Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later[^][v]#1,409,835
I thought it was going to take longer, I predicted this would happen on here a while ago, somebody said, "You don’t have any insights into geopolitics." Well guess what, I told you so! Next it’s going to overtake Germany and become the 3rd largest economy after China.
Anonymous A (OP) triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 4 minutes after the original post[^][v]#1,409,836
Historically, India and China had the largest economies prior to European colonialism. The wildcard is Africa since they’ve never had a high population in the past.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 15 minutes after the original post[^][v]#1,409,839
Right when India’s birth rate fell below replacement, they started having crazy GDP growth. It’s not genetics, it’s not culture, it’s none of that Nazi shit, it’s demographics.
Some black guy on the internet joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 6 hours later, 18 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,409,929
@previous (boof)
Just thinking logically, if India starts off with a higher population than Japan and a smaller GDP, India’s GDP will always overtake Japan’s GDP before India’s GDP per capita overtakes Japan’s GDP per capita.
India’s GDP is 4.5 trillion USD as of the end of 2025, China had a GDP of 4.6 trillion USD in 2008. Currently, India has a GDP growth of 8.2% while China had a GDP growth of 9.6% in 2008. If India continues to have GDP growth between 8% and 10% for the next 20 years (what happened in China), they will catch up to China.
Some black guy on the internet double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 11 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,409,930
Also, Africa’s GDP is 2.8 trillion, which is similar to India’s GDP in 2018. Africa has 1.5 billion people while India and China have about 1.4 billion each. However, Africa has a birth rate of 4.3 children per woman while India’s birthrate fell below replacement in the early 2020s and is now at 1.9 births per woman. Africa’s fertility rate is not expected to fall below replacement until the 2090s.
China’s fell below replacement in the 1990s (due to the one Child policy), and Japan’s fell below replacement in the 1970s.
If Africa follows the trends of China and India, Africa may not experience rapid GDP growth near 10% per year until near 2100 (plus or minus a decade maybe). But when they do, by then they will have a population of 3.8 to 4.3 billion, making up about 40% of the world’s population. And since Africa is made up of many different countries, they probably will never be able to enact a one child policy like China, meaning their birth rates will decline naturally at a slower rate than China, meaning Africa as a continent in the 22nd century could have a much larger economy for much longer.
Some black guy on the internet joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 19 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,409,934
With Africa in particular, they have the highest birth rates. So there’s this problem where the longer Africa takes to develop, the more harshly racists will judge Africans, but the longer Africa takes to develop, the longer African birth rates will remain high, meaning the larger Africa’s population will be when it eventually does develop. The larger Africa’s population is when it does develop, the more likely it is that African countries could dominate the world in the future in the same way that Europeans did in the past.
Some black guy on the internet joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 37 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#1,409,995
@previous (F)
That’s dumb. India has nuclear weapons, Japan doesn’t have any. India is way more powerful militarily than Japan. Japan might have more expensive weapons because they’re allied with America, but in a war with India, they would all be useless weapons.
India has the capability to hit Japan with an ICBM launched from inside India. They don’t even need a navy or an Air Force to vaporize Tokyo. They can fit 12 nuclear warheads on one missile. Saying India would be better off militarily if they were in Japan’s position is hilarious.
Some black guy on the internet joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 21 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#1,410,023
@previous (F)
It’s more nuanced than that. India has a weaker currency than the US dollar, so that $2,800 will go a lot farther in India than it will in the United States. There’s another measure called GDP per purchasing power parody (PPP), India’s GDP per capita PPP is $9,000 to $12,000, which is poorer than the United States, but growing much faster than the United States.
Some black guy on the internet double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 16 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#1,410,024
If you compare India to China, China’s GDP per capita PPP is about $30,000. If India’s GDP grew 8.2% in 2025, you can think about that as an exponential function.
4.5*1.082^x = India’s GDP in trillions of dollars x years after 2025.
You can turn that into an algebra problem to solve for when you could expect Indians to have the same living standard as Chinese people do today.
4.5*1.082^x=20.6
You would find x = 19.302
Or you could take a more conservative estimate with 6% GDP growth
4.5*1.06^x=20.6
x = 26.1068
So from these rough estimates, I’d say India in 20 to 30 years, so somewhere between 2046 and 2056 India could look similar to how China looks today.
Some black guy on the internet triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#1,410,025
And it’s easy to judge what I’m saying and say it sounds crazy, but look at pictures of what Shanghai looked like 30 years ago and compare it to today. China used to look like India not that long ago.
Some black guy on the internet quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#1,410,026
If you look at past data of India’s GDP growth, it is shaped like an exponential function, you can see it’s not perfectly smooth so there are other factors affecting GDP growth, some years it’s higher, some years it’s lower, but nothing has been powerful enough to interrupt to overall trend. And India is a very large country, 1.4 billion people is a lot of people. If India was smaller, I would be more skeptical, but I think they are on this path.
