Hasnain2009
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2009
- Messages
- 1,782
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Have u been to karachi??
in 5 years people forget about Shanghai...and talk Mumbai...
- Thread starter gpit
- Start date
Have u been to karachi??
Nemesis
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 1,236
- Reaction score
- 0
^^^^Are you seriously comparing Mumbai to Karachi?
Mumbai is the greatest city in South Asia not because of it's infrastructure (Delhi or maybe Islamabad beats it), but because of its people. Despite the loonies of the shiv sena, Mumbai is the melting pot of India where all different kinds of cultures interact. All the greatest cities in the world - New York, London, etc - share exactly this trait. I say this as a pukka Delhiite.
If only we could replace the people of Delhi with those of Bombay, Delhi would become perfect.
But i must say, Mumbai needs to watch itself, Bangalore and Delhi are soon going to catch up.
Mumbai is the greatest city in South Asia not because of it's infrastructure (Delhi or maybe Islamabad beats it), but because of its people. Despite the loonies of the shiv sena, Mumbai is the melting pot of India where all different kinds of cultures interact. All the greatest cities in the world - New York, London, etc - share exactly this trait. I say this as a pukka Delhiite.
If only we could replace the people of Delhi with those of Bombay, Delhi would become perfect.
But i must say, Mumbai needs to watch itself, Bangalore and Delhi are soon going to catch up.
If a leader cant deliver what he aspired/promised, regardless whether his words are considered either hyper or contract, he will not, or should not, earn credit from his constituents. A serious leader must be held accountable for what he said. Of course, I dont expect to see in India as such.
Many sane people, including myself, consider boasting democracy a panacea as brainwash.
Normally, un- or under- educated people want sensational/emotional satisfaction the most, not retrospection, not record track. Willful behavior wont benefit ordinary people or the country.
China Looms Large in India's Election
India's larger, richer neighbor figures prominently in the Congress Party's and the BJP's rhetoric about security and the economy
By Mehul Srivastava
Call it the Giant-Next-Door complex. While the world worries about India and China eating its lunch, India, for its part, keeps a wary eye on China. For India it's a decades-old habit, this anxious concern about its larger, more prosperous neighbor. India came out on the losing side of a border war in the 1960s between the two Asian giants, and many Indians have questioned Chinese motives ever since. Just in the past year, New Delhi has clashed with Beijing over trade issues, banning Chinese toy imports amid allegations of tainted chemicals, and fretted publicly over China's overt support of India's archrival, Pakistan. The Chinese, for their part, have continued to challenge Indian ownership of the northeastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh, which the Chinese refer to as South Tibet. In another border dispute, China claims the Siachen glacier, which makes up almost one-third of the disputed state of Kashmir, which Pakistan also claims. Beijing has also repeated protests about India's providing sanctuary to the Dalai Lama.
With India's monthlong national elections wrapping up on May 16, China is again figuring prominently in the national conversation.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has repeatedly said (most recently during the release of the Congress Party's election manifesto last month) that "with the right set of reforms and the right political party, India can do even better than China." After the Chinese Foreign Ministry in April referred to Nepal and Sri Lanka as "friendly neighbors of China" that Beijing wants to help "maintain their sovereignty," India's Home Minister, P. Chidambaram, issued a furious response, telling the Hindustan Times that "China is fishing in troubled waters." This wasn't the first time Chidambaram had targeted China. Last year, while lobbying members of Parliament to support a controversial nuclear-power deal with the U.S., he raised the Chinese bogeyman. "I don't want to be envious of China," he told his colleagues, arguing the deal would allow India to erase its electricity shortfalls and catch up with China's economy.
Info Tech Rivalry
The opposition also sees the advantages of playing the China card. L.K. Advani, leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party, regularly blames Congress for holding back India's growth, pointing to how much better the Chinese have done. Advani promises to do more for the one sector in which India has an undeniable lead over Chinathe IT industry. "If China can beat the world in the physical infrastructure, India can beat the world in IT infrastructure," he wrote in a manifesto that detailed plans to enhance rural access to IT services. Advani, 81, told an election rally on May 3 that his party had advocated back in the 1960s the need for India to develop nuclear weapons to match China's. India lost a short war with China in 1965 but defeated Pakistan in three separate wars. "The same [victory] could have happened in case of China, had India had an atom bomb,"
he said, according to the Press Trust of India.
