Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

A Global Shift in Foreign Aid, Starting in India

Discussion in 'World Economy' started by santosh, Mar 25, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India
    deleted
     
  2. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India
    .
    Mr Bill Gate's "Foreign Aid" for "Developing Countries"

    I made few comments on Mr Gate's comment on "2nd February 2014" in this regard as below. i think it may have a place in this thread too :tup:

    Mr Bill Gates Comment, "What does it cost to save the life of a child? The answer may surprise you: 2014 Gates Annual Letter: Myths About Foreign Aid - Gates Foundation" :coffee:
    2015 Gates Annual Letter


    My Comment on Mr Gate's Twitter on 2nd February 2014:-

    1st; at present, its all about awareness of the information available, but I do favor foreign aid (humanitarian aid) for the Least developed countries

    2nd; and i do give a credit to a Developing country like India, which certainly doesn't need foreign aid, and also help others by Aid :india:

    3rd; im running a thread to detail Indian support for LDCs. and the best i like here, India's support for scholarship/technologies for them

    4th; here post#66 is the best news of the thread as below. which we demand from developed nations too, more scholarships than aid:tup: (post#66 of this thread too.)

    A Global Shift in Foreign Aid, Starting in India | Page 5 | Indian Defence Forum


    => @rocky.idf

    first, As in the above website of Mr B.Gates on 2nd February 2014, it states, "Foreign Aids for Developing countries." so first we need to correct it, these Foreign Aids are regarded as "Humanitarian Aids" which means for proving "basic medicines" to the Least Developed countries like Congo, Siera Leone, Bangladesh, Somalia, Sudan etc. and they aren't Developing countries, but these humanitarian aids are applicable for the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) like Congo, Siera Leone, Bangladesh, Sudan, Somalia etc .....

    Foreign Aid Vs 'Humanitarian' Aids: for example of India in post#5, its over $1.5 billion foreign Aid for Burma means for building roads there. over $2.5billion India just gave to Afghanistan for building roads, Parliament etc. there. while the Humanitarian Aids of Mr Bill Gates, "means for saving life of a kid", is applicable for the LDC members like Bangladesh, Mr Genius would have more details about it as he is based there.

    here, with reference to the above news on Mr Gates's website, Its simple that LDCs can't live without Humanitarian Aid, and most of the western members of this forum aren't qualified enough to be part of knowledge based discussions, as per my experience. comparing India, China type developing countries with Least Developed Countries is one of the excellent example in regard....... its simply a crime to support idea to withdraw Aids from LDCs, as these Aid generally means for helping LDCs on very basic needs of life, which they can't afford by themselves. even if India is a developing country with the highest poor population too, it may manage to offer over $1.0billion+ foreign Aids for many Least developed Countries, as part of India's Annual Budget........

    => Least developed country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    here, its true that corruption is high in poor countries, and very high in LDCs and this is how it works. as life is tough in LDCs and Developing countries, no Welfare so people do adopt corruption some times. and the Idea of more scholarships for different courses to them does means to make them stand on their own. but corruption can't be the reason to hide the intentions behind foreign aid to LDCs, which is about helping very poor people of LDCs countries for basics of life, even if a part of it goes in corruption, which too is acceptable to an extent, i sincerely believe.......

    @rocky.idf

    we generally talk, "it would take at least 20 years for Bangladesh's 200million population, to come in the category of developing countries of standard Pakistan." how would you see this post? :coffee:

    its isn't about abusing, but this is how "Energy Consumption" of Bangladesh is considered as the bench mark of the least of world, with respect to the highest of world, the US :tup:
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2015
  3. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India
    @Averageamerican

    .
    i tried to find information about the 'net' FDI outflow-inflow for India for the financial year 2013-14 as below. can someone help with the latest data's :thumb:


    => we have some statistics about Inward FDI and Outward FDI from India as below. here we find Outward FDI from India for the first 10 months of the financial year 2013-14, is higher than the total Inward FDI for the whole 2013-14 financial year :coffee:

     
  4. Averageamerican

    Averageamerican Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    15,359
    Likes Received:
    2,379
    Country Flag:
    United States
    FDI in to India is about 10 percent of what it is into the USA.
     
    santosh likes this.
  5. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India
    hmmmm, regardless what, i do see myself happy to see India compared with US in this regard :cheers:
     
  6. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India
    A Global Shift in Foreign Aid, Starting in India
    November 15, 2012

    Britain’s decision to stop giving development aid to India by 2015 marks a turning point in the former colonial power’s relations with New Delhi, and is raising questions about the global future of foreign aid in a fast-changing economic world order.

