Khuda Hafiz, Kashmir?

Really, ylh, you should read about the games the British played to make sure the subcontinent was divided; even telling Jinnah, who had accepted some proposal at the Simla conference -- why are you accepting this when you can get Pakistan ?, and so on.

-arun gupta

In reply to hamidm (#87) :

The February 1998 Lahore visit by Vajpayee spread consternation in the male half of many Pakistani households.

Here they thought that a Partition, and numerous wars and skirmishes later, they were finally free from the various strange subspecies like Hyderabadis. Oh, the Begum Sahiba might insist on inviting them, but a frontier to cross and passports and visas effectively kept them at bay.

``We could blame it on the politicians`` -- but now the haramzaday politicians are starting up the buses and trains.

Now, Allah have mercy !, these Hyderabadis and Punjabis and the like from the wrong side of the border might visit every summer; and might extend an invitation to visit every winter. And the wife would insist on accepting.

Well, nothing to be done but to take to the hills ( mountains, actually, the higher the better). Got lost in the hills, were discovered in May by the Indian army,... the rest is history.

-arun gupta

In reply to #98, Kabuliwallah, you may be aware that some of the world`s top athletes are vegetarian.

The poor health of people in India has more to do with lack of sanitation and clean water supply than it has to do with the supposed inadequacies of a vegetarian diet.

-arun gupta

In reply to Kabuliwallah :

Some studies purporting to show that vegetarians have greater stamina than meat-eaters :

http://www.alanlam.demon.co.uk/dyk1.htm

Vegetarian pro athletes :

http://www.veg.on.ca/newsletr/janfeb97/proathletes.html

http://www.ivu.org/people/sports/index.html

-arun gupta

Ref hamidm #: 132

You say {ylh ............ you poor pathetic miserable soul ...... I feel sorry for you - you just keep on coming back for more punishment at the hands of the trecherous infidels..... you, and other simple-minded young Paki pups, are no match for the treacherous, scheming and perfidious

rascals like gymnosophist who are churi-sharp and will scar your young soul for life .....}

So I have now become a churi-sharp, scheming and perfidious infidel, have I? Is this a recent transformation on my part or have I always been like this? In order that I may mask my real self, I would like you to point out where in my writings I gave myself away so I won`t make the same mistake when I attend PSA or MSA meetings ;-)

You ask {why don`t you take the fact, that these guys are evil incarnate, at face value ? Don`t you trust your grand-parents and parents judgement that we, the Muslims of that miserable god-forsaken hell-on-earth, could never live with the saffron brigade who haven`t forgiven us for what we did to the progeny of the Vikram and Ashoka ....? so quit torturing yourself......}

So, can you exlain exactly what you did to the progeny of Vikram and Ashoka? You guys have made the claim that it was the gentle sufis who led us to see the error of our polytheistic and idolatrous ways and that we voluntarily converted when we saw the light. Don`t tell me your folks killed and raped and converted us at swordpoint, now that I have almost begun to believe the other story after 9 months on the Chowk ;-)

You say {Avoid them like the plague - it says so in the Koran........here, I will give you an easy out:

`` Verily Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta`aala) says: {Truly, the polytheists are unclean}, [Soorah at-Towbah, Aayah 28]. And He said about the hypocrites: {so leave them alone, for they are an

abomination}, [Soorah at-Towbah, Aayah 95].``}

I can claim a victory here. I have finally converted you to the same category as Asif Naqshbandi and Farangi-Kush! What next, hamidm? Start going to the local mosque and study at the feet of the mullah?

You advised {go out, have a couple of beers,}

Isn`t sharab haram in Islam?

And the next advice {and watch the babes walk around campus in shorts that rejuvenate a Momin`s faith ....}

And get the urge to put burqas on them? Aren`t the Momin required to lower their gaze when they meet women who are not mahram? Do you want me to quote the Good Book on alcohol, appropriate dress for women, and conduct of men toward women?

Hamidm, I knew you would backslide from your facade of moderation that you have put on so far on Chowk. Scratch a moderate and you uncover a fundo.

Ha, ha, ha!

re: macgupta# 139

I wasn`t really talking about merits or demerits of vegetarianism. I was just responding to something that seemed to be about the demerits of non-vegetarianism. Since I am a devout caracass-eater, I stood up for my lot (the majority of Indians). Vegetarianism might be healthy, but it ain`t fun. Believe me, you`d know if you try non-vegetarian food. (I`m assuming you are a vegetarian, sorry if I`m mistaken)

Just as an aside, Srinath was a vegetarian when he started out as a fast bowler. Later on, according to him, to build stamina, he began tucking into both bird and beast.

Regards,

Kabuli

Kabuliwallah #125?

I was referring to Fifa, up in the hills from just a few months ago.

