The message is pretty simple develop infrastructure, growth follows. I had been in UK for 3years and for the kind of infrastructure that UK has got in terms of Airport, Rail Network, Road which is one of the best in the world is still 10years behind UK and they are almost close to China. If you compare India we are not a decade behind I'm sorry to say but we are 50years behind. I'm a consultant and has pretty good offers in Bangalore but I hate the same city which I loved to settle during my childhood days for its beauty but now I hate for its pathetic infrastructure and politics. An actor is dead and the city is in fire for 2days and Millions lost in property damage and due to closure of business, thast pretty bizzare and this will not happen anywhere in the world. A simple rain Mumbai in flood and Hyderabad brand new roads, one rain washed away. There are million problems and still in the end the poor get suffered and private sector has done enough in providing jobs, creating talent and its the governments turn to provide infrastructure. You can't expect the private sector to take of logistics (building of airport, roads, ports) if then why the hell government is for? We can only hope for a better development...
RE:India's Growth
by Senthil Kumar on Mar 17, 2007 11:50 PM
UK & USA had head start.
India got freedom in 1947. When did USA and UK got their freedom?
It is not about giving excuses! But India has done a pretty decent job in getting people out of poverty.
You say "Develop Infrastructure" growth follows"
I say "Give education and freedom to citizen, every thing follows"
You are in UK because of Indian Visionaries who invested in building Educational Institutions.
You going to UK is a good thing for India. May be 10 years from now, you might get some nostalgic feeling about India. And you might decide to come back. Who knows. You 'll bring more knowledge.
Food, Shelter, Security and Freedom to pursue happiness, those are the foremost things a good government should try to give it to the people.
RE:RE:India's Growth
by Julius Caeser on Mar 20, 2007 05:29 AM
India got freedom in 1947. 50 years on what do you have to show ! Food, Shelter, Security and Freedom ? Any one of them ? Remember Japan was bombed and nearly destroyed in 1945. Do see a difference here. Getting people out of poverty ! Really ? You have definitely not seen it all.
RE:RE:RE:RE:India's Growth
by Julius Caeser on Mar 20, 2007 06:52 AM
50 years on what do we have to show ! I get it excuses, excuses, excuses.
Japan was just an example. Look around there are other countries too.Money spent on defense duh ! Does that mean there is no allocation made for infrastructure. What do we have to show. Superhighways ?
Literacy rate. Did I hear our population just crossed a billion.The literacy rate is inversely proportional to the increase in population.
East India Company has come and gone. Now the netas have taken over and the looting spree continues Ha !
Yes, the government "should" try. And they are still trying 50 years on...
RE:India's Growth
by Muralidaran Sridhar on Apr 08, 2007 08:46 PM
Please dont compare India with Japan or any other countries. Considering the huge population,diverse culture we have definitely made a good progress. Every country has undergone this transformation before. India is now in its transformaiton stage. Maybe the next genereation will have a better India than we have now
A famous study was done in 1995 where it was found out that the entire world population of 6 billion population can be accomodated in Indonesia island which is about the size of UP.
It means 6000 million people in UP can be accomondated. Or the EnTire world in UP alone !
At that rate whole of India can surely accomodate 70000 million (70 billion people) easily.
Right now we have only 1.2 billion people and our capacity is 70 billion people.
RE:Entire WORLD population can be accomodated in Indonesia
by Senthil Kumar on Mar 17, 2007 11:12 PM
Most of the over population theories stem from Thomas Malthus's original population theory of early 19th century.
It was the crudest, most barbarous theory that ever existed, a system of despair which struck down all those beautiful phrases about love thy neighbor and world citizenship.
Sir, What has been written is 100% correct.Only when Nehru was PM he had planned the all the things then rest all were only interested in their gaddis and playing politics like Garibihatao etc now this aam admi.Even in the states there is no planning for power etc only slogans .They are interested in like banning arrack or lottery which has got no relevence .All must ie,raise above their personnel prejudice think of the coubtry has whole.In fact they should compete with each other to give maximum beenfit and ultimate uplift the country .I think it is too much to ask thanks vijendra
RE:And that's the trouble with India
by Jagjit Singh on Mar 17, 2007 09:35 PM
Amen. I'm tired of these Infosys E-Contractors blaming the government for not assisting their looting spree. Why don't they house their e-coolies on the campus itself ? That'll free up half the roads in Bangalore every morning and evening.