    “Having visited India I have seen firsthand the tremendous progress being made,” the British development secretary, Justine Greening, said Nov. 9, while announcing the end of more than 50 years of aid to India. “India is successfully developing, and our own bilateral relationship has to keep up with 21st century India,” she said.

    Britain’s move may be just the first in a full-scale pullback of aid to faster-growing developing nations, some aid professionals believe.

    “There is a real concern that all the major donors are looking at excluding emerging economies from their aid programs,” Emma Seery, the head of development finance at Oxfam, said by telephone. “These countries have large pockets of poverty, and we are afraid that this trend will remove this extra lifeline from the poorest,” she said.

    For decades, the United Nations has urged developed countries to spend 0.7 percent of their national income on aid to poorer nations, a target that continues to be elusive. According to the most recent figures of the Development Assistance Committee, a consortium of the world’s main donors, the developed world gave nearly $120 billion in assistance to the developing world in 2009, or 0.32 percent.

    The United States, which doled out some $30 billion in 2010, leads the pack.

    But many traditional donors are now openly reconsidering the need for, and role of, foreign aid. The United States, for example, facing a budget crisis, has considered proposals to significantly trim the billions in foreign aid it gives. “The proposals have raised the spectre of deep cuts in food and medicine for Africa, in relief for disaster-affected places like Pakistan and Japan, in political and economic assistance for the new democracies of the Middle East, and even for the Peace Corps,” Steven Lee Myers wrote in The New York Timeslast year.

    U.S. aid to India, targeted toward clean energy, food security and health, has dropped 25 percent in recent years, from nearly $127 million in 2010 to a proposed $98.3 million in 2013. India’s emergence as a regional and global power, the 2012 annual letterfrom the U.S. Agency for International Development said, “creates an opportunity to evolve the traditional donor recipient model of development into a true partnership.”

    This threatened drought of Western aid comes as some emerging market countries, including India, have themselves become donors to more impoverished countries.

    Before a visit this week from President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, aimed at wooing investment, India approved development projects in Afghanistan to the tune of $100 million as part of India’s $2 billion aid package to the war-torn country. In 2010, the country extended a $1 billion line of credit to Bangladesh, the highest ever one-time assistance, and last year, it offered $5 billion in credit to African nations. With a broadening aid portfolio, New Delhi recently announced plans to set up its own aid agency.

    For India, once the world’s largest foreign aid recipient, with some $55 billion funneled to the country between 1951 and 1992, the change from recipient to donor comes as the country tries to redefine its role in the international community.

    For decades, as India made its haphazard transition from being a British colony to an economic powerhouse, it depended heavily on aid from prosperous nations and international institutions. In 1958, for instance, Britain offered India some ₤40 million in foreign aid, as India struggled to build a nation and implement its second five-year economic plan. British Treasury officials referred to the “long-term problems of Indian development” when announcing the package.

    Sixty years later, Britain’s decision to pull the plug on funding to India was met with little more than a shrug by India’s political class. “We don’t really need the aid,” P. Chidambaram, the finance minister, said last week. “We have accepted it in the past, but I think both countries have agreed that we can emphasize on trade rather than aid.”

    Part of the reason for such nonchalance, analysts say, is that British aid to India, which amounts to $450 million per year and is used primarily in health care and education, is small. Last year, the finance minister at the time, Pranab Mukherjee, reportedlydismissed the funds as “peanuts” compared to India’s own spending. (Mr. Mukherjee is now the president of India.)