Sadhana

Gymnosophist1

You are writing in your post ``crap from Pakistan scools about histort``

Before you wrote that Iranians solved their problems by calling themselves Persian (in association with Ayatoolah. Can you explain. What does it mean, and where did you get it from.

macgupta #133

Arun:

It is Economy, stu... . European Union is where it is today, only because it began with the formation of common market. The U.S. very early in the last century (1900`s) created a unified common market coast to coast, without any barrier of any kind. This common market was the largest single market in the world. It very quickly became such a powerhouse when it was backed by meritocracy based education system and entreprenuers. It is now the bullwark of the American phenomena.

On the other hand, Nehruvian economy in India distorted the picture badly and created inefficient industries, which were heavily protected. For example, the freight equalization policy of Indian govenrment - to provide coal from Bihar mines at the same price nationwide in Bomaby, Delhi etc. allowed wrong industries to develop in those parts, while Bihar lost out and saw very little industry. Similar thing happened to the distribution of wheat, sugar etc. at a unified and same price nationwide, did create a very inefficient Public Distribution System (PDS). The freight equalization policy, and PDS created corrupt officials and not efficient entreprenuers.

The economic reasons must be and are paramount for devolution of power, because centralization creates economic inefficiency that breeds corrput officials.

Remember ``No taxation without Representation`` was the war cry of American revolution, and famous Boston Tea Party. The U.S. taxation is highly centralized, I am not suprised at 2:1 ratio that you have found out. The right-wing republicans constantly battle with liberal democrats to reduce taxes at Federal level.

At my alma-mater Harvard Business School my professor of BIGIE (Business, International Government, and International Economy) had used the numbers I have quoted on state vs center in generation of Indian GDP. If I successfully locate the work I will send you the information. As I recall, agriculture, small scale industries, education etc. fall under state control and are responsible for over 50% of the contribution to India`s GDP.

For data on Indian economy, Center for Monitoring Indian Economy (www.cmie.com) is a good place to start. Revenue collection in the U.S. may be what you are quoting, but that is not control of the generation of GDP. In American economy, regulations controlling (other than environmental) are so few that neither the Federal nor the state government control the generation of GDP. In fact until this years surpluses, these govenrments were dependent upon borrowing from the market to run themselves. It is the markets which essentially that control the GDP in America. That is why we see constant improvement in efficiency, productivity and distribution. Milton Friedman, previously of University of Chicago and a Nobel Prize winner in Economics has done some in the area of state controls over generation of GDP and creation of wealth. Even Hoover Institute at Stanford has done a lot of interesting work in this area, including the effect of taxation on productivity and revenue collection. It found that increased taxation increases the revenues upto a certain point, after which the revenues actually decline, because productivity is affected.

I did not mean to digress it, however for the above reasons and the reasons stated in my previous email, economic reasons are critical in devolution of power. The devolution of power does not mean that center would be less strong, just as the Federal Government is not less strong in the U.S. It will have to operate differently. I am confident that Indian democracy would produce a better solution for the post-dynastic times.

No doubt, Andhra may be a recent phenomenon in efficient govenrment, but it is a phenomena just as much as liberalization of Indian economy is a recent phenomena. The fact is that these recent phenomena are in India now, and will only spread more and not less.

The challenge for Indian planners is what to do when the cash cows go home (privatized), who is going to finance inefficient government machinery. This is the main reason government is not letting operations like - Indian Oil, Steel Authority of India Ltd., VSNL, MTNL, Life Insurance and Banking go private. They can only delay, but cannot avoid the inevitable. These and other such highly profitable corporations would be privatized one day. If AT&T was not split, I doubt CISCO wold be there today and hundred of billionaires and thousands of millionares would be created in communication industry.

Likewise in India old guards will fight and new guards will want devolution, so that the market can play a proper role in India.

By the way this problem is worse in China and Russia, if it is any consolation. These countries only had inefficient state sector. Relatively speaking, India is in a lot better position, it will have to write-off only a smaller portion of GDP to get rid of inefficient infrastructure and to succeed in privatization. However, in other aspects, Indian problem is worse than China, because Indian state sectors productivity is lower than that of China, which means per capita in consumes more to generate less. Some state sector operation are profitable only because they have monopoly to charge customers.

China is solving this problem by restricting the movement of labor, where an unemoloyed worker simply cannot move to another prosperous area without state permission and hence cannot disrupt the economy. Talk about modern day slave work, it is practiced in Chinese form in the worker`s paradise, even today, but nobody talks about it. Another problem, China has is that it does not have an evolved taxation system. Thus local governments have simply arbitrary powers in all respects. While Russia has simply dropped the ball and has not paid even full wages to the Red Army soldiers.

India, for its betterment, must start with and encourage devolution of economic and political power and it must find common acceptable ground for the center to manage. The U.S. model could be more appropriate for India also, where in legislature (in Senate) state of Wyoming with less than 1 million population elects elects the same number of senators as California with nearly 30-million population. Likewise the role of bureaucrats in economic decision makeing should be restricted to government spending and limited policing of market protection.

