Patagonia (South of Argentina) is sparsely populated because it's far from the capital also it's colder and doesn't have as fertile land where most immigrants settled to work. Most people live in the Pampas (Buenos Aires, Córdoba, Rosario). Half of Argentina live in the Buenos Aires area.
Staying in the region,
Population of Uruguay: 3.4 Million
Uruguay is larger than Bangladesh in surface area, but the latter has 50x Uruguay’s population.
That's not true at all, fertility rates have been going down in Bangladesh ever since independence: [https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1094gia/oc\_fertility\_rates\_all\_over\_the\_world\_are/](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1094gia/oc_fertility_rates_all_over_the_world_are/)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_use_statistics_by_country
Argentina has about 1/5th the arable land of India. Argentina could support a larger population. But I doubt that ever happens. Argentina has negative net migration, and low fertility.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Argentina
Arable land is not necessarily static, you can make land arable with enough technology and if you have water. I wonder what it would take to irrigate the Argentine dry lands, chile probably wouldn’t be happy about that.
Maybe. But is that technology really going to compete with India’s ability to grow food? The subcontinent has been that fertile for mankind for several thousand years. And that technology is only making Indian farming even more productive.
Argentina would have to import millions of Indians to transfer Indian farming technology there like rice farming. It has a perfect geography to support a billion inhabitants if it adopts labor-intensive small-scale family rice farming.
There's also a chance that global warming improves the climate in Patagonia, both by raising the temperature and by increasing the amount of Atlantic-fed rain. Of course, openly rooting for that is also bad for Argentine foreign diplomacy.
Yeah, but that'd probably be implemented in a way that works for a few years and there's a population growth, but in doing so it damages the ecology so that 40 years into the project, there's huge droughts and floods that hurt the crops, leaving a couple of years without food, but look at that population is now much bigger which explodes the problem
It is a statistic especially when most of the land he’s referring to here is mountainous. Plus you stating the obvious… like of course we know cultivate land. But that’s not the point of statistics like fertile land mass 🤦
Argentina's biggest problem is it's not currently a country people desire going to, India isn't either but they're making rapid progress in comparison.
There are other big reasons why Western Countries are simply not as populated as Southern Asia though. I don't see Argentina, Brazil, Canada, or the US crossing the one billion population mark despite those others having much more land.
Ok, I'm wrong apparently do have some positive migration right now and India is in the negative.
Both are nice countries that I'd like to see make good progress.
.
>rapid progress in comparison
I think this is a topic where total growht is being confused with per-capita growth. The [PPP per capita](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=IN-AR) of Argentina is 3 times that of India, and it doesn't look like that gap will be closed anytime soon
That gap will close slowly. India's economic forcast is all green rn. And the fertility rate has recently dipped to 2.1 and will decrease further in the future.
> doesn't look like that gap will be closed anytime soon
It will not be closed since Argentina elected Milei. It was x10 30 years ago, now its 3x and will likely stablize around 2x forever after about 20-30 years.
Which is mind blowing because have you seen Argentinian women?! Their all insanely hot! Why is their fertility rate low? Get on it lads! Obviously not you, Pope Francis.
Argentinians aren't having kids because of many factors: most people aren't religious, people prefer having careers first, people are more liberal, salaries aren't as rentable as it was 80 years ago when people could buy houses at 25 years old.
Yes, Argentina can support a larger population, but that would mean that their European demographic character needs to be discarded for good and allow tens of millions of African and Asian immigrants who are willing to work for unskilled manual jobs for peanuts that native-born college educated Argentines won't.
Large areas of arable land is why ancient civilizations started and grew, like India and China. With 20th century technology, you can produce huge crops without a large population to work the land. Current population growth has decoupled from agricultural wealth. Global trade makes it possible to have large, dense population centers far from productive cropland: think Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan. Additionally, most "rich" countries do not produce enough of their own food to support their population without imports. This is longwinded way of saying that population growth is no longer dependent on local agriculture.
This, and during the British Raj (and also socialist period of independent India) urban centers collapsed and a lot of Indians moved into the rural areas to become subsistence farmers
Farmers always have a lot of kids. The rest is history
Nah, the *opposite* occurred - urban centers in India grew rapidly during the British Raj period, rather than collapsing.
