Will India be able to take China's place in the world economy ?

[DrBeer]

India is the new leader of the global south .... And a replacement for China ?

China has recently started to openly surrender its position. both politically and economically.
Politics is not the place to discuss, but the economy leaves much to be desired. Although it is partly a consequence of politics.

But to the main point - in the "Global South" today there is a situation when yesterday's leader, China, can no longer fulfill this role (although it wants to), and no one can take this place except India, due to many reasons.

At the same time, India looks much more attractive to the "Global West" than China, which has decided to go into a dictatorship inside, and has a rather dubious foreign policy. China has ceased to be a profitable global factory, plus purely political contradictions with the West. It was the outflow of Western investments, and the decline in demand of the Western market for products manufactured in China, that became the catalyst that accelerated the 3 processes:
- Import growth
- Reduced exports.
- And as a consequence, a shrinking trade surplus.

At the same time, a very complicated situation is brewing inside China with a chain of bankruptcies of budget-forming companies. Of course, China will hide it, but as they say "you can't cheat arithmetic, and 2+3 will never be 10". Another problem is the relocation of Western assembly sites from China. Large regional high-tech companies are also leaving Chinese sites - for example, Samsung.

And guess where all this is moving to ? That's right - to INDIA ! Stable, predictable, adopting the Western vector of development, and moving away from contacts with "dubious countries". India does not "beat in hysterics of dedolarization", does not conduct dubious negotiations, and does not support economic terrorism of some other countries against the world economy. India benefits from stability, long-term mutually beneficial relations with the developed world, a well-deserved place in the world economy and financial system, and realization of its regional ambitions, which China is beginning to lose by failing to implement 2 projects:
- "Yuanization" of the BRICS countries
- An attempt to "put the same BRICS club members on the needle" of importing Chinese products.
It was a poorly concealed but absolutely understandable attempt to save the economy, but ...

What about India? A country with a huge territory and great human potential, developed industry, and long-established ties with the Western world. India has a very good education, and not a small middle class, with good education from western educational institutions. In India, stealing Western technology is not part of the economy as it is in China, for example. In terms of logistics to EU and African countries, India is more conveniently located. Plus in India there is no problem of population aging, which started to give itself in China "thanks to" the policy - "one family - one child". It is also worth paying attention to the IT market - it is perfectly developed in India and continues to compete with other markets. Plus - wiser, more balanced and liberal business policy is what China is losing and will not contribute to the free development of the economy.


So the question is - what do you think about India's potential, opportunities and prospects, in light of the idea of India becoming at least the economical "Head of the Global South", and possibly "one of the poles of the world system" ?

[Peter90]

India's gold demand to rise in 2024

Higher purchases in the world's second-biggest gold consumer could support prices , which are trading near record highs.

India's gold demand has been stuck between 700 and 800 metric tons in the past five years, but it is expected to break out of this range and rise to between 800 and 900 tons in 2024, Somasundaram P.R., CEO of WGC's Indian operations told Reuters.

"Given the fact that high prices have now been absorbed and economic growth is robust, demand is resetting its base to 800 to 900 tons," he said.


Will India be able to take China's place in the world economy?
I don't know. What I know...
China = 1st gold consumer
India = 2nd gold consumer
After the upcoming world currency reset they will become... 2 world superpowers! 

[electronicash]

if India is the new leader of the south, the US government would have want to war with them already. obviously they are not interested to nuke India.

that's how the world works as far as i know. the aging leader whose fire power is draining everyday and not respected by the Houti group in West Asia would surely want to show their strength to overpower a coming leader. much the same as the Alpha wolf being challenged by new Alpha.

China's economy could be crumbling too but which one will crumble the most especially they fall?  the world know very well that Russia isn't as rich as China and India isn't as rich as China too. but they don't have a huge debt to China.

[DrBeer]

if India is the new leader of the south, the US government would have want to war with them already. obviously they are not interested to nuke India.

that's how the world works as far as i know. the aging leader whose fire power is draining everyday and not respected by the Houti group in West Asia would surely want to show their strength to overpower a coming leader. much the same as the Alpha wolf being challenged by new Alpha.

China's economy could be crumbling too but which one will crumble the most especially they fall?  the world know very well that Russia isn't as rich as China and India isn't as rich as China too. but they don't have a huge debt to China.

Very erroneous opinion !
First of all, India is a country that has chosen the path of development, the Western vector of interactions, economic ties, and even in the direction of military-industrial direction - also the Western vector.
For the Western world, India is a leader in the region, which is predictable, not inclined to aggression and support of dubious regimes and groups.  The West is interested, after China chose the path of aggravation of relations with the West, in transferring investments and production to India, which is already being observed. India is a more open and much more decent partner in international relations.
India is the largest country in the world by population, and to build a stable community - they are very interested in deep integration into the western economy, on a mutually beneficial relationship.
So you are not very justified in accusing the US of such intentions.