RE:RE:RE:And that's the trouble with India
by Julius Caeser on Mar 20, 2007 05:34 AM
Sour Grapes ! Sour Grapes ! Instead of building good roads blame the company for all the inefficiencies of the government. Reminds me of the Crab story. A can full of Indian crabs always pulls the other crabs from climbing out and eventually all of them die !
RE:And that's the trouble with India
by shaik karim on Apr 10, 2007 12:27 PM
Whats wrong with u guys??? I am surprised as know that there are people who are comfortable with the government's mismanagement of the resourses and the taxes we pay, and inturn blaming on the only sourses(IT and ITeS Companies) Indian Economy is lingering about. Please explain me abt the LOOTING SPREE, cant believe someone has said that... Guys, we have to accept the reality, and the reality is unfortunately is very sad. Just looking at a couple of roads with some fashionable chicks passing time, and a few flyovers here and there(Not able solve their purpose), doesn't mean that we have reached heights.
Future looks more positive than ever! Don't let people tell you doomsday is near.
Almost no one on this board seems to support my point of view. Friends please don't take this personally .. We have been brain washed from our birth with the concept of overpopulation. And may be our mind never questioned on "Why?".
I grew up in a small village. My ancestors were all farmers. I used to spend quite bit time with my grand parents asking above lives in their time. One of the striking point for me was, This generation doesn't know what real famine is. We hear about some farmer suicide in news papers. It is nothing compared to famines of 19th century and early and mid twentieth century.
None of my ancestors had the luxury of eating food made with Rice more than once in 2 weeks. Which is not at all true with current farmers or other poorest people. (I live in Tamilnadu)
The current overpopulation hysteria began in the sixties, when a Stanford ''scientist'' named Paul Ehrlich wrote a book called The Population Bomb. Just as movie Jaws frightened millions of people from swimming in the ocean, this book succeeded in scaring people with its prophesies of starvation, death, and destruction. He predicted massive increases in famine, dwindling and expensive natural resources, piles of garbage and waste, and environmental destruction. The exact opposite has occurred. Fewer than half as many people die from famine each year now than a century ago, even though our population has quadrupled. Many of those deaths today are the result of political action by ruthless dictators and not a lack of food. People in third world countries consume more food calories in their daily diet than at any time in history. And the calorie numbers are increasing every year.
Food: The UN Population Division 2001 report, World Population Monitoring 2001, studied the relationship between population growth and development. Contrary to Malthusian doomsday predictions, this U.N Report stated: "From 1900 to 2000, world population grew from 1.6 billion to 6.1 billion persons. However, while world population increased close to 4 times, world real gross domestic product (GDP) [actual output of goods and service] increased 20 to 40 times, allowing the world not only to sustain a fourfold population increase but also to do so at vastly higher standards of living."
In 1990, the UNFAO Report on the State of Food and Agriculture estimated that with present technologies fully employed, the world could feed 30 to 35 billion people. Roger Revelle, Director of the Harvard Centre for Population Studies, estimates that the world's agricultural resources are capable of supporting 40 billion people. Indian economist Raj Krishna estimates that India alone is capable of increasing crop yields to the point of providing the entire world's food supply. India, it is worth noting has four times as much arable land per person as Japan and twice as much as Britain.
Natural Resources: The inflation-adjusted market price of every major natural resource has steadily decreased over the last century, and it continues to decrease. Due to developments in waste management, the projected landfill waste for the United States (a relatively massive producer of waste) over the entire next century could be stored in a landfill area only 18 miles on each side. "World Population Monitoring 2001," emphasizes that many of the most dire predictions about the consequences of population growth have proven unfounded, and remain unlikely to occur even if the world population rises to 8.9 billion by 2050.
RE:Nature has every thing in abundance ..
by Julius Caeser on Mar 20, 2007 07:07 AM
Lallu will be proud of you. Keep it up ! Also nice Cut and Paste ;-)
Paul Ehrlich, the father of the overpopulation myth, has regularly predicted mass world starvation (among other catastrophes) ever since the early 1960s.
Ehrlich confidently wrote in 1968 in The Population Bomb that there would be a major food shortage in the United States and that "in the 1970s . . . hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death." He also claimed that by 1999 the U.S. population would have declined to 22.6 million, less than 10 percent of its actual population as of 2006. He forecast that 65 million Americans would die of starvation between 1980 and 1989. He also thought that the oceans would be destroyed by 1979 and that fishing would collapse. For instance, he said that world fishing production in 1977 would be 30 million metric tons, whereas in reality it was 73 million metric tons, or well over twice what he predicted.