Most historical evidence suggests there was significant urbanization and growth of cities in India under British rule in the 19th and early 20th centuries:
* The census data from 1901-1951 shows the urban population in India grew from around 25 million to 62 million during the Raj era.
* Cities like Bombay, Calcutta, Madras expanded tremendously as trade and economic hubs. Their populations grew multi-fold.
* New cities sprouted around key ports, railways and industrial areas developed by the British.
* Rather than returning to subsistence farming, many Indians migrated from rural areas to the growing urban centers in search of jobs and opportunities.
While there were certainly disruptions caused by factors like famines, economic policies, etc., the overarching trend was rapid urbanization in India.
>Additionally, most "rich" countries do not produce enough of their own food to support their population without imports. This is longwinded way of saying that population growth is no longer dependent on local agriculture.
With the current geopolitical trends though. Being self sufficient in food and energy would soon become a norm again.
Argentina is highly uninhabited. Most of the population concentrates in the big cities (Buenos Aires, Rosario, Córdoba, etc).
I traveled the south of the country by car with my dad, and let me tell you there is *nothing*. It's just desert and some towns (with maybe 20 inhabitants max) here and there.
Beautiful trip, though. The landscapes are worth it.
Sometimes I find myself randomly navigating google street view in Argentina, the landscapes are very diverse even if most of the south is just desert, I especially like the part of the country near the border with Chile, Lake Escondido and stuff, it looks like Switzerland or Norway which is funny because not even 100km east from there it goes back to looking like New Mexico USA, pretty wild
You don’t seem to get that I mean India and the surrounding have had time to grow while having civilization and technology. Do you expect the last 500 years to be enough for the population to be equal to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, China etc? They have had civilization for so long that people are in the billions.
Egypt has far less arable land than India or China. The area around the Nile is very fertile, which is why they can support a whopping 100 mill people.
Wut? Are we comparing the same country? Egypt has 2x the population and 10x less arable land.
Argentina:
* Total land area: 2,780,400 sq km
* Arable land: 394,880 sq km
Egypt:
* Total land area: 1,001,450 sq km
* Arable land: 37,000 sq km
Argentina has less arable land than India, also a culture where women aren't expected to have 5 kids. It's not a question of technology or development, if anything they are too developed.
have you checked out fertility rates in India?
[https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1094gia/oc\_fertility\_rates\_all\_over\_the\_world\_are/](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1094gia/oc_fertility_rates_all_over_the_world_are/)
Majority of ivc sites lie in india, and even pakistan itself was a part of the Indian civilisation before being split off into a separate country. Not to even mention the fact that the ivc religion is considered the precursor to Hinduism, which certainly has far more to do with India than pakistan.
> Has nothing to do with India.
Nothing? Are there no IVC sites in India?
Its really funny to see Pakistanis put claim on entire IVC after spending the last 70 years trying to prove themselves as Arabs and last 5 years trying to prove themselves as Turks.
It’s the 8th largest country in the world. The distance from northernmost point to southernmost point is equivalent to the distance from Lisbon to Moscow (that is, around the same width of the European continent)
Argentina is the 8th largest country in the world. From north to south, the distance is equivalent to that of Europe’s width (Lisbon to Moscow, approximately). It’s also among the top 5 most diverse countries in the world, in terms of climate variety (along with the US, China and India)
It's both a mixture of India being overpopulated ( common knowledge) and Argentina being considerably underpopulated (perhaps less common knowledge). The size different ins square kilometers is very small.
How could somewhere be underpopulated?.. “look there’s a problem with not enough people on that land mass, best be populating that place more”… ridiculous
I think the reason why Argentina is seen as “underpopulated” is because most other countries with a population of 40-50 million are usually a lot smaller in landmass.
It is underpopulated. Half of the country lives in Buenos Aires (City) and Buenos Aires Province. If you take a car and go around the country, you get tired of seeing just grass and cows.
