Anonymous D replied with this 1 month ago, 58 seconds later, 14 minutes after the original post[^][v]#1,424,843
@previous (C)
Well China has a skewed ratio because of the one child policy and people would selectively abort a fetus if they knew it was female. But that doesn’t naturally happen.
Anonymous C replied with this 1 month ago, 2 hours later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,424,933
@previous (D)
UAE has a higher population of men because of immigrant labor.
Women have agency and they could leave patriarchal countries. That would hurt economies hurting them and boost economies that they perceived to be good for women.
> > UAE has a higher population of men because of immigrant labor. > > Oh wow, look at that. People immigrate to non-white non-western countries invalidating the premise of this thread.
Hey stupid most of those are Pakistani and Indian slave laborers who had their passports pulled. Sorry you’re triggered. Nobody is clamoring to live in Nigeria who wasn’t born there.
> > Nobody is clamoring to live in Nigeria who wasn’t born there. > > Aren’t you jealous that Nigeria is a 100% black racially homogenous nation and white countries are for everyone?
It’s not ethnically homogeneous. The Fulani killed 2 million Ibo during the Biafran War. Ethnic nationalism and imperialism.
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 7 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,785
When millions of dumbass, fighting-age, criminally violent Pakistanis, Algerians, Somalians, Nigerians and Etheopeans illegally emigrate to European countries and proceed to sponge off welfare and rape the women and children, it's "cultural enrichment" and "diversity is our greatest strength". But when white English people cross oceans to bring civilization and build nations, it's "evil colonialism".
> When millions of dumbass, fighting-age, criminally violent Pakistanis, Algerians, Somalians, Nigerians and Etheopeans illegally emigrate to European countries and proceed to sponge off welfare and rape the women and children, it's "cultural enrichment" and "diversity is our greatest strength". But when white English people cross oceans to bring civilization and build nations, it's "evil colonialism".
Reverse colonization is of no benefit. I don’t understand why it’s tolerated. Particularly trying to absorb Muslim males who are rapists and groomers. And to import non-West African/non-Ethiopian or Kenyan sub-Saharan Africans is to import a prefabricated underclass.
Anonymous N double-posted this 1 month ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,827
Nigerians are also one of the most successful immigrant groups in the United States and about half of Nigerians are Muslims. They perform as well or better in American universities as Chinese immigrants. 53% of Chinese immigrants to the US have college degrees while 64% of Nigerian immigrants to the US have college degrees. When it comes to graduate degrees, about 30% of Chinese immigrants and 29% of Nigerian immigrants have them.
Anonymous N triple-posted this 1 month ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,828
Part of the reason why I don’t believe in the whole social Darwinist idea that Africans are poor because they have low IQs is because IQ was invented as a way to predict success in school. Except Nigerians actually outperform far East Asians in American universities.
Anonymous N quadruple-posted this 1 month ago, 4 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,830
Then on top of that, African Americans are ethnically Nigerian. We’re the same people in terms of our genetics and our heritage. The only difference is African Americans have been influenced by white European culture, but when Nigerians come over here they’re successful. So the lack of success of African Americans isn’t genetic, it’s cultural. And the lack of success in Nigeria isn’t cultural or genetic, it’s circumstantial and environmental. When you put a Nigerian in the same conditions as an American they do better than an American.
> > And to import non-West African/non-Ethiopian or Kenyan sub-Saharan Africans is to import a prefabricated underclass. > > That doesn’t make sense, Southern Africa is one of the most developed parts of sub Saharan Africa.
I know I already responded to this, but that was just a really stupid thing to say. South Africa has a slightly higher GDP per capita than Ukraine does. They’re at about the same level economically as Eastern Europeans.
> Part of the reason why I don’t believe in the whole social Darwinist idea that Africans are poor because they have low IQs is because IQ was invented as a way to predict success in school.
IQ predicts how job evaluations and criminality too, according to the NLSY.
> Except Nigerians actually outperform far East Asians in American universities.
> > > And to import non-West African/non-Ethiopian or Kenyan sub-Saharan Africans is to import a prefabricated underclass. > > > > That doesn’t make sense, Southern Africa is one of the most developed parts of sub Saharan Africa. > > I know I already responded to this, but that was just a really stupid thing to say. South Africa has a slightly higher GDP per capita than Ukraine does. They’re at about the same level economically as Eastern Europeans.
Anonymous N double-posted this 1 month ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,840
Racists will say South Africa is worse after apartheid because they’re just selfish and mad that whites don’t control the country anymore, but the economy got a lot bigger after apartheid ended.
Anonymous N triple-posted this 1 month ago, 4 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,843
Africa is poorer than Europe, but there’s a difference between buying power and exchange rates. African currencies are much weaker than European currencies, but things are much less expensive in Africa. So Africans are poorer than Europeans, but if you just look at the numbers you’ll get the wrong idea about how Africans in Africa are actually living. There are places in Africa where people are living relatively normal lives. Africans aren’t just a bunch of uncivilized idiots that don’t know how to do anything.
Anonymous N quadruple-posted this 1 month ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,844
If you actually bother looking into the real reasons why some countries are less developed than other countries instead of white suprematist garbage theories narcissistic white people made up to feel special, there are actually reasons to be optimistic about the economic future of Africa. They have a young population. Right now that’s holding them back because they have a higher dependency ratio than Europe since a higher portion of Africans are children, but eventually Africa’s birth rates will decline and those children will grow up, and the portion of working aged adults will become much larger.
Anonymous N quintuple-posted this 1 month ago, 17 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,845
Or take Nigeria for instance. Nigeria is a very poor country, but it is almost certain that their economy will get much larger in the future, because of their population growth.