India's China fixation is part insecurity, part blindness, says Razeen Sally, a professor at the London School of Economics who has written extensively about India. While the world lumps India and China together, he argues, the countries are worlds apart. "If you look at the hard numbers, China is not only ahead of India, but it has also been widening" the gap, Sally says. "On every big measure you look atliving standards, international trade, foreign investments, infrastructure, the business climate, trading procedures, all the way to carbon emissionsyou see not just that China is further ahead from India, but the gap has grown."
China entered the 1980s with many of the same problems that plagued India. Both had a large, impoverished rural population, few exports, and a weak currency. But in the years since then, China has expanded its economy to approximately three times that of India's, to $3.42 trillion, in 2008. Only the U.S., Japan, and Germany are larger. China exports about 10 times as many goods as India, spends six times as much on infrastructure, and has a lower percentage of its population living in poverty. "The challenges are very similar: basically the ability to move hundreds of millions out of subsistence agriculture to non-agriculture jobs, and to sustain that for a long time," says Subir Gokarn, Asia Pacific chief economist for Standard & Poor's, which, like BusinessWeek, is a unit of The McGraw-Hill Companies (MHP). "India has not had the same success in translating growth into non-agricultural employment."
Towering Chinese Economic Clout
The two countries' response to the global recession shows how India's slower rate of growth puts it at a disadvantage to China. Both countries announced big fiscal stimulus packages last year, but China's was more than 10 times larger than India's$568 billion compared with India's $50 billion. Even that relatively small amount put India's budget deficit at more than 10% of gross domestic product and prompted a scolding from ratings agencies that downgraded the outlook on Indian government debt. Beijing received no such reprimand. China's stimulus package was infrastructure-focused, but India's was more along the lines of tax breaks.
Politicians from Singh's government argue that, despite the less ambitious focus of India's plan, the stimulus nonetheless has proved effective. India's banks are lending again, some economic activity is picking up, and India's benchmark Sensex stock index is up 26% for the year, after falling 52% in 2008. Members of the opposition still call for India to take a page from Beijing's playbook and start spending a lot more on infrastructure projects. India's infrastructure needs for the next five years are estimated at more than $500 billion, which includes roads, airports, railroads, and power projects. The BJP says it plans to build 20 kilometers (12.4 miles) of road every day. "How do we handle this economic crisis? What you require in India is for the government to come out at the forefront," says Arun Jaitley, the BJP general secretary. "Whether through a public-private partnership model or just through public spending, you have to prime up the economy through infrastructure spending."
Economists say India needs to make further reforms, though, if the country hopes to close the gap with China. "The aspiration to do things the way the Chinese do is a realistic one, not a fantasy" says Gokarn. "But there are certain kinds of investments that you have to make in your infrastructure, in your labor markets, and in other areas. Only that will allow this transition to happen."
Srivastava reports for BusinessWeek from New Delhi.
China Looms Large in India's Election - BusinessWeek
India's larger, richer neighbor figures prominently in the Congress Party's and the BJP's rhetoric about security and the economy
By Mehul Srivastava
Call it the Giant-Next-Door complex. While the world worries about India and China eating its lunch, India, for its part, keeps a wary eye on China. For India it's a decades-old habit, this anxious concern about its larger, more prosperous neighbor. India came out on the losing side of a border war in the 1960s between the two Asian giants, and many Indians have questioned Chinese motives ever since. Just in the past year, New Delhi has clashed with Beijing over trade issues, banning Chinese toy imports amid allegations of tainted chemicals, and fretted publicly over China's overt support of India's archrival, Pakistan. The Chinese, for their part, have continued to challenge Indian ownership of the northeastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh, which the Chinese refer to as South Tibet. In another border dispute, China claims the Siachen glacier, which makes up almost one-third of the disputed state of Kashmir, which Pakistan also claims. Beijing has also repeated protests about India's providing sanctuary to the Dalai Lama.
With India's monthlong national elections wrapping up on May 16, China is again figuring prominently in the national conversation.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has repeatedly said (most recently during the release of the Congress Party's election manifesto last month) that "with the right set of reforms and the right political party, India can do even better than China." After the Chinese Foreign Ministry in April referred to Nepal and Sri Lanka as "friendly neighbors of China" that Beijing wants to help "maintain their sovereignty," India's Home Minister, P. Chidambaram, issued a furious response, telling the Hindustan Times that "China is fishing in troubled waters." This wasn't the first time Chidambaram had targeted China. Last year, while lobbying members of Parliament to support a controversial nuclear-power deal with the U.S., he raised the Chinese bogeyman. "I don't want to be envious of China," he told his colleagues, arguing the deal would allow India to erase its electricity shortfalls and catch up with China's economy. Info Tech Rivalry
The opposition also sees the advantages of playing the China card.
