₦airaland Forum

jln115:
Actually it doesn't since you don't believe in per capita statistics.....only total amount statistics .....Remember??

That depends on the situation but good point.

Shma2020:
35%!!!!!
pwapwapwapwapwa pwapwapwapwapwa pwapwapwapwapwa..

Hohohoho x10!

gallivant:
Hohohoho x10!

jln115:
Who are the foreign settlers?.........secondly GDP per capita, Wealth per Capita, QOL, HDI, Infrastructure ect ect South Africa destroys India...........

Foreign settlers are non Afriacns essentially which own larger portion of wealth, they settled their cities like Cape town stayed for decades which was inherited by RSA.


As for infrastructure, it's too broad again,
Including length of network (India would lead), selected urban roads (don't know who leads for density), density of roads and railways, metros as well new projects in construction.

Also according to the WB 35% of India's population live in slums....not 24%

Could you provide me year of data (mine was from 2014) and formulation of slum (methodology or source WB used)?

Abuja.

Still Abuja.

Goel:
Foreign settlers are non Afriacns essentially which own larger portion of wealth, they settled their cities like Cape town stayed for decades which was inherited by RSA.


As for infrastructure, it's too broad again,
Including length of network (India would lead), selected urban roads (don't know who leads for density), density of roads and railways, metros as well new projects in construction.

Could you provide me year of data (mine was from 2014) and formulation of slum (methodology or source WB used)?

Are they South African? Yes......now fvck of with your racist excuses ...........South Africa has higher HDI,GDP per capita, Wealth per capita, QOL ect ect ect

An yes in nearly every Index that ranks Infrastructure SA tops India..........

It's 2018 statistics.....and if you want the methodology used by the WB then you can email them

gallivant:
That depends on the situation but good point.

naaahhhh you can't pick and choose mate you got to stick to your guns

Shma2020:
35%!!!!!
pwapwapwapwapwa pwapwapwapwapwa pwapwapwapwapwa..

Imagine!
Even you kiberans with your slumish brain knows that was false. For over a decade now these bastards are quoting requote and re re requote the same figure of either 32,34 or 35% for ages

jln115:
1. its the world bank, Not a random Tanzanian on NL 2) the fgure is from 2018....not decades ago

Government figures were 84.5% in 2020.By this year,we will be almost 100%,which we will be in the levels of Algeria and Mauritius.
Your WB don't go to rural areas in TZ .Can you tell me where your world bank have they got their figured from? Did they walk in every village in TZ?
Tell me son
Pwapwapwapwapwa pwapwapwapwapwa

Pemba island nternational airport loading in Tanzania..

gallivant:
How many malls do you have in Lagos?

U tell me

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

Don't attempt to fly your ignorance like it's a substitute for facts, it's irritating, North Africa isn't Bedouin majority, North west is still heavily Berbers while Egypt & both Sudans are a mixup of several afroasiatic speakers & Nilo-saharans. Even then Arabs are semites & they together with other Afroasiatic people descend from Africa so they're not foreign to the place, their genetic admixture is.

Indians made it to Africa as European servants they didn't integrate with Africans until the 20th century so no they didn't bring wealth or knowledge, they couldn't.

Europeans arguably brought their language but to say wealth would be ironic, they stole wealth, they did not bring it.

Until the 21st century neither Bedouins nor North Africans were wealthy, mansa Musa from mali_Sub-Saharan Africa is noted to have been the wealthiest man in Africa if not the world, the richest countries via per capita are in Sub-Saharan Africa. Their current settlements are not as impressive as you'd love us to believe. Also who compares settlements to normal African countries lol.

Consumption, It's literally the point I was bringing out. Now you're bringing south Asia into this discussion, what happened to India Vs Africa, finding it a lil steamy for you huh? The essence of argument was Africa Vs India not what you decide also stop bringing China into this discussion, strategically speaking most of those counties won't be trading with India incase of an all out assault on Africa. Africans can utilize their resources it's only that this is a hypothetical scenario, reality doesn't even support the existence of anything less than 55 Africas so you see, it's in the details, while some africas can't manage theirs, other africas say Botswana, Egypt, Gaddafi Libya are/were utilizing their resources well enough.

Post the link(s) for the gdps.

I understand that India isn't static, that wasn't the focus of this discussion, also no African even called India out what you're seeing is a reaction from your actions, you ironically called out the entire Africa here when Just40 was arguing about Indian Vs Chinese trucks & I was just correcting your earlier ignorant assertions.

