₦airaland Forum

The resulting Twitter thread was damning, exposing that “every Nigerian in that company is mandated to call their Chinese employers MASTER or MISTRESS and failure to do that attracts a direct sack,” and that “male Nigerian workers are physically assaulted, while their female counterparts are sexually assaulted. … Chinese MASTERS will boast of killing you and getting away with it.”

A new leaked report obtained by Africa Confidential shows how French ports and media billionaire gained control of Ghana's busiest port, at the expense of the public purse.

Bolloré runs 18 ports in West Africa The most recent to open is Tema, a high-tech facility some 25km from the capital Accra, which serves the hinterland of Burkina Faso and Mali. It is operated in a 70% joint-owned venture between the Government of Ghana and Meridian Port Services (MPS) (itself a joint venture between Bolloré Transport and Logistics and APM Terminals)

El Dorado in real life!

Congolese Villagers get the biggest surprise of their lives, after discovering a whole mountain full of Gold!

They are digging the soil with gold deposits in it, and taking them home. pic.twitter.com/ZaoyEQKkXr

— Africa Facts Zone (@AfricaFactsZone) March 2, 2021

Shaytun:
What are you talking about.

How can you be equating a WEF report with Industrial output, a lot of metrics go into measuring global competitiveness, things like government policies, institutions, enabling environment, ease of doing business.

Does Singapore have a higher industrial output than both the united states and china because it ranked first on the Global competitiveness Report??

Wuoche:
Ghana's manufacturing industry of $3b Vs Kenya's manufacturing industry of $6b.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NV.IND.MANF.KD?locations=GH-KE

jln115:
I don't care

- It's $1990 not year 1990

Designation of WTO Members as
Least-Developed Countries
As explained above, the distinction
between developing and least-
developed countries no longer matters
for purposes of the de minimis
threshold: both are eligible for the same
2 percent rate. Nonetheless, for clarity
and consistent with section 771(36) of
the Act, this notice separately identifies
developing and least-developed
countries. The list of WTO Members
that are least-developed countries is
derived from Annex VII to the SCM
Agreement, which describes least-
developed countries as those designated
by the United Nations (Annex VII(a))
and named in Annex VII(b)), provided
the per capita GNP has not reached
$1,000 per annum. A number of WTO
Members are included on the United
Nations list of least-developed
countries,1 and several more are
included under Annex VII(b) based
upon their GNI per capita at constant
1990 dollars: Coˆte d’Ivoire, Ghana,
Honduras, Kenya, Nicaragua, Nigeria,
Pakistan, Senegal, and Zimbabwe.2

jln115:
_ "has no effect on how that Member may be
classified with respect to any other law" As I've stated before, countries not part of the WTO were not listed

- "Kenya, Nigeria, Ghana, the other named countries... are listed under special request according to the 1990 data. So no these countries aren't affirmatively reported as being LDC according to the 2020 report." Do you know why they are listed at special request?

- "Hong Kong & South Korea are developing countries while Brazil, India... Are considered developed." Hong Kong & S Korea were not on the list as developing countries...........and Brazil, India and China have been newly classified as developed as of 2020.

-

The U.S. Trade Representative also
considered whether countries account
for a significant share of world trade
and, thus, should be treated as ineligible
for the 2 percent de minimis standard.
In the 1998 rule, the U.S. Trade
Representative considered a share of
world trade of 2 percent or more to be
‘‘significant’’ because of the
commitment in the Statement of
Administration Action (SAA), approved
by the Congress along with the URAA,
that Hong Kong, Korea, and Singapore
would be ineligible for developing
country treatment and each of these
countries accounted for a share of world
trade in excess of 2 percent. The U.S.
Trade Representative now considers 0.5
percent to be a more appropriate
indicator of a ‘‘significant’’ share of
world trade. According to the most
recent available data from 2018

IGpro1:
your craz y dude.. Nigeria has been in the manufacturing business before Kenya ever became independent.

Should we post factories and the products manufactured in them?

Kenya is a baby in manufacturing.