L.K. Advani, leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party, regularly blames Congress for holding back India's growth, pointing to how much better the Chinese have done. Advani promises to do more for the one sector in which India has an undeniable lead over Chinathe IT industry. "If China can beat the world in the physical infrastructure, India can beat the world in IT infrastructure," he wrote in a manifesto that detailed plans to enhance rural access to IT services. Advani, 81, told an election rally on May 3 that his party had advocated back in the 1960s the need for India to develop nuclear weapons to match China's. India lost a short war with China in 1965 but defeated Pakistan in three separate wars. "The same [victory] could have happened in case of China, had India had an atom bomb," he said, according to the Press Trust of India. India's China fixation is part insecurity, part blindness, says Razeen Sally, a professor at the London School of Economics who has written extensively about India. While the world lumps India and China together, he argues, the countries are worlds apart. "If you look at the hard numbers, China is not only ahead of India, but it has also been widening" the gap, Sally says. "On every big measure you look atliving standards, international trade, foreign investments, infrastructure, the business climate, trading procedures, all the way to carbon emissionsyou see not just that China is further ahead from India, but the gap has grown."
China entered the 1980s with many of the same problems that plagued India. Both had a large, impoverished rural population, few exports, and a weak currency. But in the years since then, China has expanded its economy to approximately three times that of India's, to $3.42 trillion, in 2008. Only the U.S., Japan, and Germany are larger. China exports about 10 times as many goods as India, spends six times as much on infrastructure, and has a lower percentage of its population living in poverty. "The challenges are very similar: basically the ability to move hundreds of millions out of subsistence agriculture to non-agriculture jobs, and to sustain that for a long time," says Subir Gokarn, Asia Pacific chief economist for Standard & Poor's, which, like BusinessWeek, is a unit of The McGraw-Hill Companies (MHP). "India has not had the same success in translating growth into non-agricultural employment."
Towering Chinese Economic Clout
The two countries' response to the global recession shows how India's slower rate of growth puts it at a disadvantage to China. Both countries announced big fiscal stimulus packages last year, but China's was more than 10 times larger than India's$568 billion compared with India's $50 billion. Even that relatively small amount put India's budget deficit at more than 10% of gross domestic product and prompted a scolding from ratings agencies that downgraded the outlook on Indian government debt. Beijing received no such reprimand. China's stimulus package was infrastructure-focused, but India's was more along the lines of tax breaks.
Politicians from Singh's government argue that, despite the less ambitious focus of India's plan, the stimulus nonetheless has proved effective. India's banks are lending again, some economic activity is picking up, and India's benchmark Sensex stock index is up 26% for the year, after falling 52% in 2008. Members of the opposition still call for India to take a page from Beijing's playbook and start spending a lot more on infrastructure projects. India's infrastructure needs for the next five years are estimated at more than $500 billion, which includes roads, airports, railroads, and power projects. The BJP says it plans to build 20 kilometers (12.4 miles) of road every day. "How do we handle this economic crisis? What you require in India is for the government to come out at the forefront," says Arun Jaitley, the BJP general secretary. "Whether through a public-private partnership model or just through public spending, you have to prime up the economy through infrastructure spending."
Economists say India needs to make further reforms, though, if the country hopes to close the gap with China. "The aspiration to do things the way the Chinese do is a realistic one, not a fantasy" says Gokarn. "But there are certain kinds of investments that you have to make in your infrastructure, in your labor markets, and in other areas. Only that will allow this transition to happen."
Srivastava reports for BusinessWeek from New Delhi.
China Looms Large in India's Election - BusinessWeek
Indians talking about China is now very similar to , even perhaps more than, Chinese talking about US. By this token, maybe China is truly getting stronger.
I love Indian politicians: they never let us down by entertaining the world.
in Bombay it is acity of racism as Muslim actress was refused the selling of Apartment due to her being Muslim, in china this will never ever be a case. so those who boast about Bombay should think twice before making it look like a haven which it is not and look what an Indian has to say about Bombay and it sounds like more based on truth than fictions that other Indians make it out to be.
