The Future of China?, Where India left in dust? Options

[AnybodyKiller]

i went to the uni in US here, have to say chinese are not that smart, superior or something but they're quite hard workers (not all of them). And of course in the score board, every asian i saw seemed to be equal in academic achievements and higher than other races

I agree.

OP likes to cherry pick studies that make China look good. Which I don't have problems with. I have a problem when he says it makes Chinese better than other Asians like Filipinos, Vietnamese etc.

For him to say Chinese are more intelligent than Vietnamese etc. is like a white guy saying Germans are more intelligent than Swedish or Italian people. They are very close genetically (notice I didn't say identical) and have had extensive contact throughout history it doesn't make much sense.

This post has been edited by AnybodyKiller: Dec 26 2011, 11:24 AM

[richasiankid]

Short reply to comments posted:

NiceLemon writes:

Interesting read. Which countries or regions are classified as North East Asia?

For purposes of this thread, it's Japan, Korea, and China which btw by my books also includes Taiwan and HK.

Anybody killer writes:

How can you "accurately" account for culture and environment? Unless you raise hundreds of people in labs over multiple generations you can't.

When was the last time anyone under 35 has taken an IQ test? More accurate tests are being developed but until then the need to increase the difficulty of the test every generation to account for almost a full standard deviation of change (The Flynn Effect) alone is enough prove this a poor measurement of "general" intelligence.

On the subject just like athletics there are different types of intelligence. Just because someone will make an excellent pitcher in baseball, does not mean he will be an excellent NFL lineman. Same thing for intelligence. Most newer tests are starting to develop measurements for different types of intelligence.

India may be held back by multiculturalism (though they are the same race), but not because they are inferior.

Just because some variables can't be accurately accounted for never quite stopped people from blanket claiming or even crusading in the name of equality no? Why not deconstruct equality and rights instead?

Har writes:

It is an inferiority complex created by whites--Asians are told they are lacking physically in comparison to Europeans by popular global media and they work hard to compensate. If you observe closely most white people are simply trying to enjoy their lives--they don't really 'believe' they are threatened by Asians, they just think its a situation of white people who are wealthy taking advantage of them by initiating global trade practices/immigration etc.

Asians think they are in a competition with them--from outside the whites seemed more bemused at the whole affair.


The reason Indians don't work hard' and get organized copying the western way like many Asian countries have is very simple--their culture has not really been disproven--modern science is completely compatible with it--all 'new age philosophies' are just reworded Indian philosophies on various topics. The current age of the universe corresponds almost exactly to the date given by Indian sages. Even the language, mathematics, of modern science is written using Indian symbols. While the English tried very hard trying to convince Indians that they are inferior, everything in the modern world justifies their way of life not the reverse. After all, whites have had to become increasingly atheistic to incorporate science--the Chinese have given up on the Tao--what sacrifices have the Indians had to make?

Indians are culturally isolationists, they don't actually want to be part of a global culture--Indian economic organization and economic prosperity measured in the western way will improve only when their culture is either reinterpreted to explain why these things are important spiritually or if they are threatened militarily by an actual invasion.

I have never seen an Indian work very hard for material/competition principle like the Chinese/Koreans/Japanese--but they will set themselves on fire to prove ethics don't arise out of fear, bow and build grand palaces for rats while they live and sleep on dirt floors to crush their ego, cover themselves in the ashes of loved ones to show non attachment, kill their own children if they marry whites, etc etc etc

Indians work hard to live more relaxed lives, not because they wish to actually compete with whites or Asians or Blacks or etc. Do you see them really trying in sports or Olympics, they are just going through the motions of what they think is proper for the event, they don't 'feel' the competition as an expression of themselves. Have you come across an arrogant Indian and wondered wtf, what do you possibly have to be proud of, your country is in ruins, your people are hungry, your not 'white' -! The reason is that they genuinely believe they are spiritually superior, their culture tells them so, and up to date nothing has proven that it is wrong.


I think at the end of the day Asians are much more like Europeans--their civilizations are similar, their religions are similar, their world views are similar--if the economic situation reversed in the world I think Whites would work just as hard as Asians do. Indians have a different value system, Whites and Asians and blacks, they value other peoples material contributions--I don't think Indians see other people's contributions as valuable unless they are practicing some form of dharma.

Well, what about gentile whites and Jews in this loving Christmas season? Substitute Jews for white and white for Asian in your post above and you get real gist of dynamics. ?

[AnybodyKiller]

Why not deconstruct both?

Why do overseas Indians outcompete other Asians as well as host citizens in terms of education & economic success if they are such poor "human capital"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_American#Education

Indian Income- $88,583
Average- $44,684

64% of Indian Americans have attained a Bachelor's degree or more. Compared to 28% nationally, and 44% average for all Asian American groups

I would trade 20 points of this imaginary "IQ" for $40,000 yearly salary and a Bachelors degree in a heartbeat.

