Discussion:
Car exports from India surge 28%, bikes zoom 45%
(too old to reply)
TwistyCreek
2006-07-20 06:19:00 UTC
Permalink
Sunday, 16 July , 2006, 12:09

New Delhi: Passenger car exports from India jumped by 27.97 per cent in the first quarter of the fiscal 2006-07 on the back of impressive figures from Korean car major Hyundai Motors along with car market leader Maruti Udyog and Tata Motors.

Overall auto exports from the country also registered a healthy growth of 27.32 per cent at 2,47,847 units during the quarter, which also witnessed overseas shipments of motorcycles registering a whopping 45.30 per cent jump while that of scooters, fell by 42.89 per cent.

According to figures released by the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM), passenger car exports from India in the April-June period this fiscal stood at 49,132 units as against 38,393 units in the corresponding fiscal previous year.

Infy's silver jubilee smash: A special

Leading the export pack was Hyundai Motor India Ltd, which clocked a total of 30,842 units during the quarter as against 24,372 units in the same quarter a year ago, up 26.54 per cent.

Maruti Udyog also managed to improve its exports performance by 12.93 per cent at 7,544 units in the quarter as against 6,680 units in the corresponding period previous year. Tata Motors also increased its shipments to 4,865 units from 3,292.

http://samachar.com/openbin/redirect_new.vs?H/20060716/walletwatch_business/1,http://sify.com/finance/fullstory.php?id=14250589&headline=Car~exports~surge~28%,~bikes~zoom~45%
Straydog
2006-07-20 21:16:05 UTC
Permalink
Financial Times, Thurs, July 20, 2006, page 9

title "Singh sounds the alarm over educational failings"

Some quotes from the article:

"Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, could hardly have been blunter.
The Indian educational system is in such crisis, he said last week, that
it threatens the country's growth. For an outside world that haprbours an
image of a system churning out hard-working, numerate, techno-savy and
English-speaking graduates in their millions, the comments should come as
something of a shock."

"A new report [Higher Education in India: the need for change, by Pawan
Agarwall, Icrier, June 2006] highlights the waste of human capital
inherent in a higher education system that produces large numbers of
graduates who are unemployable even in sectors afflicted by by severe
labour shortages. 'The overall state of Indian higher education is dismal
and therefore poses a severe constriant on the supply of qualified
manpower,' says Rajiv Kumar, director of the Indian Council for Research
on International Economic Relations."

"Unemployment of graduates, at 17.2 per cent, in higher than the overall
rate of joblessness in the country. It is estimated that nearly 40 per
cent of graduates are not productively employed. Many show little aptitude
for the type of work to which they aspire and settle for low-grade
clerical work after enduring long periods of unemployment."

"A recent study cited by the Planning Commission found that 38 per cent of
children who have completed four years of schooling cannot read a small
paragraph with short sentences, while 55 per cent of such children cannot
divide a three-diget number by a single-diget number."

Also included is a bar graph that actually shows, progressively higher
unemployment with progressively higher levels of education (up to 12
years).
Phil Scott
2006-07-20 21:58:12 UTC
Permalink
Whelll.... now the truth comes out.
Post by Straydog
Financial Times, Thurs, July 20, 2006, page 9
title "Singh sounds the alarm over educational failings"
"Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, could hardly have
been blunter. The Indian educational system is in such
crisis, he said last week, that it threatens the country's
growth. For an outside world that haprbours an image of a
system churning out hard-working, numerate, techno-savy and
English-speaking graduates in their millions, the comments
should come as something of a shock."
"A new report [Higher Education in India: the need for
change, by Pawan Agarwall, Icrier, June 2006] highlights the
waste of human capital inherent in a higher education system
that produces large numbers of graduates who are
unemployable even in sectors afflicted by by severe labour
shortages. 'The overall state of Indian higher education is
dismal and therefore poses a severe constriant on the supply
of qualified manpower,' says Rajiv Kumar, director of the
Indian Council for Research on International Economic
Relations."
"Unemployment of graduates, at 17.2 per cent, in higher than
the overall rate of joblessness in the country. It is
estimated that nearly 40 per cent of graduates are not
productively employed. Many show little aptitude for the
type of work to which they aspire and settle for low-grade
clerical work after enduring long periods of unemployment."
"A recent study cited by the Planning Commission found that
38 per cent of children who have completed four years of
schooling cannot read a small paragraph with short
sentences, while 55 per cent of such children cannot divide
a three-diget number by a single-diget number."
Also included is a bar graph that actually shows,
progressively higher unemployment with progressively higher
levels of education (up to 12 years).''
That was enlightening... sort of looks like US business is
looking to hire the cheapest idiot they can find,,, then make
that work somehow, as long as they can get another quarters
profit or their ten million dollar bonus....and to hell with
everything else.

not to worry though... economic collapse will cure em of that,
too its legal... perhaps there could be fraud charges filed or
even a class action as these lie and say they cant find the
talent in the US...so must go to india....thats fraud of
course.. and the damages are in the trillions...not to mention
a destroyed nation and bankrupted brain trust.



confirms my suspicions with the banks... they hire minumum
wage and let anyone go that wont fit their few management
spots..... so we get constant newbies and idiots on the front
lines....

that explains a lot...like the 6000 lb ceiling panels in the
big dig..held up with anchor bolts! Im glad I wasnt there
to see the engineering done, whats' left of my already fried
mind would have been boggled into oblivion.


Phil Scott
Straydog
2006-07-20 23:00:11 UTC
Permalink
Oh, there is more, just wait.
Post by Phil Scott
Whelll.... now the truth comes out.
Post by Straydog
Financial Times, Thurs, July 20, 2006, page 9
title "Singh sounds the alarm over educational failings"
"Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, could hardly have
been blunter. The Indian educational system is in such
crisis, he said last week, that it threatens the country's
growth. For an outside world that haprbours an image of a
system churning out hard-working, numerate, techno-savy and
English-speaking graduates in their millions, the comments
should come as something of a shock."
"A new report [Higher Education in India: the need for
change, by Pawan Agarwall, Icrier, June 2006] highlights the
waste of human capital inherent in a higher education system
that produces large numbers of graduates who are
unemployable even in sectors afflicted by by severe labour
shortages. 'The overall state of Indian higher education is
dismal and therefore poses a severe constriant on the supply
of qualified manpower,' says Rajiv Kumar, director of the
Indian Council for Research on International Economic
Relations."
"Unemployment of graduates, at 17.2 per cent, in higher than
the overall rate of joblessness in the country. It is
estimated that nearly 40 per cent of graduates are not
productively employed. Many show little aptitude for the
type of work to which they aspire and settle for low-grade
clerical work after enduring long periods of unemployment."
"A recent study cited by the Planning Commission found that
38 per cent of children who have completed four years of
schooling cannot read a small paragraph with short
sentences, while 55 per cent of such children cannot divide
a three-diget number by a single-diget number."
Also included is a bar graph that actually shows,
progressively higher unemployment with progressively higher
levels of education (up to 12 years).''
That was enlightening... sort of looks like US business is
looking to hire the cheapest idiot they can find,,, then make
that work somehow, as long as they can get another quarters
profit or their ten million dollar bonus....and to hell with
everything else.
not to worry though... economic collapse will cure em of that,
too its legal... perhaps there could be fraud charges filed or
even a class action as these lie and say they cant find the
talent in the US...so must go to india....thats fraud of
course.. and the damages are in the trillions...not to mention
a destroyed nation and bankrupted brain trust.
confirms my suspicions with the banks... they hire minumum
wage and let anyone go that wont fit their few management
spots..... so we get constant newbies and idiots on the front
lines....
that explains a lot...like the 6000 lb ceiling panels in the
big dig..held up with anchor bolts! Im glad I wasnt there
to see the engineering done, whats' left of my already fried
mind would have been boggled into oblivion.
Phil Scott
p***@yahoo.com
2006-07-21 23:45:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil Scott
Post by Straydog
title "Singh sounds the alarm over educational failings"
"Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, could hardly have
been blunter. The Indian educational system is in such
crisis, he said last week, that it threatens the country's
growth. For an outside world that haprbours an image of a
system churning out hard-working, numerate, techno-savy and
English-speaking graduates in their millions, the comments
should come as something of a shock."
"A new report [Higher Education in India: the need for
change, by Pawan Agarwall, Icrier, June 2006] highlights the
waste of human capital inherent in a higher education system
that produces large numbers of graduates who are
unemployable even in sectors afflicted by by severe labour
shortages. 'The overall state of Indian higher education is
dismal and therefore poses a severe constriant on the supply
of qualified manpower,' says Rajiv Kumar, director of the
Indian Council for Research on International Economic
Relations."
"Unemployment of graduates, at 17.2 per cent, in higher than
the overall rate of joblessness in the country. It is
estimated that nearly 40 per cent of graduates are not
productively employed. Many show little aptitude for the
type of work to which they aspire and settle for low-grade
clerical work after enduring long periods of unemployment."
"A recent study cited by the Planning Commission found that
38 per cent of children who have completed four years of
schooling cannot read a small paragraph with short
sentences, while 55 per cent of such children cannot divide
a three-diget number by a single-diget number."
Also included is a bar graph that actually shows,
progressively higher unemployment with progressively higher
levels of education (up to 12 years).''
That was enlightening... sort of looks like US business is
looking to hire the cheapest idiot they can find,,, then make
that work somehow, as long as they can get another quarters
profit or their ten million dollar bonus....and to hell with
everything else.
There are talneted hardwaorking Indians. They make 20% of population.
That still works out to 200 million individuals.
Robert Kolker
2006-07-22 00:56:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@yahoo.com
There are talneted hardwaorking Indians. They make 20% of population.
That still works out to 200 million individuals.
Of the one billion Indians two thirds are adult and participate in the
economy. The rest are too young to count as either hardworking or not. A
young child is economically useless (assuming child labor laws hold). A
certain percentage of the population is too old to function so they
don't count. We can assume that maybe half the population are
functioning adults so your number drops to 100 million individuals which
is not all that bad.

Bob Kolker
minnesotti
2006-07-23 09:34:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil Scott
That was enlightening... sort of looks like US business is
looking to hire the cheapest idiot they can find,,, then make
that work somehow, as long as they can get another quarters
profit or their ten million dollar bonus....and to hell with
everything else.
It is well put... I liked the saying "US business is looking to hire
the cheapest idiot they can find".

However, this all is happening because the economical system can bear
it. They hire as unskilled workers as the economy can bear. And the
current economy system can bear 95% of its workers to be unskilled. The
reason is that the previous generations worked hard to develop the
technologies which allow to produce the food, shelter and entertainment
cheaply and in abundant amount. Thus, the today's society does not need
to worry anymore about developing and improving of the sustaining
technologies. The motivation is not there anymore. That's the end of
the Western civilization. (Actually, this is not an end, but the
societal system will be shaken soon and will be restructured in its
essence, which will be accompanied by the sufferings of the masses.)

..
anon
2006-07-23 12:51:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by minnesotti
Post by Phil Scott
That was enlightening... sort of looks like US business is
looking to hire the cheapest idiot they can find,,, then make
that work somehow, as long as they can get another quarters
profit or their ten million dollar bonus....and to hell with
everything else.
It is well put... I liked the saying "US business is looking to hire
the cheapest idiot they can find".
US business is only interested in the latest fad because it leads to
increasing share prices (remember glass companies putting dot com in their
names and reaping substantial share price increases). CEOs are not
interested in company performance as much as manipulating share prices -
whic is the bulk of their compensation.

There was a good article by Coggan (the smart one at FT). He cited some
studies which showed that excessive incentives actually decrease
performance. eg, penalty shooters in football seem to perform worse in front
of home crowd.

The share market is no longer a means of capital formation - it has become
the reason why companies do things a certain way. Analysts dislike employee
costs and do not mind operating costs. So employees get fired and are
replaced by outsourced ones or consultants. The market applauds, regardless
of the long term effects.
Robert Kolker
2006-07-23 14:29:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by anon
The share market is no longer a means of capital formation - it has become
the reason why companies do things a certain way. Analysts dislike employee
costs and do not mind operating costs. So employees get fired and are
replaced by outsourced ones or consultants. The market applauds, regardless
of the long term effects.
I wonder if anyone has asked that if the great consuming middle class is
destroyed in America, who is going to buy the goods and services of the
companies that operate in America? There are industries whose revenues
are consumer driven. Is it not in their interestest to help maintain
buying power at home?

I can understanding firing the deadwood from the job, but firing
everyone in sight?

Bob Kolker
anon
2006-07-23 13:43:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by anon
The share market is no longer a means of capital formation - it has
become the reason why companies do things a certain way. Analysts dislike
employee costs and do not mind operating costs. So employees get fired
and are replaced by outsourced ones or consultants. The market applauds,
regardless of the long term effects.
I wonder if anyone has asked that if the great consuming middle class is
destroyed in America, who is going to buy the goods and services of the
companies that operate in America? There are industries whose revenues are
consumer driven. Is it not in their interestest to help maintain buying
power at home?
1. the american system is totally driven by end of month reports. the crap
is left to sort out for the future generations, the next CEO, the next
president, or the next Fed chairman.

2. the markets have figured out that the fed and the govt will not let
consumption decline. that is why you see such dramatic moves in the price of
inelastic raw materials in the futures markets. the market knows it can
extort much more for the oil, cotton, copper, nickel etc - because these are
used in economic activity, and the fed won't let that decline.

The "risk management" approach of mr. greenspan has turned into a debt
machine where the fed will keep pumping the money. and any signs of distress
in the consumption, it will pump more. the only problem is if the banks
won't lend it to you if you don't have the collateral aka land. landowners
win, yet again.

the govt will keep up the pressure on the land via immigration, and the
collateral will keep rising in price, and hence available for more mortgages
and equity extraction.
Robert Kolker
2006-07-23 14:51:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by anon
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by anon
The share market is no longer a means of capital formation - it has
become the reason why companies do things a certain way. Analysts dislike
employee costs and do not mind operating costs. So employees get fired
and are replaced by outsourced ones or consultants. The market applauds,
regardless of the long term effects.
I wonder if anyone has asked that if the great consuming middle class is
destroyed in America, who is going to buy the goods and services of the
companies that operate in America? There are industries whose revenues are
consumer driven. Is it not in their interestest to help maintain buying
power at home?
1. the american system is totally driven by end of month reports. the crap
is left to sort out for the future generations, the next CEO, the next
president, or the next Fed chairman.
Maybe this is a good time for government to assume its proper functions:

Police, courts, and armed forces and nothing else.

A redistributionist government is hand and glove with wasteful, bloated,
nasty mega-corporations. Niether could exist without the other. Perhaps
it is time to remove The Mandate of Heaven from the current system.

Bob Kolker
Old Pif
2006-07-23 15:27:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Police, courts, and armed forces and nothing else.
A redistributionist government is hand and glove with wasteful, bloated,
nasty mega-corporations. Niether could exist without the other. Perhaps
it is time to remove The Mandate of Heaven from the current system.
If you look at typical dynamics of any industry - car, IT, airspace
etc., you notice that it consolidates with time meaning that there are
less players in the field and the survivals are bigger. In airspace,
e.g. we would have only one guy (Boeing) if the government artificially
had not created conditions for couple of competitors to survive.

That tells you what would happen if government eliminated itself from
the the game - economy monopolizes with high speed up to a point when
all competitors are dead and only couple of big guys survived and
divide the economy between themselves. It is natural instinct of any
business to eliminate competitors which is contrary to what most of
economists and politicians believe is good for society.
Straydog
2006-07-23 19:59:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Old Pif
Post by Robert Kolker
Police, courts, and armed forces and nothing else.
A redistributionist government is hand and glove with wasteful, bloated,
nasty mega-corporations. Niether could exist without the other. Perhaps
it is time to remove The Mandate of Heaven from the current system.
If you look at typical dynamics of any industry - car, IT, airspace
etc., you notice that it consolidates with time meaning that there are
less players in the field and the survivals are bigger. In airspace,
e.g. we would have only one guy (Boeing) if the government artificially
had not created conditions for couple of competitors to survive.
That tells you what would happen if government eliminated itself from
the the game - economy monopolizes with high speed up to a point when
all competitors are dead and only couple of big guys survived and
divide the economy between themselves. It is natural instinct of any
business to eliminate competitors which is contrary to what most of
economists and politicians believe is good for society.
Basically, our whole military establishment is a govt-subsidized welfare
program to support defense jobs. If we had true "free markets" I'd bet we
could get the Chinese to make anything we needed (rockets, ammo, guns,
planes) at 1/10 to 1/20th the cost and they would be happy to let the
conveyor belts run off 2X the order, and keep half of it, basically paid
for by US taxpayers. I seem to recall that even Israel, and a few other
countries get some pentagon contracts.

The question as to whether our military materiel is a "sacred cow" (and
thus providing high job security and high pay to a subset of the US
population) to be guaranteed fed from US taxpayers is something I'll leave
to the pro-globalists.

Without having studied govt subsidies in detail, its hard for me to
present an "expert" opinion as to whether they pay for themselves in
spinoff and development, but I think all parties have agreed that the
internet, originally sponsored as a military com network, has mushroomed
into a major cash cow, first for the USA, and now, the rest of the world
(of course we will never get any acknowledgement from the Indians, let
alone appreciation, because they are too lost in their own swelled heads,
fed by considerable business headed their way but in a volume far lower
than for the total volume of other kinds of MNC business flying around
the world)

Bits and pieces of news that I run into indicate that there are plenty of
complaints to spread around about govt subsidies "favoring" a local
business for the purpose of landing a "beachead" in some sector of the
world economy (eg. Euro complaints against Boeing, Boeing's complaints
againd Airbus). Agricultural subsidies are the current baracade at the
Doha WTO talks. I can just see guys in cushy chairs -- at the stroke of a
pen-- sentencing large populations of farmers in poverty to going out of
business while all the transport ships and tankers, and the oil companies
that stoke the boilers for fuel, make off like bandits. All in the name of
validating economist "castles in the sky."

But, they insist on fixing something that isn't broken.
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-07-24 06:42:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Post by Old Pif
Post by Robert Kolker
Police, courts, and armed forces and nothing else.
A redistributionist government is hand and glove with wasteful, bloated,
nasty mega-corporations. Niether could exist without the other. Perhaps
it is time to remove The Mandate of Heaven from the current system.
and perhaps it is also necessary for americans to stop thinking that
wealth originates in the US, and if only we could elect the right
president -he will solve all of our problems.
Post by Straydog
Post by Old Pif
If you look at typical dynamics of any industry - car, IT, airspace
etc., you notice that it consolidates with time meaning that there are
less players in the field and the survivals are bigger. In airspace,
e.g. we would have only one guy (Boeing) if the government artificially
had not created conditions for couple of competitors to survive.
That tells you what would happen if government eliminated itself from
the the game - economy monopolizes with high speed up to a point when
all competitors are dead and only couple of big guys survived and
divide the economy between themselves. It is natural instinct of any
business to eliminate competitors which is contrary to what most of
economists and politicians believe is good for society.
The use of a dominant position to eleminate competitors is prohibited
by US law (Sherman act) since the days of Standard Oil. But the laws
are difficult to implement -more so in a capitalist country, where
capital buys a lot more than anywhere else.
That aside, aerospace is a very capital-intensive process and if a
company with better engrs/design cannot attract capital -it won't be
able to survive. You cannot blame the guy who attracted capital for
that.
Post by Straydog
Basically, our whole military establishment is a govt-subsidized welfare
program to support defense jobs. If we had true "free markets" I'd bet we
could get the Chinese to make anything we needed (rockets, ammo, guns,
planes) at 1/10 to 1/20th the cost and they would be happy to let the
conveyor belts run off 2X the order, and keep half of it, basically paid
for by US taxpayers. I seem to recall that even Israel, and a few other
countries get some pentagon contracts.
and so now do you understand that preventing offshoring to a cheaper
location is a SIMILAR case of taxpayers/consumers paying for the
welfare of greedy pigs demanding $100K+ salaries? All of those high
incomes that american workers consider their birthright have got to be
paid by someone -just as the US taxpayer pays heavily for the military
establishment [this includes engrs working on defence equipment
deisng/manufacturing].
Post by Straydog
The question as to whether our military materiel is a "sacred cow" (and
thus providing high job security and high pay to a subset of the US
population) to be guaranteed fed from US taxpayers is something I'll leave
to the pro-globalists.
or you can leave it to people who believe in curbing wasteful govt
expenditure financed by taxpayers. If there is greater competition,
workers will be forced to lower their expectations towards min wage
[the good old iron law of wages] and that will save taxpayers money and
also keep more americans employed albeit at a lower salary.
Post by Straydog
Without having studied govt subsidies in detail, its hard for me to
present an "expert" opinion as to whether they pay for themselves in
spinoff and development, but I think all parties have agreed that the
internet, originally sponsored as a military com network, has mushroomed
into a major cash cow, first for the USA, and now, the rest of the world
yeah -but defence(DARPA) is just an alias for govt subsidy for
financially unproven research work. You could say the US taxpayer has
bankrolled lots of academic projects which benefited the world around
you.
Post by Straydog
(of course we will never get any acknowledgement from the Indians, let
alone appreciation, because they are too lost in their own swelled heads,
I just did.
Post by Straydog
fed by considerable business headed their way but in a volume far lower
than for the total volume of other kinds of MNC business flying around
the world)
Yeah -as I told you many times before, we aren't much of an export
oreitned country. If MNCs started coming to India, it isn't because
your president took pity on us and allowed them to send some jobs to
India. It is because the govt was arm-twisted by the IMF to open up the
economy. Even after all that, the Indian economy is relatively
insulated from any swings in US consumer's spending.
Post by Straydog
Bits and pieces of news that I run into indicate that there are plenty of
complaints to spread around about govt subsidies "favoring" a local
business for the purpose of landing a "beachead" in some sector of the
world economy (eg. Euro complaints against Boeing, Boeing's complaints
againd Airbus). Agricultural subsidies are the current baracade at the
Doha WTO talks. I can just see guys in cushy chairs -- at the stroke of a
pen-- sentencing large populations of farmers in poverty to going out of
business while all the transport ships and tankers, and the oil companies
that stoke the boilers for fuel, make off like bandits. All in the name of
validating economist "castles in the sky."
The US and EU provide farm subsidies which have caused irepairable
damage to many economies. In India, the govt has to let that subsidized
stuff compete in return for our engrs competing with americans. If you
didn't have subsidy at your end, your engrs will be able to compete
better and so you gain some jobs in engg but lose out on some
agri-products.
Post by Straydog
But, they insist on fixing something that isn't broken.
Its broken as far as poor people are concerned and fixed as far as
transnational businesses are concerned - i.e. the current influx of
mexican immigrants is also tied to the broken system. After NAFTA
allowed for cheaper/subsidized agri-exports from the US to mexico, many
mexican farmers went bankrupt and their erstwhile self-sustained rural
communities went bust thanks to transnat agri-businesses in league with
your politicians. That left those starving mexicans with no other
option but to start gate-crashing the US for work (and the case of
women -as strippers/prostitutes etc). It gave american businesses more
human capital because of which they prospered and as a matter of fact,
the greying population of the USA that can no longer do labour
intensiive work is being helped out by enslaved labour -that has no
rights and always lives in fear of law enforcement. I would add that
mexico suffered a severe drought in the 1990s around the same time -but
the fact that they have had normal weather for many years thereafter
means that you cannot blame it on the weather and their population
couldn't have exploded to justify the gate crashing either.

regards
-kamal
Les Cargill
2006-07-23 23:54:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by anon
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by anon
The share market is no longer a means of capital formation - it has
become the reason why companies do things a certain way. Analysts
dislike employee costs and do not mind operating costs. So employees
get fired and are replaced by outsourced ones or consultants. The
market applauds, regardless of the long term effects.
I wonder if anyone has asked that if the great consuming middle class
is destroyed in America, who is going to buy the goods and services
of the companies that operate in America? There are industries whose
revenues are consumer driven. Is it not in their interestest to help
maintain buying power at home?
1. the american system is totally driven by end of month reports. the
crap is left to sort out for the future generations, the next CEO, the
next president, or the next Fed chairman.
Police, courts, and armed forces and nothing else.
A redistributionist government is hand and glove with wasteful, bloated,
nasty mega-corporations. Niether could exist without the other. Perhaps
it is time to remove The Mandate of Heaven from the current system.
Bob Kolker
The Mandate of Heaven is a competitive differentiator in electoral
markets. And its implementation has been relatively
ruthlessly made efficient - Section 8 housing instead of
Cabrini Green, workfare, supplemental skills training.