At last i found a truthful Indian, hats off for you my bro duhastmish, i like to see more of Indians telling the truth like u do and than there will be no more wars between us just peace, prosperity and power to the people.
Jako
BANNED
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2009
- Messages
- 1,871
- Reaction score
- 0
Mumbai is surely a world class city.....but with likes of bal thackray and shiv shena activitists,one should think twice before pitching mumbai against shanghai in the next decade....... yes du,you are rite,inspite of its good infrastructure and other plus points,mumbai in the last few years has been in the global headlines for mostly wrong reasons......but still mumbai is the best indian and subcontinental city...thnx
duhastmish
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2009
- Messages
- 4,302
- Reaction score
- -4
When i go to bombay - the biggest problem i face is - it stink alot , i dont know its something about the city. I hate the traffic , the characterless nature of this city , its like a - cheaper version of new york city.
For me its hard to live in those places,
------------
bro its not just about - thackray or those extremist muslim , extremist hindu. its about the whole consiousness of city , which is sleeping and dying. This chalta hai attitude.
and pseudo revolutionist, friggin - i heard so much of voting before election -
the change -
the wave of revolution .
the movie star vote fakers
enough is enough by media
people lighting candles - and oath of we will change it.
its so easy to talk of revolution sitting in your living room sipping your scotch with musical background having some munchies. in your climate controlled atmosphere.
pointing finger. lol i hate it - when it comes to make your move everybody disappears.
----------
how much voting did we see ???????? and i tell you those educated people vote much lesser than uneducated thrash who just vote for religion and region and cast.
bombay is not going nowhere - a lot has to change. although i see the future dark - but that wont stop me from doing my share, but stop living in deny and accept the fact , that might do a lot of good.
this Shnaghai and singapore dream get out of it - make it city where people get food and people realize their service to society.
shanghai is not made in a day - and buildings dont make shanghai - people of shanghai do .
tha attitude is what matters more
unless people - will - not just talk the talk
but walk the walk.
--------------
For me its hard to live in those places,
------------
bro its not just about - thackray or those extremist muslim , extremist hindu. its about the whole consiousness of city , which is sleeping and dying. This chalta hai attitude.
and pseudo revolutionist, friggin - i heard so much of voting before election -
the change -
the wave of revolution .
the movie star vote fakers
enough is enough by media
people lighting candles - and oath of we will change it.
its so easy to talk of revolution sitting in your living room sipping your scotch with musical background having some munchies. in your climate controlled atmosphere.
pointing finger. lol i hate it - when it comes to make your move everybody disappears.
----------
how much voting did we see ???????? and i tell you those educated people vote much lesser than uneducated thrash who just vote for religion and region and cast.
bombay is not going nowhere - a lot has to change. although i see the future dark - but that wont stop me from doing my share, but stop living in deny and accept the fact , that might do a lot of good.
this Shnaghai and singapore dream get out of it - make it city where people get food and people realize their service to society.
shanghai is not made in a day - and buildings dont make shanghai - people of shanghai do .
tha attitude is what matters more
unless people - will - not just talk the talk
but walk the walk.
--------------
Indian democracy loses to Chinese efficiency - by 160 votes
China National News
Wednesday 13th May, 2009
(IANS)
As millions of Indians prepared for Wednesday's last round of elections, India's much-lauded democracy was given a thorough drubbing by China's efficiency-driven one-party system.
The result of some hard-headed voting at the end of a lively debate on India and China at the Royal Geographical Society in London Tuesday baffled many - India started out marginal favourites, but then lost heavily.
At the start of the debate, 266 members of the audience voted for the motion, 'The future belongs to India, not China,' while 223 voted against and 221 were undecided.
At the end, when the audience was asked to vote again, the don't-knows had dwindled to 23, but a massive swing saw China take the day with 421 votes and India lumbering behind with 261 votes, five fewer than it had just over an hour ago.
It was, declared moderator Edward Lucas of The Economist magazine - and author of 'The New Cold War', one of the 'sharpest' swings he had seen.
Speaking for India at the event were author and former CEO of Proctor & Gamble India, Gurcharan Das, veteran broadcaster Mark Tully and the international economist Deepak Lal.
The Chinese side had an equally distinguished team - Charles Powell, private secretary and foreign policy advisor to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, Malaysian-born economist Danny Quah, and Hong Kong businessman and socialite David Tang.
