Why is the southern part of South Asia more developed than the northern part of South Asia

[A Town]

Dude you cannot argue with my example of Vietnam as to why it is so backward now.

Have fun with delusions that some parts of India are not impoverished after nearly 7 decades of independence.

That's because I am not familiar with the situation in Vietnam and your entire point rests on one example?
Where did I say the opposite? Dumb Bangla boy...

 

[Sriram]

Its true that southern India was ahead during medieval period(7th - 16th century) and in the 18th century under
the rule of the Maratha Empire and Mysore kingdom but that wasn't the case during ancient period(4th century BC-
6th century CE)

what special happend in NI during 4th century BC-6th century CE?

 

[SirHatesALot]

cangla naahi, Changla aahe........ barobor bola ho.

Savay nahi ahey marathi,english words madhey lihaychi.
Tumcha gaumata cha discussion changla suru distay,modi allyavar kiti chances ahe kayda badlnyachi?

 

[Sriram]

Dude, BD growth is a healthy 6-7% a year these days.

You need to take into account the 2 Decades of very slow growth that BD had after independence. If it was not for the war, and the split was more amicable in 1971, then this would not have happened.

Sri Lanka could have been at around Thailand or even Malaysian level of living standards if it was not the 25 year civil war.

An independent BD from 1947 would now be light years ahead of both Pakistan and India.

all i can see is excuses... if India dint have Pak or China as neighbors, india would have achieved much more so whats ur point?
FYI, light year is a measure of distance not time...

 

[Foot12]

Afghanistan is war torn country, unfair to compare. While BD has 2x gdp per capita then UP.

This discussion is not about UP. When you compare BD, northern India and Pakistan with southern Indian states like Maharashtra, Kerala, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu its pretty obvious that southern Indian is far ahead.
In fact Maharashtra has a higher GDP than Bangladesh and Pakistan.

 

[dawn_news]

This discussion is not about UP. When you compare BD, northern India and Pakistan with southern Indian states like Maharashtra, Kerala, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu its pretty obvious that southern Indian is far ahead.
In fact Maharashtra has a higher GDP than Bangladesh and Pakistan.

Pakistan have higher per capita then whole India, don't come up with BS figures. Pakistan GDP will soon cross $300 billion by this june, which mean per capita of $1600.

 

[UKBengali]

That's because I am not familiar with the situation in Vietnam and your entire point rests on one example?
Where did I say the opposite? Dumb Bangla boy...

Maybe you should educate yourself so you can bring in other examples to support your argument.

Funny you call me dumb when you admit you are ignorant.

 

[A Town]

Maybe you should educate yourself so you can bring in other examples to support your argument.

Funny you call me dumb when you admit you are ignorant.

I don't need examples lol, we can see Bangladesh's condition right now.
I'm ignorant? Says the person who is basing his entire hypothesis on a mere assumption.

 

[UKBengali]

all i can see is excuses... if India dint have Pak or China as neighbors, india would have achieved much more so whats ur point?
FYI, light year is a measure of distance not time...

Don't be a smartass mate.

India had the chance to start its development in 1947 just like Pakistan.

BD did not get the chance till 1971.

You had an EXTRA 24 years of independence but have little to show for it.
Even now your politicians are willing to ruin the Indian economy just to win votes. BD politicians may not be great but they don't run up massive fiscal deficits for votes.

 

[Manvantaratruti]

Savay nahi ahey marathi,english words madhey lihaychi.
Tumcha gaumata cha discussion changla suru distay,modi allyavar kiti chances ahe kayda badlnyachi?

Kayi naahi honar.

 

[damiendehorn]

Afghanistan and Bangladesh are even less developed than UP. Only Gujarat has a high development.

UP has a per capita GDP under $600 while Bangladesh has a per capita GDP of $1044. Please get your facts right, before you open your mouth.

 

[Lonely Hermit]

There is little difference in actuality.

Two major factors account for the difference:

1. Some of the Northern Indian states are very populous and backyards but not all.

2. BD would be right up there with Sri Lanka if it went indepedent at a similar time to rest of South Asia.

South Asia, bar Sri Lanka, is extremely backyard and let's not pretend some parts are much better than others.

I think there are more historical factors Involved Why is it that a state like Kerala has an HDI similar to that of a developed country and the entire belt from Bangladesh til UP are worst in whole of subcontinent.
PS:Kerala was never part of British Empire but Bengal & Bihar where first to fall under British rule.

 

[Koovie]

2. BD would be right up there with Sri Lanka if it went indepedent at a similar time to rest of South Asia.
.

At least give us some form of evidence to prove this claim.... but oh I forgot..... YOU CANT.

 

[UKBengali]

I think there are more historical factors Involved Why is it that a state like Kerala has an HDI similar to that of a developed country and the entire belt from Bangladesh til UP are worst in whole of subcontinent.
PS:Kerala was never part of British Empire but Bengal & Bihar where first to fall under British rule.

BD is far ahead of UP in living standards.

 

[Koovie]

Punjab which is in north india has always been best state. southern states like kerala have higher percentage of literate people but aint high in standard of living

You know that southern states have the highest living standards right?