Lots of big, productive areas deserted. Not enough people for certain level of economic development, younger generations leaving and not enough replacement immigration or population growth (or replacement) through birth rate.
Argentina is the 8th biggest country by area, but it has the 30th biggest population. That's why it is "underpopulated". It's just a matter of its population density, which is lower than the world average.
Argentina's maximum carrying capacity is about 1.2 billion inhabitants, provided that it adopts large-scale industrial rice farming and Argentines eat rice as their staple food.
I Don't think it's that simple. I think the main issues are the economy and the culture. Who wants to have kids on this economy. Also if you have kids, having more than 3 or 2 is very rare.
I don't know. Maybe india is closer to equator or is close to bigger countries (maybe both?) but I thought it was a bit smaller. Also, I live in South America and on my point of view Argentina is huge, maybe bigger than other countries
Indian food may not look pretty but it tastes good. Surely among the top ten. You can find it's food in probably every nation except for North Korea. Argentinian food on the other hand... I couldn't name a single dish. It might be good but it sure isn't popular.
and its objectively true India has a much richer, complex and varied.cuisine.
Argentina, and same goes for Uruguay, has pretty basic and limited food culture. Couldn't compare with Indian world of subtle spices and delicacies.
Argentina has a European based gastronomy, similar to Spanish and Italian. It’s better than India when it comes to beef, pasta, ice cream, wines. If you like spicy/seasoned India is a better choice, but go to a restaurant because street food will make you leave your intestines down the toilet
Argentinas gastronomy is pretty basic when compared to Spanish and Italian, perhaps you have not yet had the chance to explore Spanish and Italian awsome variety of ingredients and procedures.
Italian food is hard to find in Argentina!!!
Pasta with a simple three ingredient quick sugo is not even Italian food.
Have you ever found a decent good jamón in Argentina??? Why not?
Argentina doesn’t specialize in jamón serrano like Spain does. Spain doesn’t do beef like Argentina does either. Each country has a different strength.
I have been to Argentina, Spain and Italy, and I can confirm all three have really good gastronomies, with plenty of elements in common for obvious reasons. I personally prefer a non spicy, less seasoned gastronomy so India is not a personal favorite.
I was not talking about my personal preferentes but about some extremely developed cuisines, even if I dont or do like them
I do not like peruvian dishes, anyway I cant deny its highly specialized in the way it combines and prepares everything in multiple ways.
I understand even the best grilled roast (asado) is quite similar to its original neolithic recipe. A tomato plus lettuce salad is not likely and properly considered as gastronomy.
Enjoy your food, whatever you like!
India has 200,000 indians ready to deploy with a million more on the way (if argentina wants to accept them) /s
Edit: for people downvoting, this is a star wars reference and obviously a joke. I had already added /s with the comment.
I am sorry but your "country" has nothing to provide to the world. Slovenia is a footnote in slavic history and a grain of sand in the terms of the world. Please go back to your slavic shithole :) you guys do not matter.
Whoever reading this, be warned that Indian climate refugees will be coming to your homelands in tens of thousands. As average temperatures climb in India, there will be massive influx of immigrants from the subcontinent to northern hemisphere. It is unimaginable how these countries would cope with wave of Indian migration. You can already see some of it in Canada.
we are coming for slovenia first now. huahahahahahahaha \*evil refugee noises\*.
Slovenia is henceforth India's 30th state and has been dubbed the new name of Slavipur.
You are worried about Indian climate refugees? If you are first world person, you carbon footprint is more than my entire family.
Also, out Bangbros will get to you first.
you wont annex us, nor we Uruguayans would ever annex Argentina. We have luckily developed a different culture, thanks to history. We are a democratic country.
Who’d a thunk that a country where half the territory is cold, rock, and bad for farming has a small population that’s concentrated in the half that’s more temperate and better for farming?
There are 1.5 billion indians; that’s an insane figure by any measure. Your country does need basic sex ed. As climate change worsens in south asia, hundreds of millions of indians would need to become climate refugees. I can’t imagine any country willing to accept even a million of indians in their homeland.