--
Les Cargill
anon
2006-07-25 02:44:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
A redistributionist government is hand and glove with wasteful, bloated,
nasty mega-corporations. Niether could exist without the other. Perhaps it
is time to remove The Mandate of Heaven from the current system.
IMO, taxation is the most important function of the government.

the tax system of the country tells you how honest the place is.
Straydog
2006-07-25 13:23:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by anon
Post by Robert Kolker
A redistributionist government is hand and glove with wasteful, bloated,
nasty mega-corporations. Niether could exist without the other. Perhaps it
is time to remove The Mandate of Heaven from the current system.
IMO, taxation is the most important function of the government.
Only if it is a bigger operation than all the corruption and bribes that
can be bigger.
Post by anon
the tax system of the country tells you how honest the place is.
Check the police departments, too.
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-07-26 08:55:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by anon
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by anon
The share market is no longer a means of capital formation - it has
become the reason why companies do things a certain way. Analysts dislike
employee costs and do not mind operating costs. So employees get fired
and are replaced by outsourced ones or consultants. The market applauds,
regardless of the long term effects.
Analysts dislike all input costs. The market applauds growth in
revenue/profits regardless of how a company achieves it. Some companies
make do with fewer -high priced employees, and some make do with lots
of low-priced employees. That is a matter of execution left to company
managers by the stock market and its only the bottom line that counts.
Post by anon
Post by Robert Kolker
I wonder if anyone has asked that if the great consuming middle class is
destroyed in America, who is going to buy the goods and services of the
companies that operate in America? There are industries whose revenues are
consumer driven. Is it not in their interestest to help maintain buying
power at home?
The consuming middle class of america will be replaced by a
less-consuming middle class in 3rd world countries, i.e. each
individual consumes less than the avg american while working a lot
harder -but a lot of consumers on account of huge untapped populations
will compensate for that and provide jobs to a lot more workers. Thanks
to consumers in India, China and many newly emerging markets -american
companies have found a lot more first-time buyers from whoim they can
extract a premium rather than forcing upgrades down the bloated
american consumer's throat.
Post by anon
1. the american system is totally driven by end of month reports. the crap
is left to sort out for the future generations, the next CEO, the next
president, or the next Fed chairman.
A quarterly view is more like it. Some large companies have plans
stretching into decades -coz they have that much insulation from
financial/market crises.
Post by anon
2. the markets have figured out that the fed and the govt will not let
consumption decline. that is why you see such dramatic moves in the price of
inelastic raw materials in the futures markets. the market knows it can
extort much more for the oil, cotton, copper, nickel etc - because these are
used in economic activity, and the fed won't let that decline.
The "risk management" approach of mr. greenspan has turned into a debt
machine where the fed will keep pumping the money. and any signs of distress
in the consumption,
Im glad you realized what is going on. Its really hard to convince
americans that their govt is printing money to keep up consumer
spending without an associated rise in productivity/wealth. For
Straydog, understand from your fellow american:-

Money != Wealth (read in C language as Money is not equal to
Wealth)

Money is a means to carry out trade in goods and servicea -and not a
replacement for wealth. It is like a credit card issues by a credit
card co. The credit card has zero residual value, unless it is honoured
and ONLY valued if swiping it does yield money -whcih can be traded in
lieo uf trade-able goods/services aka wealth.
Post by anon
it will pump more. the only problem is if the banks
won't lend it to you if you don't have the collateral aka land. landowners
win, yet again.
Individuals with a job can take a mortgage and when the Fed increases
liquidity aka money supply, refinancing yields money without having to
work for it -which in turn props up consumer spending and that results
in job creation.
Post by anon
the govt will keep up the pressure on the land via immigration, and the
collateral will keep rising in price, and hence available for more mortgages
and equity extraction.
If immigration is the cause, why do housing prices increase ONLY in
regions where there is economic activity? You will not find
hispanics/H1bs in Montana, Idaho even if they are eligible to work
there and housing costs v less -coz there is no economic activity out
there. Its there in mostly congested areas of west and east coast. Home
prices will rise when liquidity increases, or salaries increase or
productivity increases or people with money to spare zero in to a
particular residential neighbourhood [or all of the above]. From what I
understand, home prices in the US cannot be sustained by productivity
alone and act as a deterrent to employers wishing to setup factories in
the US i.e. the employer will have to pay a lot more to hire comeone in
calif than in India or maybe remote areas of the US.


regards
-kamal
alexy
2006-07-26 12:15:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Analysts dislike all input costs. The market applauds growth in
revenue/profits regardless of how a company achieves it. Some companies
make do with fewer -high priced employees, and some make do with lots
of low-priced employees. That is a matter of execution left to company
managers by the stock market and its only the bottom line that counts.
I disagree somewhat. The market doesn't applaud growth in
revenue/profits -- it anticipates future profits. Thus all the stories
of companies coming out with record earnings and having their share
price drop--the earnings, while at record levels, were below
expectations, indicating that projections for future earnings (which
are the basis for the stock price) need to be revised downward.

And the market very definitely cares how earnings are
achieved--selling off a business unit may create a large current year
profit, but have little or even negative effect on the market price,
while losing money currently on the start-up cost of serving a new
customer may generate large increases in share price if that new
customer is expected to provide significant future profits. And back
to your example of a few high-priced versus many low-priced
employees--it makes a difference to the market price to the extent
that the market (driven largely by the analysts who follow the
company) thinks that one strategy or the other will lead to more
sustainable earnings and earnings growth.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-07-26 12:33:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by alexy
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Analysts dislike all input costs. The market applauds growth in
revenue/profits regardless of how a company achieves it. Some companies
make do with fewer -high priced employees, and some make do with lots
of low-priced employees. That is a matter of execution left to company
managers by the stock market and its only the bottom line that counts.
I disagree somewhat. The market doesn't applaud growth in
revenue/profits -- it anticipates future profits. Thus all the stories
of companies coming out with record earnings and having their share
price drop--the earnings, while at record levels, were below
expectations, indicating that projections for future earnings (which
are the basis for the stock price) need to be revised downward.
well -eventually those projections (which anyone can come up with) will
have to be sunstantiated by growth in profits. I am not referring to
absolute profits -but to growth in profits i.e. something profits grew
35% year-over-year .
Post by alexy
And the market very definitely cares how earnings are
achieved--selling off a business unit may create a large current year
profit, but have little or even negative effect on the market price,
while losing money currently on the start-up cost of serving a new
customer may generate large increases in share price if that new
customer is expected to provide significant future profits. And back
My point was about shareholders bothering about workers' compensation
etc..
The BoD will leave it to the CEO who will in turn leave it to the HR to
determine prevailing wages for a given cadre and/or decide s/he wants
to make do with more fresh grads or easier to retain workers instead of
appropriately qualified workers. I don't think any shareholder meeting
is going to bring up the HR's agenda or give a damn about it.
Post by alexy
to your example of a few high-priced versus many low-priced
employees--it makes a difference to the market price to the extent
that the market (driven largely by the analysts who follow the
company) thinks that one strategy or the other will lead to more
sustainable earnings and earnings growth.
you mean they discuss such things in shareholders meetings? Mgmt is
mostly about constraints i.e. we got to get this activity done within
this budgetary alloation and this is the expected profit etc and the
mid-level mgrs will decide on how that budgetary allocation is to be
used.


But -regardless of whether you agree with me or not, the main pt which
I wanted to make and you have snipped is regarding the concept of
wealth. Printing money doesn't result in an increase in
wealth/trade-able goods or services and consequently while the US
Treassury has a charter to work for the benefit of american citizens,
it doesn't have the means to increase wealth for everybody [but can
only increase money supply/liquidity -which is different from
increasing wealth].
So those who believe that they are entitled to a higher std of living
on account of their citizenship ought to re-examine such widely held
notions.

regards
-kamal
Post by alexy
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
alexy
2006-07-26 13:47:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by alexy
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Analysts dislike all input costs. The market applauds growth in
revenue/profits regardless of how a company achieves it. Some companies
make do with fewer -high priced employees, and some make do with lots
of low-priced employees. That is a matter of execution left to company
managers by the stock market and its only the bottom line that counts.
I disagree somewhat. The market doesn't applaud growth in
revenue/profits -- it anticipates future profits. Thus all the stories
of companies coming out with record earnings and having their share
price drop--the earnings, while at record levels, were below
expectations, indicating that projections for future earnings (which
are the basis for the stock price) need to be revised downward.
well -eventually those projections (which anyone can come up with)
To your parenthetical, true, but no one gives a rat's ass about any
projection you or I may do, while a projection done by an analyst of a
major investment house will affect the market.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
will
have to be sunstantiated by growth in profits. I am not referring to
absolute profits -but to growth in profits i.e. something profits grew
35% year-over-year .
Yes, in the sense that if an analyst is consistently projecting 10%
growth and the company's profits consistently grow at 5%, the market
will start to ignore that analyst's work.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by alexy
And the market very definitely cares how earnings are
achieved--selling off a business unit may create a large current year
profit, but have little or even negative effect on the market price,
while losing money currently on the start-up cost of serving a new
customer may generate large increases in share price if that new
customer is expected to provide significant future profits. And back
My point was about shareholders bothering about workers' compensation
etc..
The BoD will leave it to the CEO who will in turn leave it to the HR to
determine prevailing wages for a given cadre and/or decide s/he wants
to make do with more fresh grads or easier to retain workers instead of
appropriately qualified workers. I don't think any shareholder meeting
is going to bring up the HR's agenda or give a damn about it.
Post by alexy
to your example of a few high-priced versus many low-priced
employees--it makes a difference to the market price to the extent
that the market (driven largely by the analysts who follow the
company) thinks that one strategy or the other will lead to more
sustainable earnings and earnings growth.
you mean they discuss such things in shareholders meetings?
Almost never, unless in response to a shareholder proposal. If
discussed at all, it would be in a conference call with analysts. Most
such issues are not significant enough to get attention of analysts.
But take a very labor intensive industry like the airlines, and
analysts will be asking questions about comp issues.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Mgmt is
mostly about constraints i.e. we got to get this activity done within
this budgetary alloation and this is the expected profit etc and the
mid-level mgrs will decide on how that budgetary allocation is to be
used.
True of first-line supervision, and largely up through middle
management, i.e., tactical management. But management is also about
strategic direction.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
But -regardless of whether you agree with me or not, the main pt which
I wanted to make and you have snipped
Snipped only because I like to quote only that portion of a message to
which I am replying, figuring that others can read the original
message.

I had no disagreement with, or at least felt no compulsion to comment
on, the parts of you message that I did not quote.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
Old Pif
2006-07-26 12:40:48 UTC
Permalink
... and when the Fed increases liquidity aka money supply ...
... Home prices will rise when liquidity increases...
Liquidity of what?
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-07-26 13:01:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Old Pif
... and when the Fed increases liquidity aka money supply ...
... Home prices will rise when liquidity increases...
Liquidity of what?
As stated above, liquidity means money supply. The US treassury can
print as many dollar bills as it likes and flood the country with tons
of money through various means. For housing, the mechanism employed is
to lower interest rates so that you can re-finance your mortgage and
get a ton of extra cash for doing nothing. A popular metaphor for that
is Bernanke raining dollar bills from his helicopter on american home
mortgage owners.

regards
-kamal
Straydog
2006-07-26 20:49:15 UTC
Permalink
Kamal (from farther below) seems to neither read, nor think, nor remember.
I have posted the following many times with zero acknowledgement from him)
-----

Quotes from the "Financial Times" Thursday, May 11, 2006, page 4:
article title: "Nations close on competitive US"
by Francis Williams in Geneva

Quotes:

"The US is still the world's most competitive economy...the IMD business
school says in its latest competitiveness rankings."

The sidebar lists the top economies:

1. US
2. Hong Kong
3. Singapore
4. Iceland
5. Denmark
6. Australia
7. Canada
8. Switzerland
9. Luxembourg
10. Finland

Farther down the list: UK at 21, Germany at 26, France 35, Italy near the
bottom at 56. In the last year, China went from 31 to 19, India from 39 to
29, still very far down the list. Economies that went down: Taiwan (18
from 11) and S Korea (38 from 29).

"The IMD scorecard uses 312 criteria" over a very broad range of factors.


----
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by anon
The share market is no longer a means of capital formation - it has
become the reason why companies do things a certain way. Analysts dislike
employee costs and do not mind operating costs. So employees get fired
and are replaced by outsourced ones or consultants. The market applauds,
regardless of the long term effects.
Analysts dislike all input costs. The market applauds growth in
revenue/profits regardless of how a company achieves it. Some companies
make do with fewer -high priced employees, and some make do with lots
of low-priced employees. That is a matter of execution left to company
managers by the stock market and its only the bottom line that counts.
Post by anon
Post by Robert Kolker
I wonder if anyone has asked that if the great consuming middle class is
destroyed in America, who is going to buy the goods and services of the
companies that operate in America? There are industries whose revenues are
consumer driven. Is it not in their interestest to help maintain buying
power at home?
The consuming middle class of america will be replaced by a
less-consuming middle class in 3rd world countries, i.e. each
individual consumes less than the avg american while working a lot
harder -but a lot of consumers on account of huge untapped populations
will compensate for that and provide jobs to a lot more workers. Thanks
to consumers in India, China and many newly emerging markets -american
companies have found a lot more first-time buyers from whoim they can
extract a premium rather than forcing upgrades down the bloated
american consumer's throat.
Post by anon
1. the american system is totally driven by end of month reports. the crap
is left to sort out for the future generations, the next CEO, the next
president, or the next Fed chairman.
A quarterly view is more like it. Some large companies have plans
stretching into decades -coz they have that much insulation from
financial/market crises.
Post by anon
2. the markets have figured out that the fed and the govt will not let
consumption decline. that is why you see such dramatic moves in the price of
inelastic raw materials in the futures markets. the market knows it can
extort much more for the oil, cotton, copper, nickel etc - because these are
used in economic activity, and the fed won't let that decline.
The "risk management" approach of mr. greenspan has turned into a debt
machine where the fed will keep pumping the money. and any signs of distress
in the consumption,
Im glad you realized what is going on. Its really hard to convince
americans that their govt is printing money to keep up consumer
spending without an associated rise in productivity/wealth. For
Straydog, understand from your fellow american:-
Money != Wealth (read in C language as Money is not equal to
Wealth)
Money is a means to carry out trade in goods and servicea -and not a
replacement for wealth. It is like a credit card issues by a credit
card co. The credit card has zero residual value, unless it is honoured
and ONLY valued if swiping it does yield money -whcih can be traded in
lieo uf trade-able goods/services aka wealth.
Post by anon
it will pump more. the only problem is if the banks
won't lend it to you if you don't have the collateral aka land. landowners
win, yet again.
Individuals with a job can take a mortgage and when the Fed increases
liquidity aka money supply, refinancing yields money without having to
work for it -which in turn props up consumer spending and that results
in job creation.
Post by anon
the govt will keep up the pressure on the land via immigration, and the
collateral will keep rising in price, and hence available for more mortgages
and equity extraction.
If immigration is the cause, why do housing prices increase ONLY in
regions where there is economic activity? You will not find
hispanics/H1bs in Montana, Idaho even if they are eligible to work
there and housing costs v less -coz there is no economic activity out
there. Its there in mostly congested areas of west and east coast. Home
prices will rise when liquidity increases, or salaries increase or
productivity increases or people with money to spare zero in to a
particular residential neighbourhood [or all of the above]. From what I
understand, home prices in the US cannot be sustained by productivity
alone and act as a deterrent to employers wishing to setup factories in
the US i.e. the employer will have to pay a lot more to hire comeone in
calif than in India or maybe remote areas of the US.
regards
-kamal
aj
2006-07-26 23:05:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
article title: "Nations close on competitive US"
by Francis Williams in Geneva
"The US is still the world's most competitive economy...the IMD business
school says in its latest competitiveness rankings."
With typical American flair the Financial Times got it wrong.

?According to the The Global Competitiveness Report 2005-2006, released
on Wednesday by the World Economic Forum, Finland remains the most
competitive economy in the world and tops the rankings for the third
consecutive year. The United States is in second position, followed by
Sweden, Denmark, Taiwan and Singapore, respectively."
Old Pif
2006-07-26 23:12:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by aj
?According to the The Global Competitiveness Report 2005-2006, released
on Wednesday by the World Economic Forum, Finland remains the most
competitive economy in the world and tops the rankings for the third
consecutive year. The United States is in second position, followed by
Sweden, Denmark, Taiwan and Singapore, respectively."
I also thought that Sweden must be around. They are pretty dynamic.
They also show an example of very positive role of government
participation.

But the point was that India is not even close.
aj
2006-07-28 04:53:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Old Pif
Post by aj
?According to the The Global Competitiveness Report 2005-2006, released
on Wednesday by the World Economic Forum, Finland remains the most
competitive economy in the world and tops the rankings for the third
consecutive year. The United States is in second position, followed by
Sweden, Denmark, Taiwan and Singapore, respectively."
I also thought that Sweden must be around. They are pretty dynamic.
They also show an example of very positive role of government
participation.
But the point was that India is not even close.
India came in at # 50. However, that is a starting point
Straydog
2006-07-27 00:15:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by aj
Post by Straydog
article title: "Nations close on competitive US"
by Francis Williams in Geneva
"The US is still the world's most competitive economy...the IMD business
school says in its latest competitiveness rankings."
With typical American flair the Financial Times got it wrong.
?According to the The Global Competitiveness Report 2005-2006, released on
Wednesday by the World Economic Forum, Finland remains the most competitive
economy in the world and tops the rankings for the third consecutive year.
The United States is in second position, followed by Sweden, Denmark, Taiwan
and Singapore, respectively."
OK, so we can have two or more studies on competitiveness. Still how about
telling us where India ranked in THAT report.
aj
2006-07-28 04:53:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Post by aj
Post by Straydog
article title: "Nations close on competitive US"
by Francis Williams in Geneva
"The US is still the world's most competitive economy...the IMD
business school says in its latest competitiveness rankings."
With typical American flair the Financial Times got it wrong.
?According to the The Global Competitiveness Report 2005-2006,
released on Wednesday by the World Economic Forum, Finland remains the
most competitive economy in the world and tops the rankings for the
third consecutive year. The United States is in second position,
followed by Sweden, Denmark, Taiwan and Singapore, respectively."
OK, so we can have two or more studies on competitiveness. Still how
about telling us where India ranked in THAT report.
# 50.
alexy
2006-07-27 04:21:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by aj
Post by Straydog
article title: "Nations close on competitive US"
by Francis Williams in Geneva
"The US is still the world's most competitive economy...the IMD business
school says in its latest competitiveness rankings."
With typical American flair the Financial Times got it wrong.
There are at least a couple of things wrong with your statement:
1) The Financial Times never writes with "American flair" (It is
English)
2) They didn't get it wrong at all. In fact, they got it absolutely
right, as you can see if you look online at the IMD Business School
ratings on which they are reporting.
Post by aj
?According to the The Global Competitiveness Report 2005-2006, released
on Wednesday by the World Economic Forum, Finland remains the most
competitive economy in the world and tops the rankings for the third
consecutive year. The United States is in second position, followed by
Sweden, Denmark, Taiwan and Singapore, respectively."
Interesting that two different studies with different methodologies
came up with such similar results. Unless you view such surveys with
"typical American flair" and exaggerated sense of the precision they
offer, these two surveys tend to support each other rather than
contradict,
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
aj
2006-07-28 04:57:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by alexy
Post by aj
Post by Straydog
article title: "Nations close on competitive US"
by Francis Williams in Geneva
"The US is still the world's most competitive economy...the IMD business
school says in its latest competitiveness rankings."
With typical American flair the Financial Times got it wrong.
1) The Financial Times never writes with "American flair" (It is
English)
Oops! I stand corrected.
Straydog
2006-07-28 12:22:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by aj
Post by alexy
Post by aj
Post by Straydog
article title: "Nations close on competitive US"
by Francis Williams in Geneva
"The US is still the world's most competitive economy...the IMD business
school says in its latest competitiveness rankings."
With typical American flair the Financial Times got it wrong.
1) The Financial Times never writes with "American flair" (It is
English)
Oops! I stand corrected.
It does, however, have a US office, but since I've been reading it for
months now, I can say it has an European/British "flair".

