Indian Economics thread.

[Coalescence]

Tibet isn't only important for its ample supply of freshwater (not piped and not drinkable in its natural form without treatment). Tibet is topographically far too separate from India.

Indian migration in the case you presented, wouldn't be to Tibet, it's far too treacherous and cannot be accessed via India. Indian migration also won't prefer or be wanted by east Asian nations. The Indians themselves identify far more closely with Europeans and the "new worlds". They'd only be migrating to accessible regional neighbours and to the West.

From the topography map you shared, which regional neighbors can they reach by foot? they might need to migrate by boat to reach the other Asian countries. If they want to migrate to the West, I think US would surely receive them more openly, since one of their objectives to maintain their dominance is to make sure they can avert the demographic crisis in their own country.

 

[ansy1968]

Let's not have the holier than attitude here. All these pollution issues are natural when a big country is aiming to quickly develop. India is just some 20 years behind China so it still hasn't started heavily focusing on environmental protection

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

@Overbom bro India is different, their environment is already dirty cause it's a cultural thing, throwing cremated dead bodies in the Ganges river is unhygienic, couple with nonchalant attitude of the populace that volunteer cleaning or calls of public duty is beneath them, it's not their role as their status in society dictate. Instead of picking garbage sprawling in the street , they will rather let it accumulate than dirtying their hands. And that same attitude is being exported as they leave their shithole country, they can't solved the problem and want other country to sort it out for them preferably IF its Caucasian.

 

[ougoah]

From the topography map you shared, which regional neighbors can they reach by foot? they might need to migrate by boat. If they want to migrate to the West, I think US would surely receive them more openly, since one of their objectives to maintain their dominance is to make sure they can avert the demographic crisis in their own country.

Bangladesh, Pakistan, Bhutan, Nepal, Myanmar.

I understand what you're going to say but in the type of situation you were talking about, yes countries will be taking people in even if limited in numbers. Bhutan and Nepal are also high up so essentially like going into Tibet but not venturing anywhere near as far and in this case they'd be allowing some level of migration in their countries. Tibet is simply far more inaccessible than Bhutan and Nepal both in physical terms and in politics since we're assuming China wouldn't allow Indians to simply go into Tibet and settle there unless they migrate to China and that's accepted and allowed.

India is quite literally on a much lower plane with respect to many neighbours so those who migrate on foot are clearly limited in where they can go but traversing some neigbours means land access to plenty of other countries. Mechanised assistance in parts of course (not walking to!) to any neighbours and most Indians would prefer migrating to other countries than the five or six (if we count China) neighbours.

 

[Coalescence]

@Overbom bro India is different, their environment is already dirty cause it's a cultural thing, throwing cremated dead bodies in the Ganges river is unhygienic, couple with nonchalant attitude of the populace that volunteer cleaning or calls of public duty is beneath them, it's not their role as their status in society dictate. Instead of picking garbage sprawling in the street , they will rather let it accumulate than dirtying their hands. And that same attitude is being exported as they leave their shithole country, they can't solved it and let other country sorted them out for them preferably IF its Caucasian.

Although I like making fun of Indians by stereotyping them as cow manuring smearing and road defecating people. I don't think its is right to generalize all of them as unhygienic or apathetic to sanitary measures, and calling it a cultural thing for them.

From what I know, there's a huge divide between the living standard for both rural and urban dwelling Indians, those who live in the urban areas will likely care more about hygiene and sanitization because of better living standards and wealth, while the rural folks toil away in the fields or do hard labor would have less regards for hygiene and sanitation.

There are more rural Indians than urban ones, and as India grows more wealthy and urbanized, their attitudes changes. Culture mostly stems from the material conditions a set of individuals grows under and learn from.

 

[ansy1968]

Yeah lol 70% of a nation's water supply being undrinkable is frankly a surprisingly low number. Depends how the measure defines "drinkable" but most nations' water supplies - natural water bodies are undrinkable. Missed that part. Well over 50% of Australia's water supply is undrinkable lol.

Water treatment and contamination is a very complex topic. Broad statements mean absolute shit and can be manipulated to paint any picture. Country A has 70% water supply undrinkable vs Country B with 50% undrinkable, Country A can actually have a better position re drinking water than Country B. Depends on a 100s of other factors not discussed... source of contamination, BOD, salinity etc.

@ougoah and there is a solution, Rain Harvesting methods as monsoon rains irrigated 70% of its farmland and 55% of its water supply. BUT knowing the Indians , this simple cheap technology is beneath them and want a grand solution BUT lack the engineering skill...lol

 

[ansy1968]

Although I like making fun of Indians by stereotyping them as cow manuring smearing and road defecating people. I don't think its is right to generalize all of them as unhygienic or apathetic to sanitary measures, and calling it a cultural thing for them.