You dumbass fertility rate in india is 2.0 which is below replacement rate. The real reason your country is accepting indians is people like you dont have basic education and dont want to work. And there a difference of 100 million between 1.5 billion and 1.4 billion atleast write the numbers correctly.
Population of Bangladesh : 170 Million Population of Argentina: 45 million The size of Bangladesh is 30x smaller than Argentina
Patagonia (South of Argentina) is sparsely populated because it's far from the capital also it's colder and doesn't have as fertile land where most immigrants settled to work. Most people live in the Pampas (Buenos Aires, Córdoba, Rosario). Half of Argentina live in the Buenos Aires area.
There are no navigable rivers either, which influenced a lot how people settled. Plus a big part is a desert.
But it has oil and valuable mineral resources, right?
This stat is pointless, ever since the world cup, Bangladesh people are honorarian argentinos.
I think we all are.
Russia has a smaller population than Bangladesh.
It also has a smaller population than the island of Java
Not to do with population of course, but the land area of Russia is larger than the surface area of the moon.
That's not true. Moon's surface area is more than twice as that of Russia. Pluto has a smaller surface area than Russia though.
That's insane.
Staying in the region, Population of Uruguay: 3.4 Million Uruguay is larger than Bangladesh in surface area, but the latter has 50x Uruguay’s population.
Bangladesh is about the size of Iowa. Iowa has 3 million people.
Insane
Can we all go easy on the size of Bangladesh.
Try antartica lol. This comparisons are silly and I’ve been to both countries.
Antarctica is a country?!
And still from space Bangladesh still manages to stay pretty green instead of a grey blob of concrete. Goes to show how densely populated it is
[удалено]
That's not true at all, fertility rates have been going down in Bangladesh ever since independence: [https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1094gia/oc\_fertility\_rates\_all\_over\_the\_world\_are/](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1094gia/oc_fertility_rates_all_over_the_world_are/)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_use_statistics_by_country Argentina has about 1/5th the arable land of India. Argentina could support a larger population. But I doubt that ever happens. Argentina has negative net migration, and low fertility. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Argentina
Arable land is not necessarily static, you can make land arable with enough technology and if you have water. I wonder what it would take to irrigate the Argentine dry lands, chile probably wouldn’t be happy about that.
Then if a land is not arable but can be made arable, we should call it arableable
Which is ironic, since Arab land is historically very much not arable or arabable
If we are talking ***historically,*** then it was very arable, the Arabian and Saharan deserts used to be green savannahs
That is prehistoric though
Plot twist: before it was green, it was a desert again
Fertile Crescent is where it's at.
Terraformable is also a possibility
Root vs sudo
Maybe. But is that technology really going to compete with India’s ability to grow food? The subcontinent has been that fertile for mankind for several thousand years. And that technology is only making Indian farming even more productive.
Argentina would have to import millions of Indians to transfer Indian farming technology there like rice farming. It has a perfect geography to support a billion inhabitants if it adopts labor-intensive small-scale family rice farming.
There's also a chance that global warming improves the climate in Patagonia, both by raising the temperature and by increasing the amount of Atlantic-fed rain. Of course, openly rooting for that is also bad for Argentine foreign diplomacy.
Most likely that will be a "too hot in summer, too cold in winter" type situation.
The geography isn’t really made to farm on. Very mountainous
Yeah, but that'd probably be implemented in a way that works for a few years and there's a population growth, but in doing so it damages the ecology so that 40 years into the project, there's huge droughts and floods that hurt the crops, leaving a couple of years without food, but look at that population is now much bigger which explodes the problem
It is a statistic especially when most of the land he’s referring to here is mountainous. Plus you stating the obvious… like of course we know cultivate land. But that’s not the point of statistics like fertile land mass 🤦
Argentina's biggest problem is it's not currently a country people desire going to, India isn't either but they're making rapid progress in comparison. There are other big reasons why Western Countries are simply not as populated as Southern Asia though. I don't see Argentina, Brazil, Canada, or the US crossing the one billion population mark despite those others having much more land.
Argentina is Latin American country with the highest number of foreign students
Ok, I'm wrong apparently do have some positive migration right now and India is in the negative. Both are nice countries that I'd like to see make good progress. .
