In statistics, you do talk about correlation rather than causation. You got it the other way round.
Still, as they say, correlation does not mean causation and by default, if you take some obviously random, irrelevant indicators such as the color of someone's teeshirt and his test score, you might still get some small correlation. That's how some of these statistical relationships might be designed.
I agree that India has a certain upper limit that its citizens won't be able to breach.
The proxy I find more reliable, more foolproof if you like, is the performance of racial, ethnic kins in other smaller societies.
For China, that would be Taiwan, maybe Hong Kong, Singapore Macao with some caveats. There are relatives in Japan and Korea, too.
For India, that would be Sri Lanka, maybe Fiji Mauritius or Guyana where they are a sizeable community. Maybe there are relatives in Nepal and Bhutan, too.
For Indonesia, that would be Brunei, Malaysia, Philippines or southern Thailand.
I have to say none of these three groups' prospects look highly promising. China's performance and achievements of mini-Chinas elsewhere, make it likely that China would outperform India and Indonesia.
Indonesia will continue to lag India in all metrics of national power while it may be able to lead, only marginally, in softer indicators such as health, crime, education stats for children but in metrics of hard national power, Indonesia can not hold a candle to either India or China for next 3 decades.
I am talking space program, nuclear weapons, ASAT weapons, aircraft carrier, nuclear submarine, supercomputer, papers and patents, high tech exports, citations in sci tech disciplines, multibillion ruble/yuan/dinar/dirham tech firms.
What I mean is, people can argue about causation, but correlation cannot be disputed. The truth is, PISA scores are highly correlated to IQ test scores. Now you can argue that IQ scores do not represent real intelligence, but it is the best measurement of intelligence we have. In fact, PISA scores is a very good predictor of prosperity regardless of race. That is the reason people care about PISA score of teenagers.In statistics, you do talk about correlation rather than causation. You got it the other way round.
Still, as they say, correlation does not mean causation and by default, if you take some obviously random, irrelevant indicators such as the color of someone's teeshirt and his test score, you might still get some small correlation. That's how some of these statistical relationships might be designed.
I agree that India has a certain upper limit that its citizens won't be able to breach.
The proxy I find more reliable, more foolproof if you like, is the performance of racial, ethnic kins in other smaller societies.
For China, that would be Taiwan, maybe Hong Kong, Singapore Macao with some caveats. There are relatives in Japan and Korea, too.
For India, that would be Sri Lanka, maybe Fiji Mauritius or Guyana where they are a sizeable community. Maybe there are relatives in Nepal and Bhutan, too.
For Indonesia, that would be Brunei, Malaysia, Philippines or southern Thailand.
I have to say none of these three groups' prospects look highly promising. China's performance and achievements of mini-Chinas elsewhere, make it likely that China would outperform India and Indonesia.
Indonesia will continue to lag India in all metrics of national power while it may be able to lead, only marginally, in softer indicators such as health, crime, education stats for children but in metrics of hard national power, Indonesia can not hold a candle to either India or China for next 3 decades.
I am talking space program, nuclear weapons, ASAT weapons, aircraft carrier, nuclear submarine, supercomputer, papers and patents, high tech exports, citations in sci tech disciplines, multibillion ruble/yuan/dinar/dirham tech firms.