It's painfully obvious that richasiankid's goals for placing Chinese and East Asians on a pedestal is masturbation at best. He tries to correlate outdated IQ scores, measurements of "g" and mathematics test scores with predictions from organizations like the IMF that China will be the next super power.

I don't have a problem with this, what I do have a problem him claiming this as immutable evidence of Chinese superiority over everyone including Southeast Asians who cluster as close as .005 (another race is about .1-.2)

Again this is basically the equivalent of a Northern European claiming superiority over a Southern European. I'm starting to suspect an ulterior motive.

This post has been edited by AnybodyKiller: Dec 27 2011, 08:23 PM

[richasiankid]

Why not deconstruct both?

Why do overseas Indians outcompete other Asians as well as host citizens in terms of education & economic success if they are such poor "human capital"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_American#Education

Indian Income- $88,583
Average- $44,684

64% of Indian Americans have attained a Bachelor's degree or more. Compared to 28% nationally, and 44% average for all Asian American groups

I would trade 20 points of this imaginary "IQ" for $40,000 yearly salary and a Bachelors degree in a heartbeat.

It's painfully obvious that richasiankid's goals for placing Chinese and East Asians on a pedestal is masturbation at best. He tries to correlate outdated IQ scores, measurements of "g" and mathematics test scores with predictions from organizations like the IMF that China will be the next super power.

I don't have a problem with this, what I do have a problem him claiming this as immutable evidence of Chinese superiority over everyone including Southeast Asians who cluster as close as .005 (another race is about .1-.2)

Again this is basically the equivalent of a Northern European claiming superiority over a Southern European. I'm starting to suspect an ulterior motive.

If the Indian diaspora is what's going to transform one billion+ people into the next superpower known as India, God help her.

Believe it or not I raised that very same question with an Indian poster once and he sent me back a message saying that the Indian diaspora are not uniformly successful (which I didn't know at the time). Take a look at South East Asia, for example, and more specifically Malaysia, where Chinese > Malays > Indians -- all in spite of those Chinese are actually often being looked down upon by their NE Asian brethren (much like Afrikaners by the Dutch). Same with some other pacific Islands like Fiji or South Africa if I recall that he cited. I subsequently came across this article which you may be interested in.

Think of it this way: Vancouverites are frequently under the impression that all Chinese are super filthy rich. Not only are they not into mortgages (let alone subprime), they have a rep of buying houses in cash. Yet if you go to China or HK you actually see many poor people there housed in cages. Why are all these HK people so "rich"? Unlike US immigration policy, the Canadian one acted as a sieve - and those who went to Canada are not necessarily all representative.

In a more extreme sense, the H-1B Visa can work miracles. As another Indian poster quipped, that H1B is more coveted than any university degree. Yet based on the PISA scores that's posted, how many are even capable of being high school grads...? In other words, just how skewed is the American sample? Don't take my word for it - ask them - and they'll invariably tell you - sooner or later - somehow they're all Brahmins in one way or another and they're not representative of the rest of their 1 billion+ poor.

But to return to this thread, I'll add one more point for clarification. In the graphs that I posted before it's actually easy to underestimate the differences between Shanghai and the two Indian cities. (This is a point which even the economist didn't get a while ago prior to release of Indian data, see here, where it plotted all scores linearly from zero!! Talk about irony......i.e. economist which doesn't get numbers.....)

No, the whole idea of PISA scores is that it's normed with a mean of roughly 500 for OECD countries, and a standard deviation of 100. That means that compared to the OECD average, China Shanghai is a whole whopping 1 standard deviation above the OECD mean in math (i.e. roughly the magnitude of the controversial black-white IQ difference in the United States); 3/4 standard deviation above the OECD mean in Sciences; and slightly more than 1/2 SD above the OECD mean in reading. Translated into percentiles, an average Shanghai student is roughly 84, 78, and 69th percentile compared to OECD mean (roughly). But how does Shanghai compare with the two Indian cities which are quoted unflatteringly by PISA as:

Himachal Pradesh-India

The mean reading literacy score for Himachal Pradesh-India was 317. This was the lowest mean reading score
observed in PISA 2009 and PISA 2009+, along with that of Kyrgyzstan.

In Himachal Pradesh-India, 11% of students are estimated to have a proficiency in reading literacy that is at or
above the baseline level needed to participate effectively and productively in life. It follows that 89% of students in
Himachal Pradesh-India are estimated to be below this baseline level.

Students in Himachal Pradesh-India attained a mean score of 338 on the PISA mathematical literacy scale,
statistically the same as those observed in Tamil Nadu-India and Kyrgyzstan. In Himachal Pradesh-India, 12% of
students are proficient in mathematics at least to the baseline level at which they begin to demonstrate the kind
of skills that enable them to use mathematics in ways considered fundamental for their future development. In
Himachal Pradesh-India, there was a statistically significant gender difference of 30 score points in mathematical
literacy, favouring boys.