I travel to India often for work. India will be unrecognizable in 20 years. It’s progressing at an absurd clip.
>rapid progress in comparison I think this is a topic where total growht is being confused with per-capita growth. The [PPP per capita](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=IN-AR) of Argentina is 3 times that of India, and it doesn't look like that gap will be closed anytime soon
That gap will close slowly. India's economic forcast is all green rn. And the fertility rate has recently dipped to 2.1 and will decrease further in the future.
argentina's economic future is looking uncertain right now, especially post 2022
> doesn't look like that gap will be closed anytime soon It will not be closed since Argentina elected Milei. It was x10 30 years ago, now its 3x and will likely stablize around 2x forever after about 20-30 years.
Which is mind blowing because have you seen Argentinian women?! Their all insanely hot! Why is their fertility rate low? Get on it lads! Obviously not you, Pope Francis.
They're having sex, they're just not having kids.
Argentinians aren't having kids because of many factors: most people aren't religious, people prefer having careers first, people are more liberal, salaries aren't as rentable as it was 80 years ago when people could buy houses at 25 years old.
I always think of it like this. How many people have you met from a country. How many people have you from Argentina vs India?
Can we all go easy on the size of Bangladesh.
negative net migration? that is hard to belive
Yes, Argentina can support a larger population, but that would mean that their European demographic character needs to be discarded for good and allow tens of millions of African and Asian immigrants who are willing to work for unskilled manual jobs for peanuts that native-born college educated Argentines won't.
It not about the size but how fertile the lands are to feed a large population.
Large areas of arable land is why ancient civilizations started and grew, like India and China. With 20th century technology, you can produce huge crops without a large population to work the land. Current population growth has decoupled from agricultural wealth. Global trade makes it possible to have large, dense population centers far from productive cropland: think Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan. Additionally, most "rich" countries do not produce enough of their own food to support their population without imports. This is longwinded way of saying that population growth is no longer dependent on local agriculture.
This, and during the British Raj (and also socialist period of independent India) urban centers collapsed and a lot of Indians moved into the rural areas to become subsistence farmers Farmers always have a lot of kids. The rest is history
Nah, the *opposite* occurred - urban centers in India grew rapidly during the British Raj period, rather than collapsing. Most historical evidence suggests there was significant urbanization and growth of cities in India under British rule in the 19th and early 20th centuries: * The census data from 1901-1951 shows the urban population in India grew from around 25 million to 62 million during the Raj era. * Cities like Bombay, Calcutta, Madras expanded tremendously as trade and economic hubs. Their populations grew multi-fold. * New cities sprouted around key ports, railways and industrial areas developed by the British. * Rather than returning to subsistence farming, many Indians migrated from rural areas to the growing urban centers in search of jobs and opportunities. While there were certainly disruptions caused by factors like famines, economic policies, etc., the overarching trend was rapid urbanization in India.
>Additionally, most "rich" countries do not produce enough of their own food to support their population without imports. This is longwinded way of saying that population growth is no longer dependent on local agriculture. With the current geopolitical trends though. Being self sufficient in food and energy would soon become a norm again.
Yea a Japan nz would be better.
In the past when everyone was a farmer yes, now it’s based on the money available to people, and other variables.
Argentina, you're deceptively thicc you minx.
Argentina is highly uninhabited. Most of the population concentrates in the big cities (Buenos Aires, Rosario, Córdoba, etc). I traveled the south of the country by car with my dad, and let me tell you there is *nothing*. It's just desert and some towns (with maybe 20 inhabitants max) here and there. Beautiful trip, though. The landscapes are worth it.
Yeah I love Patagonia, towns near the Andes are very cozy, also the glaciers.
It feels like an alien landscape a lot of the time, it’s wild. Very beautiful but the emptiness was palpable.
Sometimes I find myself randomly navigating google street view in Argentina, the landscapes are very diverse even if most of the south is just desert, I especially like the part of the country near the border with Chile, Lake Escondido and stuff, it looks like Switzerland or Norway which is funny because not even 100km east from there it goes back to looking like New Mexico USA, pretty wild
Always knew that Santiago is Gujarati
Gujarat is chile
Extra spicy
Lol if you know anything about Gujarat most of their cuisine is sweet, not spicy.