    Indeed, in recent years, India has ramped up its spending on social welfare programs, including a large rural employment scheme and a food subsidy system, aimed at lifting its millions out of poverty.

    But perhaps more significant is the fact that India now sees – and projects – itself as a global power and a partner to developed nations like Britain, rejecting the traditional model of rich nations aiding poor ones. “Aid is past, trade is future,” Foreign Minister Salman Khurshid recently said.

    This ambition stems from the Indian economy, which, even with a recent slackening, continues to grow at a faster rate than other large economies. In 2007, the World Bank moved India to a “lower middle income” country from a “low income” one. But, activists point out, it continues to be a country of rampant poverty and vast inequities. Despite two decades of growth, over 400 million people in India live on less than $1.25 a day, and the country’s malnutrition figures are among the worst in the world. India has had some success with its welfare programs, but it spends only 0.9 percent of gross domestic product on health care, among the lowest in the world, and 3 percent on education.

    This dichotomy appears to be in tune with global trends in poverty. A 2010 study by economist Andy Sumner at the Institute of Development Studies titled “The New Bottom Billion” found that two decades ago, 93 percent of the world’s poorest lived in low-income countries. Now, nearly three-quarters of them, or one billion people, live in middle-income economies.

    Economists at the Asian Development Bank, too, speak of a “middle income trap,” where rapid growth in short periods of time is followed by economic stagnation. While India is growing fast, said Rana Hasan, ADB’s principal economist in India, “historical record tells us this is not the time to disengage.”

    In recent years, ADB, which focuses primarily on infrastructure projects in India, has moved its focus from large nationwide projects such as highways and power grids to development projects in “lagging” states, like Bihar, Chattisgarh and Assam.

    British aid in India, said Ms. Seery of Oxfam, has a “real and significant impact,” and its withdrawal could have significant negative repercussions for its poorest. It has played a major role, she said, in India’s successful drive to eliminate polio, and it continues to help children attend primary schools and to give women and children access to good health care. “The decision to unaid,” Ms. Seery said, “was too hasty from a development perspective.”

    Some Indian analysts argue that the decision has less to do with India’s development than Britain’s own political and economic compulsions. In recent years, Britain has become home to a strong anti-aid sentiment, with a section of the political class arguing that India, which has its own space program, no longer needs aid from Britain, itself in the throes of an economic slowdown.

    In a poll by The Guardian newspaper, which asked if Britain should stop granting aid to India “in response to its former colony’s ‘rapid growth and development progress’ over the past decade,” 89 percent responded in the affirmative.

    Others say Britain’s new approach stems from the absence of quid pro quo. Last year, India’s decision to select a French company over its British rival for a multi-billion dollar contract to supply fighter planes caused great furor in London, with several British politicians saying India ought to have favored the British company on account of the millions it receives in aid from Britain.

    “They believe that British aid must get a bang for its buck, which means it must spread British influence,” said Jayati Ghosh, a professor of economics at Jawaharlal National University in New Delhi. “The aid is just not doing that anymore.” :coffee:

    A Global Shift in Foreign Aid, Starting in India - NYTimes.com
     
  7. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India
    Amid slowdown, India ramps up aid for neighbours
    Mar 18, 2012

    NEW DELHI: A difficult economic situation notwithstanding, India will be stepping up its assistance programme to its neighbouring countries in the coming fiscal.

    The biggest chunk of India's assistance programme is reserved for Afghanistan, Myanmar and Bhutan that are provided for in the 12th five-year Plan. But under the non-plan head, Bhutan takes the largest chunk with a combined loan-grant amount of Rs 1,500 crore. Bhutan has traditionally been the largest recipient of Indian aid, with massive hydro-electric projects being covered in the Plan expenditure. :tup:

    Afghanistan and Myanmar are big recipients, both strategically vital for India's security and economic interests. India has invested heavily in infrastructure projects in Afghanistan, including roads, parliament buildings and capacity building for the Afghans in various fields. India also runs the biggest children's hospital in Kabul. :tup:

    However, recently, India won the Hajigak iron ore mines that will necessitate building several roads connecting the mines to border points. A new component of India's aid package to Afghanistan is in the security sector. As a result of the strategic partnership agreement with Afghanistan last year, India is committed to training and equipping Afghan national security forces. This will include training programmes, to be mainly held in India.