Himachal Pradesh-India’s students were estimated to have a mean score of 325 on the scientific literacy scale,
which is below the means of all OECD countries. This was the lowest mean science score observed in PISA 2009
and PISA 2009+, along with that of Kyrgyzstan. In Himachal Pradesh-India, 11% of students are proficient in
science at least to the baseline level at which they begin to demonstrate the science competencies that will enable
them to participate actively in life situations related to science and technology. In Himachal Pradesh-India, there
was a statistically significant gender difference of 20 score points in scientific literacy, favouring boys.

Tamil Nadu-India

Students in Tamil Nadu-India attained a mean score of 337 on the PISA reading literacy scale. This mean score is
significantly higher than those for Himachal Pradesh-India and Kyrgyzstan but lower than all other participants
in PISA 2009 and PISA 2009+.

In Tamil Nadu-India, 17% of students are estimated to have a proficiency in reading literacy that is at or above
the baseline level needed to participate effectively and productively in life. This means that 83% of students in
Tamil Nadu-India are estimated to be below this baseline level.

Students in Tamil Nadu-India attained a mean score of 351 on the PISA mathematical literacy scale, the same as those observed in Himachal Pradesh-India, Panama and Peru. This was significantly higher than the mean observed in Kyrgyzstan but lower than those of other participants in PISA 2009 and PISA 2009+. In Tamil Nadu-India, 15% of students are proficient in mathematics at least to the baseline level at which they begin to demonstrate the kind of skills that enable them to use mathematics in ways considered fundamental for their future development. In Tamil Nadu-India, there was no statistically significant difference in the performance of boys and girls in mathematical literacy.

Students in Tamil Nadu-India were estimated to have a mean score of 348 on the scientific literacy scale, which
is below the means of all OECD countries, but significantly above the mean observed in the other Indian state,
Himachal Pradesh. In Tamil Nadu-India, 16% of students are proficient in science at least to the baseline level
at which they begin to demonstrate the science competencies that will enable them to participate actively in life
situations related to science and technology. In Tamil Nadu-India, there was a statistically significant gender
difference of 10 score points in scientific literacy, favouring girls.

More than a TWO standard deviation difference.

Imagine that.

And the average Indian student in the two cities surveyed, compared to Shanghai, are at roughly Shanghai's 2nd percentile!! At the 2% level!!

Now, in psychometrics, a two standard deviation below the norm is definition of mental retardation.

And these 15-year-olds are the face of India's future?

Like I said, God help India.


* * *
Postscript: I've heard a variation of the following not in relation to how China compares to India but the US. Some will be saying, oh, but you're comparing Shanghai which is not representative of China. While the US score is low, we expect those populations with blacks (e.g. southern states) to score lower and drag down white America's average. Well, yes and no. Certainly some states do much worse than others. And this is from the last round of PISA where Shanghai was not included but where "lower-scoring" entities like Taiwan and Korea were.

And look at the results.

To paraphrase Nietzsche, if you stare long enough into the future, the future stares back at you.

Cheers,

[AnybodyKiller]

If the Indian diaspora is what's going to transform one billion+ people into the next superpower known as India, God help her.

Believe it or not I raised that very same question with an Indian poster once and he sent me back a message saying that the Indian diaspora are not uniformly successful (which I didn't know at the time). Take a look at South East Asia, for example, and more specifically Malaysia, where Chinese > Malays > Indians -- all in spite of those Chinese are actually often being looked down upon by their NE Asian brethren (much like Afrikaners by the Dutch). Same with some other pacific Islands like Fiji or South Africa if I recall that he cited. I subsequently came across this article which you may be interested in.

Think of it this way: Vancouverites are frequently under the impression that all Chinese are super filthy rich. Not only are they not into mortgages (let alone subprime), they have a rep of buying houses in cash. Yet if you go to China or HK you actually see many poor people there housed in cages. Why are all these HK people so "rich"? Unlike US immigration policy, the Canadian one acted as a sieve - and those who went to Canada are not necessarily all representative.

In a more extreme sense, the H-1B Visa can work miracles. As another Indian poster quipped, that H1B is more coveted than any university degree. Yet based on the PISA scores that's posted, how many are even capable of being high school grads...? In other words, just how skewed is the American sample? Don't take my word for it - ask them - and they'll invariably tell you - sooner or later - somehow they're all Brahmins in one way or another and they're not representative of the rest of their 1 billion+ poor.

But to return to this thread, I'll add one more point for clarification. In the graphs that I posted before it's actually easy to underestimate the differences between Shanghai and the two Indian cities. (This is a point which even the economist didn't get a while ago prior to release of Indian data, see here, where it plotted all scores linearly from zero!! Talk about irony......i.e. economist which doesn't get numbers.....)