Every so often Nigeria’s GDP per capita spikes because whenever global oil prices are higher they make more money, so you have to kind of ignore those two short spikes.
You can see that the general trend is Nigeria isn’t getting poorer as their population gets larger. On average, they’ve been getting wealthier (slowly) per capita as their population grows. So population growth won’t make them worse off than they are now.
And you can see over time that Nigeria’s GDP has generally gone up.
This year, because of the war in Iran, global oil prices will be higher than they usually are, so assuming that war doesn’t end soon, Nigeria might see some economic benefit from that. But that isn’t the long term thing. The difficult thing is, oil prices can change sharply, but there’s growth in the economy that’s not caused by oil prices, so when oil prices go down, it looks like it got worse, and when oil prices go up, it looks like it got better, but in terms of the country’s infrastructure and industrialization, that’s not what’s actually happening in reality.
But I think it’s safe to predict that if right now Nigeria has 230 million people and in 2050 it will have 400 million people, and their current GDP is a little bit less than 300 billion, it wouldn’t be hard to imagine with twice the population they could get to a 600 billion USD gdp, then if you factor in that GDP per capita could rise a bit, I would expect Nigeria to eventually make it to 1 trillion USD GDP sometime in the second half of the 21st century.
Anonymous N sextuple-posted this 1 month ago, 6 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,846
Then at some point, you also have to factor in that once the collective is wealthy enough to start projecting power, that will have implications for their per capita GDP, and it’s not clear at what point that will happen, because it depends on their strength relative to their neighbors. And that region is relatively unstable politically so it’s not easy to predict what could happen, but Nigeria has a lot more people than their neighbors so it would make more sense to bet on Nigeria winning any sort of conflict.
Anonymous N septuple-posted this 1 month ago, 20 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,848
Then the other benefit of Nigeria is even though they’re very ethnically, culturally, linguistically, and religiously diverse, they aren’t racially diverse. So they won’t have the same problem as South Africa where wealthier white people hoard all the nation’s resources and stunt growth trying to hold on to economic power.
Anonymous L replied with this 1 month ago, 24 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,858
@previous (N) > wealthier white people hoard all the nation’s resources and stunt growth trying to hold on to economic power.
Fucking nonsense. The vast majority of that country's land and resources is owned and controlled by the communist ANC government. Furthermore there's something called black economic empowerment baked into labour law which makes it compulsory to employ a certain percentage of non-whites in any business.
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,860
@previous (L)
Isn’t 70% of the land in South Africa owned by whites even though they’re only 7% of the population? Yet they complain that South Africa doesn’t manage its resources correctly when they own all the resources and they’re not doing anything with those resources.
Anonymous P double-posted this 1 month ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,861
And in a country that’s 7% white, why should any business hire only whites? That doesn’t make any sense. Every business in South Africa should be mostly black people unless there’s discrimination going on because black South Africans aren’t a minority. They’re the vast majority.
Anonymous P triple-posted this 1 month ago, 6 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,862
The thing with South Africa, is its majority black, by far, and it is a democracy. If you tell the black majority the ANC is screwing them over, they’re not going to move towards a government that gives white people more advantages, if they want to benefit their country, it would probably go to the other way. Shouldn’t white South Africans be grateful that the black led government treats them so much better than white South Africans treated black South Africans?
Anonymous P quadruple-posted this 1 month ago, 4 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,864
And now there’s a simple solution to this 70:7 problem. The government can step in and give the majority of the resources to the majority of the people. The way you fix the problems you point out is by the policies that you don’t like.
Anonymous P quintuple-posted this 1 month ago, 4 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,865
And the thing is, this isn’t really racist even. When Europeans took over Africa they did it for the stated goal of white supremacy. So we have to be able to say that the state of Africa is because of white people because white people literally made it their stated goal to intentionally destroy Africa and now Africa has to rebuild. It doesn’t mean hating white people or blaming all white people alive today, it’s just literally what happened.
Anonymous P sextuple-posted this 1 month ago, 50 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,866
Although, even though I said all that about South Africa, I really think South Africa in the long term will be greatly surpassed by Nigeria because South Africa has a much lower birth rate so they won’t have the population to compete eventually. It’s sort of like how in Asia, Japan used to be stronger than China, until China’s birth rate fell and they were so much larger Japan just couldn’t keep up and China surpassed them. The same thing will happen between Nigeria and South Africa. It would be really hard to imagine a future where that doesn’t happen.
Anonymous L replied with this 1 month ago, 5 hours later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,945
@1,425,860 (P) > Isn’t 70% of the land in South Africa owned by whites even though they’re only 7% of the population?
No. Easily proved false simply by going and looking at the government's own data on land ownership.
Anonymous Q joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 7 minutes later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,948
Love that no matter the thread once it involves the words "Africa" , "India" or "china" like clockwork the discussion devolves into the usual "in x amount of years x continent will surpass the world in everything"
or something about religion or education or the population.
then some one posts the delusional nigger monkey pic and its back to square one lol
Anonymous R double-posted this 1 month ago, 5 minutes later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,952
People wonder if India or China will be the next superpower, but if they came together they would be one already. And that’s the problem with Asians. They don’t have unity unlike the hypothetical magical people who are unified we’re comparing Asians to because those people don’t exist.
Anonymous Q replied with this 1 month ago, 27 minutes later, 4 days after the original post[^][v]#1,425,956
@previous (R)
yeah they dont believe in that "we are one" kumbaya shit. BUT if they did unite. if they combine all their asian-ness into one super Asian. nobody would able to stop them.
it'd take Africa to become a weapon to surpass metal asia.