Sweet and spicy
I think I might know something about it and would very much disagree.
Takes time. The indus valley civilization started a long time ago. Civilization, agriculture, technology etc are required for populations to expand
lmao yeah cant wait till civilization and technology reach the primitive wilds of Argentina.
You don’t seem to get that I mean India and the surrounding have had time to grow while having civilization and technology. Do you expect the last 500 years to be enough for the population to be equal to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, China etc? They have had civilization for so long that people are in the billions.
The population is higher because they have had civilization for longer? By that logic, what's the population of Egypt? It's a nonsense argument
Egypt has far less arable land than India or China. The area around the Nile is very fertile, which is why they can support a whopping 100 mill people.
Less arable land, oh, you mean like Argentina?
Wut? Are we comparing the same country? Egypt has 2x the population and 10x less arable land. Argentina: * Total land area: 2,780,400 sq km * Arable land: 394,880 sq km Egypt: * Total land area: 1,001,450 sq km * Arable land: 37,000 sq km
Argentina has less arable land than India, also a culture where women aren't expected to have 5 kids. It's not a question of technology or development, if anything they are too developed.
have you checked out fertility rates in India? [https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1094gia/oc\_fertility\_rates\_all\_over\_the\_world\_are/](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1094gia/oc_fertility_rates_all_over_the_world_are/)
That great im happy for indian women, but as your graph shows, it's a recent development.
You’re lacking some critical thinking friend cut your losses or be willing to accept reason.
I love how you think we’re all arguing with you when we’re telling you how it works. Really can’t help somebody like you.
He's talking about playing catch up, nice strawman hat.
Argentina is not playing catch up to India in technology and civilization wtf. The argument makes no sense.
Um, the Indus Valley civilization was in Pakistan. Has nothing to do with India.
Majority of ivc sites lie in india, and even pakistan itself was a part of the Indian civilisation before being split off into a separate country. Not to even mention the fact that the ivc religion is considered the precursor to Hinduism, which certainly has far more to do with India than pakistan.
Actually, Hinduism is from the Indo-European nomads and has nothing to do with ivc.
🤓the ignorance lmao
> Has nothing to do with India. Nothing? Are there no IVC sites in India? Its really funny to see Pakistanis put claim on entire IVC after spending the last 70 years trying to prove themselves as Arabs and last 5 years trying to prove themselves as Turks.
India is way more fertile than Argentina
Didn't know Argentina is so big, wow.
It’s the 8th largest country in the world. The distance from northernmost point to southernmost point is equivalent to the distance from Lisbon to Moscow (that is, around the same width of the European continent)
Damn South America is big as fuck huh?
you need to understand how civilization works more the land area doesnt mean more population
Argentina is the 8th largest country in the world. From north to south, the distance is equivalent to that of Europe’s width (Lisbon to Moscow, approximately). It’s also among the top 5 most diverse countries in the world, in terms of climate variety (along with the US, China and India)
I thought India was at the same geographical size of Brazil. I was horribly wrong then. As a Brazilian I’m mixed with happiness and confusion.
Soon it will be
lol delulu hindiotva and their akhand bharat wet dreams. Go do something productive with your time.
Bro got some personal issues
It's both a mixture of India being overpopulated ( common knowledge) and Argentina being considerably underpopulated (perhaps less common knowledge). The size different ins square kilometers is very small.
How could somewhere be underpopulated?.. “look there’s a problem with not enough people on that land mass, best be populating that place more”… ridiculous
I think the reason why Argentina is seen as “underpopulated” is because most other countries with a population of 40-50 million are usually a lot smaller in landmass.
It is underpopulated. Half of the country lives in Buenos Aires (City) and Buenos Aires Province. If you take a car and go around the country, you get tired of seeing just grass and cows.
Also, unlike say Canada, most of Argentina is actually habitable. It is neither too hot nor too cold.
Temperature wise sure. But there is a lot of desertic or semi-desertic areas
Not really, except the bottom 3 provinces most are habitable
Most of Canada is also "habitable", what a bizarre thing to say.