I would compare it with the WSJ in quality. I don't much care for the pink
color of the paper, though.
aj
2006-07-26 23:08:11 UTC
Permalink
Straydog wrote:
Check out how finland became # 1 in Competativeness

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/4031805.stm
Straydog
2006-07-27 00:55:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by aj
Check out how finland became # 1 in Competativeness
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/4031805.stm
I actually read all of that page and it really did NOT explain how Finland
became #1 in competitiveness because at no place in the article did it
explain what went into the survey/study that led to Finland becomeing #1.

You may want to go back and re read the article yourself. What the article
did do was to allow a spokesperson for Finland present _an_ explanation
based on a critical contribution from Finland's educational system.

You will also find, near the end of the article, an acknowledgement that
Finland's unemployment is worse than the UKs, a factor that counts against
quality of life in Finland.
aj
2006-07-28 04:55:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Post by aj
Check out how finland became # 1 in Competativeness
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/4031805.stm
I actually read all of that page and it really did NOT explain how
Finland became #1 in competitiveness because at no place in the article
did it explain what went into the survey/study that led to Finland
becomeing #1.
Real Investment in education, Free education for the gifted.
Straydog
2006-07-28 12:20:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by aj
Post by Straydog
Post by aj
Check out how finland became # 1 in Competativeness
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/4031805.stm
I actually read all of that page and it really did NOT explain how Finland
became #1 in competitiveness because at no place in the article did it
explain what went into the survey/study that led to Finland becomeing #1.
Real Investment in education, Free education for the gifted.
No, that page said that the competitiveness report essentially endorsed
the educational system. It did not _prove_ anything. It did not show cause
and effect.

Please bear in mind that I am not trying to discredit the competitiveness
report and I am not trying to discredit the Finish school system. In
general, European schools have good reputations and the Europeans have
traditionally taken their schooling seriously, but there is also a
juvenile delinquent problem in Europe just as there is in Russia, the USA,
and now even in Japan.

You really need to critically read those sentences and critically evaluate
exactly what they said and just because they put one thing in the same
sentence with another thing and make it _sound_ like something more than
it is, then it is not.
Les Cargill
2006-07-27 00:06:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by anon
The share market is no longer a means of capital formation - it has
become the reason why companies do things a certain way. Analysts dislike
employee costs and do not mind operating costs. So employees get fired
and are replaced by outsourced ones or consultants. The market applauds,
regardless of the long term effects.
Analysts dislike all input costs. The market applauds growth in
revenue/profits regardless of how a company achieves it. Some companies
make do with fewer -high priced employees, and some make do with lots
of low-priced employees. That is a matter of execution left to company
managers by the stock market and its only the bottom line that counts.
Analysts like to see sector-leading numbers - whatever
that happens to mean. And this entire discussion ignores
the analyses that Drucker did in the 70s/80s/90s - that
compensation is a declining component of production cost.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Robert Kolker
I wonder if anyone has asked that if the great consuming middle class is
destroyed in America, who is going to buy the goods and services of the
companies that operate in America? There are industries whose revenues are
consumer driven. Is it not in their interestest to help maintain buying
power at home?
The consuming middle class of america will be replaced by a
less-consuming middle class in 3rd world countries, i.e. each
individual consumes less than the avg american while working a lot
harder -but a lot of consumers on account of huge untapped populations
will compensate for that and provide jobs to a lot more workers.
That seems unlikely. We're already seeing what, 33% growth rates?
in and among the ofshoring companies. That means you'll have, as
the mean moves to the median, increased wages. Then the cycle
we see in the US will execute there, only faster.

And there's a *strong* possibility that American
consumers are reaching satiety.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Thanks
to consumers in India, China and many newly emerging markets -american
companies have found a lot more first-time buyers from whoim they can
extract a premium rather than forcing upgrades down the bloated
american consumer's throat.
We'll see. That won't necessarily work without a strong
consumer credit system. Given the distribution of
property "over there", I don't know how that
can work the same.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
1. the american system is totally driven by end of month reports. the crap
is left to sort out for the future generations, the next CEO, the next
president, or the next Fed chairman.
A quarterly view is more like it. Some large companies have plans
stretching into decades -coz they have that much insulation from
financial/market crises.
Very few, though. Increasingly, employment in America is
going to be with privately held firms, mainly
to avoid the cost of being public. Those
sorts of firms have much more latitude.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
2. the markets have figured out that the fed and the govt will not let
consumption decline. that is why you see such dramatic moves in the price of
inelastic raw materials in the futures markets. the market knows it can
extort much more for the oil, cotton, copper, nickel etc - because these are
used in economic activity, and the fed won't let that decline.
The "risk management" approach of mr. greenspan has turned into a debt
machine where the fed will keep pumping the money. and any signs of distress
in the consumption,
Im glad you realized what is going on. Its really hard to convince
americans that their govt is printing money to keep up consumer
spending without an associated rise in productivity/wealth.
That's *partially* true - the conversion of home equity into
consumption, and the credit card bloat are those things. But
there have been productivity increases.

Much of the "printing money" is just a return flow for
bootstrapping China's consumer goods production base.
That'll taper off soon, if it hasn't already. It's
a short drop from WalMart buying stuff to financing
its production as well.

Do not assume all Americans think the debt is a good
thing - it's artificially made establishing production
in the U.S. very difficult. But it's hardly
pernicious. And we're beginning to see interest
rates rise.

<snip>
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Individuals with a job can take a mortgage and when the Fed increases
liquidity aka money supply, refinancing yields money without having to
work for it -which in turn props up consumer spending and that results
in job creation.
Right. In a recession, that's the plan - although the job
numbers never have been all that overwhelmingly positive.

Still, the equities markets have seen considerable flows
to them as well, still.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
the govt will keep up the pressure on the land via immigration, and the
collateral will keep rising in price, and hence available for more mortgages
and equity extraction.
If immigration is the cause, why do housing prices increase ONLY in
regions where there is economic activity? You will not find
hispanics/H1bs in Montana, Idaho even if they are eligible to work
there and housing costs v less -coz there is no economic activity out
there. Its there in mostly congested areas of west and east coast. Home
prices will rise when liquidity increases, or salaries increase or
productivity increases or people with money to spare zero in to a
particular residential neighbourhood [or all of the above]. From what I
understand, home prices in the US cannot be sustained by productivity
alone and act as a deterrent to employers wishing to setup factories in
the US i.e. the employer will have to pay a lot more to hire comeone in
calif than in India or maybe remote areas of the US.
But much of the runup in home prices is sheer
speculation, fueled by cheap and easy refinancing.

Wages have, for the last two cycles, lagged home
price increases by several years.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
regards
-kamal
--
Les Cargill
minnesotti
2006-07-23 14:31:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
I wonder if anyone has asked that if the great consuming middle class is
destroyed in America, who is going to buy the goods and services of the
companies that operate in America? T
The economy is operated by the greed of the upper class ("fatcats").
Since the last 10-15-20 years, they discovered that thatr did not need
anymore the local consuming middle class anymore to drive the economy.
The manufacturing and development can be outsourced to the cheap
countries such as China. The fatcats will receive their luxury stuff
anyway (made in China and by innumerous locals). What they need is the
servant class in America who will build houses for them and plumb their
toilets. And teach. And provide banking services, and lawer services.
Oh, and medical services. That's it. The massive consumer middle class
is not needed anymore. The most of the Americans are not needed anymore
by the American economy. Go and order a coffin for yerself while you
still have money.
aj
2006-07-23 17:56:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
I wonder if anyone has asked that if the great consuming middle class is
destroyed in America, who is going to buy the goods and services of the
companies that operate in America? There are industries whose revenues
are consumer driven. Is it not in their interestest to help maintain
buying power at home?
I can understanding firing the deadwood from the job, but firing
everyone in sight?
Bob Kolker
That is why the Corporations have to go overseas so they can cater to an
American Consumer who by enlarge no longer has a middle class income.
Les Cargill
2006-07-23 23:50:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Kolker
Post by anon
The share market is no longer a means of capital formation - it has
become the reason why companies do things a certain way. Analysts
dislike employee costs and do not mind operating costs. So employees
get fired and are replaced by outsourced ones or consultants. The
market applauds, regardless of the long term effects.
I wonder if anyone has asked that if the great consuming middle class is
destroyed in America, who is going to buy the goods and services of the
companies that operate in America? There are industries whose revenues
are consumer driven. Is it not in their interestest to help maintain
buying power at home?
If a person is steering a corprate entity, they are probably right
to consider developing markets as more important than established
markets. The American consumer is probably quite saturated, these
days.
Post by Robert Kolker
I can understanding firing the deadwood from the job, but firing
everyone in sight?
Bob Kolker
You assume a reliable mechanism for telling one from the other.

--
Les Cargill
aj
2006-07-23 17:54:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by minnesotti
Post by Phil Scott
That was enlightening... sort of looks like US business is
looking to hire the cheapest idiot they can find,,, then make
that work somehow, as long as they can get another quarters
profit or their ten million dollar bonus....and to hell with
everything else.
It is well put... I liked the saying "US business is looking to hire
the cheapest idiot they can find".
Saying that without considering the the chronic plight of the US
educational system is telling
Post by minnesotti
However, this all is happening because the economical system can bear
it. They hire as unskilled workers as the economy can bear. And the
current economy system can bear 95% of its workers to be unskilled. The
reason is that the previous generations worked hard to develop the
technologies which allow to produce the food, shelter and entertainment
cheaply and in abundant amount. Thus, the today's society does not need
to worry anymore about developing and improving of the sustaining
technologies. The motivation is not there anymore. That's the end of
the Western civilization. (Actually, this is not an end, but the
societal system will be shaken soon and will be restructured in its
essence, which will be accompanied by the sufferings of the masses.)
..
BroTher zAchary
2006-07-23 21:06:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by minnesotti
Post by Phil Scott
That was enlightening... sort of looks like US business is
looking to hire the cheapest idiot they can find,,, then make
that work somehow, as long as they can get another quarters
profit or their ten million dollar bonus....and to hell with
everything else.
It is well put... I liked the saying "US business is looking to hire
the cheapest idiot they can find".
However, this all is happening because the economical system can bear
it. They hire as unskilled workers as the economy can bear. And the
current economy system can bear 95% of its workers to be unskilled. The
reason is that the previous generations worked hard to develop the
technologies which allow to produce the food, shelter and entertainment
cheaply and in abundant amount. Thus, the today's society does not need
to worry anymore about developing and improving of the sustaining
technologies.
Maybe they don't need to be.
Post by minnesotti
That's the end of
the Western civilization. (Actually, this is not an end, but the
societal system will be shaken soon and will be restructured in its
essence, which will be accompanied by the sufferings of the masses.)
Yeah, you guys have been saying that for two centuries, now. We're
still waiting.
aj
2006-07-23 17:52:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phil Scott
Whelll.... now the truth comes out.
You can only say that without being informed about the state of US
education.
Straydog
2006-07-20 23:30:04 UTC
Permalink
Financial Times, Thurs, July 20, page 9.

title: "Up to the job? How India and China risk being stifled by a skills
squeeze" authors: Jo johnson and Richard McGregor

Quotes:

First paragraph:

"When Ishmael Chawla advertises for software developers in New Delhi, he
braces himself for rejection. 'More than half our candidates don't show up
for a scheduled interview,' says Mr. Chawla, 33, who manages the Indian
operations of Live-Career, a San Francisco-based provider of online career
counseling. 'Even then we probably have one qualified person for every 20
we interview--and by qualified, I essentially mean 'trainable'"

Approximately one third of the article says nearly the same thing about
China. They are getting caught, too, in a lack of qualified candidates for
jobs, too. Most of the article talks about examples.

"While 3m [million] students graduate from Indian universities each
year...only about 25 per cent of engineering graduates and 10-15 per cent
of general college graduates are considered suitable for direct employment
in the offshore information technology and [BPO] industries [according to
a NASSCOM study]." "The lobby group has warned that the Indian IT sector
faces a shortfall of 500,000 professionals by 2010...."

"With the industry as a whole struggling with annual employee turnover
rates approaching 40 per cent, wage inflation is rising." The article
quoted "13.5 per cent last year" and expects it to become 20 per cent this
year. The article goes on to quote Infosys as boosting pay by "12.5 per
cent" to hold back turnoever.

More BPO failure cited:

"Last month, Apple Computer and Powergen, the UK utility, announced the
closure of their Indian support activities. More closures are likely to
follow as opportunities for labor cost arbitrage become ever more scarce."

"Even in a traditional business like construction, the squeeze is on, as a
result of debt-fuelled housing boom and breakneck development of mall
complexes. Large building companies report chronic shortages of skilled
foremen and supervisors."

"'Skills shortages are not just starting to pinch--they're biting in a
massive way,' says Kanwarjit Chawla, chairman of the New Delhi-based
Chawla Techno Construct. Struggling to serve its clients, the group
decided to offer all its skilled foremen and supervisors a 60 per cent pay
rise to retain their services."

The rest of the articles gives still further examples and quotes both
Indians and Chinese.
Old Pif
2006-07-20 23:54:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Financial Times, Thurs, July 20, page 9.
title: "Up to the job? How India and China risk being stifled by a skills
squeeze" authors: Jo johnson and Richard McGregor
..................................................................................................................
Post by Straydog
The rest of the articles gives still further examples and quotes both
Indians and Chinese.
I suspected something like that judging by those I have met here.
However, is it really a thing to celebrate? If the outsourcing pressure
from this side continue to rise or even stays at the same level they
catch up with education. The western universities respond to the market
demand usually with the delay about 4-5 years. Why the Indian
universities would not? All that is to say that the fact they are bad
now does not mean to do nothing to keep the US job market healthy.
Straydog
2006-07-21 00:30:38 UTC
Permalink
WSJ, July 12, 2006, front page, lower right corner:

title: "States and Towns Attempt to Draw the Line on Illegal Immigration"
by Miriam Jordan

Third paragraph:

"This year, more than 500 pieces of immigration-related legislation have
been introduced in state legislatures, and 57 of them have been enacted in
27 states, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. In
April, Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue, a Republican, signed into law a bill
that will restrict public health benefits and certain employment rights
for illegal immigrants, starting next year. On Monday, Colorado
legislators passed similar measures."

The article goes into substantial detail, including laws making it
possible to litigate against employers (headed by those greedy-selfish
parasite CEOs) of illegal aliens, and that people are tired of paying
taxes that get spent on benefits being paid out to illegals. I've even
heard from some other people that sometimes the illegals can get benefits
in the US but legal citizens of the US who pay the taxes that get spent
delivering those benefits to the illegals cannot get those benefits.
minnesotti
2006-07-23 09:27:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Financial Times, Thurs, July 20, 2006, page 9
title "Singh sounds the alarm over educational failings"
"Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, could hardly have been blunter.
The Indian educational system is in such crisis, he said last week, that
it threatens the country's growth. For an outside world that haprbours an
image of a system churning out hard-working, numerate, techno-savy and
English-speaking graduates in their millions, the comments should come as
something of a shock."
There is a universal principle: "90% of everything is crap". This is an
explanation of how the image of the Indian "hard-working, numerate,
techno-savy and English-speaking graduates in millions" combines with
the claims of the Indian educational system in crisis.

..
aj
2006-07-23 17:51:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Financial Times, Thurs, July 20, 2006, page 9
title "Singh sounds the alarm over educational failings"
"Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, could hardly have been blunter.
The Indian educational system is in such crisis, he said last week, that
it threatens the country's growth.
To bad he was not listening to the politicians in the US who for decades
have bewailed the plight of the US educational system.

The alarm bells have been ringing in the US for the last 40 years and it
got politicians of every stripe elected. Never mind the US student SAT
scores are among the lowest in the Industrial world, despite all this
verbiage the US economy keeps on steaming along.

So anyone wanting to make anything significant about Indian education is
motivated by pure malice.
Straydog
2006-07-23 19:13:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Financial Times, Thurs, July 20, 2006, page 9
title "Singh sounds the alarm over educational failings"
"Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, could hardly have been blunter.
The Indian educational system is in such crisis, he said last week, that it
threatens the country's growth.
To bad he was not listening to the politicians in the US who for decades have
bewailed the plight of the US educational system.
And where was India for 3,000 years?
The alarm bells have been ringing in the US for the last 40 years and it got
politicians of every stripe elected. Never mind the US student SAT scores are
among the lowest in the Industrial world,
I don't have any problem with other countries catching up to the USA.

despite all this verbiage the US
economy keeps on steaming along.
Well, the economy is still steaming along.
So anyone wanting to make anything significant about Indian education is
motivated by pure malice.
No problem, I see plenty of malice in all the pro-India propaganda being
posted by the remailers and plenty of malice in the same guys spreading
anti-US propaganda, too.
Straydog
2006-07-21 01:16:55 UTC
Permalink
Front Page, WSJ, July 19, 2006, lower right corner.

"Global Growth, Weak Dollar Unleash a Wave of U.S. Exports"
by Mark Whitehouse

All kinds of good news, expansion, trade deficit down, details,
statistics.

---and a bonus just for those who don't know anything-----


The Economist (I hope you know that periodical) publishes in the back pages of
every issue lots of financial data. In the April 29, 2006 issue on page 101,
is a bar graph showing (title of bar graph) "Trade in commercial services"
with an asterisk which says "Transport, travel, commmunications, financial
and other services" and under the title it says "Top exporters, 2005, $bn"
and guess who is at the top? The USA, exported $350 billion in services.
The next highest exporter is Britain with $180 bil. There were 13 more
countries listed (Germany, France, Japan, Italy, Spain, China [with $80 bil],
Netherlands, _India_ [with $65 bil in services], and the rest with Canada
ending at $50 bil). The source was given as the WTO.


Just in the Tuesday, May 16, issue of the WSJ, front page, is another bar
graph on world wide farm exports. Guess what, US is at the top with $79.6
bil in exports. The whole EU exports $78.4 bil. Others in order down the
list are Canada (40.1), Brazil (30.9), China (24.1), Oz (22.1), Argentina
(17.1), and down through Russia (13.8), and Malaysia (13.1), and India not
even on the list.


---- and another one -----


Quotes from the "Financial Times" Thursday, May 11, 2006, page 4:
article title: "Nations close on competitive US"
by Francis Williams in Geneva

Quotes:

"The US is still the world's most competitive economy...the IMD business
school says in its latest competitiveness rankings."

The sidebar lists the top economies:

1. US
2. Hong Kong
3. Singapore
4. Iceland
5. Denmark
6. Australia
7. Canada
8. Switzerland
9. Luxembourg
10. Finland

Farther down the list: UK at 21, Germany at 26, France 35, Italy near the
bottom at 56. In the last year, China went from 31 to 19, India from 39 to
29, still very far down the list. Economies that went down: Taiwan (18
from 11) and S Korea (38 from 29).