No, the whole idea of PISA scores is that it's normed with a mean of roughly 500 for OECD countries, and a standard deviation of 100. That means that compared to the OECD average, China Shanghai is a whole whopping 1 standard deviation above the OECD mean in math (i.e. roughly the magnitude of the controversial black-white IQ difference in the United States); 3/4 standard deviation above the OECD mean in Sciences; and slightly more than 1/2 SD above the OECD mean in reading. Translated into percentiles, an average Shanghai student is roughly 84, 78, and 69th percentile compared to OECD mean (roughly). But how does Shanghai compare with the two Indian cities which are quoted unflatteringly by PISA as:

[/indent]

[indent]

More than a TWO standard deviation difference.

Imagine that.

And the average Indian student in the two cities surveyed, compared to Shanghai, are at roughly Shanghai's 2nd percentile!! At the 2% level!!

Now, in psychometrics, a two standard deviation below the norm is definition of mental retardation.

And these 15-year-olds are the face of India's future?

Like I said, God help India.


* * *
Postscript: I've heard a variation of the following not in relation to how China compares to India but the US. Some will be saying, oh, but you're comparing Shanghai which is not representative of China. While the US score is low, we expect those populations with blacks (e.g. southern states) to score lower and drag down white America's average. Well, yes and no. Certainly some states do much worse than others. And this is from the last round of PISA where Shanghai was not included but where "lower-scoring" entities like Taiwan and Korea were.

And look at the results.

To paraphrase Nietzsche, if you stare long enough into the future, the future stares back at you.

Cheers,

Nietzsche (How fitting)
"If you stare long enough into the future, the future stares back at you"

Funny, he should tell that to all those organizations he puts so much faith in predicting "certain countries will or will not succeed". They predicted at such a high rate in the past, why not (Sarcasm Font). And we should just "face the facts" of this undeniable truth ?

The rest is pretty much more of the same; Trying to imply causation between "PISA math scores" and the future success of nations. Just more masturbation of what will supposedly happen in the future as predicted by predominantly European organizations based on research gathered by other European organizations.

Ask yourself this, what ways do PISA scores measure the potential of a person? Rather than how hard he has worked to obtain those scores.

I like this quote too...

they'll invariably tell you - sooner or later - somehow they're all Brahmins in one way or another and they're not representative of the rest of their 1 billion+ poor

They might tell you this, but it wouldn't be the truth. In terms of populations genetics the "castes" are nearly indistinguishable. It would be like an English person claiming they are different races from French and Germans and less "inherently intelligent" at that.

Has having a "Low Average IQ" stopped India from developing into a nuclear power with (until recently) the fastest nuclear strike capability on the planet? But hey! they didn't do their sophomore math homework.

Game over man, Game over...

This post has been edited by AnybodyKiller: Dec 28 2011, 07:36 PM

[RafaelM]

Why not deconstruct both?

Why do overseas Indians outcompete other Asians as well as host citizens in terms of education & economic success if they are such poor "human capital"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_American#Education

Indian Income- $88,583
Average- $44,684

64% of Indian Americans have attained a Bachelor's degree or more. Compared to 28% nationally, and 44% average for all Asian American groups

I would trade 20 points of this imaginary "IQ" for $40,000 yearly salary and a Bachelors degree in a heartbeat.

It's painfully obvious that richasiankid's goals for placing Chinese and East Asians on a pedestal is masturbation at best. He tries to correlate outdated IQ scores, measurements of "g" and mathematics test scores with predictions from organizations like the IMF that China will be the next super power.

I don't have a problem with this, what I do have a problem him claiming this as immutable evidence of Chinese superiority over everyone including Southeast Asians who cluster as close as .005 (another race is about .1-.2)

Again this is basically the equivalent of a Northern European claiming superiority over a Southern European. I'm starting to suspect an ulterior motive.

Why the decision to base your statements about India on a small sample of what? 2 million people? why not speak about the universe of 1.2 billion people who earn $3,703 on average?

Do either diaspora realistically represent the average citizens of their respective countries? I thought India usually sent their smartest people to get high paying jobs overseas.

In fact, do you know what's India's literacy rate? is 74.04.
The literacy rate of Indonesia is 92.0, the literacy of China is 95.9, and the literacy rate of the Philippines is 93.4. All of which are heavily populated countries from the same continent.

[AnybodyKiller]

Why the decision to base your statements about India on a small sample of what? 2 million people? why not speak about the universe of 1.2 billion people who earn $3,703 on average?

Do either diaspora realistically represent the average citizens of their respective countries? I thought India usually sent their smartest people to get high paying jobs overseas.

In fact, do you know what's India's literacy rate? is 74.04.
The literacy rate of Indonesia is 92.0, the literacy of China is 95.9, and the literacy rate of the Philippines is 93.4. All of which are heavily populated countries from the same continent.

Closer to 3 million I think. Anyways, because the ongoing theme is a sort of "racial Social-Darwinism", I chose Indian-Americans because they are genetically the same as Indians and they've managed to succeed more than any other demographic in the most powerful country to have ever existed. The racial castes of Indians are the same race as well. So if it's not a "racial"(In a genetic sense) cause of inequity what is it?