The difference, it appears, lay in how the two countries went about preparing for the future - or indeed the debate itself.
Although speakers on both sides agreed that in an ideal world the future would belong to India's democracy, Powell - a former bureaucrat - told the audience that that was just 'wishful thinking.'
'It may be what ought to happen, but it's not going to happen,' Powell said.
'China has a strategy to own the future, to reclaim what it regards as its rightful leading place in the world. And it has a system of government that is geared to achieving just that. It is disciplined, single-minded and dynamic in pursuit of its goal in a way that a democracy cannot be,' Powell said.
As in the world outside, so inside the historic debating hall of the Royal Geographic Society.
The Chinese side were a thoroughly rehearsed lot - Powell spoke of rehearsals with the other speakers in his office.
And the Indian team? You guessed it: as the articulate and passionate Gurcharan Das later told IANS: 'I don't know about the others, but I certainly went through my speech several times.'
Indian democracy loses to Chinese efficiency - by 160 votes
---------------
In the Battle of Midway, the Japanese ought to win, but they did not.
China National News
Wednesday 13th May, 2009
(IANS)
As millions of Indians prepared for Wednesday's last round of elections, India's much-lauded democracy was given a thorough drubbing by China's efficiency-driven one-party system.
The result of some hard-headed voting at the end of a lively debate on India and China at the Royal Geographical Society in London Tuesday baffled many - India started out marginal favourites, but then lost heavily.
At the start of the debate, 266 members of the audience voted for the motion, 'The future belongs to India, not China,' while 223 voted against and 221 were undecided.
At the end, when the audience was asked to vote again, the don't-knows had dwindled to 23, but a massive swing saw China take the day with 421 votes and India lumbering behind with 261 votes, five fewer than it had just over an hour ago.
It was, declared moderator Edward Lucas of The Economist magazine - and author of 'The New Cold War', one of the 'sharpest' swings he had seen.
Speaking for India at the event were author and former CEO of Proctor & Gamble India, Gurcharan Das, veteran broadcaster Mark Tully and the international economist Deepak Lal.
The Chinese side had an equally distinguished team - Charles Powell, private secretary and foreign policy advisor to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, Malaysian-born economist Danny Quah, and Hong Kong businessman and socialite David Tang.
The difference, it appears, lay in how the two countries went about preparing for the future - or indeed the debate itself.
Although speakers on both sides agreed that in an ideal world the future would belong to India's democracy, Powell - a former bureaucrat - told the audience that that was just 'wishful thinking.'
'It may be what ought to happen, but it's not going to happen,' Powell said.
'China has a strategy to own the future, to reclaim what it regards as its rightful leading place in the world. And it has a system of government that is geared to achieving just that. It is disciplined, single-minded and dynamic in pursuit of its goal in a way that a democracy cannot be,' Powell said.
As in the world outside, so inside the historic debating hall of the Royal Geographic Society.
The Chinese side were a thoroughly rehearsed lot - Powell spoke of rehearsals with the other speakers in his office.
And the Indian team? You guessed it: as the articulate and passionate Gurcharan Das later told IANS: 'I don't know about the others, but I certainly went through my speech several times.'
Indian democracy loses to Chinese efficiency - by 160 votes
---------------
In the Battle of Midway, the Japanese ought to win, but they did not.
Last edited:
Energon
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2007
- Messages
- 1,077
- Reaction score
- 0
So then I guess you don't understand the difference; nor do you seem particularly adapt at grasping the realities of democratic nations or the system at large.
And again, this has nothing to do with "brainwashing."
indiatech
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2009
- Messages
- 753
- Reaction score
- 0
Hasnain2009
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2009
- Messages
- 1,782
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
No........ U are 100% wrong here!
CHeck the 1st post abt what indian govt want!!
But they dont have capability!
For reference!
So truthful Dehastmesh, and i hope i am pronouncing and writing your name write, We need people like you more so than those who deny everything in order to put others down and in order to showoff.
And these are the people who start wars if they get a chance to be the leaders, Duhasmech, It is up to us to stop these kind and bring some justice, reality and goodness to this world, The world has been yearning for our kind.
I for one offer you my hand in Friendship and let us hope me joining hands with you will bring others of our style and thoughts and will work on making this world a place of justice, goodness and friendship that it was meant to be.
Similar threads