Poor England fared even worse than the U.S. in Ehrlich's scenario: "If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000." Julian Simon, Population Matters (New Jersey: Transaction Publications, 1990), pp. 364-365.Note
RE:over population myths - even USA and UK were predicted to collapse
by Nasir on Apr 10, 2007 12:50 PM
There is something really wrong with u!!!! So u r happy STANDING all through ur life unable to move an inch in a situation like that( As u r trying to accomodate the words population inIndonesia)... What r u, an LGK student????
RE:over population myths - even USA and UK were predicted to collapse
by arbind on Mar 17, 2007 03:00 AM
My third point for Senthil.
Have you never read about starvation deaths? In Kalahandi district of Orissa people died of starvation, bcoz they didn't have food to eat. But you will never know and understand that bcoz u have too tiny a brain
RE:RE:over population myths - even USA and UK were predicted to collapse
by Kutta on Mar 17, 2007 09:57 PM
An example-
Isreal has a very very density of population ahead of bengal and yet is able to grow huge amounts of fruits and vegetables plus meat. AND THEY ARE RICHER THAN ARABS despite oil.
Answer is HIGHER PRODUCTIVITY not idiotic idle mind complaining like yourself.
RE:over population myths - even USA and UK were predicted to collapse
by arbind on Mar 17, 2007 03:24 AM
My 5th point for Senthil.
You talk about population densities. You talk about, I quote you: "... The United Kingdom also has a far higher population density than does China.." "... Switzerland is more densely populated than Pakistan..." "... Maryland, the UK, and Switzerland have greater population densities than India, China, and Pakistan..."
When you talk about all this you do not have the knowledge and education to understand that this higher population densities are supported by resources from the hinterlands. Tokyo has a higher population density than most places on earth but it is supported by supplies from other places.
To enlighten you further and elevate the standard of your tiny brain I will continue further. The term "over-population" is not "absolute" but "relative". It is relative to how much population can be supported by the "exploitable" resources of a place. The term exploitable not only means how much natural resources are physically present but also how much of it can be economically exploited within the constraints of "physical limitations".
For example, in the Tundra (have you heard of this term ever? No? Then look it up in Google. I am not going to explain everything to you.) even a density of 100 people in a square kilometer may be considered over-population. Whereas in Punjab, even 1000 people in a square kilometer is not over-population. Why? If you have even a tiny amount of brain inside ur big skull then .... think.... think about it.
RE:over population myths - even USA and UK were predicted to collapse
by s on Mar 16, 2007 06:12 PM
So are you suggesting that India is not over populated ?
RE:RE:over population myths - even USA and UK were predicted to collapse
by Senthil Kumar on Mar 16, 2007 07:51 PM
Indian can easily support 70 times the current population (70 billion people) if not more.
RE:RE:RE:over population myths - even USA and UK were predicted to collapse
by Julius Caeser on Mar 20, 2007 06:02 AM
True.70 billion people with no water, food, clothes and shelter. I can only imagine what kind of world record it could be !
RE:RE:RE:over population myths - even USA and UK were predicted to collapse
by Silly on Mar 17, 2007 04:17 PM
Sir do you have any idea about population growth and its impact on economy ? It is quite evident that you don't have any..
I could spend hours talking about this, but not with someone who can be as dumb. OPEN your eyes.. we are getting crushed under our own weight.. look at public transport, traffic, pollution, per capita.
I don't resort to personal attacks but you've just crossed the limits of dumb talks. My advise to you : Get a MRI done, your brain is not bigger than a grape, and Don't go out in the heat.. it'll shrink further and become a raisin !
RE:over population myths - even USA and UK were predicted to collapse
by arbind on Mar 17, 2007 02:48 AM
You are so short of intelligence, as it appears from all of ur messages, that I am left flabbergasted as to how a human with such a low quality or tiny amount of brain as you can possibly be born.
RE:over population myths - even USA and UK were predicted to collapse
by arbind on Mar 17, 2007 03:07 AM
My 4th point for Senthil.