Just because the average Indian is poor and/or illiterate doesn't mean they're "functionally retarded" on average. They're an emerging superpower maybe not on the same level as China, but still not to be underestimated.

[RafaelM]

Just because the average Indian is poor and/or illiterate doesn't mean they're "functionally retarded" on average. They're an emerging superpower maybe not on the same level as China, but still not to be underestimated.

I am not saying that they are "functionally retarded" I am opposing the idea that they are all geniuses based on how well the ones in USA are doing.

Why is it so hard to believe that they are encouraging their educated elite to seek better paying jobs overseas and send remittances? Since they are racially the same that would still explain why they are doing worse than other emerging countries (not only China) on many aspects, even thought their diaspora is doing better.

[AnybodyKiller]

I am not saying that they are "functionally retarded" I am opposing the idea that they are all geniuses based on how well the ones in USA are doing.

Why is it so hard to believe that they are encouraging their educated elite to seek better paying jobs overseas and send remittances? Since they are racially the same that would still explain why they are doing worse than other emerging countries (not only China) on many aspects, even thought their diaspora is doing better.

you aren't saying that. The OP is implying it.

[richasiankid]

Nietzsche (How fitting)
"If you stare long enough into the future, the future stares back at you"

Funny, he should tell that to all those organizations he puts so much faith in predicting "certain countries will or will not succeed". They predicted at such a high rate in the past, why not (Sarcasm Font). And we should just "face the facts" of this undeniable truth ?

The rest is pretty much more of the same; Trying to imply causation between "PISA math scores" and the future success of nations. Just more masturbation of what will supposedly happen in the future as predicted by predominantly European organizations based on research gathered by other European organizations.

Ask yourself this, what ways do PISA scores measure the potential of a person? Rather than how hard he has worked to obtain those scores.

I like this quote too...

They might tell you this, but it wouldn't be the truth. In terms of populations genetics the "castes" are nearly indistinguishable. It would be like an English person claiming they are different races from French and Germans and less "inherently intelligent" at that.

Has having a "Low Average IQ" stopped India from developing into a nuclear power with (until recently) the fastest nuclear strike capability on the planet? But hey! they didn't do their sophomore math homework.

Game over man, Game over...

If that's the case, why do most people spend their time toiling and working so hard when all they could have so easily done is to have gotten rich playing the lottery?

Nah, life's still about playing probabilities and odds.

And whether it's lottery or false hope, it's mere another voluntary tax on the innumerate.

As to your question

Ask yourself this, what ways do PISA scores measure the potential of a person? Rather than how hard he has worked to obtain those scores.

That would imply low scorers deserve more blame - for they could have done something about it - and didn't. But of course, it's also unfair to them: if you have a Down's child who tried his darn hardest and still can't make it to the average, it's unrealistic - perhaps even cruel - to punish him for what he didn't do.

[foi2]

The rest is pretty much more of the same; Trying to imply causation between "PISA math scores" and the future success of nations. Just more masturbation of what will supposedly happen in the future as predicted by predominantly European organizations based on research gathered by other European organizations.

Ask yourself this, what ways do PISA scores measure the potential of a person? Rather than how hard he has worked to obtain those scores.

I like this quote too...

They might tell you this, but it wouldn't be the truth. In terms of populations genetics the "castes" are nearly indistinguishable. It would be like an English person claiming they are different races from French and Germans and less "inherently intelligent" at that.

Has having a "Low Average IQ" stopped India from developing into a nuclear power with (until recently) the fastest nuclear strike capability on the planet? But hey! they didn't do their sophomore math homework.

Game over man, Game over...

You speak too soon. It's pretty clear to me that the economic success of nations largely depend on the quality of its talent(i.e. "Human Capital"). PISA Math scores reflect just that, the quality of Human capital in a nation. Fact of the matter is, PISA scores highly correlate with economic development. So if you measure 'Success' in economic terms, you can't afford to ignore standardized scores like PISA.

On the other hand, I don't think countries like China should gloat either over their high scores. If history has taught us anything at all, it's that social institutions are *MUCH* more important to economic success than the quality of human capital. Just look at North Korea, or China before Deng. All were horribly beaten by the west, who scored 1 standard deviation lower on the PISA math.

PISA scores and standardized tests like PISA are one important ingredient of success. But it's not the only thing that matters. If China doesn't reform to introduce more competition in its economy and insists on controlling the economy, then its economy will likewise suffer. The short-sightedness of ignoring capitalism will come around to bite them in the @$$ in the future. Command economies are never going to be as efficient at allocating resources as privatized economies. When was the last time you heard of a government agency outperforming a private company? Never. And there's a reason why. Economic success is borne out of competition. Without competition, there is no success.

There's a reason America leads. It's not because of PISA scores. It's because the social institutions in America keeps the spirit of competition alive. China has done well with Deng's reforms in the last 30 years, but the pace of economic reform is faltering, and I'm afraid the future does not bold well for China if this keeps up.

