respected and credible source for pakistan"Haq's Musings":

Haq's Musings: India and Pakistan Contrasted in 2010

World Bank, World Development Indicators - Google public data

Not that this thread concerns Pakistan's growth rate, but 3 percent is very wrong. I don't know whether you were just being sarcastic or whether you believe it. In either case, estimates for Pakistan's population growth range from 1.589% (CIA data for 2010) to 2.1%.

CIA data: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2002.html

To be responsible and reasonable, one should probably take a mid point between these, yielding a rate of roughly 1.84% or thereabouts.

 

[LaBong]

Looking at population in isolation is meaningless. Population density is what counts. China, being much larger than India, even at the same population has more land/person than India does. The story is the same in Pakistan... I believe Pakistan has 1.6 times the land resources per person as compared to India.

Bangladesh is the worst off in this regard. In fact of all sizeable nations with populations at least in the double digit millions, Bangladesh is the most densely populated and hence the most land resource poor. It is very good that they have reduced their growth rate as much as they have. But, personally, I feel they still might be at an unsustainable density. Their government has started to lease land in neighbouring countries for agriculture, etc. That's definitely a good move.

BD also has almost all his land arable. Many part of China is scarcely populated, while west part being densely populated.

 

[justanobserver]

Looking at population in isolation is meaningless. Population density is what counts. China, being much larger than India, even at the same population has more land/person than India does. The story is the same in Pakistan... I believe Pakistan has 1.6 times the land resources per person as compared to India.

Bangladesh is the worst off in this regard. In fact of all sizeable nations with populations at least in the double digit millions, Bangladesh is the most densely populated and hence the most land resource poor. It is very good that they have reduced their growth rate as much as they have. But, personally, I feel they still might be at an unsustainable density. Their government has started to lease land in neighbouring countries for agriculture, etc. That's definitely a good move.

Not really, most of China is frigid/arid wasteland, good for mining minerals but not suitable for human habitation.

Only coastal China is habitable. This picture will give a better representation

(picture of world at night)

 

[Aeon]

lol

If China can manage it, looks like they have room for a billion more people in their western half.

 

[justanobserver]

lol

If China can manage it, looks like they have room for a billion more people in their western half.

Remember that place has had civilization for 5000years. If it wasn't fit for habitation then, it wont be fit now (unless humans evolve super quickly)

The subcontinent is more rich than you think...

Here's another interesting pic

Map of world percentage arable land.


(this pic shows an averaged value per country, eg: Punjab is arable but most of Pakistan isn't)

 

[siegecrossbow]

Time for India to implement birth control policies. A large population is good only if it is sustainable. One-Child policies could be repealed when the population drops but going the over way around is going to raise some eyebrows.

 

[Aeon]

Time for India to implement birth control policies. A large population is good only if it is sustainable. One-Child policies could be repealed when the population drops but going the over way around is going to raise some eyebrows.

??

India wants to rule the world?!

 

[HAIDER]

If people still give birth at higher rate then parents should be ready to die of starvation. Its era of two kids, if somone is landlord then its differ story. Otherwise civic life doesn't allow more then two...

 

[justanobserver]

??

India wants to rule the world?!

In the words of another Chinese member.

"The day is not far when the Star on the CCP flag will be replaced by a Hindu Swastika"

 

[6642.CN]

In the words of another Chinese member.

"The day is not far when the Star on the CCP flag will be replaced by a Hindu Swastika"

 

[chinautumn]

Remember that place has had civilization for 5000years. If it wasn't fit for habitation then, it wont be fit now (unless humans evolve super quickly)

The subcontinent is more rich than you think...

Here's another interesting pic

Map of world percentage arable land.


(this pic shows an averaged value per country, eg: Punjab is arable but most of Pakistan isn't)

Indeed China is a mountainous country with less arable land!

 

[justanobserver]

Indeed China is a mountainous country with less arable land!

China has lots of arable land.The percentage is less. The land is arable in Coastal China where the bulk of the population resides.

Check this out

Country Arableland(km2)↓ (&#37

1.United States: 1,650,062 18.01%
2.India : 1,451,810 48.83%
3.China :1,385,905 14.86% (percentage low, but actual land is high)
......
34.Bangladesh 74,173 55.39%