From what I know, there's a huge divide between the living standard for both rural and urban dwelling Indians, those who live in the urban areas will likely care more about hygiene and sanitization because of better living standards and wealth, while the rural folks toil away in the fields or do hard labor would have less disregard for hygiene and sanitation.

There are more rural Indians than urban ones, and as India grows more wealthy and urbanized, their attitudes changes. Culture mostly stems from the material conditions a set of individual grows under and learn from.

Bro washing yourself in a river full of dead cremated human bodies is hygienic? and Ganges is their holy river which is part of their culture. the Hindu religious practices, so bro am I right to describe it as a Cultural thing?

 

[Coalescence]

Bro washing yourself in a river full of dead cremated human bodies is hygienic? and Ganges is their holy river which is part of their culture. the Hindu religious practices, so bro am I right to describe it as a Cultural thing?

For the Hindus that religiously practice them, you're right that its a cultural thing, and its completely unhygienic lol. But we can't generalize that all Indians share the same religious culture of washing in corpse ridden water (who actually thought it was a good idea), because India is similar to China, that they have a multi-ethnic culture as well.

From the conversations I see from Indian users in Twitter have on explaining about their culture, not all of them practice washing themselves in the Ganges river, eating cow manure or drinking cow urine, I think I recall the eating cow manure and urine part is only practiced from a specific region in India.

But anyways I'm not really well-versed in Indian cultures, and I personally don't like standing for them, just want to point it out because there's a parallel to how China as well got generalized by perceived negative or hygienic cultural practices from one of their many ethnic groups.

 

[ansy1968]

For the Hindus that religiously practice them, you're right that its a cultural thing, and its completely unhygienic lol. But we can't generalize that all Indians share the same religious culture of washing in corpse ridden water (who actually thought it was a good idea), India is similar to China, that they are multi-ethnic as well.

From the conversations I see from Indian users in Twitter have on explaining about their culture, not all of them practice washing themselves in the Ganges river, eating cow manure or drinking cow urine, I think I recall the eating cow manure and urine part is only practiced from a specific region in India.

But anyways I'm not really well-versed in Indian cultures, and I personally don't like standing for them, just want to point it out because there's a parallel to how China as well got generalized by perceived negative or hygienic cultural practices from one of their many ethnic groups.

Bro pre revolution China then I may partially agree ( even in ancient time we are known for our hygiene) Mao change all of that and thrust us into the 21st century. India need its Mao moment to change society, cleansing some undesirable aspect of it and be adaptive. Is Modi capable of doing a Mao, well for him projection is more important knowing that his Indian audience is susceptible to such image rather than governing.

Ohh!!! one more thing, I think you're right, there is a large minority group that practices perfect hygiene, the Muslim and Sikh.

 

[Coalescence]

Bro pre revolution China then I may partially agree ( even in ancient time we are known for our hygiene) Mao change all of that and thrust us into the 21st century. India need its Mao moment to change society, cleansing some undesirable aspect of it and be adaptive. Is Modi capable of doing a Mao, well for him projection is more important knowing that his Indian audience is susceptible to such image rather than governing.

Under Modi, lmao no. The guy is turning his country into a Hindu nationalist fascist hell hole, and they might ended up sparking an Islamic extremist group and indirectly feeding them new members with the amount of Muslim discrimination and violence they are enabling. Who knows, maybe it'll become similar to China's history of the peasants revolting against the KMT nationalist party for their failure to bring prosperity to their people.

 

[In4ser]

Although I like making fun of Indians by stereotyping them as cow manuring smearing and road defecating people. I don't think its is right to generalize all of them as unhygienic or apathetic to sanitary measures, and calling it a cultural thing for them.

From what I know, there's a huge divide between the living standard for both rural and urban dwelling Indians, those who live in the urban areas will likely care more about hygiene and sanitization because of better living standards and wealth, while the rural folks toil away in the fields or do hard labor would have less regards for hygiene and sanitation.

There are more rural Indians than urban ones, and as India grows more wealthy and urbanized, their attitudes changes. Culture mostly stems from the material conditions a set of individuals grows under and learn from.

While we should stay away from generalizations of Indians, I don’t necessarily believes cities are cleaner than the rural areas. Urban areas tend to more densely packed, more polluted and reliant a city services which are often shoddy at best (e.g trains and electricity).

Moreover, in rural areas there often is greater sense of communal spirit and ownership in land which makes people more likely to take care of it.