"The IMD scorecard uses 312 criteria" over a very broad range of factors.
r***@comcast.net
2006-07-21 07:21:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Front Page, WSJ, July 19, 2006, lower right corner.
"Global Growth, Weak Dollar Unleash a Wave of U.S. Exports"
by Mark Whitehouse
All kinds of good news, expansion, trade deficit down, details,
statistics.
---and a bonus just for those who don't know anything-----
The Economist (I hope you know that periodical) publishes in the back pages of
every issue lots of financial data. In the April 29, 2006 issue on page 101,
is a bar graph showing (title of bar graph) "Trade in commercial services"
with an asterisk which says "Transport, travel, commmunications, financial
and other services" and under the title it says "Top exporters, 2005, $bn"
and guess who is at the top? The USA, exported $350 billion in services.
The next highest exporter is Britain with $180 bil. There were 13 more
countries listed (Germany, France, Japan, Italy, Spain, China [with $80 bil],
Netherlands, _India_ [with $65 bil in services], and the rest with Canada
ending at $50 bil). The source was given as the WTO.
Just in the Tuesday, May 16, issue of the WSJ, front page, is another bar
graph on world wide farm exports. Guess what, US is at the top with $79.6
bil in exports. The whole EU exports $78.4 bil. Others in order down the
list are Canada (40.1), Brazil (30.9), China (24.1), Oz (22.1), Argentina
(17.1), and down through Russia (13.8), and Malaysia (13.1), and India not
even on the list.
---- and another one -----
article title: "Nations close on competitive US"
by Francis Williams in Geneva
"The US is still the world's most competitive economy...the IMD business
school says in its latest competitiveness rankings."
1. US
2. Hong Kong
3. Singapore
4. Iceland
5. Denmark
6. Australia
7. Canada
8. Switzerland
9. Luxembourg
10. Finland
Farther down the list: UK at 21, Germany at 26, France 35, Italy near the
bottom at 56. In the last year, China went from 31 to 19, India from 39 to
29, still very far down the list. Economies that went down: Taiwan (18
from 11) and S Korea (38 from 29).
"The IMD scorecard uses 312 criteria" over a very broad range of factors.
And still the trade deficit grew.

________________
I am human; nothing in humanity is alien to me.
Terence
minnesotti
2006-07-21 03:21:26 UTC
Permalink
Lately, when I am coming to read s.r.c., I thought occurs to my mind:

When there is a gap in conversation and people have nothing to say,
people are divided into two categories. The first category thinks: "I
have nothing to say ! Quick ! I have to say something !" and the other
category of people: "I have nothing to say. I will keep quiet".
Old Pif
2006-07-21 04:13:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by minnesotti
When there is a gap in conversation and people have nothing to say,
people are divided into two categories. The first category thinks: "I
have nothing to say ! Quick ! I have to say something !" and the other
category of people: "I have nothing to say. I will keep quiet".
In principle, statistical analysis of discussion topics is an
interesting subject. I am thinking of teaming with a physiologist (my
wife?) and wright an article about that.

An interesting phenomenon is that after short period after original
posting the discussion behaves like a tree, each branch most often
having very little in common with the original posting .

Another thing is that every new group has something like stable
attractor of topics and no matter from what the discussion starts the
end belongs to one of the stable themes. A classical example of that is
the Goodwin law which is a universal attractor for any discussion. For
our group the stable topics are Indian supremacy, stupid management and
the decline of the Western civilization.

Usenet is a Klondike for studies in human relations.
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-07-21 09:32:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Old Pif
end belongs to one of the stable themes. A classical example of that is
the Goodwin law which is a universal attractor for any discussion. For
our group the stable topics are Indian supremacy, stupid management and
the decline of the Western civilization.
...not to mention false ideas of the origin of wealth, intellect and
everything good as inherently belonging to the master race. Did anyone
from India ever suggest that Indians are superior? I would only go so
far as to suggest that comparable manpower can be found in India, and
it costs a lot less to hire a person of a given calibre in India than
in the US.

regards
-kamal
Straydog
2006-07-21 11:47:47 UTC
Permalink
India: Government Brutality, Injustice, and
Questionable Democracy.

A sellection of quotes from the book "An Ordinary Person's Guide to
Empire" by Arundhati Roy (the author of The God of Small Things, on the
NYT best seller list for 49 weeks, and she lives in New
Delhi); ISBN 0896087271, c 2004.

Parts of the book criticise US foreign policy, and other parts criticise
Indian foreign and domestic policy. All of the chapters were originally
given as speeches or were published as articles in major printed media.
The book contains hundreds of sources for details about which statements
were made. The book gives substantial detail about the internal political
and social components of modern India and India's problems and changes
while undergoing modernisation. At one point the author identifies fascist
themes in some government policy and especially in connection with
globalization. The book is easy to read and contains a great deal of
information about the political situation in India, today. If you are a
corporate goon-parasite, then all this doesn't matter. If you care about
democracy, ethics, morals, and people, then read on.

Quotes:

page 12
"According to the State, when victims refuse to be victims, they become
terrorists and are dealt with as such. They're either killed or arrested
under POTA (Prevention of Terrorism Act). In states like Orissa, Bihar,
and Jharkhand, which are rich in mineral resources and, therefore,
vulneralble to ruthless corporations on the hunt, hundreds of villagers,
including minors, have been arrested under POTA and are being held in jail
without trial. Some states have special police battalions for
'anti-development' activity. This is quite apart from the other use that
POTA is being put to--terrorizing Muslims, particularly in states
like Jammu and Kashmir and Gujarat. The space for genuine nonviolent civil
disobediance is atrophying. In the era of corporate globalization, poverty
is a crime, and protesting against further impoverishment is terrorism. In
teh era of the War on Terror, poverty is being slyly conflated with
terrorism." I have sellected just a few passages to show the message that
this book offers and that it is important to everyone, not just India or
Indians.

***
page 13:
"Vast parts of the country are already more or less beyond the control of
the Indian state--Kashmir, the North East, large parts of Madhya Pradesh,
Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand."
***
"The real issue is that the privatization of essential infrastructure is
essentially undemocratic. The real issue is the towering mass of
incriminating evidence against big dams. The real issue is the fact that
over the last fifty years in India alone big dams have displaced more
than 33 million people.... The real issue is the fact that the Supreme
Court of India ordered the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam to
proceed even though it is aware that it violates the fundamental rights to
life and livelihood of the citizens of India."

I should point out that dam construction and other Army Corps of Engineer
projects in the USA have been seriously criticised by environmentalists in
the USA at least as far back as 50 years ago. Many dam construction
projects in the USA have been declared failures and Jared Diamond, in his
book "Collapse" mentioned at least one US dam that was blown up to restore
water flows back to their original nature without loss of non-existent
benefits but with the restoration of the fishing industry in the area.

page 45:
"Never mind that forty years ago, the CIA, under President John F.
Kennedy, orchestrated a regime change in Baghdad. In 1963, after a
succesful coup, the Ba'ath party came to power in Iraq. Using lists
provided by the CIA, the new Ba'ath regime systematically eliminated
hundreds of doctors, teachers, lawyers, and political figures known to be
leftists [reference given]. An entire intellectual community was
slaughtered. (The same technique was used to massacre hundreds of
thousands of people in Indonesia and East Timor.[reference given])....In
1980...[the US said] 'We see no fundamental incompatibility of
interests between the United States and Iraq [reference given].'"

page 55:
"In South Africa, after three hundred years of brutal domination of the
black majority by a white minority through colonialism and apartheid, a
nonracial, multi-party democracy came to power in 1994. It was a
phenomenal acheivement. Within two years of coming to power, the African
National Congress had genuflected with no caveats to the Market God. Its
massive program of structural adjustment, privatization, and
liberalization has only increased the hideous disparities between the
rich and the poor. Official unemployment among blacks has increased from
forty percent to fifty percent since the end of Apartheid [reference
given]. The corporatization of basic services-- electricity, water, and
housing-- has meant that ten million South Africans, almost a quarter of
the population, have been disconnected from water and electricity
[reference given]."

Now how does propaganda work?

page 57:
"...Clear Channel Communications is the largest radio station owner in the
country. It runs more than twelve hundred channels, which together
account for nine percent fo the market [reference given]. When hundreds of
thousands of American citizens took to the streets to protest against
the war on Iraq, Clear Channel orgaized pro-war patriotic "Rallies for
America" across the country [reference given]. It used its radio stations
to advertise the events and then sent correspondents to cover them as
though they were breaking news."

It should be noted that consolidation in the broadcast radio and TV
business continues, today. Same for the book publishing business. Soon,
only a few entities will control all media.

page 71:

This deals with Hindu nationalism. Many passages in the book talk about
this with parallels with the development of Nazi power in Germany in the
1930s.

"On August 15, 2003, Independence Day he [Cheif Minister of Gujarat,
Narendra Modi] hoisted the Indian flag before thousands of cheering
people. In a gesture of menacing symbolism, he wore the black RSS
cap--which proclaims him as a member of the Hindu nationalist guild that
has not been shy of admiring Hitler and his methods [reference
given]."

"One hundred and thirty million Muslims--not to mention the other
minorities, Dalits, Christians, Sikhs, Adivasis--live in India under the
shaddow of Hindu nationalism."

page 85:

Additional text documenting thousands of people killed and hundreds of
thousands of people displaced by Indian police.

page 91:

"Gandhi's Salt March was not just political theater. When, in a simple act
of defiance, thousands of Indians marched to the sea and made their own
salt, they broke the salt tax laws."

page 97:

"The U.S. government used the lies and disinformation generated around the
September 11 attacks to invade no just one country, but two.... The Indian
government uses the same strategy not with other countries, but against
its own people. Over the last decade the number of people who have been
killed by the police and security forces runs into the thousands. Recently
several Bombay policemen spoke openly to the press about how many
'gangsters' they had eliminated on 'orders' from their senior officers
[reference given]. Andhra Pradesh chalks up an average of about two
hundred 'extremists' in 'encounter' deaths a year [reference given]. In
Kashmir in a situation that almost amounts to war, an estimated eighty
thousand people have been killed since 1989. Thousands have simply
'disappeared' [reference given]. According to the records of the
Association of Parents of Disappeared People (APDP), more than three
thousand people were killed in 2003, of which four hundred and sixty-
three were soldiers [reference given]."

The text goes on to say things are getting worse.

page 102:

"Fourty-seven percent of India's children below three suffer from
malnutrition, forty-six percent are stunted [reference given]."

page 103:
"Today, an average rural family eats about one hundred killograms [about
220 lbs.] less food in a year than it did in the early 1990s [refernce
given]."

"But in urban India, wherever you go--shops, restaurants, railway
stations, airports...--you have TV monitors in which election promises
have already come true. India's Shining, Feeling Good."

page 104:

The thing that is happening is that much infrastructure (eg. water
supplies, electricity, transport, telecommunications, health services,
education, etc, that the government was "supposed to hold in trust for the
people it represents, assets that have been built and maintained with
public money over decades--are sold by the state to private corporations."
Guess where that leads?

The book ends with a short glossary of terms, names, etc., that define or
explain political parties, important people, important historical
events, and a long list of information sources (21 pages), and an index.

If you want to see how globalization is affecting the so-called
"developing countries" this is one good book to start with.
m***@yahoo.com
2006-07-21 13:42:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
India: Government Brutality, Injustice, and
Questionable Democracy.
Naa India don't have democracy but democraZy.. 300 million low caste
dalits had concrete evidence to convinence UN....
Post by Straydog
A sellection of quotes from the book "An Ordinary Person's Guide to
Empire" by Arundhati Roy (the author of The God of Small Things, on the
NYT best seller list for 49 weeks, and she lives in New
Delhi); ISBN 0896087271, c 2004.
Parts of the book criticise US foreign policy, and other parts criticise
Indian foreign and domestic policy. All of the chapters were originally
given as speeches or were published as articles in major printed media.
The book contains hundreds of sources for details about which statements
were made. The book gives substantial detail about the internal political
and social components of modern India and India's problems and changes
while undergoing modernisation. At one point the author identifies fascist
themes in some government policy and especially in connection with
globalization. The book is easy to read and contains a great deal of
information about the political situation in India, today. If you are a
corporate goon-parasite, then all this doesn't matter. If you care about
democracy, ethics, morals, and people, then read on.
page 12
"According to the State, when victims refuse to be victims, they become
terrorists and are dealt with as such. They're either killed or arrested
under POTA (Prevention of Terrorism Act). In states like Orissa, Bihar,
and Jharkhand, which are rich in mineral resources and, therefore,
vulneralble to ruthless corporations on the hunt, hundreds of villagers,
including minors, have been arrested under POTA and are being held in jail
without trial. Some states have special police battalions for
'anti-development' activity. This is quite apart from the other use that
POTA is being put to--terrorizing Muslims, particularly in states
like Jammu and Kashmir and Gujarat. The space for genuine nonviolent civil
disobediance is atrophying. In the era of corporate globalization, poverty
is a crime, and protesting against further impoverishment is terrorism. In
teh era of the War on Terror, poverty is being slyly conflated with
terrorism." I have sellected just a few passages to show the message that
this book offers and that it is important to everyone, not just India or
Indians.
***
"Vast parts of the country are already more or less beyond the control of
the Indian state--Kashmir, the North East, large parts of Madhya Pradesh,
Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand."
***
"The real issue is that the privatization of essential infrastructure is
essentially undemocratic. The real issue is the towering mass of
incriminating evidence against big dams. The real issue is the fact that
over the last fifty years in India alone big dams have displaced more
than 33 million people.... The real issue is the fact that the Supreme
Court of India ordered the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam to
proceed even though it is aware that it violates the fundamental rights to
life and livelihood of the citizens of India."
I should point out that dam construction and other Army Corps of Engineer
projects in the USA have been seriously criticised by environmentalists in
the USA at least as far back as 50 years ago. Many dam construction
projects in the USA have been declared failures and Jared Diamond, in his
book "Collapse" mentioned at least one US dam that was blown up to restore
water flows back to their original nature without loss of non-existent
benefits but with the restoration of the fishing industry in the area.
"Never mind that forty years ago, the CIA, under President John F.
Kennedy, orchestrated a regime change in Baghdad. In 1963, after a
succesful coup, the Ba'ath party came to power in Iraq. Using lists
provided by the CIA, the new Ba'ath regime systematically eliminated
hundreds of doctors, teachers, lawyers, and political figures known to be
leftists [reference given]. An entire intellectual community was
slaughtered. (The same technique was used to massacre hundreds of
thousands of people in Indonesia and East Timor.[reference given])....In
1980...[the US said] 'We see no fundamental incompatibility of
interests between the United States and Iraq [reference given].'"
"In South Africa, after three hundred years of brutal domination of the
black majority by a white minority through colonialism and apartheid, a
nonracial, multi-party democracy came to power in 1994. It was a
phenomenal acheivement. Within two years of coming to power, the African
National Congress had genuflected with no caveats to the Market God. Its
massive program of structural adjustment, privatization, and
liberalization has only increased the hideous disparities between the
rich and the poor. Official unemployment among blacks has increased from
forty percent to fifty percent since the end of Apartheid [reference
given]. The corporatization of basic services-- electricity, water, and
housing-- has meant that ten million South Africans, almost a quarter of
the population, have been disconnected from water and electricity
[reference given]."
Now how does propaganda work?
"...Clear Channel Communications is the largest radio station owner in the
country. It runs more than twelve hundred channels, which together
account for nine percent fo the market [reference given]. When hundreds of
thousands of American citizens took to the streets to protest against
the war on Iraq, Clear Channel orgaized pro-war patriotic "Rallies for
America" across the country [reference given]. It used its radio stations
to advertise the events and then sent correspondents to cover them as
though they were breaking news."
It should be noted that consolidation in the broadcast radio and TV
business continues, today. Same for the book publishing business. Soon,
only a few entities will control all media.
This deals with Hindu nationalism. Many passages in the book talk about
this with parallels with the development of Nazi power in Germany in the
1930s.
"On August 15, 2003, Independence Day he [Cheif Minister of Gujarat,
Narendra Modi] hoisted the Indian flag before thousands of cheering
people. In a gesture of menacing symbolism, he wore the black RSS
cap--which proclaims him as a member of the Hindu nationalist guild that
has not been shy of admiring Hitler and his methods [reference
given]."
"One hundred and thirty million Muslims--not to mention the other
minorities, Dalits, Christians, Sikhs, Adivasis--live in India under the
shaddow of Hindu nationalism."
Additional text documenting thousands of people killed and hundreds of
thousands of people displaced by Indian police.
"Gandhi's Salt March was not just political theater. When, in a simple act
of defiance, thousands of Indians marched to the sea and made their own
salt, they broke the salt tax laws."
"The U.S. government used the lies and disinformation generated around the
September 11 attacks to invade no just one country, but two.... The Indian
government uses the same strategy not with other countries, but against
its own people. Over the last decade the number of people who have been
killed by the police and security forces runs into the thousands. Recently
several Bombay policemen spoke openly to the press about how many
'gangsters' they had eliminated on 'orders' from their senior officers
[reference given]. Andhra Pradesh chalks up an average of about two
hundred 'extremists' in 'encounter' deaths a year [reference given]. In
Kashmir in a situation that almost amounts to war, an estimated eighty
thousand people have been killed since 1989. Thousands have simply
'disappeared' [reference given]. According to the records of the
Association of Parents of Disappeared People (APDP), more than three
thousand people were killed in 2003, of which four hundred and sixty-
three were soldiers [reference given]."
The text goes on to say things are getting worse.
"Fourty-seven percent of India's children below three suffer from
malnutrition, forty-six percent are stunted [reference given]."
"Today, an average rural family eats about one hundred killograms [about
220 lbs.] less food in a year than it did in the early 1990s [refernce
given]."
"But in urban India, wherever you go--shops, restaurants, railway
stations, airports...--you have TV monitors in which election promises
have already come true. India's Shining, Feeling Good."
The thing that is happening is that much infrastructure (eg. water
supplies, electricity, transport, telecommunications, health services,
education, etc, that the government was "supposed to hold in trust for the
people it represents, assets that have been built and maintained with
public money over decades--are sold by the state to private corporations."
Guess where that leads?
The book ends with a short glossary of terms, names, etc., that define or
explain political parties, important people, important historical
events, and a long list of information sources (21 pages), and an index.
If you want to see how globalization is affecting the so-called
"developing countries" this is one good book to start with.
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-08-09 09:54:34 UTC
Permalink
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you keep
talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its practice of
slavery, you may want to look at another view of Indian society wrt
caste system.

http://in.rediff.com/news/2006/jun/15franc.htm

The author Francois Gautier is a french man who was inspired by Indian
culture and hinduism, and settled down in India. The caste system did
empower upper caste people at one pt of time. The Indian constitution
doesn't follow the same path -and this is one of your own fellow
europeans confirming that statement.

