Iranian Puzzle

Dear Idiot , thanks for displaying your idiocy.

Idiot : ``you will be thanking Pakistan being in your neighborhood, else West and USA would have not given India so much importance as it received!``

Dear Idiot. Kindly elaborate on the above statement. Makes no sense.

Also you make a lot of the fact the India`s debt-to-GDP ratio is 56%. Do you know what America`s debt-to-GDP ratio is ? 65%.

(http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html)

Re: # 61
When you will learn to behave like good humans, you will understand the meaning of words carrying wisdom! The statement is for humans those have sense and it was understood by the majority of your american settled Indian industrialists!

#57 ,

Dear Idiot.....Fact is India does not seek foreign aid. Aids given to NGOs and private organisations does not count as aid given to a nation. I never denied 250 million Indians out of a population of 1.1 billion live below poverty line. But the figure was 420 million only 15 years back. So obviously there has been a substantial reduction in poverty and this is linked to the opening up of the economy in 1991.

I stressed on the fact about India not seeking foreign aid because foreign aid does not work and is subject to the law of diminishing returns. So India objects to aid and seeks business , investment , trade and jobs.

Re: # 57

Though it hurts to try and reason with some one like you because of the attitude, still one last try is hereunder for your awakening, for I understand from where you are coming:

An Indian news paper (The Hindu May 13, 2005) clipping reads as: `` NEW DELHI: The World Bank and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) on Thursday signed agreements with the Indian Government for extending an IDA credit of $ 465 million from the World Bank and a total aid package of $205 million from the ADB towards post-tsunami reconstruction and recovery efforts in the country.

Of the ADB assistance, $100 million is to come as loan, another $100 million as grant and the balance $5 million is to be provided from the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction, according to a World Bank statement here.``


Secondly, if you have some interest in economics you may like to read your Kelkar Task Force (KTF) paper regarding whether Indian debt / borrowing is sustainable or not; where the sustainability of borrowing or debt of a country is understood when the debt to GDP ratio is 50 percent, as per my information, the present (2005) level of Indian ratio is 56.8 per cent, which implies that it may be borrowing to pay off some outstanding debts with interest. Thus India needs to perform much well than what it is even doing now. Your desires that India should not borrow, as foreign aid does not work, is commendable, and every poor and developing country around the world desires the same, however the ground realities are different, at present it just stand as wishful thinking...When you are able to get some wisdom, you will be thanking Pakistan being in your neighborhood, else West and USA would have not given India so much importance as it received!

Take good care of yourself and if possible do try to see other side of the strories that you are at the moment familiar with!

Hallo... still confused as to why with 60% of Iranians voting, a hardliner still won! Just when I thought Iran was opening her doors and becoming flexible, Iran took a step backward through the current election. Not sure why better candidates did not make the appearance. Yes, the Iranians voted for themselves and so we have to respect that, but one has to be cautious with the Pakistani, Afghani, and neighboring populations getting more religiously inclined.

-zensufi-

Sifzal....being the idiot again I see.....there are NGOs in US asking donations for the poor and underprivileged Americans . Are we now supposed to believe US is a poor country ? As I said , facts are that India is not an aid seeking country anymore.

Re: # 54
Dear uncivilized fellow, make sense American NGOs are not asking for donations in Australia or India, they are keeping their home affairs well within their own home, unlike India which needs to ... well forget it, its something which you would not understand ...

Even your PM cannot claim that you are claiming...see your total debt the assistance given to Afghanistan is not because India has become affluent (refresh your current statistics, India`s 250 million population still lives below poverty line), but to have some political gains to win hearts of Afghans, which it mercilessly crushed at the time of Russian invasion

Re: # 56

``but to have some political gains to win hearts of Afghans, which it mercilessly crushed at the time of Russian invasion``

india crushing afghan hearts during soviet invasion? I wonder how much leverage india had.
Its true the financial aid to afghan (or other small countries) are for generating goodwill or sustaining indian cultural/traditional activities.
Moreover, india did help afghans after the soveits left. During the civil war the Northern Alliance had got a lot of help from India (even though they controlled only 10% of afghanistan). Infact, Sher-e-Panjshir breathed his last in an indian army run hospital. NA`s leadership had taken shelter in india during the Taliban days. Even karzai got his degree from india. Hence once taliban was ousted indias position in afghanistan became stronger then it ever was since the 80`s.

I am perplexed by how EVERYTHING eventually culminates into a pak-india match of who`s better.

Thank you 31, 26 and 48 for your replies. I shall ignore 48, for the lack of civil language and can only tell him to either live in Australia or USA to see the TV realities, the add does not take a name of any Indian organization, they say poor children in India and other African countries...the advertising agency is ``Save the Child``!

Netizen, I appreciate your reply as it showed good selection of words and some sense, yes you are right, for if the next 45 years India continue to grow at the pace of 8%, it would be the second largest economy in the world. But you need to keep few realities in mind, no country in the world has thus far able to sustain for that long, and more you develop the less becomes your growth rate. Further, all economics rules start with cetris peribis...and believe me the real world does change. Nevertheless, as I said earlier, if India continued to get leaders such as the present ones, it does have a chance to succeed and be able to look after its population.

Regarding the exchange rate pressure from US on China, it means a little. Remember Economics tells you many things regarding the same issue, and ``learned`` economists make the best by fooling the most through showing only that side of the picture that the audience wants to see. If China today increases its currency value, the USA and other countries will have to pay China a lot more and those countries in debt to China will have to adopt policies that China would like them to adopt, believe me no developed country would like to fall in the trap it made for most of the developing countries.