[DrBeer]

India's gold demand to rise in 2024

Higher purchases in the world's second-biggest gold consumer could support prices , which are trading near record highs.

India's gold demand has been stuck between 700 and 800 metric tons in the past five years, but it is expected to break out of this range and rise to between 800 and 900 tons in 2024, Somasundaram P.R., CEO of WGC's Indian operations told Reuters.

"Given the fact that high prices have now been absorbed and economic growth is robust, demand is resetting its base to 800 to 900 tons," he said.


Will India be able to take China's place in the world economy?
I don't know. What I know...
China = 1st gold consumer
India = 2nd gold consumer
After the upcoming world currency reset they will become... 2 world superpowers! 

Leadership is a very unstable title, especially when today's leader has begun to suffer from inflated self-esteem, and has begun to unconsciously or consciously destroy his former greatness and power. The flight of Western capital and technology from China is making China's feet sandy, without which China will not be able to further develop its export-oriented economy. it looks like China is becoming a "paper tiger", and the place of a leader, especially of such an interesting region, will never be empty. And objectively, there are no other candidates for this role except India in the region. At least, I do not see others in the space from the Asian-African region to the ocean.

[Peter90]

What about India? A country with a huge territory and great human potential, developed industry, and long-established ties with the Western world. India has a very good education, and not a small middle class, with good education from western educational institutions. In India, stealing Western technology is not part of the economy as it is in China, for example. In terms of logistics to EU and African countries, India is more conveniently located. Plus in India there is no problem of population aging, which started to give itself in China "thanks to" the policy - "one family - one child". It is also worth paying attention to the IT market - it is perfectly developed in India and continues to compete with other markets. Plus - wiser, more balanced and liberal business policy is what China is losing and will not contribute to the free development of the economy.

... plus political stability ...




zerohedge.com

[DrBeer]

What about India? A country with a huge territory and great human potential, developed industry, and long-established ties with the Western world. India has a very good education, and not a small middle class, with good education from western educational institutions. In India, stealing Western technology is not part of the economy as it is in China, for example. In terms of logistics to EU and African countries, India is more conveniently located. Plus in India there is no problem of population aging, which started to give itself in China "thanks to" the policy - "one family - one child". It is also worth paying attention to the IT market - it is perfectly developed in India and continues to compete with other markets. Plus - wiser, more balanced and liberal business policy is what China is losing and will not contribute to the free development of the economy.

... plus political stability ...




zerohedge.com

This is also a good indicator for India. I have several acquaintances in China, I talk to them from time to time, and according to them, "Xi Jinping is not the one we need". The approval rating there is far from Modi's. At the same time, we realize that we will not see the rating for China, or it will be the "official" version with a rating close to 110% .
Stability and predictability is something that has always been valued in the West, used to the fact that a partner (politics, economy, any other alliance) will be predictable, stick to its commitments. And this is something that China has clearly completely lost. As you know - it takes a couple of seconds to ruin your image, but it can take years and decades to restore it. That is why the west will be looking for and supporting a new leader in the region as China has lost its credibility and political face

[joniboini]

I have several acquaintances in China, I talk to them from time to time, and according to them, "Xi Jinping is not the one we need". The approval rating there is far from Modi's. At the same time, we realize that we will not see the rating for China, or it will be the "official" version with a rating close to 110% .

Is this sentiment prevalent on a national scale, or just a minority coming from an opposition party/opposing group? I'm not sure it is possible to change the political system in China anyway, so this stability is probably not a thing that they even consider. Especially if they can shut down any opposition easily without any repercussions. It would be a miracle if a revolution happened though. On the other hand, SEA is also growing rapidly, although most of them are consumers or low-paid workers. Some of them have relations with China still, considering how many infrastructure projects use their capital to build. CMIIW.

[electronicash]

if India is the new leader of the south, the US government would have want to war with them already. obviously they are not interested to nuke India.

that's how the world works as far as i know. the aging leader whose fire power is draining everyday and not respected by the Houti group in West Asia would surely want to show their strength to overpower a coming leader. much the same as the Alpha wolf being challenged by new Alpha.

China's economy could be crumbling too but which one will crumble the most especially they fall?  the world know very well that Russia isn't as rich as China and India isn't as rich as China too. but they don't have a huge debt to China.