Some black guy on the internet quintuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#1,410,027
And I know that some people buy into the whole biological deterministic argument and say things like "oh Indians have low IQs they’ll never develop blah blah blah." If Indians are stupid, why do they have nuclear weapons? Why do they have a space program? Why did they send a satellite to Mars? Why are they the CEOs of American tech giants? To me it seems obvious the IQ statistics are nothing more than propaganda, but that’s just me. Other people are free to be wrong.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 weeks ago, 14 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#1,410,176
@1,410,023 (Some black guy on the internet)
PPP only works when you are buying and selling within the country.
When you want to import anything, you have to use the actual dollar amount. If you're buying dal, use PPP, if you're buying a computer you use the unadjusted figure because that has to come from outside the country.
Some black guy on the internet joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 43 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#1,410,193
@previous (F)
Smartphones and computers are manufactured in Asia. It doesn’t actually cost $1,000 to make an iPhone, it costs closer to $400 to $500. There are Chinese brands that are more popular in India that are much less expensive than the phones that Americans buy. Except the phones that Americans buy are also manufactured in China. Almost 90% of Indians have smartphones.
Some black guy on the internet double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#1,410,194
While I agree that India is poorer than the United States, the issue with your line of thinking is that Europe and the United States have stronger currencies because Europe and the United States are wealthier. But Europe and the United States don’t produce most products. Most products are manufactured in Asia, everywhere from the cheapest screws to the most advanced chips. The reason why is actually because Asian currencies are weaker, therefore they can pay their workers lower wages and produce products for less than the west can, which is why everything is made in China, and Indians can afford smartphones living off a yearly salary of what a smartphone costs in the United States. Because we’re actually getting ripped off because we’re rich, and that’s how China improved their economy, and now it’s how India probably will too.
That still doesn't change the fact that importing electronics means you don't use PPP.
Those phones are cheaper because they are not as powerful, come with less warranty, less customer service, and there are less IP protections.
PPP adjusts higher because of domestic food, housing, and service costs are lower. Paying for Chinese electronics means paying Chinese rates, and China has higher costs so you can't use Indian PPP to adjust for the same good.
Some black guy on the internet joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 6 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#1,410,204
@previous (F)
Chinese rates aren’t that bad for Indians, they’re much better than American rates. That’s my entire point. America doesn’t produce electronics.
Some black guy on the internet double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#1,410,205
The reason why you don’t see a bunch of Chinese cars and smartphones in the United States is because the government either outright bans them or puts high tariffs on them to make them prohibitively expensive. In other parts of the world, Chinese cars and electronics are much more common.
Some black guy on the internet triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#1,410,206
China actually produces more cars than the United States and Japan combined. Yet you don’t see any Chinese cars on the roads in the United States. In Europe or Asia you would.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 weeks ago, 15 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#1,410,227
@1,410,204 (Some black guy on the internet)
I didn't say they were bad, and I didn't say they were the same as the US.
I said you can't use Indian PPP to calculate their ability to purchase Chinese imports, which is true. The purchasing power for indians importing Chinese goods is higher than Indian domestic goods, and lower than American imports.
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 hour later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#1,410,238
@previous (F)
My point is that if Indians can buy from wherever they want, then your point that their purchasing power is more limited outside of their country than inside of it isn’t really relevant, because Indians will always buy what they can most easily afford anyway. It doesn’t prohibit their economy from developing.
Anonymous N double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#1,410,242
The fact that their currency is weaker isn’t really that much of a limitation if they get to choose where they buy from, which they do. Wealth isn’t a zero-sum game. There isn’t a finite amount of wealth in the world and we all trade it. Indians can import things, and use those things to create more value inside India than the amount they spent on importing said thing. There’s no reason why India having a weaker currency would prevent India from developing. India is a net importer, but so is the United States. China is a net exporter. America, India, and China all have economies that generally tend to grow over time. Whether an economy grows or not isn’t dependent on purchasing power relative to other economies, it’s dependent on whether those trades are beneficial.
Anonymous N triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#1,410,244
Then if the economy grows, purchasing power will increase, and India’s economy is growing, and their purchasing power is increasing over time. But you also have to remember that a measure GDP per capita PPP is just an average. There are Indians who are much much more wealthy than the average Indian. So there is no question of can India import this or can India not import this, it’s a question of how much of a good can India import. There is no good that’s so expensive India can’t buy it, it’s just a question of, how much are they buying and how much does what they’re buying benefit their country.
Anonymous N quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#1,410,246
An economy can be complicated. For example, say some farmer in India who is particularly wealthy and owns more land than average imports farm equipment to help to industrialize his farm. Now he’s producing more food at a lower cost. Since demand for food stays about the same, and there’s more food, now food is less expensive, so people who can’t afford to buy farm equipment from other countries can spend more of their money on things other than food which they can use to increase their own productivity. Everyone doesn’t need to be able to import things for imports to benefit everybody.