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

Also rvp20182 already brought in a valid argument on which between ppp & nominal gdp is way better for an internal country analysis, & which works for a country Vs country/continent analysis. Still there is nothing wrong with regarding either of the two.

Popizaino check out this new estate development I Abuja.
I love the design and attention to details.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB7k6o-m590



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eerX_mld3xM



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uioJzj77bvA

Justnotyou:
Indians made it to Africa as European servants they didn't integrate with Africans until the 20th century so no they didn't bring wealth or knowledge, they couldn't.

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.

Justnotyou:
Europeans arguably brought their language but to say wealth would be ironic, they stole wealth, they did not bring it.

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.

Justnotyou:
Also who compares settlements to normal African countries lol.

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.

Justnotyou:
Consumption, It's literally the point I was bringing out. Now you're bringing south Asia into this discussion, what happened to India Vs Africa, finding it a lil steamy for you huh? The essence of argument was Africa Vs India not what you decide also stop bringing China into this discussion, strategically speaking most of those counties won't be trading with India incase of an all out assault on Africa. Africans can utilize their resources it's only that this is a hypothetical scenario, reality doesn't even support the existence of anything less than 55 Africas so you see, it's in the details, while some africas can't manage theirs, other africas say Botswana, Egypt, Gaddafi Libya are/were utilizing their resources well enough.

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.

Justnotyou:
Post the link(s) for the gdps.

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

Justnotyou:
I understand that India isn't static, that wasn't the focus of this discussion, also no African even called India out what you're seeing is a reaction from your actions, you ironically called out the entire Africa here when Just40 was arguing about Indian Vs Chinese trucks & I was just correcting your earlier ignorant assertions.

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.

Justnotyou:
Also rvp20182 already brought in a valid argument on which between ppp & nominal gdp is way better for an internal country analysis, & which works for a country Vs country/continent analysis. Still there is nothing wrong with regarding either of the two.

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.

Are you doing country(ies) to country comparison or racial comparison? Should we start listing blacks in Brazil, Caribean, US?

This is nonsense.

Compare India with China. That is good template - same population - nearly same size. Obviously India is piece of crap so you want to run to Africa

Africa is 52 countries with less population than India.

But you want to slice it further so you remove South Africa and entire North Africa Just so India can look good.

India is a horrible third world country like most of Africa. That is the reality 101.

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.

I hope you're electrifying households - not villages.

Kazikazi:
Tanzania has about 12,000+ villages. The government have so far electrified 10,000+ villages,the rest will be electrified for these 6 months up to June.So in June,we will be almost 100%

Forget about 35%.That is a bullshit which have been said for decades

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.

I know a little bit of India and can tell you this, Indians are really hardworking..The Indian diaspora is very rich and hard-working..just look at the US silicon valley..But we can't just ignore the situation at home..Many Indians are truly poor..the condition is worsened by the caste system..open defecation on streets ..that's all facts there..

But assume we didn't know that, then how would we know India is a sh.thole just like many African countries( sorry for my language)..By you first participating in the convo..if India was truly a developed country you would just ignore the debate here coz it would be of no-consequences to you..If my home country was Switzerland then i would not participate in the D measuring in this forum..
The fact is if you want to roll in the mud then probably ya a pig..

So despite the progress ya have India , is still a sh.ithole an a shame compared to other southeast Asian countries..You have the biggest democracy in the world but see the poverty..After 3000 years of civilization now you competing against who ?
Bythe way am not a hater..I truly appreciate human progress but curse the sh.tness when i see one

There is fine details to this.
1) Mall with greater than 100K SQM - with over 250 stores - are called super regional centers - South Africa has I think 4-12 - Kenya zero - Two Rivers will eventually get there.
2) Mall with btw than 50-100k SQM of lettable space - with around 150-250 stores - regional centers - Two Rivers size.
3) Mall with btw 25-50k SQM of lettable space - 75-150
4) Mall with btw 12-25K

Get the drill.

Vlain:
SA has over 2000 Al's. There is no way joburg with be rolling over paltry 42 malls.

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.

You should be on your knees thanking Kali for finding wealth in Africa, do you not know what bringing wealth means in English, did you bring wealth to the US, Europe Australia since you also have a high household income per capita in those regions? Also Indians in Africa pre-19th century is just priceless, where in Africa? I know in the pre-19th century an African was your kingmaker Malik Ambar

The families that had seed money, which part of Africa did they hand this money over? Even jln115 won't be to clumsy to claim Boer brought money or handed it over, they leached the resources & Africans took over.