Very erroneous opinion !
First of all, India is a country that has chosen the path of development, the Western vector of interactions, economic ties, and even in the direction of military-industrial direction - also the Western vector.
For the Western world, India is a leader in the region, which is predictable, not inclined to aggression and support of dubious regimes and groups.  The West is interested, after China chose the path of aggravation of relations with the West, in transferring investments and production to India, which is already being observed. India is a more open and much more decent partner in international relations.
India is the largest country in the world by population, and to build a stable community - they are very interested in deep integration into the western economy, on a mutually beneficial relationship.
So you are not very justified in accusing the US of such intentions.

well it is known to all parts of the world how the US government subdue most of the countries that tries to rise up. from Argentina, Germany, Russia, China to Japan. the little ones, the tiny countries are just peony to them a regime change are the answers to subdue them but the rest can turn to trade wars to financial sanctions.

so for India to rise without Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) i doubt that. because China had already covered almost the entire Middle East or the one they now started calling East Asia.

so lets say India is the leader of the south, which bloc did they create again? because so ffar its only BRICS and SCO that exist that has the most dominant rivaling NATO or the G7.

[0t3p0t]

what do you think about India's potential, opportunities and prospects, in light of the idea of India becoming at least the economical "Head of the Global South", and possibly "one of the poles of the world system" ?

Based on my observation regarding India's progress and it's economic growth, there is really huge possibility of dethroning China in terms of being the new King of the south. Foreign investments in China is fleeing and possibly be investing and making business with India. The new trend of selling military hardware India has an edge on this as they have huge market compared to China which is only their few allies buying arms from them as they lost their trust from it's closest neighbors which is switching to Indian products.

[DrBeer]

well it is known to all parts of the world how the US government subdue most of the countries that tries to rise up. from Argentina, Germany, Russia, China to Japan. the little ones, the tiny countries are just peony to them a regime change are the answers to subdue them but the rest can turn to trade wars to financial sanctions.

so for India to rise without Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) i doubt that. because China had already covered almost the entire Middle East or the one they now started calling East Asia.

so lets say India is the leader of the south, which bloc did they create again? because so ffar its only BRICS and SCO that exist that has the most dominant rivaling NATO or the G7.

I will say at once - you make a dubious statement that "the whole world knows..." and then, based on this erroneous opinion, build your answer. I disagree, because the first statement is not true. Or let's put it this way - arguments and evidence in favor of your opinion ? But preferably not only manifestations but also voice the reasons, so it will be clear and transparent where you or I was wrong ? Ok? Let's try again?

Regarding "China has covered all of Asia" is also very controversial.  I for example can argue and will provide proof that China is very insidious, giving its investment and then taking 100 times more, ruining the one to whom it gave the loan. We can discuss such examples. And I think that many countries have already guessed the predatory concept of Chinese investment. And China uses bribery, corruption and many other things that Western countries have never dreamed of.

Regarding BRICS. If earlier it was an alliance for realistic solutions to economic issues of allied countries, now it has become purely political, and some of the participants are trying to manipulate others, solely for their own political benefit, which many have already begun to guess and began to openly talk about it. For example, India. It does not want countries with dubious reputations to circumvent the sanctions they deservedly received. I am sure that others are beginning to realize what they are being used for by the BRICS allies who are not clean in their hands. So the prospects for BRICS are very dim as a real powerful counterweight to the G7.

[electronicash]

well it is known to all parts of the world how the US government subdue most of the countries that tries to rise up. from Argentina, Germany, Russia, China to Japan. the little ones, the tiny countries are just peony to them a regime change are the answers to subdue them but the rest can turn to trade wars to financial sanctions.

so for India to rise without Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) i doubt that. because China had already covered almost the entire Middle East or the one they now started calling East Asia.

so lets say India is the leader of the south, which bloc did they create again? because so ffar its only BRICS and SCO that exist that has the most dominant rivaling NATO or the G7.

I will say at once - you make a dubious statement that "the whole world knows..." and then, based on this erroneous opinion, build your answer. I disagree, because the first statement is not true. Or let's put it this way - arguments and evidence in favor of your opinion ? But preferably not only manifestations but also voice the reasons, so it will be clear and transparent where you or I was wrong ? Ok? Let's try again?

Regarding "China has covered all of Asia" is also very controversial.  I for example can argue and will provide proof that China is very insidious, giving its investment and then taking 100 times more, ruining the one to whom it gave the loan. We can discuss such examples. And I think that many countries have already guessed the predatory concept of Chinese investment. And China uses bribery, corruption and many other things that Western countries have never dreamed of.