regards
-kamal
Post by Straydog
India: Government Brutality, Injustice, and
Questionable Democracy.
A sellection of quotes from the book "An Ordinary Person's Guide to
Empire" by Arundhati Roy (the author of The God of Small Things, on the
NYT best seller list for 49 weeks, and she lives in New
Delhi); ISBN 0896087271, c 2004.
Parts of the book criticise US foreign policy, and other parts criticise
Indian foreign and domestic policy. All of the chapters were originally
given as speeches or were published as articles in major printed media.
The book contains hundreds of sources for details about which statements
were made. The book gives substantial detail about the internal political
and social components of modern India and India's problems and changes
while undergoing modernisation. At one point the author identifies fascist
themes in some government policy and especially in connection with
globalization. The book is easy to read and contains a great deal of
information about the political situation in India, today. If you are a
corporate goon-parasite, then all this doesn't matter. If you care about
democracy, ethics, morals, and people, then read on.
page 12
"According to the State, when victims refuse to be victims, they become
terrorists and are dealt with as such. They're either killed or arrested
under POTA (Prevention of Terrorism Act). In states like Orissa, Bihar,
and Jharkhand, which are rich in mineral resources and, therefore,
vulneralble to ruthless corporations on the hunt, hundreds of villagers,
including minors, have been arrested under POTA and are being held in jail
without trial. Some states have special police battalions for
'anti-development' activity. This is quite apart from the other use that
POTA is being put to--terrorizing Muslims, particularly in states
like Jammu and Kashmir and Gujarat. The space for genuine nonviolent civil
disobediance is atrophying. In the era of corporate globalization, poverty
is a crime, and protesting against further impoverishment is terrorism. In
teh era of the War on Terror, poverty is being slyly conflated with
terrorism." I have sellected just a few passages to show the message that
this book offers and that it is important to everyone, not just India or
Indians.
***
"Vast parts of the country are already more or less beyond the control of
the Indian state--Kashmir, the North East, large parts of Madhya Pradesh,
Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand."
***
"The real issue is that the privatization of essential infrastructure is
essentially undemocratic. The real issue is the towering mass of
incriminating evidence against big dams. The real issue is the fact that
over the last fifty years in India alone big dams have displaced more
than 33 million people.... The real issue is the fact that the Supreme
Court of India ordered the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam to
proceed even though it is aware that it violates the fundamental rights to
life and livelihood of the citizens of India."
I should point out that dam construction and other Army Corps of Engineer
projects in the USA have been seriously criticised by environmentalists in
the USA at least as far back as 50 years ago. Many dam construction
projects in the USA have been declared failures and Jared Diamond, in his
book "Collapse" mentioned at least one US dam that was blown up to restore
water flows back to their original nature without loss of non-existent
benefits but with the restoration of the fishing industry in the area.
"Never mind that forty years ago, the CIA, under President John F.
Kennedy, orchestrated a regime change in Baghdad. In 1963, after a
succesful coup, the Ba'ath party came to power in Iraq. Using lists
provided by the CIA, the new Ba'ath regime systematically eliminated
hundreds of doctors, teachers, lawyers, and political figures known to be
leftists [reference given]. An entire intellectual community was
slaughtered. (The same technique was used to massacre hundreds of
thousands of people in Indonesia and East Timor.[reference given])....In
1980...[the US said] 'We see no fundamental incompatibility of
interests between the United States and Iraq [reference given].'"
"In South Africa, after three hundred years of brutal domination of the
black majority by a white minority through colonialism and apartheid, a
nonracial, multi-party democracy came to power in 1994. It was a
phenomenal acheivement. Within two years of coming to power, the African
National Congress had genuflected with no caveats to the Market God. Its
massive program of structural adjustment, privatization, and
liberalization has only increased the hideous disparities between the
rich and the poor. Official unemployment among blacks has increased from
forty percent to fifty percent since the end of Apartheid [reference
given]. The corporatization of basic services-- electricity, water, and
housing-- has meant that ten million South Africans, almost a quarter of
the population, have been disconnected from water and electricity
[reference given]."
Now how does propaganda work?
"...Clear Channel Communications is the largest radio station owner in the
country. It runs more than twelve hundred channels, which together
account for nine percent fo the market [reference given]. When hundreds of
thousands of American citizens took to the streets to protest against
the war on Iraq, Clear Channel orgaized pro-war patriotic "Rallies for
America" across the country [reference given]. It used its radio stations
to advertise the events and then sent correspondents to cover them as
though they were breaking news."
It should be noted that consolidation in the broadcast radio and TV
business continues, today. Same for the book publishing business. Soon,
only a few entities will control all media.
This deals with Hindu nationalism. Many passages in the book talk about
this with parallels with the development of Nazi power in Germany in the
1930s.
"On August 15, 2003, Independence Day he [Cheif Minister of Gujarat,
Narendra Modi] hoisted the Indian flag before thousands of cheering
people. In a gesture of menacing symbolism, he wore the black RSS
cap--which proclaims him as a member of the Hindu nationalist guild that
has not been shy of admiring Hitler and his methods [reference
given]."
"One hundred and thirty million Muslims--not to mention the other
minorities, Dalits, Christians, Sikhs, Adivasis--live in India under the
shaddow of Hindu nationalism."
Additional text documenting thousands of people killed and hundreds of
thousands of people displaced by Indian police.
"Gandhi's Salt March was not just political theater. When, in a simple act
of defiance, thousands of Indians marched to the sea and made their own
salt, they broke the salt tax laws."
"The U.S. government used the lies and disinformation generated around the
September 11 attacks to invade no just one country, but two.... The Indian
government uses the same strategy not with other countries, but against
its own people. Over the last decade the number of people who have been
killed by the police and security forces runs into the thousands. Recently
several Bombay policemen spoke openly to the press about how many
'gangsters' they had eliminated on 'orders' from their senior officers
[reference given]. Andhra Pradesh chalks up an average of about two
hundred 'extremists' in 'encounter' deaths a year [reference given]. In
Kashmir in a situation that almost amounts to war, an estimated eighty
thousand people have been killed since 1989. Thousands have simply
'disappeared' [reference given]. According to the records of the
Association of Parents of Disappeared People (APDP), more than three
thousand people were killed in 2003, of which four hundred and sixty-
three were soldiers [reference given]."
The text goes on to say things are getting worse.
"Fourty-seven percent of India's children below three suffer from
malnutrition, forty-six percent are stunted [reference given]."
"Today, an average rural family eats about one hundred killograms [about
220 lbs.] less food in a year than it did in the early 1990s [refernce
given]."
"But in urban India, wherever you go--shops, restaurants, railway
stations, airports...--you have TV monitors in which election promises
have already come true. India's Shining, Feeling Good."
The thing that is happening is that much infrastructure (eg. water
supplies, electricity, transport, telecommunications, health services,
education, etc, that the government was "supposed to hold in trust for the
people it represents, assets that have been built and maintained with
public money over decades--are sold by the state to private corporations."
Guess where that leads?
The book ends with a short glossary of terms, names, etc., that define or
explain political parties, important people, important historical
events, and a long list of information sources (21 pages), and an index.
If you want to see how globalization is affecting the so-called
"developing countries" this is one good book to start with.
Straydog
2006-08-09 13:58:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you keep
talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its practice of
slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is in
Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
another matter of fact, it was only recently that child labor was outlawed
you your country. So, in fact, it is YOUR country that has a long way to
go yet.

you may want to look at another view of Indian society wrt
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
caste system.
http://in.rediff.com/news/2006/jun/15franc.htm
Yeah, I actually looked. title: "Anti-Brahminsim Has to Go" but the
article also very clearly stated that this subject is hard to get
published. According to the author, your media stonewalls on the topic.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
The author Francois Gautier is a french man who was inspired by Indian
culture and hinduism, and settled down in India. The caste system did
empower upper caste people at one pt of time.
I have read about many of the protests against your "reservations" by the
higher castes. Its just fine with me if you want to have a few decades of
social upheaval just like we did with "civil rights" and "affirmative
action". Maybe someday some good will come out of it and maybe there will
be more justice in India for more people. Right now, I think even black
people today are in a much better situation in the USA than Dalits in
India.

The Indian constitution
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
doesn't follow the same path -and this is one of your own fellow
europeans confirming that statement.
He is not one of my "own fellow Europeans" because I am not European. I
was born and raised in the USA and I'm still here. But he is just one
voice talking about India dealing with its own problems.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
regards
-kamal
Post by Straydog
India: Government Brutality, Injustice, and
Questionable Democracy.
A sellection of quotes from the book "An Ordinary Person's Guide to
Empire" by Arundhati Roy (the author of The God of Small Things, on the
NYT best seller list for 49 weeks, and she lives in New
Delhi); ISBN 0896087271, c 2004.
Parts of the book criticise US foreign policy, and other parts criticise
Indian foreign and domestic policy. All of the chapters were originally
given as speeches or were published as articles in major printed media.
The book contains hundreds of sources for details about which statements
were made. The book gives substantial detail about the internal political
and social components of modern India and India's problems and changes
while undergoing modernisation. At one point the author identifies fascist
themes in some government policy and especially in connection with
globalization. The book is easy to read and contains a great deal of
information about the political situation in India, today. If you are a
corporate goon-parasite, then all this doesn't matter. If you care about
democracy, ethics, morals, and people, then read on.
page 12
"According to the State, when victims refuse to be victims, they become
terrorists and are dealt with as such. They're either killed or arrested
under POTA (Prevention of Terrorism Act). In states like Orissa, Bihar,
and Jharkhand, which are rich in mineral resources and, therefore,
vulneralble to ruthless corporations on the hunt, hundreds of villagers,
including minors, have been arrested under POTA and are being held in jail
without trial. Some states have special police battalions for
'anti-development' activity. This is quite apart from the other use that
POTA is being put to--terrorizing Muslims, particularly in states
like Jammu and Kashmir and Gujarat. The space for genuine nonviolent civil
disobediance is atrophying. In the era of corporate globalization, poverty
is a crime, and protesting against further impoverishment is terrorism. In
teh era of the War on Terror, poverty is being slyly conflated with
terrorism." I have sellected just a few passages to show the message that
this book offers and that it is important to everyone, not just India or
Indians.
***
"Vast parts of the country are already more or less beyond the control of
the Indian state--Kashmir, the North East, large parts of Madhya Pradesh,
Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand."
***
"The real issue is that the privatization of essential infrastructure is
essentially undemocratic. The real issue is the towering mass of
incriminating evidence against big dams. The real issue is the fact that
over the last fifty years in India alone big dams have displaced more
than 33 million people.... The real issue is the fact that the Supreme
Court of India ordered the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam to
proceed even though it is aware that it violates the fundamental rights to
life and livelihood of the citizens of India."
I should point out that dam construction and other Army Corps of Engineer
projects in the USA have been seriously criticised by environmentalists in
the USA at least as far back as 50 years ago. Many dam construction
projects in the USA have been declared failures and Jared Diamond, in his
book "Collapse" mentioned at least one US dam that was blown up to restore
water flows back to their original nature without loss of non-existent
benefits but with the restoration of the fishing industry in the area.
"Never mind that forty years ago, the CIA, under President John F.
Kennedy, orchestrated a regime change in Baghdad. In 1963, after a
succesful coup, the Ba'ath party came to power in Iraq. Using lists
provided by the CIA, the new Ba'ath regime systematically eliminated
hundreds of doctors, teachers, lawyers, and political figures known to be
leftists [reference given]. An entire intellectual community was
slaughtered. (The same technique was used to massacre hundreds of
thousands of people in Indonesia and East Timor.[reference given])....In
1980...[the US said] 'We see no fundamental incompatibility of
interests between the United States and Iraq [reference given].'"
"In South Africa, after three hundred years of brutal domination of the
black majority by a white minority through colonialism and apartheid, a
nonracial, multi-party democracy came to power in 1994. It was a
phenomenal acheivement. Within two years of coming to power, the African
National Congress had genuflected with no caveats to the Market God. Its
massive program of structural adjustment, privatization, and
liberalization has only increased the hideous disparities between the
rich and the poor. Official unemployment among blacks has increased from
forty percent to fifty percent since the end of Apartheid [reference
given]. The corporatization of basic services-- electricity, water, and
housing-- has meant that ten million South Africans, almost a quarter of
the population, have been disconnected from water and electricity
[reference given]."
Now how does propaganda work?
"...Clear Channel Communications is the largest radio station owner in the
country. It runs more than twelve hundred channels, which together
account for nine percent fo the market [reference given]. When hundreds of
thousands of American citizens took to the streets to protest against
the war on Iraq, Clear Channel orgaized pro-war patriotic "Rallies for
America" across the country [reference given]. It used its radio stations
to advertise the events and then sent correspondents to cover them as
though they were breaking news."
It should be noted that consolidation in the broadcast radio and TV
business continues, today. Same for the book publishing business. Soon,
only a few entities will control all media.
This deals with Hindu nationalism. Many passages in the book talk about
this with parallels with the development of Nazi power in Germany in the
1930s.
"On August 15, 2003, Independence Day he [Cheif Minister of Gujarat,
Narendra Modi] hoisted the Indian flag before thousands of cheering
people. In a gesture of menacing symbolism, he wore the black RSS
cap--which proclaims him as a member of the Hindu nationalist guild that
has not been shy of admiring Hitler and his methods [reference
given]."
"One hundred and thirty million Muslims--not to mention the other
minorities, Dalits, Christians, Sikhs, Adivasis--live in India under the
shaddow of Hindu nationalism."
Additional text documenting thousands of people killed and hundreds of
thousands of people displaced by Indian police.
"Gandhi's Salt March was not just political theater. When, in a simple act
of defiance, thousands of Indians marched to the sea and made their own
salt, they broke the salt tax laws."
"The U.S. government used the lies and disinformation generated around the
September 11 attacks to invade no just one country, but two.... The Indian
government uses the same strategy not with other countries, but against
its own people. Over the last decade the number of people who have been
killed by the police and security forces runs into the thousands. Recently
several Bombay policemen spoke openly to the press about how many
'gangsters' they had eliminated on 'orders' from their senior officers
[reference given]. Andhra Pradesh chalks up an average of about two
hundred 'extremists' in 'encounter' deaths a year [reference given]. In
Kashmir in a situation that almost amounts to war, an estimated eighty
thousand people have been killed since 1989. Thousands have simply
'disappeared' [reference given]. According to the records of the
Association of Parents of Disappeared People (APDP), more than three
thousand people were killed in 2003, of which four hundred and sixty-
three were soldiers [reference given]."
The text goes on to say things are getting worse.
"Fourty-seven percent of India's children below three suffer from
malnutrition, forty-six percent are stunted [reference given]."
"Today, an average rural family eats about one hundred killograms [about
220 lbs.] less food in a year than it did in the early 1990s [refernce
given]."
"But in urban India, wherever you go--shops, restaurants, railway
stations, airports...--you have TV monitors in which election promises
have already come true. India's Shining, Feeling Good."
The thing that is happening is that much infrastructure (eg. water
supplies, electricity, transport, telecommunications, health services,
education, etc, that the government was "supposed to hold in trust for the
people it represents, assets that have been built and maintained with
public money over decades--are sold by the state to private corporations."
Guess where that leads?
The book ends with a short glossary of terms, names, etc., that define or
explain political parties, important people, important historical
events, and a long list of information sources (21 pages), and an index.
If you want to see how globalization is affecting the so-called
"developing countries" this is one good book to start with.
me
2006-08-09 14:21:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you keep
talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its practice of
slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is in
Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
another matter of fact, it was only recently that child labor was outlawed
you your country.
Child labor is not necessarily slavery any more than adult labor is
necessarily slavery.
Post by Straydog
So, in fact, it is YOUR country that has a long way to
go yet.
Sure, but how? When (Chief Minister) Chandrababu Naidu threatened to
prosecute parents who sent their children to work rather than to school, he
got an adverse reaction from those parents and their supporters and was
forced to back down. Governments can't enforce child labor laws in an
environment where it looks like vote blocs will unseat any government that
tries to enforce the law.
Post by Straydog
I have read about many of the protests against your "reservations" by the
higher castes. Its just fine with me if you want to have a few decades of
social upheaval just like we did with "civil rights" and "affirmative
action". Maybe someday some good will come out of it and maybe there will
be more justice in India for more people. Right now, I think even black
people today are in a much better situation in the USA than Dalits in
India.
How about the situation of whites? Have there been any observations or
claims that affirmative action for blacks caused some whites to become
cottonpickers or servants in black households?
Straydog
2006-08-09 22:07:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by me
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you keep
talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its practice of
slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is in
Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
another matter of fact, it was only recently that child labor was outlawed
you your country.
Child labor is not necessarily slavery any more than adult labor is
necessarily slavery.
Child labor, in all advanced societies, is considered bad for the child
and exploitation by the boss/owner/parents who force or need the child to
work for them. Adult labor, by definition, is labor which is paid for.
Slavery is, by definition, involuntary labor without pay and without
freedom to leave, move, or change labor.
Post by me
Post by Straydog
So, in fact, it is YOUR country that has a long way to
go yet.
Sure, but how? When (Chief Minister) Chandrababu Naidu threatened to
prosecute parents who sent their children to work rather than to school, he
got an adverse reaction from those parents and their supporters and was
forced to back down. Governments can't enforce child labor laws in an
environment where it looks like vote blocs will unseat any government that
tries to enforce the law.
Your country will have to look at itself and compare itself with whatever
goals it wants to set (whether by wisdom, democracy, power influence,
corruption, or whatever) and compare itself with other countries and what
they do and why. Kamal continues to insist that slavery exists in the USA
without talking about comparable conditions in India. I do not deny that
exploitation exists in the USA, but I will suggest that there is much less
of it than in India.
Post by me
Post by Straydog
I have read about many of the protests against your "reservations" by the
higher castes. Its just fine with me if you want to have a few decades of
social upheaval just like we did with "civil rights" and "affirmative
action". Maybe someday some good will come out of it and maybe there will
be more justice in India for more people. Right now, I think even black
people today are in a much better situation in the USA than Dalits in
India.
How about the situation of whites? Have there been any observations or
claims that affirmative action for blacks caused some whites to become
cottonpickers or servants in black households?
As a matter of fact, in the history books, there are records of blacks
also owning slaves. There are records clearly showing that whites were
slaves in the 20th century under other whites (and not in the USA). And,
there are records clearly showing that in the 20th century, there were
peoples "slightly darker" than _whites_ who were slaves of others who
were "slightly darker" than _whites_ and they also were not in the USA,
and I'll wonder if you know enough to guess what I'm talking about.
me
2006-08-09 22:19:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Post by me
Child labor is not necessarily slavery any more than adult labor is
necessarily slavery.
Child labor, in all advanced societies, is considered bad for the child
and exploitation by the boss/owner/parents who force or need the child to
work for them. Adult labor, by definition, is labor which is paid for.
Both child and adult labor can be paid for and both children and adults can
be enslaved.
Post by Straydog
Slavery is, by definition, involuntary labor without pay and without
freedom to leave, move, or change labor.
Then, children who are paid and are not denied the freedom to leave or
change labor are not slaves.
Post by Straydog
Kamal continues to insist that slavery exists in the USA
without talking about comparable conditions in India.
Which are the supposed slaves in the US?
Post by Straydog
Post by me
How about the situation of whites? Have there been any observations or
claims that affirmative action for blacks caused some whites to become
cottonpickers or servants in black households?
As a matter of fact, in the history books,
How about currently? Are any white ministers' or schoolteachers'
grandchildren cottonpickers or maids/ errand boys in middle class black
households?
Post by Straydog
there are records of blacks
also owning slaves. There are records clearly showing that whites were
slaves in the 20th century under other whites (and not in the USA). And,
there are records clearly showing that in the 20th century, there were
peoples "slightly darker" than _whites_ who were slaves of others who
were "slightly darker" than _whites_ and they also were not in the USA,
and I'll wonder if you know enough to guess what I'm talking about.
There were lords and lieges in India. Where are there records of 20th
century marketplaces in India where slaves were bought, sold or bartered,
where husbands, wives and children were sundered forever because they were
bought by different purchasers?
Straydog
2006-08-09 23:00:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by me
Post by Straydog
Post by me
Child labor is not necessarily slavery any more than adult labor is
necessarily slavery.
Child labor, in all advanced societies, is considered bad for the child
and exploitation by the boss/owner/parents who force or need the child to
work for them. Adult labor, by definition, is labor which is paid for.
Both child and adult labor can be paid for
How is this phrase different from what I said?

and both children and adults can
Post by me
be enslaved.
How is this different from what I said?
Post by me
Post by Straydog
Slavery is, by definition, involuntary labor without pay and without
freedom to leave, move, or change labor.
Then, children who are paid and are not denied the freedom to leave
Go ask the parents or guardians who tell them they have to work or suffer
consequences.

or
Post by me
change labor are not slaves.
As I said, child labor, in all advanced societies, is considered bad for
the child.
Post by me
Post by Straydog
Kamal continues to insist that slavery exists in the USA
without talking about comparable conditions in India.
Which are the supposed slaves in the US?
Ask him to explain it to you. He considers the H1B visa guys as slaves. I
say they are not, but I will also say they are exploited. He seems to
think there was never any slavery anywhere, anytime except in the USA. He
has made hundreds of posts over the last year to this extent. Just read
the archives. Judge for yourself.
Post by me
Post by Straydog
Post by me
How about the situation of whites? Have there been any observations or
claims that affirmative action for blacks caused some whites to become
cottonpickers or servants in black households?
As a matter of fact, in the history books,
How about currently? Are any white ministers' or schoolteachers'
grandchildren cottonpickers or maids/ errand boys in middle class black
households?
In what capacity? As slaves? Very very little in the USA as I read in our
media, but the police sometimes discover what is called "trafficking" of
people, meaning they are brought in illegally and kept locked up in a room
and thus against their will in the USA. Usually they are women from
foreign countries brought in under a promise of a job, but then becomes
someone's sex slave. This gets into the newspapers when they are caught.
It also happens to males who are brought in as cheap labor, and they are
also kept locked up at night, sometimes in chains, and made to work, and
paid little or nothing. Its also in our media. Usually Mexicans/Hispanics,
but can also be Asians. This also gets into some of our media.

There are also a few stories I've heard/read when Asians pay lots of money
to some guy in Asia to be taken to the USA, then a hundred of them are
loaded onto boats, the boats go out ten miles and they take machine guns
and just shoot all of these guys who think they are going to the USA. They
dump the bodies overboard, and the guys in charge come back to start the
cycle all over. Then, we have these "mail order brides" schemes that some
guys set up, get young girls from Asia (too poor, too ignorant to know
what is going on but they have ideas of a bright future) and set them up
with men in the USA who promise to marry them if they will marry the men.
All they get are exchange of one picture each and one letter each, and it
happens. What happens to the girls is anyone's guess. I think its all a
bad idea.

See below.
Post by me
Post by Straydog
there are records of blacks
also owning slaves. There are records clearly showing that whites were
slaves in the 20th century under other whites (and not in the USA). And,
there are records clearly showing that in the 20th century, there were
peoples "slightly darker" than _whites_ who were slaves of others who
were "slightly darker" than _whites_ and they also were not in the USA,
and I'll wonder if you know enough to guess what I'm talking about.
There were lords and lieges in India. Where are there records of 20th
century marketplaces in India where slaves were bought, sold or bartered,
where husbands, wives and children were sundered forever because they were
bought by different purchasers?
There are many examples. White prisoners of war by Nazi Germany became
slaves in German munitions factories during WWII. When Japan invaded and
treated brutally Chinese and Korean prisoners of war, many became slaves
of the Japanese and some Chinese and Korean women became sex slaves for
the Japanese soldiers. There is some very intense bitterness in both China
and Korea over this, and more bitterness that Japanese school textbooks
either don't mention this or give it much much less attention than Germany
does about its Nazi past.

There is a deep history of slavery going back thousands of years. I have
not read it extensively, but I think there might be no culture that did
not use, at one time or the other, slaves of their own kind or another
kind, one way or the other. In today's contexts, people in advanced
societies might be considered "enslaved" in a way because of
written contracts they sign in connection with purchases that are made
under voluntary conditions but in the haste of poor judgement, they sign
their names on dotted lines without fully appreciating what they are
getting into. There are many things in the modern world that are totally
legal, but questionable in terms of morals and ethics.

Some additional references (FYI):

Below are two sets of references to slavery in India; first, two books,
and second--farther below--a sample of Google results on the term "slavery
in India":

From the book "Atlas of World Population History" by Colin McEvedy and
Richard Jones (1978, reprinted 1980, Penguin): from pages 210-218 covers
slave trade. The legend of figure 3.5 contains the sentence "The east
coast route...which reached as far south as Mozambique, was probably the
most profitable: from its northern terminus at Oman there was considerable
re-export trade to Iran and India."

From the book "Slavery: A World History" by Milton Meltzer
(c 1993): Today there is extensive child labor slavery in the India rug
industry. The book also pointed out something that makes the laws
irrelevant: the law against slavery is on the books in India, but it is
not enforced and there is plenty of selling of children into servitude
today.