Charlie

> While India has chosen the easy way of submission to west, as they have been doing since centuries

Do you think that this attitude is partly to blame for historically keeping subcontinental Muslims generally less educated (and to use a more loaded term, more backward) than their Hindu neighbors?

Iranian elections are hue

Charlie #12

`` Ahmedinijad, certainly not my favourite, was not favourite of Elite Mullahs in Iran. He didn`t win because he is a conservative, he won because he is a middleclass person who promised to help poor people. While he was the mayor of Tehran, he showed by his acts that he lives a simple life and he has roots in his people. As a result, it was the people who voted for him. It is what democracy is. ``

Would you have a prince who governs for the welfare for the majority ? Would you have a commoner who looks out for his enrichment ?

`` Despite US propoganda and an 8 year long war imposed by imperialist powers and two decades of strict bans, Iran has survived well. Theiir per capita income is more than any other country in the region. Their economy is stronger than anyone else. Their life style is better han other countries in the region and population living under poverty line is less than any other country in the region. Iranians live happily, they know how to live happily with what they have. It is a proven fact that Iranians hate west and they have reasons for it. ``

Iranians have a lower standard of living than Gulf Arab states and Turkey. The Iranian economy is heavily dependent on oil revenues. Despite their human resource potential they trail badly in other areas. Reapproachment with the Western Europe (if not USA) is crucial to the development of Iranian middle class.

Sifzal...You are obviously an ignorant fool unaware or unwilling to learn about current global realities. A resurgent confident economically powerful India is a no longer just a pipe dream.

India does not survive on foreign aid. The days of India begging for foreign aid are over. It is possible certain private organisations ask for aid , but thats nothing to do with the Indian government. India wants business , trade and investment. Not aid.
#India`s ppp gdp amounts to $3.65 trillion..which is the 3rd highest in the world.
#India`s forex reserves are worth $150 billion.
#Total US aid to India (to certain private projects) : $72 million.
Now you do the math.

Infact India is today an aid giver rather than an aid taker , having sent aid amounting to $100 million to Afghanistan , which is more than the total US aid ($72 million) to India.

Article from Haaretz.


Iranians didn`t `betray` the U.S.

By Zvi Bar`el

A sense of dread befell the world: The new Iranian president is an extremist, a lover of nukes, a Beckham-hater, a believer in the separation of the sexes; to cut a long story short - prepare for war. One could sense the disappointment that crossed the ocean with the news that Hashemi Rafsanjani - the ``liberal`` and ``the champion of human rights`` - failed to get elected.

So how does Iran - which ever since the revolution in 1979 has been seen as an entrenched foundation of the axis of evil, has had sanctions imposed on it by the United States, and in the past two years has come under threat of war from both the United States and Israel - spring a surprise by simply fulfilling expectations?

The answer to this question can be found in the erroneous perception according to which Iran is aligned around two polar opposites - reformists and conservatives. The reformists want Western democracy; the conservatives want the West`s soul. The reformists are opponents of nuclear arms; the conservatives want an atom bomb in every backyard. The reformists support a free economy; the conservatives want the state to control the economy.




Advertisement

And lo and behold, after eight years of rule by a ``reformist`` like Mohammed Khatami, it is difficult to distinguish between the two streams. Khatami, for example, is opposed to a change in the unique Iranian system of government in which the supreme spiritual leader is also the supreme political leader. The man who served as speaker of the parliament, Mehdi Karroubi, is actually a liberal, but neither does he want to change the system; and the same goes for the brother of the spiritual leader, Hadi Khamenei.

Hundreds of thousands of students, who make up the liberals` public infrastructure, voted for the new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and not for their ``natural`` candidate, Mustafa Moin, a relative of Khatami. It also turns out that spiritual leader Ali Khamenei is encouraging foreign investments in Iran, while the ``moderate`` candidate, Rafsanjani, is perceived as an economic reactionary due to his vast wealth and involvement in governmental corruption.

The confusion is even greater when one realizes that support for Iran`s nuclear armament crosses party lines, as does the attitude toward the United States. When President George Bush defined Iran as part of the axis of evil, thousands of reformists joined conservatives in demonstrations against the United States. These are the same reformists who lit candles in solidarity with the Americans in the wake of the Al-Qaida terror attacks in September 2001. These are the same Iranian residents who, in a poll conducted in Iran some two and half years ago, declared their support for the renewal of dialogue with Washington.

The Iranian public did not ``betray`` Washington in last week`s elections. It simply remained an Iranian public that first considers its government`s internal policy, its economic situation and its national pride. It did not elect the man who let it down over the past eight years or promised new relations with America, but the man who promised jobs for 30 percent of the unemployed and welfare programs for the poor - just as any public anywhere else in the world does.

Furthermore, the reformists did not have an election promise from Bush that they could wave around and vow that the United States would change its policy toward Iran if the president was elected from among them. In fact, Washington, which is now so frightened by the results of the election, did not do much at all to bolster the reformists over the past eight years, thus allowing Russia, China, India and Pakistan to become stronger allies and wield a greater influence over Iran.

Is Iran more frightening than ever now? Not necessarily. Iran is not an insane state, and its citizens, despite the oppression, know how to rally the street into action when things are bad for them. They were the ones who elected more liberal representatives as a result of their disappointment with the representatives of the revolution; and they are the ones who changed the government now.