Anwar Sadat the Egyptian president was a Nubian Nilo-saharan. North Africa & Sub-Saharan Africa exist racially separated only in racist minds, of course North African settlements will benefit North Africans just like east African settlements don't benefit west Africans, what is wrong with that? Does Hong Kong benefit India since they're both in Asia Since when have settlements been beneficial to others more than the people currently living there, what is your point really?

You're fake, everyone can see you mentioning the entire Africa that I bolded in your quote, we'll take nothing less than you admitting that you're a hypocrite & a map reading ret@rd, I suggest you give up now while you still can.

Good you should also drop China out. I'll look into that link shortly.

They were discussing Chinese Vs Indian trucks so you called the entire Africa out first.

South African cities are >>>> Indian cities this is a fact you shouldn't even dare to refute unless you can backup your assertions.

Yes we can & it'll turn out to be Europe> China> Africa or India. There are countries in Africa, Nigeria, DRC... each with a >20 trillion dollar potential that can rival Europe's entire economy, so for now while Africa is undoubtedly underperforming, India is doing quite well for itself & you'll definitely have the edge by 2030.

Lagos

Mkenya2019:
There is fine details to this.
1) Mall with greater than 100K SQM - with over 250 stores - are called super regional centers - South Africa has I think 4-12 - Kenya zero - Two Rivers will eventually get there.
2) Mall with btw than 50-100k SQM of lettable space - with around 150-250 stores - regional centers - Two Rivers size.
3) Mall with btw 25-50k SQM of lettable space - 75-150
4) Mall with btw 12-25K

Get the drill.

Your analysis is wrong

rvp20182:
Joburg - v- Nairobi - pretty close.
Population is pretty close Nairobi should be about 4.5M versu Joburg 5M.
Looking even at malls - 42 malls versus Nairobi probably around 35 now.
I am not sure about hotels - 3,4,5 star rated hotel in Nairobi - about 40-50.
JKIA is now 4th busiest airport in Africa (maybe 10-12M passengers before covid) after Joburg (20M), Cairo and Bole (Ethiopia).

Joburg as a whole has over 200 malls more than Kenya as a whole

Has bigger paved roads than Kenya

The largest urban area in africa

Bigger real estate than the entire kenya

Greater sports facilities

Stadiums

Etc

No competition there....

Shma2020:
I didn't post any shopping center brother. It's only that you're in disbelief.. :

There are nearly 15 legit shopping centers in karen alone that I haven't seen on the list. Lang'ata alone has countless of them..... Those are my region of operation.

And FYI, that list is outdated. currently, Nairobi should be having 70malls if I'm not wrong.

Lol Joburg has larger number of malls than entire Kenya as a country.

I don't think you know how big Johannesburg is, it is the largest urban area in africa, joburg has over 500 suburbs

Mkenya2019:
There is fine details to this.
1) Mall with greater than 100K SQM - with over 250 stores - are called super regional centers - South Africa has I think 4-12 - Kenya zero - Two Rivers will eventually get there.
2) Mall with btw than 50-100k SQM of lettable space - with around 150-250 stores - regional centers - Two Rivers size.
3) Mall with btw 25-50k SQM of lettable space - 75-150
4) Mall with btw 12-25K

Get the drill.

The drill is that U just admitted U gat nothing on SA when we talk of malls.

Austine1213:
Lol Joburg has larger number of malls than entire Kenya as a country.

I don't think you know how big Johannesburg is, it is the largest urban area in africa, joburg has over 500 suburbs

Spit the fact bro,spit it even if it's so bitter.

Vlain:
Spit the fact bro,spit it even if it's so bitter.

Even Capetown, Durban, Pretoria has bigger number of malls he wanna compare with Joburg lol

This a waste of time

Vlain:
Spit the fact bro,spit it even if it's so bitter.

SA 23 million square meter of retail space 8th in the World vs less than 1 Million square meters for Kenya.

Vlain:
Spit the fact bro,spit it even if it's so bitter.

Are there no men in Nigeria anymore .. for real man you always wait for Austine to post you start smooching him about south africa stuff..guy thats just low

See the guy in the second photo..His name Maina Kiai ..guy brought alot of wahala here sometimes back..

Kazikazi:
Tanzania has about 12,000+ villages. The government have so far electrified 10,000+ villages,the rest will be electrified for these 6 months up to June.So in June,we will be almost 100%

Forget about 35%.That is a bullshit which have been said for decades

Don't blame us please. This is a report from your government and it says that electricity connectivity in Tanzania is 37%