[AsiaticGlory]

I think the reasons why Indians seem to do better than other Asian American groups is because of language and social skills.

Learning English is easier for Indians because of the following two reasons:
- India was once a British colony. Today, India's different ethnic groups talk to each other with English which will of course make them better at English.
- Most Indians speak an Indo-European language. A lot of Indian languages are part of the same language family as English.

Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese, etc. all struggle with English a lot since they speak Altaic, Sino-Tibetan, and Austro-Asiatic languages. None of those are in the same language family as English. Asians are more likely to succeed in America if they are from former British colonies like Singapore and Hong Kong though.

In America, having good social skills is actually more important than being smart if you want to succeed. The talented engineer who can't really talk is less likely to be successful than the mediocre engineer who has people skills. This contrasts with East Asians who value knowledge and education over social skills.

I think Asians have a predisposition towards introversion. A lot of Asians are rather quiet. Even those Altaic nomads are rather introverted despite being descendants of fierce warriors. Hint: There is not necessary a correlation between assertive behavior and being extroverted.
In my opinion, Indians and other South Asians tend to be more social. This will of course help them succeed in America.

I also agree that Asians and whites tend to be more competitive. This is probably why the most developed countries tend to be Asian or white. Since they are more competitive, they are more likely to make that final push.

It does seem the brown races like Latinos and Indians seem motivated by a desire to live a comfortable life. If you ask the typical Mexican what he wanted out of life, he would probably just say good food, TV, women, fancy cars, etc. He probably won't tell you he wants to invent something or create a work of art.

For example, let's say a group of people get jobs that have good pay. They are able to have a place to live, buy necessities, and have a little bit for entertainment. The Latinos, Indians, and Arabs would see that as the dream. They would be very happy to live like that for the rest of their lives. The Asians and the whites, on the other hand, may not be happy about living like that forever. Asians and whites would probably feel unfulfilled and feel like they aren't doing enough.

By the way, I am not saying every individual is like this. I am just talking about tendencies.

This post has been edited by AsiaticGlory: Dec 31 2011, 01:45 AM

[richasiankid]

You speak too soon. It's pretty clear to me that the economic success of nations largely depend on the quality of its talent(i.e. "Human Capital"). PISA Math scores reflect just that, the quality of Human capital in a nation. Fact of the matter is, PISA scores highly correlate with economic development. So if you measure 'Success' in economic terms, you can't afford to ignore standardized scores like PISA.

On the other hand, I don't think countries like China should gloat either over their high scores. If history has taught us anything at all, it's that social institutions are *MUCH* more important to economic success than the quality of human capital. Just look at North Korea, or China before Deng. All were horribly beaten by the west, who scored 1 standard deviation lower on the PISA math.

PISA scores and standardized tests like PISA are one important ingredient of success. But it's not the only thing that matters. If China doesn't reform to introduce more competition in its economy and insists on controlling the economy, then its economy will likewise suffer. The short-sightedness of ignoring capitalism will come around to bite them in the @$$ in the future. Command economies are never going to be as efficient at allocating resources as privatized economies. When was the last time you heard of a government agency outperforming a private company? Never. And there's a reason why. Economic success is borne out of competition. Without competition, there is no success.

There's a reason America leads. It's not because of PISA scores. It's because the social institutions in America keeps the spirit of competition alive. China has done well with Deng's reforms in the last 30 years, but the pace of economic reform is faltering, and I'm afraid the future does not bold well for China if this keeps up.

To rudely jump in anyway and I agree with close to 99% you said. At the same time I don't think it totally explains the China-India gap. Knowing how indices are concocted (not least Americans' idea of projection) and HK and Singapore are indeed wealthy, the so-called Index of Economic Freedom actually reveals China having less economic freedom (rank 135) vs India (rank 124).

Just another datapoint for pocketbooks.

[richasiankid]

I think the reasons why Indians seem to do better than other Asian American groups is because of language and social skills.

Learning English is easier for Indians because of the following two reasons:
- India was once a British colony. Today, India's different ethnic groups talk to each other with English which will of course make them better at English.
- Most Indians speak an Indo-European language. A lot of Indian languages are part of the same language family as English.

Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese, etc. all struggle with English a lot since they speak Altaic, Sino-Tibetan, and Austro-Asiatic languages. None of those are in the same language family as English. Asians are more likely to succeed in America if they are from former British colonies like Singapore and Hong Kong though.

In America, having good social skills is actually more important than being smart if you want to succeed. The talented engineer who can't really talk is less likely to be successful than the mediocre engineer who has people skills. This contrasts with East Asians who value knowledge and education over social skills.

I think Asians have a predisposition towards introversion. A lot of Asians are rather quiet. Even those Altaic nomads are rather introverted despite being descendants of fierce warriors. Hint: There is not necessary a correlation between assertive behavior and being extroverted.
In my opinion, Indians and other South Asians tend to be more social. This will of course help them succeed in America.

