Originally posted by trev33Perhaps Indians on an internet chess site wouldn't be the most representative group to give such an analysis. It certainly seems India has many people who are "destitute":
Any Indians here want to debate with palynka that it's not?
Of its nearly 1 billion inhabitants, an estimated 350-400 million are below the poverty line, 75 per cent of them in the rural areas.
More than 40 per cent of the population is illiterate, with women, tribal and scheduled castes particularly affected.
http://www.anonlineindia.com/facts/poverty.htm
Originally posted by no1marauderThe continuing strength of the Naxalite-Maoist insurgency, which controls 92,000 square kilometres of Indian territory and is active is more than 200 districts constituting 40% of India's total surface area, might also be taken of evidence that there's a lot of destitution in India.
Perhaps Indians on an internet chess site wouldn't be the most representative group to give such an analysis. It certainly seems India has many people who are "destitute":
Of its nearly 1 billion inhabitants, an estimated 350-400 million are below the poverty line, 75 per cent of them in the rural areas.
More than 40 per cent of the p ...[text shortened]... and scheduled castes particularly affected.
http://www.anonlineindia.com/facts/poverty.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite-Maoist_insurgency
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_corridor
Originally posted by TeinosukeThe world need more Maoist insurgencies. Islamic Fundamentalists are sooooooooooooooooooo played out and medieval.
The continuing strength of the Naxalite-Maoist insurgency, which controls 92,000 square kilometres of Indian territory and is active is more than 200 districts constituting 40% of India's total surface area, might also be taken of evidence that there's a lot of destitution in India.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naxalite-Maoist_insurgency
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_corridor
1 edit
India is desperately overpopulated. That's the main problem. A general social consciousness that having more than 2 children is excessively detrimental to the environment as well as the common weal needs to be fostered. The advancement of women's rights and the elimination of the caste system would also help.
Originally posted by SoothfastThat kind of social consciousness might be pretty hard to foster, especially when the areas with the highest birthrate are the tribal and remote ones least directly under the sway of the Indian government. A fall in the fertility rate tends to come as a consequence of growing prosperity - once parents can reasonably expect their children to live to adulthood, they don't feel the need to have so many.
India is desperately overpopulated. That's the main problem. A general social consciousness that having more than 2 children is excessively detrimental to the environment as well as the common weal needs to be fostered. The advancement of women's rights and the elimination of the caste system would also help.
In any case, India's total fertility rate in 2010 was 2.68, close to the world average and fairly low for a developing country. India's population density is high at 368 people per square kilometre, but the figure for prosperous Japan is not very much lower, and South Korea and the Netherlands, also prosperous, have higher density. India also benefits from more agricultural land than any other country apart from the United States.
Basically, I think that overpopulation is a secondary problem compared to inequality.
Originally posted by TeinosukeWell said.
That kind of social consciousness might be pretty hard to foster, especially when the areas with the highest birthrate are the tribal and remote ones least directly under the sway of the Indian government. A fall in the fertility rate tends to come as a consequence of growing prosperity - once parents can reasonably expect their children to live to adultho ...[text shortened]... tes.
Basically, I think that overpopulation is a secondary problem compared to inequality.
2 edits
Originally posted by TeinosukeSince India's population has tripled since 1950, I'd say they don't have to worry too much about infant mortality or living to adulthood.
A fall in the fertility rate tends to come as a consequence of growing prosperity - once parents can reasonably expect their children to live to adulthood, they don't feel the need to have so many.
.
A population of one billion should be adequate, especially since over 800 million of them are living on less than 2 dollars per day.
Who here is claiming India isn't destitute?
Sweden in 1950 had a population of 7 million, in 2010 just under 9 million.
They had things figured out until they started doing this:
Somalia's population in 1950 = 2 million, in 2010 10 million.
Good luck Sweden.
Originally posted by Zapp BranniganWelcome back!
Since India's population has tripled since 1950, I'd say they don't have to worry too much about infant mortality or living to adulthood.
A population of one billion should be adequate, especially since over 800 million of them are living on less than 2 dollars per day.
Who here is claiming India isn't destitute?
Sweden in 1950 had a populat ...[text shortened]... zIv1U
Somalia's population in 1950 = 2 million, in 2010 10 million.
Good luck Sweden.