You say that 7% of earth's crust is aluminium. right. But you do not have the intelligence to understand that most of it is not "exploitable", means it cannot be extracted/mined. Why? I will enlighten you with some light of knowledge. There is aluminium even in the garden soil in your backyard, in the soild along the roads, everywhere where there is clay there is aluminium. When geologists say that 7% of earth's crust is aluminium they include all this. But I think even a dimwit like you will understand that you cannot "mine" aluminium from ur garden soil.
RE:over population myths - even USA and UK were predicted to collapse
by arbind on Mar 17, 2007 02:54 AM
I will prove my point by logic and tear your arguments one at a time.
First. You say that India can support 70 times the current population. Well what is the mathematical / statistical procedure you have employed to arrive at this figure? (By the way, do you at all know that there are subjects called mathematics and statistics?) Did you just had a dream in which some alien told you this magic figure of 70 times !!!??? Why is it 70 times and not 80 times? or 75 times? or 65 times? or 71 times? 72... 73....
So you understand how short of mental faculties you actually are
RE:over population myths - even USA and UK were predicted to collapse
by arbind on Mar 17, 2007 02:57 AM
Second point. Senthil, I presume you can read the english language. So have you ever read about the one-child policy of China?
If population explosion is not an issue then all the Chinese... all 1.3 billion of them must be mad. right? And you must be the only "intelligent" animal on planet Earth.
The world as we know it will likely be ruined before the year 2000 and the reason for this will be its inhabitants' failure to comprehend two facts. These facts are: 1. World food production cannot keep pace with the galloping growth of population. 2. `Family Planning' cannot and will not, in the foreseeable future, check this runaway growth." " Note In other words, nothing could be done to prevent a major catastrophe because food production was declining on a per capita basis, and this catastrophe would strike "before the year 2000."
We regularly hear dire warnings about the dangers it poses. But the term "overpopulation" is never defined.
Exactly what is it? How do we know if a country is overpopulated? If overpopulation exists, is there such a thing as underpopulation?
For decades people have been announcing that China is "overpopulated,".
The United Kingdom also has a far higher population density than does China. Actually, the UK has a population density almost equal to that of "overpopulated" India.
And Switzerland is more densely populated than Pakistan.
Clearly, some problems exist when it comes to defining our terms. If Maryland, the UK, and Switzerland have greater population densities than India, China, and Pakistan, then why are the latter considered overpopulated, but not the former?
RE:Population Myths
by Tuhin Abhyankar on Mar 16, 2007 09:44 AM
UK and Switzerland, even while having greater population densities than India China and Pakistan are not considered overpopulated because they have the infrastructure to support that population. Overpopulation occurs when the population exceeds beyond a figure that can be supported by the existing available infrastructure.
Dr VS Rao of BITS Hyderabad may think that Chandrababu Naidu was wrong in considering Economics as more important than politics. Who told Economics is urban and politics is for rural? Bihar gave importance to politics instead of economics and see the state of affairs there. Bhagavat Gita says that you cannot do good somewhere without doing bad somewhere else and vice versa. Naidu did not mean to do bad for rural and intended to do good for urban. In West Bengal Left Front used to give importance to Rural and win all votes there but used to loose seats in Kolkata city. Naidu's Urban development with subsequent rural benefits was indeed wise thinking. Success is not to be measured by CM designations, elections fought and seats won but by the enormous obstacles which were overcome and there is no doubt that with Economic Focus Chandrababu Naidu is indeed a success which pigeon headed fellows have failed to appreciate.
as per the article above all the creatures(including labours .. or so called dirty people) except high tech people should go to jungle ...only buildings and high tech people should live in the electronic city.... u create naxalites urself ...and finaly cry.......development is necessary but not at the cost of people....... it is india ..........land for everyone not only for u....if u want to live sophisticated life move to west....where only money matters nothingelse
RE:others to go jungle
by Sreekanth Nemani on Mar 16, 2007 09:04 AM
My dear fellow, the first people who will benefit from good roads is farmers... dont't be stupid.
RE:others to go jungle
by prashant babu on Mar 16, 2007 07:37 AM
So, my suggestion is that even if the article is long, please read it completely so that you can avoid posting such irresponsible comments. The writer does not talk about creating Naxalites.He is only talking about the infrastructure problem. And this problem does not just affect the Software engineers.
RE:others to go jungle
by prashant babu on Mar 16, 2007 07:29 AM
I think you should read the article well first. What is also mentioned is the plight of the farmers due to poor infrastructure. Dont jump to conclusions.