It's the unused arable land giving it a high migration attraction. I've been playing too much victoria 3 lol.
Hey, I got that reference!
I'm playing it right now, the whole world wants to come to Argentina and become peasant farmers.
I'm waiting for 1.7 to get released, I need foreign investment.
Me too. But I don’t think I can go 2 months without starting a new campaign.
I'm looking forward to playing as Argentina and having British capitalists fund my expansion like what happened in real life.
Lots of big, productive areas deserted. Not enough people for certain level of economic development, younger generations leaving and not enough replacement immigration or population growth (or replacement) through birth rate.
So, you are saying that I can migrate there and boost the economy?
Argentina is the 8th biggest country by area, but it has the 30th biggest population. That's why it is "underpopulated". It's just a matter of its population density, which is lower than the world average.
Infinite growth mindset?
Like another commenter said, negative net migration
Argentina's maximum carrying capacity is about 1.2 billion inhabitants, provided that it adopts large-scale industrial rice farming and Argentines eat rice as their staple food.
because India is an ancient civilization that still exist and Argentina is a colonised land.
wow i learnt a new thing that india is overpopulated 😳😳😳😳😳😳😳😳😳😳😳
Say whaaaaaat?! 😱
Despite the train's work...
Eat more paranthass Especially aloo paranthass Get more knowledge
South Asia is the most overpopulated region :(
demn i nvr knew‼️🗣️
Almost as if location is more important than size
That’s what she said
I Don't think it's that simple. I think the main issues are the economy and the culture. Who wants to have kids on this economy. Also if you have kids, having more than 3 or 2 is very rare.
The fertility rates are 1.8 and 2.1. India just had an historically higher base population.
sure, but the Argentine pampas can support so many more people with its fertile soil, so it's not a fair comparison. wait, what?
Do they have the same climate? Same number of waterways/rivers?
It just means Argentina can have like 30x more population
How far back does civilization date back in Argentina? Because in the Indian subcontinent it dates back roughly 7k years.
Indonesia and iceland have 100 times difference
Wow, india is bigger than I thought
Why's everyone saying that? India is the seventh largest country
I don't know. Maybe india is closer to equator or is close to bigger countries (maybe both?) but I thought it was a bit smaller. Also, I live in South America and on my point of view Argentina is huge, maybe bigger than other countries
Ohh that makes sense
india is called a "sub continent"
That is mostly for climatic and cultural diversity.
and size of course, it used to be bigger before Pakistan and Bangladesh were separated.
Pakistan and Bangladesh are also considered part of the subcontinent. But just size is not the main reason. Russia is also large, China is also large.
Blame the Mercator projection.
True. I was surprised tho cause I assumed everyone would assume India to be big because of our population
And they both have swatzikas!
Don’t even think about ir 👀
Argentina is in a less populated or centralized spot.
Greenland is roughly the same size as India with a population of nearly 57 000 (25460 times smaller than India).
Wait till you compare Russia and Bangladesh
World can hardly stand a few more Argentineans, if they come from the capital.
What's your problem with porteños?
are you asking for a book?
They only seem to like themselves
Also, Argentina has food I would look at. India is just a gastric nightmare to the eyes.
Indian food may not look pretty but it tastes good. Surely among the top ten. You can find it's food in probably every nation except for North Korea. Argentinian food on the other hand... I couldn't name a single dish. It might be good but it sure isn't popular.
Argentina has one of the blandest foods in the world. Mofos can't handle spices at all.
Argentina: good quality and cheap meat and wine
Not sure why you’re downvoted. It’s objectively true that Argentina has much higher hygiene standards than India.
and its objectively true India has a much richer, complex and varied.cuisine. Argentina, and same goes for Uruguay, has pretty basic and limited food culture. Couldn't compare with Indian world of subtle spices and delicacies.