Sample of Google search results:

News results for slavery in india - View today's top stories
Terms of forced employment and slavery - Ha'aretz - Apr 14, 2006


Human Trafficking & Modern-day Slavery in India
2004 A Report on Debt Bondage, Carpet-Making, and Child Slavery in India ...
1996 THE SMALL HANDS OF SLAVERY - Bonded Child Labor In India ...
gvnet.com/humantrafficking/India.htm - 41k - Cached - Similar pages

The Small Hands of Slavery: Bonded Child Labour in India
Slavery in India dates back at least 1500 years.31 Various forms of debt
bondage ... Agricultural bondage is the oldest form of slavery known in
India: ...
www.hrw.org/reports/1996/India3.htm - 486k - Cached - Similar pages

Child hierodulic servitude (temple slavery) in India and Nepal
in India and Nepal. Hierodulic child prostitution is a generic term which
the ... Historically, these girls served as hierodules, or sacred temple
slaves or ...
www.anti-slaverysociety.addr.com/hieroras.htm - 22k - Cached - Similar pages

Slavery Abolition Act 1833 (UK)
It was the provisions of the Indian Penal Code 1860 which effectively abolished slavery in India by making the
enslavement of human beings a criminal ...
www.anti-slaverysociety.addr.com/huk-1833act.htm - 31k - Cached - Similar pages
[ More results from www.anti-slaverysociety.addr.com ]

Slavery in the Modern World
Child "carpet slaves" in India. Kidnapped from their villages when they are
as young as five years old, between 200000 and 300000 children are held
captive ...
www.infoplease.com/spot/slavery1.html - 23k - Cached - Similar pages

Seven Children
Seven Children Freed from Slavery in India (by Samuel Grumiau). Brussels/New
Delhi, 26 March 1999 (ICFTU Online):. Tuesday, 16 March 1999 marked the
end of ...
www.corrystuart.com/slavechildren7.html - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
me
2006-08-10 00:48:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Go ask the parents or guardians who tell them they have to work or suffer
consequences.
I've come across quite a few children earning wages; I once spanked one of
them for eating half my fruitcake from the refrigerator. I don't know of
any such parents or guardians but they presumably exist somewhere.
Post by Straydog
As I said, child labor, in all advanced societies, is considered bad for
the child.
That it is bad doesn't, in itself, make it slavery.
Post by Straydog
Post by me
Post by Straydog
Kamal continues to insist that slavery exists in the USA
without talking about comparable conditions in India.
Which are the supposed slaves in the US?
Ask him to explain it to you. He considers the H1B visa guys as slaves.
Bah! They're free to return to India to find other jobs without having their
feet amputated like Kunta Kinte.
Post by Straydog
Post by me
How about currently? Are any white ministers' or schoolteachers'
grandchildren cottonpickers or maids/ errand boys in middle class black
households?
In what capacity? As slaves?
As paid laborers earning an hourly wage.
Post by Straydog
Below are two sets of references to slavery in India; first, two books,
and second--farther below--a sample of Google results on the term "slavery
From the book "Atlas of World Population History" by Colin McEvedy and
Richard Jones (1978, reprinted 1980, Penguin): from pages 210-218 covers
slave trade. The legend of figure 3.5 contains the sentence "The east
coast route...which reached as far south as Mozambique, was probably the
most profitable: from its northern terminus at Oman there was considerable
re-export trade to Iran and India."
That looks like the slave trade operated by Muslims, not an Indian
institution in particular.
Post by Straydog
From the book "Slavery: A World History" by Milton Meltzer
(c 1993): Today there is extensive child labor slavery in the India rug
industry. The book also pointed out something that makes the laws
irrelevant: the law against slavery is on the books in India, but it is
not enforced and there is plenty of selling of children into servitude
today.
You might find this interesting reading.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JQP/is_2001_August/ai_77711999
Post by Straydog
News results for slavery in india - View today's top stories
Terms of forced employment and slavery - Ha'aretz - Apr 14, 2006
Human Trafficking & Modern-day Slavery in India
2004 A Report on Debt Bondage, Carpet-Making, and Child Slavery in India
... 1996 THE SMALL HANDS OF SLAVERY - Bonded Child Labor In India ...
gvnet.com/humantrafficking/India.htm - 41k - Cached - Similar pages
The Small Hands of Slavery: Bonded Child Labour in India
Slavery in India dates back at least 1500 years.31 Various forms of debt
bondage ... Agricultural bondage is the oldest form of slavery known in
India: ...
www.hrw.org/reports/1996/India3.htm - 486k - Cached - Similar pages
BTW, the most precise term, which is unfortunately obsolete, would be "the
oldest form of naifty". I know of people who sold themselves into bondage
for a fixed number of years in order to raise money to pay their sisters'
dowries. Curiously, they didn't raise money by getting married and using
the dowry that came with their wife in order to pay their sister's dowry;
to do this was against their principles as per their customs or at any rato
said the lawyer who was telling me about these people.
Post by Straydog
Child hierodulic servitude (temple slavery) in India and Nepal
in India and Nepal. Hierodulic child prostitution is a generic term which
the ... Historically, these girls served as hierodules, or sacred temple
slaves or ...
www.anti-slaverysociety.addr.com/hieroras.htm - 22k - Cached - Similar pages
A canard that has been making the rounds. There were no hierodules in
temples. There was child prostitution, though.
Post by Straydog
Slavery Abolition Act 1833 (UK)
It was the provisions of the Indian Penal Code 1860 which effectively
abolished slavery in India by making the enslavement of human beings a
criminal ... www.anti-slaverysociety.addr.com/huk-1833act.htm - 31k -
Cached - Similar pages
[ More results from www.anti-slaverysociety.addr.com ]
Ah, but which Indians had been slavers before 1860? As a rule, workers and
Indian masters had feudal relations, not master-slave relations, AFAIK.

BTW, have you heard of apprenticeship?
http://www.trinicenter.com/kwame/2001/oct/
Post by Straydog
Slavery in the Modern World
Child "carpet slaves" in India. Kidnapped from their villages when they
are as young as five years old, between 200000 and 300000 children are
held captive ...
www.infoplease.com/spot/slavery1.html - 23k - Cached - Similar pages
Seven Children
Seven Children Freed from Slavery in India (by Samuel Grumiau).
Brussels/New Delhi, 26 March 1999 (ICFTU Online):. Tuesday, 16 March 1999
marked the end of ...
www.corrystuart.com/slavechildren7.html - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
BroTher zAchary
2006-08-10 00:16:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Post by me
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you keep
talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its practice of
slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is in
Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
another matter of fact, it was only recently that child labor was outlawed
you your country.
Child labor is not necessarily slavery any more than adult labor is
necessarily slavery.
Child labor, in all advanced societies, is considered bad for the child
and exploitation by the boss/owner/parents who force or need the child to
work for them.
I assume you mean forced labor in which the children are overworked,
underpaid, lackadaisical (or lack of) safety environments, and their
wages confiscated, even, by parents. By today's absurd definitions,
were I a child today, I would not have been able to hold many of the
part time jobs (most of which were labor: yard work, trash clean-up,
using a chainsaw to but wood, splitting it by hand, etc.), and I
suspect you would not have either.
Straydog
2006-08-10 00:59:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by BroTher zAchary
Post by Straydog
Post by me
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you keep
talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its practice of
slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is in
Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
another matter of fact, it was only recently that child labor was outlawed
you your country.
Child labor is not necessarily slavery any more than adult labor is
necessarily slavery.
Child labor, in all advanced societies, is considered bad for the child
and exploitation by the boss/owner/parents who force or need the child to
work for them.
I assume you mean forced labor in which the children are overworked,
underpaid, lackadaisical (or lack of) safety environments, and their
wages confiscated, even, by parents. By today's absurd definitions,
were I a child today, I would not have been able to hold many of the
part time jobs (most of which were labor: yard work, trash clean-up,
using a chainsaw to but wood, splitting it by hand, etc.), and I
suspect you would not have either.
All depends on some details: i) did/were you working under any exceptions
to the rules (of which there are some, even today), ii) were you actually
being paid by someone other than your parents, iii) who arranged the work
you or your parents or a third party, iv) if the work was part time, it
does not count (I'm talking about child work conditions from the 1800s and
before, which were like adult working conditions in the same era, which
were 10-14 hour days, 7 days a week), and v) in India, the stories are
that the child labor (paid for, arranged by parents) is along the same
line. And, I'll leave out the workplace hazards & dangers. And, I have no
idea if they have any disability over there for injuries etc to children,
but the books I've been reading say that child injuries on the jobs left
them sometimes with permanent problems. Also left out: they don't get any
education while they are working 10-14/day & 7d/wk.
Day Brown
2006-08-11 18:39:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by BroTher zAchary
Post by Straydog
Post by me
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you keep
talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its practice of
slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is in
Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
another matter of fact, it was only recently that child labor was outlawed
you your country.
Child labor is not necessarily slavery any more than adult labor is
necessarily slavery.
Child labor, in all advanced societies, is considered bad for the child
and exploitation by the boss/owner/parents who force or need the child to
work for them.
I assume you mean forced labor in which the children are overworked,
underpaid, lackadaisical (or lack of) safety environments, and their
wages confiscated, even, by parents. By today's absurd definitions,
were I a child today, I would not have been able to hold many of the
part time jobs (most of which were labor: yard work, trash clean-up,
using a chainsaw to but wood, splitting it by hand, etc.), and I
suspect you would not have either.
I was born on a farm, and remember it well; was I exploited by not being
paid cash money, or was I rewarded by being taught something of what it
took to put food on the table and recognized for my contribution to that
process? Imagine "self esteem" that is actually the result of doing
something productive.
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-08-10 05:23:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by me
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you keep
talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its practice of
slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is in
Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
The slavery in Indian rug factories is against the law -and requires
better enforcement.
Slavery in the USA is supported implicitly by the law. Your politicians
receive money for ensuring that there is a steady stream of manpower on
restricted rights. If americans have a heterogenity of opinion about
doing away with illegals, H1Bs and numerous other workers on restricted
rights -it is because they are not willing to disown the benefits of
slavery in entirety.
Post by me
Post by Straydog
another matter of fact, it was only recently that child labor was outlawed
you your country.
Indentured labour was outlawed maybe 50 yrs back -but recently, the
govt came out with specific legislation to prosecute individuals hiring
child labour in specific circumstances. Labour when free, is labour and
not slavery. You need to understand the difference between child labour
and child slavery.
Post by me
Child labor is not necessarily slavery any more than adult labor is
necessarily slavery.
it boils down to whether the govt has restricted civic rights of
individuals or not. Whether the labour is below age 12 or 18 is not
relevant to the case.
Post by me
Post by Straydog
So, in fact, it is YOUR country that has a long way to
go yet.
Sure, but how? When (Chief Minister) Chandrababu Naidu threatened to
prosecute parents who sent their children to work rather than to school, he
got an adverse reaction from those parents and their supporters and was
forced to back down. Governments can't enforce child labor laws in an
environment where it looks like vote blocs will unseat any government that
tries to enforce the law.
yeah -people send their children to work because they are poor, not
because they dislike them or because they are lesser humans or because
the govt is conniving with businesses to perpetuate slavery i.e. hold
them back against their will. I have even seen a shop keeper tell a kid
working in a shop that if he doesn't work properly -he will tell his
father about it. You can find lots of children working in India -doing
mostly menial work in return for money. To change that, you need better
employment oppurtunities for their guardians.
Post by me
Post by Straydog
I have read about many of the protests against your "reservations" by the
higher castes. Its just fine with me if you want to have a few decades of
social upheaval just like we did with "civil rights" and "affirmative
action". Maybe someday some good will come out of it and maybe there will
reservations are not a means to bring civil rights to lower caste
people. They are a ploy to get votes by pitting lower caste people
against upper caste people. The folks who advocate it are either
politicians who want votes -or people who want to benefit from the same
i.e. get a free ride on the basis of 3000 yrs of exploitation. They
will talk of 3000 yrs back because the current situation does not
justify that compensation. And americans will talk of it so that they
can justify their own version of slavery.
Post by me
Post by Straydog
be more justice in India for more people. Right now, I think even black
people today are in a much better situation in the USA than Dalits in
India.
looks like a drastic statement. I saw Larry Kind LIve discuss the fact
that blacks are being turned away from voting booths, or their votes
not fully accounted for -either by a dysfunctional voting mechanism or
by keeping too few personnel so that they keep standing in line till
midnight and then walk away due to time out.
Post by me
How about the situation of whites? Have there been any observations or
claims that affirmative action for blacks caused some whites to become
cottonpickers or servants in black households?
Nope. Its pretty much a given that skin colour determines economic
status in the US barring a few exceptions like athletes, movie stars
etc.

regards
-kamal
me
2006-08-10 11:59:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you
keep talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its
practice of slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is
in Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
The slavery in Indian rug factories is against the law -and requires
better enforcement.
Slavery in the USA is supported implicitly by the law. Your politicians
receive money for ensuring that there is a steady stream of manpower on
restricted rights. If americans have a heterogenity of opinion about
doing away with illegals, H1Bs and numerous other workers on restricted
rights -it is because they are not willing to disown the benefits of
slavery in entirety.
Restricted rights is not slavery. H1Bs are free to return to India.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Nope. Its pretty much a given that skin colour determines economic
status in the US barring a few exceptions like athletes, movie stars
etc.
An American coworker, an amateur sociologist, once told me that Americans
recognize 3 skin colors - green, white and black [; those with much money
being green people].
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
regards
-kamal
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-08-10 12:50:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you
keep talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its
practice of slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is
in Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
The slavery in Indian rug factories is against the law -and requires
better enforcement.
Slavery in the USA is supported implicitly by the law. Your politicians
receive money for ensuring that there is a steady stream of manpower on
restricted rights. If americans have a heterogenity of opinion about
doing away with illegals, H1Bs and numerous other workers on restricted
rights -it is because they are not willing to disown the benefits of
slavery in entirety.
Restricted rights is not slavery. H1Bs are free to return to India.
it is slavery because while in the US, you do not have the same rights
as you had in India or americans have in their own country.

To return to India, one has to dispose off all immovable property like
a car, furniture etc.. If the employer provides relocation -that is
fine. Otherwise, there is a lumpsum to be written off in going back.
And given that H1B salaries are not all that great, most will be
inclined to return only as a last resort. If they were told about
restricted rights before coming to the US, they have a better chance of
opting out and probably will.

The key pt is to tell every potential visa holder to the US that
the US govt is conniving with visa sponsors to perpetuate slavery. Once
they know the govt that is supposed to uphold the law has other things
on its mind -they will be in a better position to take a decision.
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Nope. Its pretty much a given that skin colour determines economic
status in the US barring a few exceptions like athletes, movie stars
etc.
An American coworker, an amateur sociologist, once told me that Americans
recognize 3 skin colors - green, white and black [; those with much money
being green people].
yeah -no doubt about that.

regards
-kamal
me
2006-08-10 14:53:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Slavery in the USA is supported implicitly by the law. Your politicians
receive money for ensuring that there is a steady stream of manpower on
restricted rights. If americans have a heterogenity of opinion about
doing away with illegals, H1Bs and numerous other workers on restricted
rights -it is because they are not willing to disown the benefits of
slavery in entirety.
Restricted rights is not slavery. H1Bs are free to return to India.
it is slavery because while in the US, you do not have the same rights
as you had in India or americans have in their own country.
Not having the same rights doesn't make it slavery.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
To return to India, one has to dispose off all immovable property like
a car, furniture etc.. If the employer provides relocation -that is
fine. Otherwise, there is a lumpsum to be written off in going back.
And given that H1B salaries are not all that great, most will be
inclined to return only as a last resort. If they were told about
restricted rights before coming to the US, they have a better chance of
opting out and probably will.
They are free to advise others in India not to come.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
The key pt is to tell every potential visa holder to the US that
the US govt is conniving with visa sponsors to perpetuate slavery. Once
they know the govt that is supposed to uphold the law has other things
on its mind -they will be in a better position to take a decision.
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-08-11 05:30:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Slavery in the USA is supported implicitly by the law. Your politicians
receive money for ensuring that there is a steady stream of manpower on
restricted rights. If americans have a heterogenity of opinion about
doing away with illegals, H1Bs and numerous other workers on restricted
rights -it is because they are not willing to disown the benefits of
slavery in entirety.
Restricted rights is not slavery. H1Bs are free to return to India.
it is slavery because while in the US, you do not have the same rights
as you had in India or americans have in their own country.
Not having the same rights doesn't make it slavery.
Before you make an authoritative statement, you need to be sure of what
you are saying.
Do you know anything about the economics of slavery? From an economic
perspective, every human imported on restricted rights is a slave. How
they bring and retain captive labour is the modus operandi -which can
change over time. If the labour was not captive -it could not be
considered enslaved and would not deliver better returns than free
labour.
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
To return to India, one has to dispose off all immovable property like
a car, furniture etc.. If the employer provides relocation -that is
fine. Otherwise, there is a lumpsum to be written off in going back.
And given that H1B salaries are not all that great, most will be
inclined to return only as a last resort. If they were told about
restricted rights before coming to the US, they have a better chance of
opting out and probably will.
They are free to advise others in India not to come.
which is about what i am doing right now. A better thing for americans
who do not want fingers pointing at them for practising/benefitting
from - slavery, would be to inform every potential newcomer of what
working on restricted rights ientails and how their govt will create
legislation from the ground up to benefit their financiers.

regards
-kamal
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
The key pt is to tell every potential visa holder to the US that
the US govt is conniving with visa sponsors to perpetuate slavery. Once
they know the govt that is supposed to uphold the law has other things
on its mind -they will be in a better position to take a decision.
Straydog
2006-08-11 11:49:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Slavery in the USA is supported implicitly by the law. Your politicians
receive money for ensuring that there is a steady stream of manpower on
restricted rights. If americans have a heterogenity of opinion about
doing away with illegals, H1Bs and numerous other workers on restricted
rights -it is because they are not willing to disown the benefits of
slavery in entirety.
Restricted rights is not slavery. H1Bs are free to return to India.
it is slavery because while in the US, you do not have the same rights
as you had in India or americans have in their own country.
Not having the same rights doesn't make it slavery.
Before you make an authoritative statement, you need to be sure of what
you are saying.
For over a year now, I can tell from what you write that half the time you
don't know what you are talking about. You can't even tell the difference
between exploitation and slavery.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Do you know anything about the economics of slavery? From an economic
perspective, every human imported on restricted rights is a slave.
There is a very big difference between "restricted rights" and "no rights
whatsoever" and you do not deal with that fact.

Working under conditions that are more favorable to the boss than the
worker is NOT slavery. You could go back to India any time you wanted.
There were no chains around your arms or legs. No handcuffs. No iron bars.
No guns pointed at your head.

How
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
they bring and retain captive labour
Captive labor means physically incarcerated.

is the modus operandi -which can
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
change over time. If the labour was not captive -it could not be
considered enslaved and would not deliver better returns than free
labour.
You can't even understand the facts. Slaves are economically beneficial
because the slave manager does not have to pay them wages. (Slave
management, on the other hand, does involve costs)
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
To return to India, one has to dispose off all immovable property like
a car, furniture etc.. If the employer provides relocation -that is
fine. Otherwise, there is a lumpsum to be written off in going back.
And given that H1B salaries are not all that great, most will be
inclined to return only as a last resort. If they were told about
restricted rights before coming to the US, they have a better chance of
opting out and probably will.
They are free to advise others in India not to come.
which is about what i am doing right now.
You are mostly complaining about the H1B program and its fine with me if
Indians don't want to come. We have tons of Russians and others, even
Hispanics, in my neighborhood who are on work permitting visas and they
are all happy.

