China a Western colony, first in HK, Macau, now in Taiwan

[observer]

You have to pity China. It was under European colonialism till as late as just 10 years back. Britain took pity on China and handed back Hong Kong in 1997 and Portugal handed back Macau in 1999. Till then China couldn't do anything to get back these places from Europe...how sad.

Compare this India which drove out the first batch of Europeans from India, the British, in 1947, then kicked out Portugese from Goa by scaring them with the Indian Army and finally drove out the French from Puducherry (earlier Pondicherry) in 1962.

Even till today China is under European origin colonialism through Taiwan which is a virtual US colony being under US military protection. China doesn't have the guts to take back Taiwan as it cowers from fear of the US.

Thus one has to pity the poor and weak Chinese. They are the last nation on Earth which is still under Western colonialism.

[googleabcd]

There were only 2 cities in China under colonialism, Hongkong and Manchu.
The west can't send troops in other Chinese cities. Compared to the famous British's slaves, we are nothing...Hoho:D
You have to pity China. It was under European colonialism till as late as just 10 years back. Britain took pity on China and handed back Hong Kong in 1997 and Portugal handed back Macau in 1999. Till then China couldn't do anything to get back these places from Europe...how sad.

Compare this India which drove out the first batch of Europeans from India, the British, in 1947, then kicked out Portugese from Goa by scaring them with the Indian Army and finally drove out the French from Puducherry (earlier Pondicherry) in 1962.

Even till today China is under European origin colonialism through Taiwan which is a virtual US colony being under US military protection. China doesn't have the guts to take back Taiwan as it cowers from fear of the US.

Thus one has to pity the poor and weak Chinese. They are the last nation on Earth which is still under Western colonialism.

[Nikster]

We may have been slaves to the British for two hundred years, but we kicked them out and now we are a free country and control our destiny. That is why there is no foreign person running Indian industry. In contrast, China has 500,000 foreign managers running the country's companies (mostly in Shanghai). The rest of the Chinese work for these foreign managers like slaves for little or no pay. We may have once been slaves to colonists, but you continue to be slaves. That is why India will win in the end and China will lose.

[torabera]

hehe..., here is something to scare the shit out the rats, :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kMBjq2EQBE&mode=related&search=

[Nikster]

Scared? You must be kidding me. A bunch of moronic fascists screaming like a bunch of monkeys is supposed to scare who? It's very funny to see Chinese monkeys sreaming in unison. You people can do great tricks to make us laugh. Maybe we should send all the monkeys in India to live happily with their monkey Chinese brethren. Read some history. India was the centre of world industry before the British came. India controlled 30 percent of the world economy.

India has opened it's doors to foreign corporations, but everyone comes to India and hires India to manage their business or takes India's great brainpower to work abroad. There are no foreign managers in India even though India is home to numerous multinational corporations like Nokia, Eriksson, Suzuki, IBM, Accenture, Intel, . . . the list goes on and on. All these companies come and hire Indians to run businesses. In contrast, China has to import 500,000 managers becasue the Chinese are too dumb to run companies. I bet some of those foreigners are Indian managers too. The Chinese government is really smart. Let foreigners come in and work slave Chinese labor to death while enjoying cheap Chinese imports and record profits for foreign companies. Keep it up dumb China.

[torabera]

Hehe, the only thing that the indians is good at is day dreaming :D
get urself a mirror, and u will see u need a underware, stupid hopeless indians :D

-------
India the Superpower? Think again
India should put aside pride about its growing economy and concentrate on improving the lives of average citizens, argues Fortune's Cait Murphy.
By Cait Murphy, Fortune assistant managing editor
February 9 2007: 12:29 PM EST


NEW YORK (Fortune) -- Plug in the words "India" and "superpower" into an Internet search engine and it's happy to oblige - with 1.3 million hits. I confess that I did not check each one, but I suspect that almost all of these entries date from the last couple of years.

This is understandable. For the first time ever, India has posted four straight years of 8 percent growth; since it cracked open its economy in 1991, it has averaged growth of 6 percent a year - not in the same league as China, but twice the derisory "Hindu rate of growth" that had marked the first 45 years of independence.