    New Delhi is building a multi-modal transport system in Myanmar that could also serve to improve trade with the country that India now regards as the gateway to south-east Asia. :cheers:

    Other countries that will continue to receive Indian aid this fiscal is Sri Lanka, where India has invested in rehabilitation and rebuilding programmes in the north, railway lines and oil terminals as well as building houses for the internally displaced persons from the Tamil regions. Bangladesh also takes a sizeable chunk of Rs 250 crore after the PM announced a $1-billion credit line for the country in 2010. :coffee:

    Bafflingly, the government spends a minuscule amount for "energy security" in the MEA, but it's so small that it's unclear what this would be used for. Equally strangely, Mongolia gets Rs 2 crore this year from India, but the reason for that remains unclear.

    Amid slowdown, India ramps up aid for neighbours - Times Of India
     
  8. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India
    @Averageamerican
    @Picdelamirand-oil

    .
    i have prepared a post regarding changing India as below, which may have a place here too, i think :tup:
    .
    => Literacy Rate

    here the comparison is based on 347 million population in 1947 to 1.25 billion people by 2011. here we find, Youth Literacy Rate might have reached 90%+ by 2015, as we had almost 95%+ attendance of kids in schools since 1997
    .

    => Per Capita Income of India

    Considering the method which was in application till 2006, by both World Bank and IMF

    British Left around 2% to 5% rich and rest poor in 1947, out of total 347 million population in 1947, while we now have around 350 million Middle Class of India whose Per Capita Income is well over $20,000+ on PPP now, similar to Very High HDI countries like Argentina, Poland, Saudi Arabia etc

    We have new GDP Per Capita on PPP calculation for India by 2015, as below:

    now poverty of India is because of its over population. Most of the problems of India is because of its Over Population and India has to reduce its population only. otherwise India has around 350mil Upper Middle Class, more than total population in 1947, whose per capita income on PPP is similar to the Very High HDI countries like Argentina, Poland, Saudi Arabia etc. one day I calculated as below:-

    first, we find GDP on PPP of India was $5.2tn in 2013 but its still manipulated by the US/UK since 2007. as, till 2006, we had a different way of measuring GDP on PPP which used to include estimated undocumented part of GDP also. and I remember, this way GDP of high population 'developing' countries was around 50% to 80% higher, and for the middle order countries like Brazil/Turkey it was around 10% to 25% higher. and for the developed nations, the difference was hardly around 1% to 3% by that "Old Method" which was in application till 2006, by IMF and World Bank both. like as below:
    means, GDP of India on PPP was already $5.16tn in 2007, higher than Japan that year, making it the 3rd Largest Economy on PPP by 2007 itself this way.

    again we have India's growth rate since 2007 as below:

    India GDP Annual Growth Rate | 1951-2014 | Data | Chart | Calendar

    here we find, "Average Growth Rate" of India from first quarter of 2008 till the December quarter 2015, stood at around 7.2%, on 'annual' basis. hence considering GDP on PPP of India at $5.16tn in 2007 by Old Method as above, with the estimated 6.5% growth by 2015, we may calculate its value by 2015, after 8 years since early 2008, as below:

    GDP on PPP of India by end 2015 = 5.16*1.067*1.086*1.089*1.067*1.051*1.069*1.074*1.065= $8.93 trillion on PPP

    but we would also get to know that PPP value consider value of goods and services in US$ term, means we would also include the factor of inflation of United States also. and if we consider average 1.5% inflation of US for these 8 year in between early 2008 to 2015, with considering an overall factor of just 1.1 this way, then GDP on PPP of India comes around = 8.93*1.1 = $9.82tn by 2015. and it still hasn't included 'Value Added' effects........
    (also its true that "undocumented part" of GDP might not have registered a similar growth, but most of the economics data's are based on 'estimate' only, its also very true.)