A better thing for americans
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
who do not want fingers pointing at them for practising/benefitting
from - slavery,
I think all readers of these posts by Kamal need to understand their
rights and read the "fine print" on their contracts BEFORE they move to
another country under any visit or temporary arrangements rather than come
first and then get upset when they discover how the law works and then get
upset and then point fingers at the USA as if the USA did something bad.

would be to inform every potential newcomer of what
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
working on restricted rights ientails and how their govt will create
legislation from the ground up to benefit their financiers.
That is fine: point your finger at the corporate executives and our
crooked politicians who do favors for Big Business in exchange for
campaign contributions (i.e. money-bribes).
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
regards
-kamal
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
The key pt is to tell every potential visa holder to the US that
the US govt is conniving with visa sponsors to perpetuate slavery. Once
they know the govt that is supposed to uphold the law has other things
on its mind -they will be in a better position to take a decision.
anon
2006-08-12 02:37:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Captive labor means physically incarcerated.
the USA has a history of indentured labour.
Post by Straydog
I think all readers of these posts by Kamal need to understand their
rights and read the "fine print" on their contracts BEFORE they move to
unfortunately, the fine print is not available to the employee, unless one
reads the immigration laws. these people are programmers, not lawyers.

http://h1bmajdoor.blogspot.com/
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-08-22 07:04:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by anon
Post by Straydog
Captive labor means physically incarcerated.
Physical incarceration is a means that was employed to create captive
labour. Depending on times and circumstances, it might be possible to
create captive labour without physical incarceration. The motive is to
create captive labour and the modus operandi used can change with
circumstances and isn't limited to physical incarceration. One can
create H1B legislation that makes one captive -without using whips or
without categorizing their status as illegal. For hispanics, one can
dump goods and destroy self-sustained communities in rural mexico
forcing them to give up their civic rights [as enjoyed in their own
country] and become illegals in the USA -wherein their presence is
illegal, but the services they provide are legal and benefit society
and businesses alike.
For students, one can create visas which make it illegal to work off
campus and so they are forced to accept campus jobs which pay less than
min wage.
Post by anon
the USA has a history of indentured labour.
Yeah -slavery is a pillar of the american economy. Without it,
americans won't be able to live the kind of lifestyle they currently
do.
Post by anon
Post by Straydog
I think all readers of these posts by Kamal need to understand their
rights and read the "fine print" on their contracts BEFORE they move to
The fine print isn't available for one to read. It can only be gathered
from experience. Show me where the fine print states that the US govt
accepts money to perpetuate slavery, that all rules and the law
enforcement mechanism are there to remind slaves of their status and to
ensure they do a good job on the work front? Or show me where the fine
print says that one should contribute to the profits of american
businesses or pay royalty to good-for-nothing citizens to earn freedom.
Post by anon
unfortunately, the fine print is not available to the employee, unless one
reads the immigration laws. these people are programmers, not lawyers.
The immigration laws provide only some insight as to how bad things can
get. To know how bad they will get, you need to experience it first
hand and pass on the info to others.
Post by anon
http://h1bmajdoor.blogspot.com/
how many visitors do you manage to get?

regards
-kamal
Straydog
2006-08-22 11:19:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Straydog
Captive labor means physically incarcerated.
Physical incarceration is a means that was employed to create captive
labour. Depending on times and circumstances, it might be possible to
create captive labour without physical incarceration. The motive is to
create captive labour and the modus operandi used can change with
circumstances and isn't limited to physical incarceration.
One can
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
create H1B legislation that makes one captive -without using whips or
without categorizing their status as illegal.
Wrong. The H1B holder can find a different employer and at the minimum go
into "pending" status which is not illegal and if "approved" (which just
takes time) becomes legal. I have seen many job announcements now which
REQUIRE that the applicant already be H1B.

For hispanics, one can
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
dump goods and destroy self-sustained communities in rural mexico
forcing them to give up their civic rights [as enjoyed in their own
country] and become illegals in the USA -wherein their presence is
illegal, but the services they provide are legal and benefit society
and businesses alike.
Wrong. It is illegal to hire but enforcement is weak. Employers are
breaking the law to hire people who do not have a legal right to work in
the USA, AND are here illegally. Yet it happens.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
For students, one can create visas which make it illegal to work off
campus and so they are forced to accept campus jobs which pay less than
min wage.
The students can avail themselves of lawyers to get on the green card
path. And, you lie again about "forced to accept ...jobs that pay less"
because the laws are written in a way that some jobs will always pay less
than min wage no matter who you are.

So, you have your continuous story of twisting facts around to fit your
prejudice.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
the USA has a history of indentured labour.
Yeah -slavery is a pillar of the american economy.
Yeah, India is where you should really be looking; child slave labor in
the rug factories exists today and anyone can prove it with a search
engine. However, despite me telling you and anyone else who is reading
this, you still prefer to lie.

Without it,
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
americans won't be able to live the kind of lifestyle they currently
do.
With 88% of the people in the USA as people who were born and raised here,
and a workforce of about 140 miillion, it is a fact that WE really do work
to support ourselves and the non-US born people come here to get a better
life than where they came from. And, I'm waiting for any real search
engine results that show there is any slavery in the USA like the child
slave labor that really does exist in India.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Straydog
I think all readers of these posts by Kamal need to understand their
rights and read the "fine print" on their contracts BEFORE they move to
The fine print isn't available for one to read.
You have to learn to dig around for the laws, yourself. You have to ask
questions. You have to learn to expand your mind.

It can only be gathered
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
from experience.
Then you have to ask other people and get the story from those who have
gone before you.

Show me where the fine print states that the US govt
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
accepts money to perpetuate slavery,
I can take you to almost any community public library in the USA and
within minutes show you sections where there are shelves that explain this.
There are also newspapers which often explain these things. And, lastly,
there are a lot of people in the USA who don't bother, because they are
either stupid or ignorant about the laws and the practices.

that all rules and the law
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
enforcement mechanism are there to remind slaves of their status and to
ensure they do a good job on the work front?
See above.

Or show me where the fine
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
print says that one should contribute to the profits of american
businesses
A large fraction of the people already knwo they have no power over how
they are hired, what they are paid, or what they are offered.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
or pay royalty to good-for-nothing citizens to earn freedom.
This is just blatant anti-US namecalling as well as a big lie that you
keep telling everyone when the fact of the matter is that most of the
people here actualy work to support themselves and quite a few foreigners
come here to be the ones who freeload on our govt services and exploit
even their own kind when they import them into their own shops and
businesses. I know many examples.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
unfortunately, the fine print is not available to the employee, unless one
reads the immigration laws. these people are programmers, not lawyers.
The immigration laws provide only some insight as to how bad things can
get. To know how bad they will get, you need to experience it first
hand and pass on the info to others.
Since the H1B is NOT a slave, the H1B can quit anytime and go back where
he came from. Real slaves have chains around their wrists and legs and
can't quit and can't go back to where they came from.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
http://h1bmajdoor.blogspot.com/
how many visitors do you manage to get?
regards
-kamal
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-08-22 12:38:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Straydog
Captive labor means physically incarcerated.
Physical incarceration is a means that was employed to create captive
labour. Depending on times and circumstances, it might be possible to
create captive labour without physical incarceration. The motive is to
create captive labour and the modus operandi used can change with
circumstances and isn't limited to physical incarceration.
One can
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
create H1B legislation that makes one captive -without using whips or
without categorizing their status as illegal.
Wrong. The H1B holder can find a different employer and at the minimum go
into "pending" status which is not illegal and if "approved" (which just
takes time) becomes legal. I have seen many job announcements now which
REQUIRE that the applicant already be H1B.
On paper, they can transfer their visa to another employer. In
practice, one has to leave on good terms for the employer not to raise
a red flag. The employer has full rights to cancel the visa, order the
INS to deport the H1B on 24 hours notice. All rights for the H1B's stay
in the country are wholly and solely with the employer. That is what
makes for a captive labour force. In order to break free from this, one
has to go in for a green card -which requires employer to certify that
beneficiary of the green card application has contributed to his
business satisfactorily and hence is deserving of a green card. If
someone waits for 5 yrs to earn his liberation -he will be off the hook
else will remain captive.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
For hispanics, one can
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
dump goods and destroy self-sustained communities in rural mexico
forcing them to give up their civic rights [as enjoyed in their own
country] and become illegals in the USA -wherein their presence is
illegal, but the services they provide are legal and benefit society
and businesses alike.
Wrong. It is illegal to hire but enforcement is weak. Employers are
breaking the law to hire people who do not have a legal right to work in
the USA, AND are here illegally. Yet it happens.
No -the enforcement is weak on purpose and all loopholes in law are
intentional and not accidental. It takes 1 hr for the INS to round up
workers at any major employer of hispanics. Your own statements
indicate that the entire food processing industry employs illegals.
What exactly is difficult about going to a food processing factory and
lining up all workers at 10 am and checking who is or is not legal? The
only difficulty I see is the loss of slave labour to the employers and
their customers.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
For students, one can create visas which make it illegal to work off
campus and so they are forced to accept campus jobs which pay less than
min wage.
The students can avail themselves of lawyers to get on the green card
path. And, you lie again about "forced to accept ...jobs that pay less"
They cannot file for green cards while on student visas. They need to
be employed to file for a green card and it can only be done by the
employer -not by the employee.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
because the laws are written in a way that some jobs will always pay less
than min wage no matter who you are.
The jobs will always pay less -but the students on a visa rather than
free labour will accept the jobs because the law constrains them to do
so.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
So, you have your continuous story of twisting facts around to fit your
prejudice.
I have pointed to facts and to portions of legislation enacted by the
US govt.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
the USA has a history of indentured labour.
Yeah -slavery is a pillar of the american economy.
Yeah, India is where you should really be looking; child slave labor in
the rug factories exists today and anyone can prove it with a search
engine. However, despite me telling you and anyone else who is reading
this, you still prefer to lie.
Im telling you the truth. There are lots of bad things happening in
India, not limited to child labour. We are a country where blood flows
cheap, and the right to remain silent (5th amenndment) when in police
custody does not apply. That doesn't mean there is no slavery in the US
or that slavery isn't a msinstay of the US economy.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Without it,
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
americans won't be able to live the kind of lifestyle they currently
do.
With 88% of the people in the USA as people who were born and raised here,
and a workforce of about 140 miillion, it is a fact that WE really do work
to support ourselves and the non-US born people come here to get a better
No -you have others to support your lifestyle, and that others happens
to be 12% of your population (your own words above) which is HUGE. It
could mean illegals, or educated work permit holders or top notch
technocrats hired with lucrative prospects -but without an influx of
alien manpower, you just don't stand a chance at sustaining your living
std/purchasing power.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
life than where they came from. And, I'm waiting for any real search
engine results that show there is any slavery in the USA like the child
slave labor that really does exist in India.
Its done by sleight of hand -and the reason why Im talking about it is
coz if I don't, lots of prospective H1Bs/F1s etc will fall into the
trap.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Straydog
I think all readers of these posts by Kamal need to understand their
rights and read the "fine print" on their contracts BEFORE they move to
The fine print isn't available for one to read.
You have to learn to dig around for the laws, yourself. You have to ask
questions. You have to learn to expand your mind.
I was referring to others being able to read the fine print.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
It can only be gathered
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
from experience.
Then you have to ask other people and get the story from those who have
gone before you.
which is what I am (the guy who has gone and come back before some
H1B/F1 applicants). Im telling them their experience -hope they read
this -before they land in the US. Once they land and buy immovable
property, their fate is sealed.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Show me where the fine print states that the US govt
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
accepts money to perpetuate slavery,
I can take you to almost any community public library in the USA and
within minutes show you sections where there are shelves that explain this.
There are also newspapers which often explain these things. And, lastly,
there are a lot of people in the USA who don't bother, because they are
either stupid or ignorant about the laws and the practices.
so you accept that the US govt accepts money to perpetuate slavery? I
thought you are denying its very existence in the USA.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
that all rules and the law
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
enforcement mechanism are there to remind slaves of their status and to
ensure they do a good job on the work front?
See above.
Or show me where the fine
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
print says that one should contribute to the profits of american
businesses
A large fraction of the people already knwo they have no power over how
they are hired, what they are paid, or what they are offered.
they have no power over the demand/supply curve -yes. But many have the
power to look for better oppurtunities or not put up with harassment
-and those on restricted rights don't have those rights.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
or pay royalty to good-for-nothing citizens to earn freedom.
This is just blatant anti-US namecalling as well as a big lie that you
keep telling everyone when the fact of the matter is that most of the
people here actualy work to support themselves and quite a few foreigners
come here to be the ones who freeload on our govt services and exploit
even their own kind when they import them into their own shops and
businesses. I know many examples.
No -every american who expects businesses to reward them with jobs in
return for hiring foreigners, or who expects a good salary on account
of his citizenship/race is a parasite (good-for-nothing). You can find
lots of posters claiming this right of theirs on usenet. These are
their own words and I do not have to extrapolate on that.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
unfortunately, the fine print is not available to the employee, unless one
reads the immigration laws. these people are programmers, not lawyers.
The immigration laws provide only some insight as to how bad things can
get. To know how bad they will get, you need to experience it first
hand and pass on the info to others.
Since the H1B is NOT a slave, the H1B can quit anytime and go back where
he came from. Real slaves have chains around their wrists and legs and
can't quit and can't go back to where they came from.
In theory -they can quit and go back. In practice, they cannot after
having bought immovable property in the US. Before they get to the US
-they can opt not to enter the US and so cannot be considered enslaved.
If americans make it explicit to potential visa holders as to what to
expect, they will create choice and pre-empt slavery. if they keep mum
or encourage them to come to the US, it indicates a desire to profit
from slavery.


regards
-kamal
Straydog
2006-08-22 13:37:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Straydog
Captive labor means physically incarcerated.
Physical incarceration is a means that was employed to create captive
labour. Depending on times and circumstances, it might be possible to
create captive labour without physical incarceration. The motive is to
create captive labour and the modus operandi used can change with
circumstances and isn't limited to physical incarceration.
One can
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
create H1B legislation that makes one captive -without using whips or
without categorizing their status as illegal.
Wrong. The H1B holder can find a different employer and at the minimum go
into "pending" status which is not illegal and if "approved" (which just
takes time) becomes legal. I have seen many job announcements now which
REQUIRE that the applicant already be H1B.
On paper, they can transfer their visa to another employer. In
practice, one has to leave on good terms for the employer not to raise
a red flag.
Untrue. Former employer cannot block a transfer, but a new company will
interview H1B holders!!!

The employer has full rights to cancel the visa, order the
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
INS to deport the H1B on 24 hours notice.
Then tell me why there are so many advertisements looking for people who
have H1B visas? The new employer can sponsor. The old employer can't
block.

All rights for the H1B's stay
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
in the country are wholly and solely with the employer.
And, the employer can be anyone who wants to employ that H1B.

That is what
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
makes for a captive labour force.
Untrue.

In order to break free from this, one
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
has to go in for a green card
I can tell you for a fact that I had a Chinese woman on a student visa who
ended up working for an employer in the capacity of a CS/IT employee. They
don't have to go for a green card. She even told me this in followup
correspondence after she was on her new job.

-which requires employer to certify that
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
beneficiary of the green card application has contributed to his
business satisfactorily and hence is deserving of a green card.
Irrelevant.

If
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
someone waits for 5 yrs to earn his liberation -he will be off the hook
else will remain captive.
Go talk to your lawyer. They can do anything. It just takes time.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
For hispanics, one can
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
dump goods and destroy self-sustained communities in rural mexico
forcing them to give up their civic rights [as enjoyed in their own
country] and become illegals in the USA -wherein their presence is
illegal, but the services they provide are legal and benefit society
and businesses alike.
Wrong. It is illegal to hire but enforcement is weak. Employers are
breaking the law to hire people who do not have a legal right to work in
the USA, AND are here illegally. Yet it happens.
No -the enforcement is weak on purpose and all loopholes in law are
intentional and not accidental.
All the law provides is mental _pressure_. It is just common for
foreigners to come in legally, and then stay illegally. So, they take
their chances to get caught, which is very rare. Our population of
foreigners is growing some 1-2 million per year. Of course more come in
than get deported.

It takes 1 hr for the INS to round up
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
workers at any major employer of hispanics.
Its very rare. A manager at the local chicken plant told me that 90% of
their workers are illegal. They dont' get deported. But the employer pays
a fine.

Your own statements
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
indicate that the entire food processing industry employs illegals.
Yeah, so what?
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
What exactly is difficult about going to a food processing factory and
lining up all workers at 10 am and checking who is or is not legal?
See above.

The
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
only difficulty I see is the loss of slave labour to the employers and
their customers.
It has not happened.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
For students, one can create visas which make it illegal to work off
campus and so they are forced to accept campus jobs which pay less than
min wage.
The students can avail themselves of lawyers to get on the green card
path. And, you lie again about "forced to accept ...jobs that pay less"
They cannot file for green cards while on student visas.
Who needs a green card to work here?

They need to
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
be employed to file for a green card and it can only be done by the
employer -not by the employee.
No, I have been asked, and in some cases, actually helped by writing
letters for people who are NOT working for me, to get a green card. You
are misinformed.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
because the laws are written in a way that some jobs will always pay less
than min wage no matter who you are.
The jobs will always pay less -but the students on a visa rather than
free labour will accept the jobs because the law constrains them to do
so.
There are tons of jobs here that pay less than min wage because these jobs
fall below the thresholds. Doesn't matter who takes the jobs. I myself
have hired people born in the US on jobs that paid less than min wage.
Part time jobs almost always are missed by the min wage laws. Even Walmart
likes to hire more people at part time than fewer at full time because
then they don't have to pay benefits, SS, insurance, pension, taxes, and
makes labor cheaper. Its all about how big US corporations can cheat
employees born in the USA (in addition to foreigners).
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
So, you have your continuous story of twisting facts around to fit your
prejudice.
I have pointed to facts
A lot of them are wrong and misinformed.

and to portions of legislation enacted by the
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
US govt.
You don't know the details and you don't know the cheats.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
the USA has a history of indentured labour.
Yeah -slavery is a pillar of the american economy.
Yeah, India is where you should really be looking; child slave labor in
the rug factories exists today and anyone can prove it with a search
engine. However, despite me telling you and anyone else who is reading
this, you still prefer to lie.
Im telling you the truth. There are lots of bad things happening in
India, not limited to child labour. We are a country where blood flows
cheap, and the right to remain silent (5th amenndment) when in police
custody does not apply.
Fine, we have a lot of bad things in the USA, too.

That doesn't mean there is no slavery in the US
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
or that slavery isn't a msinstay of the US economy.
If you want to call it exploitation, then I will agree with you. But its
not slavery and its not the mainstay of the US economy. 99.999999% of the
population does not have chains around its arms and legs. The others are
smuggled in and they have to be hidden. The 4 percent or so that are here
illegally and are ignorant and can't speak or understand english are good
targets for exploitation and unscrupulous employers will exploit them.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Without it,
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
americans won't be able to live the kind of lifestyle they currently
do.
With 88% of the people in the USA as people who were born and raised here,
and a workforce of about 140 miillion, it is a fact that WE really do work
to support ourselves and the non-US born people come here to get a better
No -you have others to support your lifestyle, and that others happens
to be 12% of your population (your own words above) which is HUGE.
60% of that 12% is illegal and here of their own free will. The other 40%
of that 12% is here legally and of their own free will. They only support
part of "our" lifestyle, and all of their own. I never heard of any
significant number even trying to leave.

It
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
could mean illegals, or educated work permit holders or top notch
technocrats hired with lucrative prospects -but without an influx of
alien manpower, you just don't stand a chance at sustaining your living
std/purchasing power.
I'm sorry, I don't agree. They can all go anytime they want as far as I'm
concerned. If they don't like it here, they can go back to where they came
from. I see they all want to stay. I don't see chains around their legs or
arms. I see them all sitting out on their front porches, happily talking
on free minutes to their relatives in Mexico on cell phones, and even the
newspapers tell about them sending $20 billion back to their families
where they came from.

You make up a big fantasy fairy tale of falsehood based on nothing but an
anti-US atitude.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
life than where they came from. And, I'm waiting for any real search
engine results that show there is any slavery in the USA like the child
slave labor that really does exist in India.
Its done by sleight of hand -and the reason why Im talking about it is
coz if I don't, lots of prospective H1Bs/F1s etc will fall into the
trap.
Sorry, but the employers just love the H1B, and from what I'm reading
there are people all over the world who love to come here on H1Bs and see
what life here is like and decide whether to stay or go back. I see mostly
Russians here in restaurants, cash registers in lots of stores now, and I
talk to almost all of them. Some want to stay, others want to go back. Its
their choice. No slavery. They freely talk with me.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Straydog
I think all readers of these posts by Kamal need to understand their
rights and read the "fine print" on their contracts BEFORE they move to
The fine print isn't available for one to read.
You have to learn to dig around for the laws, yourself. You have to ask
questions. You have to learn to expand your mind.
I was referring to others being able to read the fine print.
Same answer.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
It can only be gathered
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
from experience.
Then you have to ask other people and get the story from those who have
gone before you.
which is what I am (the guy who has gone and come back before some
H1B/F1 applicants). Im telling them their experience -hope they read
this -before they land in the US. Once they land and buy immovable
property, their fate is sealed.
Fine, go tell them. I read on a.c.c all the time. Where are you telling
them what to do? Go on the immigration newsgroups and tell them anything
you want, I don't care. Just don't lie about facts.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Show me where the fine print states that the US govt
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
accepts money to perpetuate slavery,
I can take you to almost any community public library in the USA and
within minutes show you sections where there are shelves that explain this.
There are also newspapers which often explain these things. And, lastly,
there are a lot of people in the USA who don't bother, because they are
either stupid or ignorant about the laws and the practices.
so you accept that the US govt accepts money to perpetuate slavery?
That is not what I said. You call it slavery, it is not. But the fine
print is out there and the exploiter does not have to tell you about it.
That is why it is called fine print. Anyone in the USA who has heard about
this, knows what it is about. The fine print is always a trap. But, it is
not slavery. YOu have to read the fine print before you sign your name.

I
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
thought you are denying its very existence in the USA.
I am. You take something I say and make it into whatever you want. Its
your big defect.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
that all rules and the law
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
enforcement mechanism are there to remind slaves of their status and to
ensure they do a good job on the work front?
See above.
Or show me where the fine
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
print says that one should contribute to the profits of american
businesses
A large fraction of the people already knwo they have no power over how
they are hired, what they are paid, or what they are offered.
they have no power over the demand/supply curve -yes. But many have the
power to look for better oppurtunities or not put up with harassment
-and those on restricted rights don't have those rights.
I'm sorry, I have no sympathy for people who want to just come here and
have everything handed to them on a silver platter for free just like born
citizens who have citizenship as a birthright. You have no claim over
that. If you want to get a green card, there are procedures. If you want
to become a citizen, there are procedures, too.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
or pay royalty to good-for-nothing citizens to earn freedom.
This is just blatant anti-US namecalling as well as a big lie that you
keep telling everyone when the fact of the matter is that most of the
people here actualy work to support themselves and quite a few foreigners
come here to be the ones who freeload on our govt services and exploit
even their own kind when they import them into their own shops and
businesses. I know many examples.
No -every american who expects businesses to reward them with jobs in
return for hiring foreigners, or who expects a good salary on account
of his citizenship/race is a parasite (good-for-nothing).
The real parasites are the executives who do nothing for their high
salaries, and the real parasites are the foreigners who come here and
expect to get jobs, money, govt services, free hospital treatment all for
just gate crashing.