Y'all think you can just post what you like, it's terrible.
Like Singapore doing more manufacturing than China, you're sick.

jln115:
Google USTR LDC and developing country lists

The effect of these designations is
limited to Title VII of the Act.
Specifically, section 771(36)(E) of the
Act provides that the fact that a WTO
Member is designated in the list as
developing or least-developed has no effect on how that Member may be
classified with respect to any other law

Data Sources
In making the designations, the U.S.
Trade Representative relied on per
capita gross national income (GNI) data
from the World Bank and trade data
from the Trade Data Monitor which
contains official data from national
statistical bureaus, customs authorities,
central banks, and other government
agencies.
3. Designation of WTO Members as
Least-Developed Countries
As explained above, the distinction
between developing and least-
developed countries no longer matters
for purposes of the de minimis
threshold: both are eligible for the same
2 percent rate. Nonetheless, for clarity
and consistent with section 771(36) of
the Act, this notice separately identifies
developing and least-developed
countries. The list of WTO Members
that are least-developed countries is
derived from Annex VII to the SCM
Agreement, which describes least-
developed countries as those designated
by the United Nations (Annex VII(a))
and named in Annex VII(b)), provided
the per capita GNP has not reached
$1,000 per annum A number of WTO
Members are included on the United
Nations list of least-developed
countries,1 and several more are
included under Annex VII(b) based
upon their GNI per capita at constant
1990 dollars: Coˆte d’Ivoire, Ghana,
Honduras, Kenya, Nicaragua, Nigeria,
Pakistan, Senegal, and Zimbabwe.2

For purposes of U.S. CVD law, the
U.S. Trade Representative therefore
considers countries with a share of 0.5
percent or more of world trade to be
developed countries. Thus, Brazil,
India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand,
and Viet Nam are ineligible for the 2
percent de minimis standard,
notwithstanding that, based on the most
recent World Bank data, each country
has a per capita GNI below $12,375

The U.S. Trade Representative also
took into account G20 membership. The
G20 was established in September 1999,
and so was not considered in the 1998
rule. The G20 is a preeminent forum for
international economic cooperation,
which brings together major economies
and representatives of large
international institutions such as the
World Bank and International Monetary
Fund. Given the global economic
significance of the G20, and the
collective economic weight of its
membership (which accounts for large
shares of global economic output and
trade), G20 membership indicates that a
country is developed. Thus, Argentina,
Brazil, India, Indonesia, and South
Africa are ineligible for the 2 percent de
minimis standard, notwithstanding that,
based on the most recent World Bank
data, each country has a per capita GNI
below $12,375.

jln115:
Google USTR LDC and developing country lists

Appisko:
Can u provide source

jln115:
See above

Appisko:
It doesn't take anything away that ur country still lagging behind

Manufacturing refers to industries belonging to ISIC divisions 15-37. Value added is the net output of a sector after adding up all outputs and subtracting intermediate inputs. It is calculated without making deductions for depreciation of fabricated assets or depletion and degradation of natural resources. The origin of value added is determined by the International Standard Industrial Classification (ISIC), revision 3. Data are in current U.S. dollars

Methodology
We define competitiveness as the set of institutions, policies, and factors that determine the level of productivity of a country The level of productivity, in turn, sets the level of prosperity that can be reached by an economy. The productivity level also determines the rates of return obtained by investments in an economy, which in turn are the fundamental drivers of its growth rates. In other words, a more competitive economy is one that is likely to grow faster over time

jln115:
but you're not though

Appisko:
According to macrotrends
Most industrialized countries in Africa top 5

South Africa
Egypt
Nigeria
Morroco
Ghana

Rvp the chief lier would deny this

Vlain:
Lmao idiot. 95% of nairobi pics here is edited. Quality image is what U saw in Durban.

