“South Asia has a lower income per capita than sub-Saharan Africa.

” Comment on
the validity of this statement.
The term "income per capita" refers to the amount of money earned per person in
a given location. It is also used to characterize the standard of life in a city, state, or
country and to measure an individual's earning ability (Amadeo, 2020). The
statement “South Asia has a lower income per capita than sub-Saharan Africa” is
based on the standard of living of people in the mentioned countries. However,
there are significant differences in the natural growth rate of the population and
the recent evolution of life expectancy between these two locations. Life
expectancy in Southeast Asian countries has increased dramatically, whereas it has
decreased dramatically in SubSaharan Africa – and has been sharply negative in
Botswana since 1985 – attributable to the HIV/AIDS epidemics (Carbonnier,
Chakraborty, Mulle, & presente, 2010). Asians were, on average, much poorer than
Africans in the 1960s. In 1960, SSA's GDP per capita was somewhat lower than that
of East Asia and the Pacific, but it was 3.5 times larger than that of South Asia (Gill
& Karakülah, 2018). In the present times, South Asia is bountiful with resources
however, this region can also be a place where extreme poverty exists. But if we
are going to compare this to the current situation of South Asia, the gap is evidently
visible. Though South Asia has a land of fabulous wealth, it could also be seen as
the place Where extreme poverty takes place. Despite it has only 20% of the world's
population, it has nearly half of the world's underprivileged. Therefore, in some
ways, Sub-Saharan Africa is far better to South Asia in terms of economic
performance