Regarding BRICS. If earlier it was an alliance for realistic solutions to economic issues of allied countries, now it has become purely political, and some of the participants are trying to manipulate others, solely for their own political benefit, which many have already begun to guess and began to openly talk about it. For example, India. It does not want countries with dubious reputations to circumvent the sanctions they deservedly received. I am sure that others are beginning to realize what they are being used for by the BRICS allies who are not clean in their hands. So the prospects for BRICS are very dim as a real powerful counterweight to the G7.

how can China ruin the country that loans to them when their interests is lower than IMF interest?
"the whole world knows." not everyone knows i guess because only the ones who think logically knows, the rest who don't think are swallowed by what the media says.
NATO is also political. everything is political even the sports today, have you noticed its only UFC that can speak against the woke?

the democracy that they know is the individual's democracy but what China offers is the country's democracy. every country has to have democracy that they can develop their own. African countries has a choice. BREXIT for example. Britain had exit but what is the catch to them? they don't have the choice to say NO when US government wants them to build up their army, they have to otherwise they'd be sanctioned. now EU have to fight Russia because they said so.

middle east is getting rich they are now developing and turning the desert to green and even extending the sea on their desert so what US military doing there which every corner in that region has military camp.

[DrBeer]

....

how can China ruin the country that loans to them when their interests is lower than IMF interest?
"the whole world knows." not everyone knows i guess because only the ones who think logically knows, the rest who don't think are swallowed by what the media says.
NATO is also political. everything is political even the sports today, have you noticed its only UFC that can speak against the woke?

the democracy that they know is the individual's democracy but what China offers is the country's democracy. every country has to have democracy that they can develop their own. African countries has a choice. BREXIT for example. Britain had exit but what is the catch to them? they don't have the choice to say NO when US government wants them to build up their army, they have to otherwise they'd be sanctioned. now EU have to fight Russia because they said so.

middle east is getting rich they are now developing and turning the desert to green and even extending the sea on their desert so what US military doing there which every corner in that region has military camp.

Yep, I see what you mean
NATO and EU should already fight against Russia 

Let me try to help you get back to reality.
1. the EU and the US and Britain and the entire civilized world fighting Russia is a response to terrorism and the violation of all the commitments made. I guess you won't deny that this "struggle" didn't happen until 2014 for some reason ? And what happened then? So the conclusion is that you are confusing cause with effect, or deliberately forgetting about the causes.  But let's finish about politics, it's a separate topic, and let's get back to China!

And here I will try to show you the real picture.
Yes, China does give cheap loans. You're right. The only thing you are mistaken about is your estimation of what it leads to.
First of all, loans, whether from China or the IMF, do not destroy a country.
Secondly - China does not aim to destroy an investment. It aims to IMPROVE the investment. Do you understand what this means? No ? Still think China is nice and friendly?  Then a simple example from life, which you can check, and then look for other data about other "friendly investments" of China. So. Sri Lanka, port hub project. I won't give the actual figures, I don't remember, but the gist remains.
1. China is promoting a maritime hub project at the Sri Lankan government level, which can bring huge profits to the country. Okay, it looks nice. The government takes the bait.....
2. China says - listen, we have a huge experience, we will make you a business plan, and we are ready to invest, for example 10 billion dollars. Of course for small projects, not like the IMF. The government takes the bait....
3. Chinese specialists make a business plan, it looks very attractive, and yes its value is 10 billion dollars. The government signs the contract and the work is done.
But there are small nuances
- China says - we are not the IMF, we are your friends, let our specialists do the project documentation! We are friends, what do you care who you pay money to? Ok? Ok !
- And let our companies supply equipment and materials ! We are friends, not IMF! Okay? Ok !
and many other things Chinese companies do. Does he realize what's going on? China has given 10 billion loan, receives interest for it, plus most of the loan is already returned to .... China. And Sri Lanka still has to pay the 10 billion + interest.
But that's not all.
The construction is finished, everything is fine. The government launches the hub.... and nothing happens! No queue of ships, no contracts, no nothing ! You haven't guessed who's responsible for this yet? 
Some time passes and China says - dear friends, we are not the IMF, but why are you not making profits and why is the project not working, which according to our calculations should already be paying off !?? Perhaps you are doing something wrong and violating our friendly obligations.  And the friendly pressure begins...  China is demanding loan payments, Sri Lanka doesn't have the money, but we do. And when the Sri Lankan government throws up its hands and says - we have no money to pay ! And FRIENDLY china says ok, no problem. Let's do this - we buy this project for 10% of its value, this amount will be written off as a loan that you owe us ! And so it happens with the majority of Chinese friendly investments - study the subject area, you will understand what really happens ! Isn't that IMF ? Is it true that China does not destroy but only helps ?

[electronicash]

lol

clearly there is a huge disconnection of the media versus the real world here.  everyday the politicians are saying China is the greatest threat and should be decoupling from China yet the most consumers of Alibaba are from US. just recently Consumer Electronic Show (CES) in Vegas was participated by 1/3 of the 400 tech companies have connections back to mainland China.

politicians keep demonizing China making the world thinks its the bogey man when they have not bombed countries. but they are rising sure and they will be the leader too. if India can build factories in Mexico like the Chinese did, I shall believe it but i don't see it happening.

[Peter90]

if India is the new leader of the south, the US government...

India is the new leader of the south