Ur CBD us crappy ASF and I am glad U are starting to see that. Gradually U are making progress

jln115:
per capita income

jln115:
Simply stated that black South Africans earn 3 times more than Kenyans, live in much less poverty than Kenyans and that the black Middle class is much larger than Kenya.... Oh and there are many many more Black millionaires is SA to compared to Kenya... Those are the facts bru

Tayser:
Before & After

mtisTheQubit:
Ok the word 'Tanzania' should replace laziness in the dictionary

Christian F. Hempelmann, then of Purdue University, has theorized that the episode was stress-induced In 1962, Tanganyika had just won its independence, he said, and students had reported feeling stressed because of higher expectations by teachers and parents MPI, he says, usually occurs in people without a lot of power "MPI is a last resort for people of a low status It's an easy way for them to express that something is wrong

mtisTheQubit:
calm down we just trying to debate on stuff Anyway fact is there is no country in Africa with kind of tech India owns..like i said they might have poor souls but they are way ahead of Africa in many areas..Did you know that more than half of IBM employees reside in India Or many of the big tech companies ceos in states are indian born. Do you know that apart from the whites the next group in Africa which controls massive investments are Indians. Those are facts bro..I will not wail where Africa cannot reach..

an yes India got lot of poor folks. Extremely poor...

Nemesis2you:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKmfHOPf3YU

Those who know the least want to be heard the most - idi amin

Funny guy

Nemesis2you:
It is if u want me to answer , otherwise wetin my concern

kikuyu1:
Its all TRUE! They also led in technology in the ancient WORLD.
Heard of wootz steel?


[url][/www.ancient-origins.net/artifacts-ancient-technology/wootz-steel-damascus-blades-0010148]

The West knows this as Damascus steel which is simple a copy of ancient Indian steel making.




Or Urumi swords? A multi bladed whip valuable of supersonic speed.

[url][https://youtu.be/fMz_Z0Xq-2Iurl]


[url][/www.ancient-origins.net/artifacts-other-artifacts/flexible-and-deadly-blade-dangerous-urumi-007805]

There's much MUCH more but I don't want to overwhelm people here.

This graph shows how India's share of global trade in 1 ad 1000 ad and 1700 WAS greater than China's.
[url]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)/url]

The Muslim invaders killed 90 mn Hindus beginning with the first warlord Mohamed Ghori in 1175.
The following Mughals slaughtered and starved millions dismantling tens of thousands, some say at LEAST 40,000 temples looking for treasure.


[url][socialissuesindia./1000-years-of-islamic-jihad-in-india/url]



Fyi, THEY NEVER hid their atrocities!



Now the descendants of these mass murderers are yelping about Kashmir pretending THEY'RE Palestinians!

Some idea of what happened to Hindu temples.

.

These are contemporary accounts!







You can guess the amount of wealth the Hindus lost!



Will Durant was right.



The chronicles of continuous looting are depressing like reading atrocity porn.
Believe you me: the berserker rage of the homo mass murderers ruined India. The arrival of the Brits early 1700s completed a process of pauperisation that BEGAN with Islamic invaders.
Evidence of their temple destruction is plain to see like the Hamphi ruins.

Nemesis2you:
First which country r u from sir ?

Nemesis2you:
Now that's a start to the inevitable realisation someday lol

kikuyu1:
Dude? What the ACTUAL FECK!? Did I pee in your cornflakes? Have I written any falsities?

kikuyu1:
THE WORLD HAS NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THE WEALTH OF ANCIENT INDIA!?

Nemesis2you:
India is a more than 8000 year's old civilization , older than Egyptian and mesopotamian civilizations .

I know I shouldn't be correcting anybody here since u all are self appointed PhDs in internet history

Goel:
Indians just rank next to whites in wealth ownership just in Africa. And they strictly are not the group brought as servants by Brits. They have been migrating and settling around world, in Americas, Europe, Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore for long, as early as 19th century.

They "brought" it than handing it over to Africans. They stole African resources, made themselves wealthier and some families moved to Africa who had more seed money before settling.

Their wealth, settlement and things they made is counted as a part of wealth of particular African country. But it benefits African people too little. That's why I said North Africa (Arabic) and South Africa (Indo-European) are special cases.

I didn't. People here start it with bringing Algeria, Egypt and Seychelles into discussion when they find it hard to defend countries like Nigeria, Ghana and Kenya.