    again, we know that share of agriculture would be around 17.0% in India's GDP in 2015. therefore, we find share of agriculture in indian economy, 0.17 * 9.82= $1.7 trillions (around), on which 50% population of india is dependent. means around 600mil people based on agriculture in india have per capita income around = $3,000 on PPP by 2015 this way, which is itself similar to the better side of Lower Order Countries like Bangladesh.....
    this way, 9.82 - 1.70 = $8.12tn is left for rest of 600mil people based in industry and service in India, with per capita income of around $13,600 on PPP which is higher than Middle Order Countries like Brazil, South Africa etc..........

    The World Factbook

    again, we have news that 25% of the population of cities are either in slum or in bit better condition only. so we would consider per capita income of 300mil living in cities in low condition at hardly $3,000 which takes a share of $900 billion from its GDP. hence we are then left with around 8.12 - 0.9 = $7.22 trillions for the rest of 300 mil people living in cities, the so called Middle Class of India with per capita income around $25,000 on PPP this way.

    but it is estimated that out of total 600mil people based in agriculture sector, it also has around 50mil Lower Middle Class with Per Capita Income around $15,000 on PPP. (as we know that agriculture has higher share of 'undocumented' part of GDP. with that, Agriculture also has higher share of non-taxable business of India.) Hence, we find total middle class of India around 350mil with per capita income around $22,000+ on PPP which is similar to Very High HDI countries like Argentina, Poland etc, which is more than total population of India at the time of freedom in 1947 :tup:
    .
    =>
    .
    =>
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2015
  9. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India

    hmmm, literacy rate of India was around 12% in 1947, at the time of freedom, while our current old aged people belongs to 60s-70s when we hardly at around 20%+ literacy rate. and yes, women among them hardly had around 10%+ literacy rate during the 60-s and 70s... so your figure does state the ground reality :tup:

    hence here as below, which state literacy rate of India at the time of Independence in 1947 to upto 2011, we find Youth Literacy rate of India must have been crossed 90%+ by 2015, as we had almost 95%+ attendance of kids in schools since 1997. the Youth, whose age range fall in between 16 to 24 year :cheers:
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2015
  10. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India
    The Industrialized India

    ; India has now entered among the Newly Industrialized nations as below:

    Newly industrialized country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    India had overall 5.81% growth rate since 1951.....
    We now have Industrialists as below too, who are building the nation. as we do know that our these honored Super Riches/ Billionaires don't have money in pocket, but they are Industrialists/ billionaires in terms of the industries they have to provide employment, generating taxes for the government which government use to help the common public itself, along with improving production line hence reducing cost of products, with introducing new technologies too through their industries, hence building the nation this way.... :india:

    The report as below, mention around 115 Billionaires in India, as compare to hardly around 60 by Forbes. its because Forbes estimate only Share values, while the report as below includes, "shares in public and private companies, residential and investment properties, art collections, planes, cash and other assets, according to Wealth-X...".
    World's Billionaire Club Grows; Ultra Millionaires Lose Money - WORLD PROPERTY JOURNAL Global News Center

    and here is the main report, as below.....
    Wealth-X World Ultra Wealth Report 2011-2012 | Wealth-X


    Further to the above talks, BRIC economies as whole have their UHNWI estimate, with India's at around 8,200, is given in the article as below: :thumb:


    => BRIC Country Super-Rich Worth $4 Trillion

    The future of wealth will be built with BRICs.

    According to new data from Wealth-X, the wealth research and consulting firm, Brazil, Russia, India and China now have a combined 25,600 people with $30 million or more in net worth (which includes shares in publicly traded and closely held companies, residential and investment real estate, art, planes, cash and other investible assets).

    That is about half the number of ultra-high-net individuals in the U.S., according to Wealth-X.

    The BRIC ultrarich have a combined net worth of $4.125 trillion, compared to $6.4 trillion for the U.S.