A homeless Indian mother feeds her child in Hyderabad.

More from FORTUNE
India the Superpower? Think again

Nardelli's fake bogey: earnings per share

Get outta my phone!


FORTUNE 500
Current Issue
Subscribe to Fortune
India has gone nuclear, and even gotten the United States to accept that status. Its movies are crossing over to become international hits. The recent $11.3 billion takeover of Corus by Mumbai-based Tata Steel was the biggest acquisition ever by an Indian firm.

No wonder the idea of India as the next superpower is fast becoming conventional wisdom. "Our Time is Now," asserts The Times of India. And in an October survey by the Chicago Council on World Affairs, Indians said they saw their country as the second most influential in the world.

Sorry: India is not a superpower, and in fact, that is probably the wrong ambition for it, anyway. Why? Let me answer in the form of some statistics.

47 percent of Indian children under the age of five are either malnourished or stunted.
The adult literacy rate is 61 percent (behind Rwanda and barely ahead of Sudan). Even this is probably overstated, as people are deemed literate who can do little more than sign their name.
Only 10 percent of the entire Indian labor force works in the formal economy; of these fewer than half are in the private sector.
The enrollment of six-to-15-year-olds in school has actually declined in the last year. About 40 million children who are supposed to be in school are not.
About a fifth of the population is chronically hungry; about half of the world's hungry live in India.
More than a quarter of the India population lives on less than a dollar a day.
India has more people with HIV than any other country.

(Sources: UNDP, Unicef, World Food Program; Edward Luce)

You get the idea.

The 2006 UN Human Development Report, which ranks countries according to a variety of measures of human health and welfare, placed India 126th out of 177 countries. India was only a few places ahead of rival Pakistan (134th) and hapless Cambodia (129) and behind such not-about-to-be-superpowers as Equatorial Guinea (120), and Tajikistan (122).

As these and other numbers suggest, Indian triumphalism (a notable 126,000 hits on Google) is not only premature, it is misguided. Yes, growth has been brisk, and of course growth is necessary to make a dent in poverty. But as Edward Luce, author of the excellent, "In Spite of the Gods: The Strange Rise of Modern India," noted in a recent talk, poverty in India is not falling nearly as fast as its brisk rate of growth might anticipate.

The reason for this is that Indian growth has been capital-intensive, driven by the growth in high-value services such as IT. This is a good thing, but what it does not do is create stable and reasonably paid employment for not particularly skilled people - and this matters a lot, considering eight to 10 million Indians enter the labor force every year. Luce estimates that there are 7 million Indians working in the formal manufacturing sector in India - and 100 million in China.

India is awash in private equity
To look at it another way, the 1 million Indians working in IT account for less than one-half of one percent of the entire working population. This helps build reserves (and national confidence, and tax revenues) but is not the poverty buster that labor-intensive development is. As Prime Minister Singh told Luce, "Our biggest single problem is the lack of jobs for ordinary people."

The problem with India's self-proclaimed (and wildly premature) declaration of superpower status is that it reflects a complacency about both its present - which for many people is dire - and its future. Eight percent growth for four years is wonderful, but as the saying goes, past performance is no guarantee of future results. And India is not doing what it needs to in order to sustain this momentum.

Consider the postwar history of East and Southeast Asia. The comparison is appropriate because India started at about the same point, and has watched just about every country in the region get ahead of it on the economic curve. All these places developed by being relatively open to trade; by investing in primary and secondary education; and by building pretty decent infrastructure (not only roads and ports, but health clinics and water supplies). India has begun to embrace one leg of this triangle - freer trade.

Wireless Wonder: India's Sunil Mittal
Even here, though, many of the worst features of the swadeshi ("self-reliance") era remain intact, including an unreformed state banking sector; labor regulations that actively discourage hiring; abstruse land laws (and consequent lack of land titles); misshapen subsidies that hurt the poor; and corruption that is broad, deep and ubiquitous. Nothing useful is being done about any of this.