Lol why are you going after essence? I gave that because you brought Bangladesh and Pakistan. Look, I'm dropping South Asia, it doesn't affect my argument because India itself is 80% of South Asia and has all indicators above South Asian average.


https://databank.worldbank.org/data/download/GDP.pdf

No, they called out first, I don't even jump in discussion otherwise.

When I push for automotives or sometimes we talk about poverty reduction and slum population, somebody again comes and post, "look Cape Town is better than Delhi" and things always go like it.

GDP is strictly for indicating internal trade. Countries which have been developed for a long time have low GDP to wealth ratios while those growing have it higher.

We have a lot of things, "percentage of population in industries vs farms", innovation and a tonne of development indicators and further indicators. You can't describe any comparison that simply.

Also, both a country and a continent are just two settlements. Their political discourse is different but they still are settlements. In that regard, if they are of same size, indeed we can compare Europe vs China vs India vs Africa.

Goel:
India occupied Pakistan's larger part twice and scored even a complete submissive surrender letter from Pakistan in 1971.
Trolling apart, by reaching, I strictly mean reaching. Indian naval ships and aircrafts have that range. Missiles cover up to Atlantic ocean and can even hit anywhere in entire Europe. Same capability doesn't lie with anyone in Africa.

You know what I'm trying to say but ignoring deliberately. Africa is the land of blacks. Foreign settlers like Arabs, Indians or Europeans who came to Africa brought their wealth and knowledge from their origin. Their settlements are no way comparable to a normal African country.

Again vague man. Production requires consumption which wasn't ever an issue with African population. Africa's problem was lack of skill development and integration. China and India were integrated as single countries to work for themselves, Africa was broken into small countries with issues with each other.

I am afraid that you are unaware of history saying that hardships of your countries were any more than those in South Asia. We didn't have anything and never got benefits of friendship as had hostile relations with big powers initially. This led to attempts to localise, although of poor quality but localised production and relations with west became normal after 80s.

That's what I'm critique of, stop losing the essence of argument. Africa's natural resources are far larger than India who had nothing to start with, yet has an overwhelming industrial advantage because of processing.

India doesn't have much petroleum but is world's largest producer of petroleum products. Same goes with other things and Chinese list is even longer.

Strategically speaking, India doesn't have to depend solely upon Africa (and doesn't even now either) for raw materials. Australia, Brazil, Russia, China etc. are there.

Issue was if Africa was China.
China has one of largest ores or Iron and enormous capacity to make steel. That's why even US can't dare to touch their shores. Same case doesn't lie with Afriacns who can't utilise what they have naturally.

MER (nominal) total for 2019 nearly per IMF and world bank:
India: 2.95 trillions
Africa: 2.6 trillions
Stable figures for 2020 will come sometime in mid of 2021.

Seems that you don't even bother to read.

India's GDP per capita was a fraction of Africa in past few months decades. Surpassed only around 2014-17 and yet is heading to become double in mid of next decade. Why? Africa's population growth is way higher and India's GDP growth is.

I'm not saying that India is a too great place to live in like Europe and US are, I'm saying that Afriacns calling out India is like pot calling the cattle black. I stand correct there as it is.

Even the current similar economic size of India and Africa is an illusion simply (PPP) and is temporary. This is like comparing Ukraine and Moldavia to Namibia etc.. All have similar per capita GDPs for now but Ukraine is a completely different kind of economy and right now below its "normal position" for some reason. It will eventually go there. India is in transition stage and just surpassing them.

Have a good read to get what I'm trying to say:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Complexity_Index

Goel:
Africa isn't a thing in common thing in Indian minds in general. Entire African continent combined is incapable of even bothering India even once economically or militarily either

kikuyu1:
YES. THEY. WOULD. They're so far ahead of us technologically its not even funny.
Subs, satellites, attack choppers, aircraft carriers, working directed energy warfare platforms etc, etc all INDIGENOUS.
If we had to throw down we couldn't even touch them -fact.

Appisko:
Lol am asking a humble question hahahaha who is this man