    [​IMG]

    What is most interesting about the BRIC data is the concentration of wealth at the very top of the wealth pyramid. In Russia, the nation’s 80 billionaires account for 7% of the total population of people with a net worth of $30 million or more, but they own 84% of that group’s $640 billion in wealth.

    In Brazil, the nation’s 50 billionaires account for less than 1% of the ultrarich population but a third of the group’s $890 billion in wealth. India’s 115 billionaires represent 1.4% of the total ultrarich population and 20% of the group’s wealth of $945 billion.

    China’s billionaires account for 1% of the ultrarich and about a third of their wealth of $1.65 trillion.

    The U.S., of course, isn’t exactly a model of equity when it comes to billionaires and the ultra-rich. Its 450 billionaires account for less than one percent of the ultra-rich population but control 25% of the group’s $6.4 trillion wealth.

    But the fastest global growth in billionaires and their lesser ultra-rich aspirants will likely be from the BRICS rather than the U.S. or Europe.

    “In Russia, as in other emerging markets….billionaires and near-billionaires, followed in aggregate by the mass of ultra-high-net-worth will dominate wealth,” according to Wealth-X.

    Which country would you want to live in if you had a net worth of $30 million or more?

    BRIC Country Super-Rich Worth $4 Trillion - The Wealth Report - WSJ
     
  11. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India
    hmmm, while i do feel impressed when you compare US's and Indian businessmen, even in this language :cheers:

    around half of the billionaire list are American itself, what this means? but Indians do have some ranking here, and thats the discussion :tup:

    dont downgrade India if you find it having 120billionaires+ only as in the last post, showing strength of Indian market/buying power of its Middle class this way. but just have a look on the neighborhood India, example Pakistan+Bangladesh, not even one gentleman has a place there....:wave:
    (Bangladesh+Pakistan with over 180million+ population is well compared to Brazil, but its only the "consumer/buying power", why businesses dont grow there.)

    similarly half of the top 2000 largest firms are American, but even if you find 60+ Indian firms there, it does bring a credit considering nil from Indian neighborhood.... only 2 of Pakistani firm as below got a place :tup:

    The World’s Biggest Public Companies - Forbes

    .
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2015
  12. Averageamerican

    Averageamerican Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    15,359
    Likes Received:
    2,379
    Country Flag:
    United States
    house holds and non profits, not commercial are 80 trillion compared to 4.5 for BRICS don't brag about BRICs when you don't have anything to brag about.
     
  13. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India

    its also because of exchange rate issue, 1.0US$ = 60+ Indian Rupees/Russian Ruble

    but we generally talk, land/property prices of Mumbai-Delhi is more expansive to US/Australia, even in exchange rate term :coffee:

    look, American firms pay tax to US's government on the profit they make in India/Asia too, :rofl:

    => also, US's firms have a type of rule in world, traditionally, but they loosing their grip with rise of BRIC, its equally true.....

    US's billionaires/turn over of their firms, doesn't show buying power of their consumers 'only', but its more about their business in whole world..... if we see Indian-Brazilian firms showing buying power of their home consumers, then its certainly not true in case of US's or Chinese firms too, who now have buyers in whole world :coffee:
     
  14. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India

    Over-Population Notes

    World is changing and few points everyone knows on the world platform in today's world, no need to read articles, as below:

    1st; High Population means high consumption of resources, and hence its higher prices for the people of whole world.

    2nd; high energy consumption and hence higher green house gas emission, hence increasing Climate Change threats this way

    3rd; High Subsidy to feed poor below poverty line, especially in case of India. which is possible only until its Middle Class may afford it. and we must avid that breaking point :tup:

    4th; and, we also encourage a "Population Tax" on every second kid taking birth in a family, which may be denoted to World Bank/ Climate Change Organizations to reduce its effects. i mean, if you can't reduce population then at least pay something to reduce its effects on the world's Climate Change. and yes, this "Population Tax" on the 'non-first' child would be same for the people of whole world. :coffee:

    .
    Few Key Points I always mention on this Topic as below:

    these are my own ideas so it does require criticism by other members to make the topic interesting :thumb:

    1st; if the poor of India ask the Western nations to share the burden of subsidies then they will simply kick these shiits of India, isn't it? and if its only Indian Middle Class who is generating money and running government and also paying heavy price for the welfare/subsidies for poor, then they do have a right to ask the Indian Government, "to what extent they will have to bear this burden of tax just to feed poor, and whether they will remain capable enough in future also to bear this burden on long run if the government doesn't control the population?????" :facepalm:

    like the news as below, around 50% indian population is based in agriculture only, around 600mil, while even 200mil population may produce the same agriculture output? and the same in cities of India, around 50% people just try to earn a decent salary which they can't, simply because too many mouths and limited resources. and Indian Middle Class is just paying high price to feed these around 600mil 'excess' population, but still there is no effort to have a control on this growing population????

    2nd; here for example of Pakistan and Bangladesh, right now overly populated Pakistan is full of target killings, simply because too many mouth and no resources to feed them. its also similar to 'genocide' itself?????? and Bangladeshis just want to run from Bangladesh, mainly to India. its the worse to see people dying without dignity than controlling population by force........

    3rd; many economists of India advocate "food security"/ "free medicines"/ "right to get a job" etc in India which is not possible until the Indian government may control its population. they simply can't feed 1.25bil population from the limited natural resources they have . USA is 3 times bigger in area than India but population of India is 4 times to USA? and on the top of that, Indian government wants to give welfare/ heavy subsidies to its people? if India face a sudden fall like ASEAN in late 90s and South America like in 80s, all these they will have to withdraw after that so better they keep habit to live in less and get rid off the unnecessary subsidies/welfares . for example, we always find Pakistan increasing petrol and diesel prices as per market prices as they can't afford to give subsidies while the people of Pakistan are poorer than India, but Indian government always hesitate to do so? but the day India will reach level of Pakistan, just one good economic fall is required, and India will learn all by themselves. :wave:

    4th; here we have report from world bank that around 60% people of India are living with income less than $2.0 per day, as below

    here, how is it wise to have high population if you can't give them good life? how is it advisable to have more population this way???

    => [//data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.2DAY?order=wbapi_data_value_2011+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=asc]Poverty headcount ratio at $2 a day (PPP) (% of population) | Data | Table]

    5th; Population of India was hardly around 341 million at the time of freedom, in 1947, and we can't have more than 700 million people, and we need a national consensus on it. :india:

    and as Overpopulation of India is directly related to consumption of natural resources of the world. as, higher International price of natural resources, due to high demands from the high population countries, is applicable on whole world. high pollution and hence Climate Change due to high consumption of energy. reduced water level has also been caused in India due to the same high population and hence high demand reasons, hence India is directly answerable to the rest of the world about the measures it is adopting to reduce its population to 700 million, say by 2050
    :truestory:

    we can't let India become one of the reason for the destruction of this world, as the Earth belongs to every person of the world, regardless any nationality :nono:

    6th; and here, first there is no control on the population, as much as India can have, and on the top of that, they want to feed them for nothing too :rofl:

    => [//articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-07-09/news/40469205_1_food-security-bill-foodgrain-subsidies]At Rs 1,25,000 cr, Food Security Bill largest in world: Implementation a challenge, says Morgan Stanley - Economic Times]
     
  15. santosh

    santosh Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    2,924
    Likes Received:
    426
    Country Flag:
    India
    In latest Indian budget, aid spending dwarfs aid receipts
    February 2014

    [​IMG]
    Children running with Indian flags. India’s foreign assistance expenditures will reach $1.3 billion in 2014-15 — more than double its anticipated net overseas aid receipts

    Fast emerging as a major aid donor in its right, the Indian government has adopted an increasingly dismissive posture toward its foreign aid donors. Most notably, more than two years ago, then-Indian Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee — now the country’s president —called U.K. foreign aid to India “a peanut in our total development spending.”

    While India remains one of the largest recipients of official development assistance — 17th in the world in 2012 — a Devex analysis of India’s interim, pre-election 2014-15 budget released last week shows that the bravado coming out of New Delhi seems to be much more than the hollow rhetoric some critics have suggested.