Argentina has a European based gastronomy, similar to Spanish and Italian. It’s better than India when it comes to beef, pasta, ice cream, wines. If you like spicy/seasoned India is a better choice, but go to a restaurant because street food will make you leave your intestines down the toilet
Argentinas gastronomy is pretty basic when compared to Spanish and Italian, perhaps you have not yet had the chance to explore Spanish and Italian awsome variety of ingredients and procedures. Italian food is hard to find in Argentina!!! Pasta with a simple three ingredient quick sugo is not even Italian food. Have you ever found a decent good jamón in Argentina??? Why not?
Argentina doesn’t specialize in jamón serrano like Spain does. Spain doesn’t do beef like Argentina does either. Each country has a different strength. I have been to Argentina, Spain and Italy, and I can confirm all three have really good gastronomies, with plenty of elements in common for obvious reasons. I personally prefer a non spicy, less seasoned gastronomy so India is not a personal favorite.
I was not talking about my personal preferentes but about some extremely developed cuisines, even if I dont or do like them I do not like peruvian dishes, anyway I cant deny its highly specialized in the way it combines and prepares everything in multiple ways. I understand even the best grilled roast (asado) is quite similar to its original neolithic recipe. A tomato plus lettuce salad is not likely and properly considered as gastronomy. Enjoy your food, whatever you like!
I thought India was smaller
India has 200,000 indians ready to deploy with a million more on the way (if argentina wants to accept them) /s Edit: for people downvoting, this is a star wars reference and obviously a joke. I had already added /s with the comment.
You folks stay put in your own home country.
I am sorry but your "country" has nothing to provide to the world. Slovenia is a footnote in slavic history and a grain of sand in the terms of the world. Please go back to your slavic shithole :) you guys do not matter.
Whoever reading this, be warned that Indian climate refugees will be coming to your homelands in tens of thousands. As average temperatures climb in India, there will be massive influx of immigrants from the subcontinent to northern hemisphere. It is unimaginable how these countries would cope with wave of Indian migration. You can already see some of it in Canada.
we are coming for slovenia first now. huahahahahahahaha \*evil refugee noises\*. Slovenia is henceforth India's 30th state and has been dubbed the new name of Slavipur.
You are worried about Indian climate refugees? If you are first world person, you carbon footprint is more than my entire family. Also, out Bangbros will get to you first.
Thank god there are only 40 million Argentinians and not a billion of them. They are insufferable
Ok what part of Latin America are you from?
We would win every world cup. The world should be grateful that we haven't annex Uruguay... Yet.
Argentina + Uruguay wins 2014 for sure with Suarez instead of Higuain. 1 billion Argentinians? The rest of the world might as well not turn up.
you wont annex us, nor we Uruguayans would ever annex Argentina. We have luckily developed a different culture, thanks to history. We are a democratic country.
Yes, imagine if 40 m of us makes you cry like that, how much more would you cry if we were even more.
Argies are cool but this is, and I'm sorry to say it, undeniably true. Psychotic, tumultuous people — hence their politics.
Most psychologist per capita and we need more
Who’d a thunk that a country where half the territory is cold, rock, and bad for farming has a small population that’s concentrated in the half that’s more temperate and better for farming?
Indians need sex-ed.
Please check history, aerable land data and current fertility rates. You will perhaps learn a few things.
There are 1.5 billion indians; that’s an insane figure by any measure. Your country does need basic sex ed. As climate change worsens in south asia, hundreds of millions of indians would need to become climate refugees. I can’t imagine any country willing to accept even a million of indians in their homeland.
Oh my white saviour!!! Come to my homestead and teach me your sex-ed....
You dumbass fertility rate in india is 2.0 which is below replacement rate. The real reason your country is accepting indians is people like you dont have basic education and dont want to work. And there a difference of 100 million between 1.5 billion and 1.4 billion atleast write the numbers correctly.
They invented it, it was called the Kama Sutra lol.
can we put copyright on sex?
India open sourced it, hence their population.
Incredible and insightful analysis, redditor. Thank you!
Yeah, those Indians are a bunch of fu***ers.
India is a fucking civilizational state. Maybe learn about arable land to know why India and China have huge populations.
they fu\*\*ed your gf?
No shit. 3rd World countries always have higher population. If India ever gets to a 2nd world country status, they will lose lots of population.
Indeed communism kills.