As for the other two legs of this development triangle - education and infrastructure - these are still badly broken. About a third of teachers fail to show up on any given day (and, of course, are unsackable); the supply of both water and power is expensive and unreliable.

These facts of life too often go unremarked in the current euphoria about the state of the nation. "We no longer discuss the future of India," Commerce Minister Kamal Nath told the Financial Times in a typical comment. "The future is India."

Hubris, of course, is the stuff of politics everywhere. But the future will not belong to India unless it takes action to embrace it, and that means more than high-profile vanity projects like putting a man on the moon or building the world箂 tallest tower. It means showing that the world's largest democracy can deliver real progress to the hundreds of millions who have never used the phone, much less the Internet. And in important ways, that just isn't happening.

India has many reasons to be proud, but considering it remains a world leader in hunger, stunting and HIV, its waxing self-satisfaction seems sadly beside the point.

[torabera]

the link is here

http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/08/news/international/pluggedin_murphy_india.fortune/?postversion=2007020912


stop spitting shit, and day dreaming, stupid lazy ndians,
work harder,
at least give those homeless enough food,

[Nikster]

Well, I suppose it's easy to use statistics against India as they come from a country that is free enough and smart enough to make them. Everyone knows that China's statistics agencies are puppet government run bureaucracies whose numbers cannot be trusted. And we all know how China restricts access to rural areas of poverty and urban areas of plight. Why? What is your government soooo afraid of? That people will realize that the so called Chinese dream is nowhere near as great as the government likes to make everyone believe it is. That's why they make up a lot of these statistics so people like you can go around and brag while the rest of your people are slaving away making cheap condoms and toilets for rich Westerners on little or no pay.

Also, according to the Goldman Sachs report India's growth is only going to accelerate and result in much less poverty over the coming decades (see India's Rising Growth Potential, availabe at http://www.usindiafriendship.net/viewpoints1/Indias_Rising_Growth_Potential.pdf)

Also, India's population is going to grow and surpass China's in the next decade. India will grow rich before it grows old like all other economic giants rose before it. China, on the other hand, because of it's cruel and vicious one child policy that forces parents to kill their babies or face the vengence of the Chinese governemnt will result in China getting old before it gets rich (see Race to the Top of World - India Vs. China, available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3YcxFgD89U&mode=related&search=). How will China deal with such an ageing population when it's still trying to develop?

Let's not forget this race has only begun. China is already claiming victory and we still haven't finished the first lap. Remember at the turn of the last century everyone was saying how amazing Stalin's Soviet Union was because it got things done so efficiently because it had a Communist government or how Hitler managed to force through changes quickly because he had a fascist government. Who won that race? Oh yeah, the country of mixed bred, bastardized Europeans (Hitler's words) known as America that was always criticized for it's slow democracy and lack of cohesiveness. Sound familiar?

[torabera]

keep day dreaming, hopeless indian boy,

here is something more interesting for u :D

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6161691.stm

wahhhaha....:D

[Nikster]

Ah, thank you for showing where most of your intellignece lies. And judging from this article, there's not much space for it - http://news.xinhuanet.com/health/2005-06/28/content_3145070.htm. I particularly like the part about how the article goes on to give instructions for measuring a penis, and also counsels that men should not worry if their penises are small, but should find appropriate lovemaking methods so that their size does not affect their sex lives.

That's why Chinese women prefer even old, impotent, White men like your most famous star Zhang Ziyi while Indian women, like Aiswariya Rai (the most beautiful woman in the world according to the Miss World competition and Julia Roberts), prefer Indian men.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/167/366719923_c26f1df68f.jpg

[observer]

The point is China was a British slave till 1997, a Portugese slave till 1999 and an American slave till today whereas India removed ALL foreign presence from its soil 50-60 years ago! . HK and Taiwan under slavery developed greatly over China in the many decades and now China itself is copying the slave cities in its development. Not to mention China is a Russian and German slave in copying their Communism and wearing Western clothes like the Chinese tinpot dictator Mao wore Western caps. Complete Western slaves = Chinese.