Indian road map to devolution need not be completed in a short time, but could be evolved over a period of time. One thing Indians have, in my opinion, is patience, however, what India lacks is charimatic leaders who can carry forward the evolution of Indian democracy to the next level in the post-dynastic time.

ANIL KAPURIA

Anil@Kapuria.COM

YLH, Just out of interest what are your views on the status of minorities within modern day Turkey? I only ask becuase while your posts on Ataturk have been enlightening for me as a non-Muslim, I live in a part of London that has a large Kurdish population. It is shocking to hear from them about their treatment in Turkey (they are a very politicised community here in London....I dont know if you remember when Ocalan was arrested, hell broke loose in Kurdish areas of London, one girl, British born and bred commited an act of self-immolation....) They are banned from speaking their own language, are tortured etc, quite apart from what they suffer at the hands of the Iranians, and Saddam Hussein. I just wondered whether their plight has its origin in Ataturks policies or rule, and how you view this intra-muslim struggle in light of your views on him, secularism, and their relevance to Pakistan. It is interesting to note that the Kurds have not resorted to Islamicised, ``jihad`` style freedom struggle but has been nationalist in character. I have a Kurdish friend here who is a journalist and who may be interested in reading yuur views. I look forward to hearing from you,

regards

Harpreet

Re: YLH

What happened to your slogans?

Ciao!

Ref krashid #: 144

You ask {Before you wrote that Iranians solved their problems by calling themselves Persian (in association with Ayatoolah. Can you explain. What does it mean, and where did you get it from.}

It was pretty rough in the 1980s to be identified with Iran in the United States. So, any Iranian would simply say he was a Persian. You even get a positive association with Persian rugs!

In fact, the two anti-Khomeini Iranians who worked for me (who were here on political asylum) never called themselves anything but Persians.

Obviously, the problem exists for only world-travelling Iranians and not for those who were in Khomeiniland. Similarly, Pakistanis who wander around the world and who get thoroughly ckecked out for their green passports probably need a different handle during their daily life, if they do not want to be subjected to scrutiny. That is what I meant.

YHL Reply #77

``

and since the World War 2 happened ... independence struggle or no independence struggle .... the Sub Continent would have been free sooner or later...

``

-- Could you tell me why the British would have let go of their most prized colony ? What was compelling them to do so, if not Gandhi`s call for independence, the Civil Disobedience Movement etc.

WW2 did help give the Congress a strong bargaining chip but that`s it.

In fact Winston Churchill said, that he did not become the prime minister to the throne to see the empire collapse (or words to that effect).

So you see the British were not too happy to let go of india. Perhaps you should see the movie Gandhi, to get a feel for the freedom struggle. And since it is made by a Bristish producer and an American studio, you cannot/should not claim that movie to be biased.

Ad

#147 FerozK

A silly young man is a man with a ``sense of humor``; a silly mature (old?) man is merely a silly goat.

Avoid such posts in the future if you can. You come through ugly with such gauche communications.

In reply to Anil (#145 ) :

I am not, and I don`t think anyone here is against decentralization, liberation of the economy from the government and so on.

However, Central versus State revenue is not an indicator of autonomy, e.g., the case of the US where the Federal Government raises twice the revenue than all the state governments put together.

Nor is it how much the Central government levies by way of taxes. The US Federal Government gets about 34% of GDP as taxes. And that is low -- France and Germany for instance take 50% of their GDP as taxes. (In India the Central Government takes about 20% of GDP as taxes. )

There definitely is a problem with having to take permission from the Indian Government to do anything (the license-permit raj). However, the cure is not to move the license-permit function from the Center to the States, it is to do away with it where possible and streamline it when it must absolutely be retained in the public interest.

Now let us talk about Government expenditure. It is a common fallacy to lament that only 3% of the GDP is spent by the government on education while an equal amount is spent on defence, which is considered wasteful. The implication is that by spending more, say, 6% of GDP on education, India would be better off.

But that assumes that the amount currently being spent is well spent. If it is vanishing into black holes, raising the amount spent by government on education to 6% will merely double the money wasted.

The solution then would be to first make sure that the 3% spent is better spent and then raise the budget; or get government out of the field of education and privatizing.

Again, fixing these problems have very little to do with autonomy.

Your Harvard Business School people may be very acquainted with the economics of India, but I`m not so sure about their knowledge of Indian politics.

To put it bluntly, the Indian politicians are using the ``lack of autonomy`` to be the reason for their failures in performance.

Somehow, removing from the State politicians the shackles of the Supreme Court, the Election Commission, and the danger that if they screw up, their governments might be dismissed by the Center

is going to enable them to deliver paradise to their constituents.

Yeah, right !

-arun gupta

In further reply to Anil (#145 ) :

By the way, today`s Economic Times reports that collection of direct taxes jumped 66% in 1Q2000 over 1Q1999 and indirect taxes collection jumped 13.5%.

The number of income tax assessees is slated to jump from 22 million to 26.5 million which is also a healthy jump.

-arun gupta