I also agree that Asians and whites tend to be more competitive. This is probably why the most developed countries tend to be Asian or white. Since they are more competitive, they are more likely to make that final push.

It does seem the brown races like Latinos and Indians seem motivated by a desire to live a comfortable life. If you ask the typical Mexican what he wanted out of life, he would probably just say good food, TV, women, fancy cars, etc. He probably won't tell you he wants to invent something or create a work of art.

For example, let's say a group of people get jobs that have good pay. They are able to have a place to live, buy necessities, and have a little bit for entertainment. The Latinos, Indians, and Arabs would see that as the dream. They would be very happy to live like that for the rest of their lives. The Asians and the whites, on the other hand, may not be happy about living like that forever. Asians and whites would probably feel unfulfilled and feel like they aren't doing enough.

By the way, I am not saying every individual is like this. I am just talking about tendencies.

Thanks and I recognize this is getting far afield but will just offer one notable exception: Japan in spite of its English illiteracy managed to trump many other nations in Asia which have had much greater English facility let alone many African nations not just in terms of scores but also in terms of wealth, or other socially valued outcomes such as life-expectancy and infant mortality. Don't miss the forest for the trees.

Similarly China in spite of its handicap in English literacy or whatever "democratic deficit" is catching up real fast. Even half a decade ago, a Deutsche bank report illustrates:

[haragain]

Har, sorry to disagree with all your unsophisticated and ill-concieved views about Indian, Asian, and European cultures. I fear your views are very prejudiced and lop-sided and totally wrong and with no scientific or anthropoligical evidence to support your absurd claims. The Hindus are a very old and sophisticated peoples with a culture equal to and as great as the Taoist culture or the ancient Greek culture.

Please stop writing nonsense and prejudice until you have done more independent research to support your views, with appropriate references to research papers.

Its personal observation and opinion--by the way, I think you should re-read what I wrote. The whole point I am making is that Indian Dharma sees itself as greater than Greek or Tao cultures because they have not been able to withstand 'modern science' while Indian Culture is able to. This fosters an arrogance that doesn't require one to compete with peoples who wish to compete in unimportant forums such as capitalism/sports etc

[elleX0]

Thanks and I recognize this is getting far afield but will just offer one notable exception: Japan in spite of its English illiteracy managed to trump many other nations in Asia which have had much greater English facility let alone many African nations not just in terms of scores but also in terms of wealth, or other socially valued outcomes such as life-expectancy and infant mortality. Don't miss the forest for the trees.

Similarly China in spite of its handicap in English literacy or whatever "democratic deficit" is catching up real fast. Even half a decade ago, a Deutsche bank report illustrates:

To appreciate those statistics and to find reasons for the discrepancies, we have to study the culture of the people. India is a very Hindu country and her people's culture is based on Hinduism. And one of the factors in the Hindu culture is their total acceptance of Karma. This affects their cultural attitudes and that affects their industrial attitudes.

Karma and Destiny
Sri Ramana Maharshi
Edited by David Godman

Preamble
By David Godman

The theory of Karma is common to many oriental religions. In its most popular form it states that there is a universal accounting system in which each individual must experience the consequences of all his actions (Karmas); good actions bring good results and bad actions inevitably result in suffering to the one who does them. The theory also states that the consequences of actions (also known as Karmas) need not necessarily be experienced in the present life, they can be carried over into future lives. Because of this, several sub-divisions of Karma have been postulated. The following classification, which was used by Sri Ramana Maharshi, is common to many Hindu schools of thought.

Sanchita Karma. The store of Karmic debts accumulated from previous births.
Prarabdha Karma. That part of one’s Sanchita Karma which must be worked out in the present life. Because the law of Karma implies determinism in human activities, Prarabdha is often translated as destiny.
Agami Karma. New Karma accumulated in the present lifetime which is carried forward into future lives.
Sri Ramana Maharshi accepted the validity of the laws of Karma but said that they were only applicable as long as a person imagined that he was separate from the Self. At this level (the level of the ajnani or the ignorant), he said that individuals will pass through a series of pre-ordained activities and experiences, all of which are the consequences of previous acts and thoughts. He occasionally even said that every act and experience in a person’s life is determined at birth and that the only freedom one has is to realise that there is no one acting and no one experiencing. However, once one realises the Self there is no one left to experience the consequences of actions and so the whole structure of Karmic laws then becomes redundant.

Sri Ramana regarded the law of Karma as a manifestation of God’s will. He said that prior to Self-realisation there is a personal God, Iswara, who controls each person’s destiny. It is Iswara who has ordained that everyone must suffer the consequences of his actions and it is Iswara who selects the sequences of activities that each person must undergo in each lifetime. One cannot escape from Iswara’s jurisdiction while one still identifies with the activities of the body. The only way to become free of his authority is to transcend Karma completely by realising the Self.

http://www.hinduism.co.za/karma&.htm

[haragain]

Short reply to comments posted:

NiceLemon writes:

[/indent]

For purposes of this thread, it's Japan, Korea, and China which btw by my books also includes Taiwan and HK.