    The budget reveals that the Indian government’s foreign aid expenditures will reach $1.3 billion in 2014-15 — more than double New Delhi’s anticipated net foreign aid receipts of $655 million that financial year.

    According to Indian government figures, the South Asian country has been giving more aid than it has been receiving since 2012-13. The gap between New Delhi’s foreign aid expenditures and receipts has widened significantly, from just 1 percent in 2012-13 to 55 percent in 2013-14. (Based on figures from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, however, India remains a net ODA recipient).

    Despite repeated delays in the launch of India’s long-promised stand-alone aid agency, New Delhi’s foreign aid spending has been rising steadily since 2009-10. Between 2013-14 and 2014-15, Indian foreign aid expenditures are slated to increase by 18 percent.

    On the other hand, India’s net foreign aid receipts have fallen sharply each year since 2010-11. Citing India’s middle-income status, the United Kingdom, Australia and the European Unionhave recently set in motion plans to phase out their bilateral aid to India. The Indian government anticipates that its net foreign aid receipts will drop by 11 percent between 2013-14 and 2014-15.

    India’s general election is due to be held in May, and the new government will present a full 2014-15 budget in either June or July. The Indian financial year begins April 1.

    Opinion polls suggest that the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party is poised to end the Congress Party’s decadelong grip on power. Despite slowing growth at home, a BJP-led government isn’t likely to reverse course on India’s donor ambitions abroad. Back in 2003, it was the then-BJP-led government that first announced New Delhi’s intentions to re-orient its positioning in the international community from aid recipient to donor.

    Top recipients and donors

    [​IMG]

    India’s interim budget also sheds light on both the largest recipients of Indian foreign aid in 2014-15 as well as the leading foreign aid donors to India in 2013-14. (See tables above).

    Despite New Delhi’s increasingly global ambitions for its aid program, the vast majority of Indian foreign aid will remain close to home in South Asia over the next year. Representing more than 60 percent of Indian aid spending, Bhutan is expected to receive $813 million in Indian foreign aid in 2014-15. India has historically been Bhutan’s largest aid donor. Bhutan has also traditionally been the largest recipient of Indian aid.

    Slated for $97 million in Indian assistance in 2014-15, Afghanistan is set to outpace Bangladesh to become the second-largest recipient of Indian aid. Currently Afghanistan’s 10th largest aid donor, New Delhi is widely believed to be gearing up for an even larger role in the Afghan reconstruction effort following the drawdown of NATO troops at the end of the year. In addition to Bhutan and Afghanistan, India’s other South Asian neighbors Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh and the Maldives — with the unsurprising exception of geostrategic rival Pakistan — are major recipients of Indian foreign aid as well.

    The Indian government has also set aside $56 million in aid for African countries in 2014-15 — an amount roughly equal to its foreign aid to Bangladesh. In the run-up to this summer’s third India-Africa Summit — a gathering of African heads of state to be hosted by the Indian government — New Delhi could, however, announce further aid pledges to the region. India is keen on expanding its aid presence in Africa, sources familiar with the Indian aid program have told Devex.

    India’s interim budget further revealed that the World Bank and Japan maintained their standingas India’s largest and second-largest aid donors, respectively, in 2013-14. Over the past year, the World Bank has disbursed $1.1 billion in assistance to India, the bulk of it from the bank’s concessional lending arm for poor countries, the International Development Association. Japan meanwhile disbursed $883 million in assistance to India.

    In recent years, the World Bank, the United States and the Asian Development Bank — among other leading aid donors to India — have been targeting their aid to India to the country’s poorest states.

    Both the United Kingdom and European Union are likely to remain among India’s major donors at least through next year. The United Kingdom has pledged to continue grant-based aid to New Delhi through 2015, while EU officials have emphasized that Brussels will phase out aid to India and other middle-income countries over several years.

    In latest Indian budget, aid spending dwarfs aid receipts | Devex

    .
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page