Anybody killer writes:

Just because some variables can't be accurately accounted for never quite stopped people from blanket claiming or even crusading in the name of equality no? Why not deconstruct equality and rights instead?

Har writes:

[indent]

Well, what about gentile whites and Jews in this loving Christmas season? Substitute Jews for white and white for Asian in your post above and you get real gist of dynamics. ?

I have no Idea what this obsession with the Arabs who happen to follow Judaism is--why are you not equally worried about the Muslim Arabs?

[haragain]

I think the reasons why Indians seem to do better than other Asian American groups is because of language and social skills.

Learning English is easier for Indians because of the following two reasons:
- India was once a British colony. Today, India's different ethnic groups talk to each other with English which will of course make them better at English.
- Most Indians speak an Indo-European language. A lot of Indian languages are part of the same language family as English.

Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese, etc. all struggle with English a lot since they speak Altaic, Sino-Tibetan, and Austro-Asiatic languages. None of those are in the same language family as English. Asians are more likely to succeed in America if they are from former British colonies like Singapore and Hong Kong though.

In America, having good social skills is actually more important than being smart if you want to succeed. The talented engineer who can't really talk is less likely to be successful than the mediocre engineer who has people skills. This contrasts with East Asians who value knowledge and education over social skills.

I think Asians have a predisposition towards introversion. A lot of Asians are rather quiet. Even those Altaic nomads are rather introverted despite being descendants of fierce warriors. Hint: There is not necessary a correlation between assertive behavior and being extroverted.
In my opinion, Indians and other South Asians tend to be more social. This will of course help them succeed in America.

I also agree that Asians and whites tend to be more competitive. This is probably why the most developed countries tend to be Asian or white. Since they are more competitive, they are more likely to make that final push.

It does seem the brown races like Latinos and Indians seem motivated by a desire to live a comfortable life. If you ask the typical Mexican what he wanted out of life, he would probably just say good food, TV, women, fancy cars, etc. He probably won't tell you he wants to invent something or create a work of art.

For example, let's say a group of people get jobs that have good pay. They are able to have a place to live, buy necessities, and have a little bit for entertainment. The Latinos, Indians, and Arabs would see that as the dream. They would be very happy to live like that for the rest of their lives. The Asians and the whites, on the other hand, may not be happy about living like that forever. Asians and whites would probably feel unfulfilled and feel like they aren't doing enough.

By the way, I am not saying every individual is like this. I am just talking about tendencies.

I think maybe I have failed to get across my point--it is not that Indians don't compete--they do, just against their own egos. Imagine India as many different castes competing against each other in dharma, competing in varied forms to rid oneself of the ego, the outcome of such a thing produces what from the outside would appear to be material wealth. This is classic India, this is what produced the Vedas, Upanishads yogas, Buddhas, tantra, mathematics, surgery, complex water irrigation and farming etc etc. The reason this does not work today is because the Indian governing systems and economic modeling is based on western designs not on dharma--if it was based on dharma then the outward effect would be wealth in the way Whites and Asians understand the concept.

Let me put it this way--Europeans and Asians have no Real religion--their goals are defined by this world, so their religions reflect this world. And what is in this world but material competition? They are defined by this competition. Indians are defined by a different type of competition, not wealth/art, as this is simply one of the byproducts on the path of Moksa/liberation from the cycles of rebirth. Wealth/art is the end product in Western and Asian cultures that is why they are similar.

I think Indians would have less problems dealing with countries like China if they understood this underlying similarity--the fact that they are told repeatedly that the East adopted Prince Siddhartha's Dharma clouds what should be self evident.

[AsiaticGlory]

Thanks and I recognize this is getting far afield but will just offer one notable exception: Japan in spite of its English illiteracy managed to trump many other nations in Asia which have had much greater English facility let alone many African nations not just in terms of scores but also in terms of wealth, or other socially valued outcomes such as life-expectancy and infant mortality. Don't miss the forest for the trees.

Similarly China in spite of its handicap in English literacy or whatever "democratic deficit" is catching up real fast. Even half a decade ago, a Deutsche bank report illustrates:

I was talking about Asian Americans. If you want to be successful in America, social skills are more important than knowledge. East Asian FOBs would have a tougher chance at being social in America because of language barriers. At the same time, I think East Asians have an inherent predisposition towards introversion which is also an obstacle to being social.

This post has been edited by AsiaticGlory: Dec 31 2011, 06:45 AM

[richasiankid]

I was talking about Asian Americans. If you want to be successful in America, social skills are more important than knowledge. East Asian FOBs would have a tougher chance at being social in America because of language barriers. At the same time, I think East Asians have an inherent predisposition towards introversion which is also an obstacle to being social.

Totally agree, but also think of the alternative.

"Thinking outside the box" which is more euphemistically known as creativity is seldom substitute.