And, besides, a lot of them are theives, too.

You can find
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
lots of posters claiming this right of theirs on usenet. These are
their own words and I do not have to extrapolate on that.
And, you just say that Americans don't have a right to a job and all that
means is that you consider it OK to steal someone else's livlihood. Fine,
lets send the British back into India and run the country and take out of
it whatever they want. Because then you, as Indians born in your own
country, don't own your rights either.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
unfortunately, the fine print is not available to the employee, unless one
reads the immigration laws. these people are programmers, not lawyers.
The immigration laws provide only some insight as to how bad things can
get. To know how bad they will get, you need to experience it first
hand and pass on the info to others.
Since the H1B is NOT a slave, the H1B can quit anytime and go back where
he came from. Real slaves have chains around their wrists and legs and
can't quit and can't go back to where they came from.
In theory -they can quit and go back. In practice, they cannot after
having bought immovable property in the US.
Well, I'm sorry if you don't have enough money to put your immovable
property in storage so you can sell it and get some of your money back. Do
you think this does never happen to US people in the USA? Why should I
have more sympathy for you than for US people here that this happens to?

Before they get to the US
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
-they can opt not to enter the US and so cannot be considered enslaved.
That is THEIR problem, not MY problem.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
If americans make it explicit to potential visa holders as to what to
expect, they will create choice and pre-empt slavery.
Sorry, the laws are written and go into books. Everyone has to beware of
the laws. If I go to India, then the moment I get off the plane, the
Indian government does not put into my hands many large boxes of all
Indian laws for me to read about. And, it does not happen to Indians that
get off the plane when it lands in the USA, either. You have to talk to
people and ask questions.

if they keep mum
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
or encourage them to come to the US, it indicates a desire to profit
from slavery.
Yes.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
regards
-kamal
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-08-22 14:51:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Straydog
Captive labor means physically incarcerated.
Physical incarceration is a means that was employed to create captive
labour. Depending on times and circumstances, it might be possible to
create captive labour without physical incarceration. The motive is to
create captive labour and the modus operandi used can change with
circumstances and isn't limited to physical incarceration.
One can
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
create H1B legislation that makes one captive -without using whips or
without categorizing their status as illegal.
Wrong. The H1B holder can find a different employer and at the minimum go
into "pending" status which is not illegal and if "approved" (which just
takes time) becomes legal. I have seen many job announcements now which
REQUIRE that the applicant already be H1B.
On paper, they can transfer their visa to another employer. In
practice, one has to leave on good terms for the employer not to raise
a red flag.
Untrue. Former employer cannot block a transfer, but a new company will
interview H1B holders!!!
they can cancel the visa and get the INS to deport the H1B. Its the law
stupid.
Post by Straydog
The employer has full rights to cancel the visa, order the
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
INS to deport the H1B on 24 hours notice.
Then tell me why there are so many advertisements looking for people who
have H1B visas? The new employer can sponsor. The old employer can't
block.
No -employers ask for H1Bs because they are cheaper to hire. It doesn't
mean employers want them to be free and be paid heavily. To the
contrary, it means they like them because of the restricted rights
under which they work.
Post by Straydog
All rights for the H1B's stay
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
in the country are wholly and solely with the employer.
And, the employer can be anyone who wants to employ that H1B.
H1B sponsor can only be a green card holder or US citizen. I know of
some H1B colleagues of mine who wanted to do unto others, what others
did to them i.e. open a bodyshop and cater to american companies.
Post by Straydog
That is what
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
makes for a captive labour force.
Untrue.
If labour is not 100% free -then by definition, it is captive. How can
it be untrue?
Post by Straydog
In order to break free from this, one
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
has to go in for a green card
I can tell you for a fact that I had a Chinese woman on a student visa who
ended up working for an employer in the capacity of a CS/IT employee. They
don't have to go for a green card. She even told me this in followup
correspondence after she was on her new job.
yeah -student visa holders have something like 1 yr after completing
their graduation to work in the US as apprentice or something like
that.
Post by Straydog
-which requires employer to certify that
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
beneficiary of the green card application has contributed to his
business satisfactorily and hence is deserving of a green card.
Irrelevant.
If
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
someone waits for 5 yrs to earn his liberation -he will be off the hook
else will remain captive.
Go talk to your lawyer. They can do anything. It just takes time.
they can't. Your politicians can do anything one likes -but it costs
money to get them to do something.
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
For hispanics, one can
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
dump goods and destroy self-sustained communities in rural mexico
forcing them to give up their civic rights [as enjoyed in their own
country] and become illegals in the USA -wherein their presence is
illegal, but the services they provide are legal and benefit society
and businesses alike.
Wrong. It is illegal to hire but enforcement is weak. Employers are
breaking the law to hire people who do not have a legal right to work in
the USA, AND are here illegally. Yet it happens.
No -the enforcement is weak on purpose and all loopholes in law are
intentional and not accidental.
All the law provides is mental _pressure_. It is just common for
foreigners to come in legally, and then stay illegally. So, they take
their chances to get caught, which is very rare. Our population of
foreigners is growing some 1-2 million per year. Of course more come in
than get deported.
as long as the jobs are there -they will keep streaming in.
Post by Straydog
It takes 1 hr for the INS to round up
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
workers at any major employer of hispanics.
Its very rare. A manager at the local chicken plant told me that 90% of
their workers are illegal. They dont' get deported. But the employer pays
a fine.
why don't they just stop employing illegals or why doesn't the govt
force employers to stop employing illegals? Its really simple for law
enforcement to act on large companies. The only reason I can think of
is that both employers and their customers do want the benefits of
cheaper services that these illegals provide.
Post by Straydog
Your own statements
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
indicate that the entire food processing industry employs illegals.
Yeah, so what?
so -it is not difficult to enforce the law, if they really want to do
that.
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
What exactly is difficult about going to a food processing factory and
lining up all workers at 10 am and checking who is or is not legal?
See above.
The
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
only difficulty I see is the loss of slave labour to the employers and
their customers.
It has not happened.
- because you are unwilling to disown the benefits of slavery.
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
For students, one can create visas which make it illegal to work off
campus and so they are forced to accept campus jobs which pay less than
min wage.
The students can avail themselves of lawyers to get on the green card
path. And, you lie again about "forced to accept ...jobs that pay less"
They cannot file for green cards while on student visas.
Who needs a green card to work here?
you said she applied for a green card or that one can file for a green
card directly.
Post by Straydog
They need to
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
be employed to file for a green card and it can only be done by the
employer -not by the employee.
No, I have been asked, and in some cases, actually helped by writing
letters for people who are NOT working for me, to get a green card. You
are misinformed.
you cannot sponsor any individual other than those working for you -for
a green catd.. Exceptions would be relatives, spouses, parents etc. I
am quoting your own country's law here -not twisting anything.
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
because the laws are written in a way that some jobs will always pay less
than min wage no matter who you are.
The jobs will always pay less -but the students on a visa rather than
free labour will accept the jobs because the law constrains them to do
so.
There are tons of jobs here that pay less than min wage because these jobs
fall below the thresholds. Doesn't matter who takes the jobs. I myself
have hired people born in the US on jobs that paid less than min wage.
Part time jobs almost always are missed by the min wage laws. Even Walmart
likes to hire more people at part time than fewer at full time because
then they don't have to pay benefits, SS, insurance, pension, taxes, and
makes labor cheaper. Its all about how big US corporations can cheat
employees born in the USA (in addition to foreigners).
there are certainly native individuals in the food chain so low down,
that even enslaved labour has a better economic status than natives. It
doesn't mean they aren't enslaved -just that slavery can happen at
various pts in the food chain, many a times involving educated people.
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
So, you have your continuous story of twisting facts around to fit your
prejudice.
I have pointed to facts
A lot of them are wrong and misinformed.
and what would that be?
Post by Straydog
and to portions of legislation enacted by the
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
US govt.
You don't know the details and you don't know the cheats.
text of legislation is text. Either I have not quoted properly or have
quoted properly. There can't be something in between. The statements
about:-

-employer can cancel visa and ask INS to deport H1B visa holder
-employer needs to certify that beneficiary of green card application
has satisfactorily contributed to the business and consequently to
national interest

is very much straight out of the legislation enacted by the US govt.
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
the USA has a history of indentured labour.
Yeah -slavery is a pillar of the american economy.
Yeah, India is where you should really be looking; child slave labor in
the rug factories exists today and anyone can prove it with a search
engine. However, despite me telling you and anyone else who is reading
this, you still prefer to lie.
Im telling you the truth. There are lots of bad things happening in
India, not limited to child labour. We are a country where blood flows
cheap, and the right to remain silent (5th amenndment) when in police
custody does not apply.
Fine, we have a lot of bad things in the USA, too.
That doesn't mean there is no slavery in the US
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
or that slavery isn't a msinstay of the US economy.
If you want to call it exploitation, then I will agree with you. But its
not slavery and its not the mainstay of the US economy. 99.999999% of the
population does not have chains around its arms and legs. The others are
smuggled in and they have to be hidden. The 4 percent or so that are here
illegally and are ignorant and can't speak or understand english are good
targets for exploitation and unscrupulous employers will exploit them.
Their civic rights are curtailed as it happens for any other slaves.
All of those 12 million hispanics live under the threat of the gun i.e
of law enforcement, just as slave labour in plantations used to. On
paper, they aren't supposed to be working in the US -but in reality
they will not be deported or more importantly prevented from working,
unless they aren't doing a good job and the business owner asks law
enforcement aka the govt for help. Every visa type issued by the US
govt comes with constraints aka restricted rights -to the extent the
situation permits, in order to create captive labour.
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Without it,
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
americans won't be able to live the kind of lifestyle they currently
do.
With 88% of the people in the USA as people who were born and raised here,
and a workforce of about 140 miillion, it is a fact that WE really do work
to support ourselves and the non-US born people come here to get a better
No -you have others to support your lifestyle, and that others happens
to be 12% of your population (your own words above) which is HUGE.
60% of that 12% is illegal and here of their own free will. The other 40%
of that 12% is here legally and of their own free will. They only support
free will is not entirely free. There are many constraints which the US
govt exploits to land them in their situation. Think of your govt as a
profit making corporation that provides services to businesses. One
such service is creation of a captive labour pool, some others would be
invading oil rich countries.
Post by Straydog
part of "our" lifestyle, and all of their own. I never heard of any
significant number even trying to leave.
if they can leave -then the procedure for creating captive labour has
gone dysfunctional and the purpose for which businesses pay your govt
money would be lost.
Post by Straydog
It
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
could mean illegals, or educated work permit holders or top notch
technocrats hired with lucrative prospects -but without an influx of
alien manpower, you just don't stand a chance at sustaining your living
std/purchasing power.
I'm sorry, I don't agree. They can all go anytime they want as far as I'm
concerned. If they don't like it here, they can go back to where they came
from. I see they all want to stay. I don't see chains around their legs or
arms. I see them all sitting out on their front porches, happily talking
on free minutes to their relatives in Mexico on cell phones, and even the
newspapers tell about them sending $20 billion back to their families
where they came from.
yeah -inflated currency is one of the means of retaining slave labour.
The other would be to destroy self-sustained rural communities in their
home country, or assasinating popular politicians there so that they
can all gatecrash into the US for livelihood.
Post by Straydog
You make up a big fantasy fairy tale of falsehood based on nothing but an
anti-US atitude.
well -you can look at facts mentioned by me and decide for yourself. If
you say you like slavery and want it to continue for another 300 yrs
-there is nothing I can do about it. Im just trying to create awareness
amongst people who don't want such a thing to continue.
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
life than where they came from. And, I'm waiting for any real search
engine results that show there is any slavery in the USA like the child
slave labor that really does exist in India.
Its done by sleight of hand -and the reason why Im talking about it is
coz if I don't, lots of prospective H1Bs/F1s etc will fall into the
trap.
Sorry, but the employers just love the H1B, and from what I'm reading
yeah -they do love captive labour, which is why they pay politicians
money to bring in more captive labour and keep it captive.
Post by Straydog
there are people all over the world who love to come here on H1Bs and see
depends on the options on hand. A war-torn country doesn't provide any
options. A country with politicial stability, and reasonable amt of
domestic industry does provide some options. I have an option to find
employment that isn't as good as the ones in the US -but good enough to
meet my economic requirements. And so, I have opted out of H1B and
really don't want to be in the US.
Post by Straydog
what life here is like and decide whether to stay or go back. I see mostly
Russians here in restaurants, cash registers in lots of stores now, and I
talk to almost all of them. Some want to stay, others want to go back. Its
their choice. No slavery. They freely talk with me.
Slavery is practised by the employer, not by the customer. At one pt,
the US had lots of irish immigrants who were disliked by the citizenry.
Then, Bill Clinton brokered peace in N Ireland and domestic
oppurtunities increased, which gave them an option to go back and lots
of them did go back. So, if there are individuals who are furious about
the influx of foreigners -the best thing to do is to take away their
jobs in the US and stop meddling in their local economies or even
better help them create a better country of their homeland -so that
they won't gatecrash/inconvenience americans.
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Straydog
I think all readers of these posts by Kamal need to understand their
rights and read the "fine print" on their contracts BEFORE they move to
The fine print isn't available for one to read.
You have to learn to dig around for the laws, yourself. You have to ask
questions. You have to learn to expand your mind.
I was referring to others being able to read the fine print.
Same answer.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
It can only be gathered
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
from experience.
Then you have to ask other people and get the story from those who have
gone before you.
which is what I am (the guy who has gone and come back before some
H1B/F1 applicants). Im telling them their experience -hope they read
this -before they land in the US. Once they land and buy immovable
property, their fate is sealed.
Fine, go tell them. I read on a.c.c all the time. Where are you telling
them what to do? Go on the immigration newsgroups and tell them anything
you want, I don't care. Just don't lie about facts.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Show me where the fine print states that the US govt
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
accepts money to perpetuate slavery,
I can take you to almost any community public library in the USA and
within minutes show you sections where there are shelves that explain this.
There are also newspapers which often explain these things. And, lastly,
there are a lot of people in the USA who don't bother, because they are
either stupid or ignorant about the laws and the practices.
so you accept that the US govt accepts money to perpetuate slavery?
That is not what I said. You call it slavery, it is not. But the fine
print is out there and the exploiter does not have to tell you about it.
That is why it is called fine print. Anyone in the USA who has heard about
this, knows what it is about. The fine print is always a trap. But, it is
not slavery. YOu have to read the fine print before you sign your name.
I
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
thought you are denying its very existence in the USA.
I am. You take something I say and make it into whatever you want. Its
your big defect.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
that all rules and the law
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
enforcement mechanism are there to remind slaves of their status and to
ensure they do a good job on the work front?
See above.
Or show me where the fine
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
print says that one should contribute to the profits of american
businesses
A large fraction of the people already knwo they have no power over how
they are hired, what they are paid, or what they are offered.
they have no power over the demand/supply curve -yes. But many have the
power to look for better oppurtunities or not put up with harassment
-and those on restricted rights don't have those rights.
I'm sorry, I have no sympathy for people who want to just come here and
have everything handed to them on a silver platter for free just like born
citizens who have citizenship as a birthright. You have no claim over
There is no such thing as native or immigrant. All humans were born to
the same set of biological parents 60000 yrs back in africa and moved
out of it. Every country's native population is a result of human
migration and there is no divine decree that gives them rights over the
land on which they settled.
Post by Straydog
that. If you want to get a green card, there are procedures. If you want
to become a citizen, there are procedures, too.
and all those procedures are there to extract something from the
newcomer by denying them their civic rights.
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
or pay royalty to good-for-nothing citizens to earn freedom.
This is just blatant anti-US namecalling as well as a big lie that you
keep telling everyone when the fact of the matter is that most of the
people here actualy work to support themselves and quite a few foreigners
come here to be the ones who freeload on our govt services and exploit
even their own kind when they import them into their own shops and
businesses. I know many examples.
No -every american who expects businesses to reward them with jobs in
return for hiring foreigners, or who expects a good salary on account
of his citizenship/race is a parasite (good-for-nothing).
The real parasites are the executives who do nothing for their high
salaries, and the real parasites are the foreigners who come here and
expect to get jobs, money, govt services, free hospital treatment all for
just gate crashing.
No -the real parasites are those who want others to work for them,
Employers like foreigners in the US coz they deliver better return on
investment. They hold their nose when hiring many a native coz they
know he wouldn't deliver good returns -but have got to hire some so as
not to create public backlash.
Post by Straydog
And, besides, a lot of them are theives, too.
are they? how about you categorize them as terrorists too and tell the
way Bill Frist(?) did that we cannot give them citizenship coz they
could be a threat to national security. So, lets ensure they remain on
restricted rights till we feel confident of giving them citizenship.
Come to think of it, how many of those 12 million can afford to be in
the US without income to support their existence?
Post by Straydog
You can find
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
lots of posters claiming this right of theirs on usenet. These are
their own words and I do not have to extrapolate on that.
And, you just say that Americans don't have a right to a job and all that
means is that you consider it OK to steal someone else's livlihood. Fine,
The job isn't yours to be stolen. It belongs to the investor who puts
money to create a job. If the job does belong to any american, then by
extension the capital that creates the job is also his -in which case,
he won't be in the working class, but will be in the investor class and
can stop slogging it out for his living.
Post by Straydog
lets send the British back into India and run the country and take out of
it whatever they want. Because then you, as Indians born in your own
country, don't own your rights either.
They cannot run the country, coz one needs to stand for election to do
that -and by law foreigners cannot stand for election coz they may be
at odds with national interest. But that doesn't mean they cannot work
in India. Blore [and maybe soon some other export zones] has a hufe
influx of whites who have followed their job to India. They can live as
long as they like, and there is no requirement that employers offer
jobs to natives before they hire any of these newcomers. The govt is
more than glad to collect taxes from such higher income people -and no
matter how poor people are, they do not have anything against these
newcomers. If the govt does want to confer citizenship on them, it will
do so absolutely free of cost -and the question of working for one's
freedom doesn't arise. They have full rights on landing legally - other
than voting rights or the right to hold an Indian passport. For
political refugees, there is a grey area -but we do have lots of them
in our country, mostly those who have nothing to offer in return for
asylum.
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
unfortunately, the fine print is not available to the employee, unless one
reads the immigration laws. these people are programmers, not lawyers.
The immigration laws provide only some insight as to how bad things can
get. To know how bad they will get, you need to experience it first
hand and pass on the info to others.
Since the H1B is NOT a slave, the H1B can quit anytime and go back where
he came from. Real slaves have chains around their wrists and legs and
can't quit and can't go back to where they came from.
In theory -they can quit and go back. In practice, they cannot after
having bought immovable property in the US.
Well, I'm sorry if you don't have enough money to put your immovable
property in storage so you can sell it and get some of your money back. Do
you think this does never happen to US people in the USA? Why should I
have more sympathy for you than for US people here that this happens to?
because natives have freedom and H1Bs don't. They cannot opt out of the
H1B scam after buying immovable property.
Post by Straydog
Before they get to the US
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
-they can opt not to enter the US and so cannot be considered enslaved.
That is THEIR problem, not MY problem.
yeah -and to fix their and not your problem, I am stating how things
work in the US.
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
If americans make it explicit to potential visa holders as to what to
expect, they will create choice and pre-empt slavery.
Sorry, the laws are written and go into books. Everyone has to beware of
the laws. If I go to India, then the moment I get off the plane, the
Indian government does not put into my hands many large boxes of all
Indian laws for me to read about. And, it does not happen to Indians that
get off the plane when it lands in the USA, either. You have to talk to
people and ask questions.
if they keep mum
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
or encourage them to come to the US, it indicates a desire to profit
from slavery.
Yes.
glad you agree on this.

regards
-kamal
alexy
2006-08-22 15:09:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
If labour is not 100% free -then by definition, it is captive. How can
it be untrue?
That's total, unmitigated BS. Ever hear of shades of grey? I am
self-employed, but my labor is still not 100% free--I can't legally
install electrical outlets for pay, even though I am fully capable of
performing that task. No doubt that someone working for an employer
has less freedom, and one in a production job has even less. And an
H-1B has less still in many ways.

But I'm not captive, and while some people may feel "trapped" in a
job, that is hardly "captivity".
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
Straydog
2006-08-22 15:38:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Straydog
Captive labor means physically incarcerated.
Physical incarceration is a means that was employed to create captive
labour. Depending on times and circumstances, it might be possible to
create captive labour without physical incarceration. The motive is to
create captive labour and the modus operandi used can change with
circumstances and isn't limited to physical incarceration.
One can
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
create H1B legislation that makes one captive -without using whips or
without categorizing their status as illegal.
Wrong. The H1B holder can find a different employer and at the minimum go
into "pending" status which is not illegal and if "approved" (which just
takes time) becomes legal. I have seen many job announcements now which
REQUIRE that the applicant already be H1B.
On paper, they can transfer their visa to another employer. In
practice, one has to leave on good terms for the employer not to raise
a red flag.
Untrue. Former employer cannot block a transfer, but a new company will
interview H1B holders!!!
they can cancel the visa and get the INS to deport the H1B. Its the law
stupid.
Not true.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
The employer has full rights to cancel the visa, order the
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
INS to deport the H1B on 24 hours notice.
Then tell me why there are so many advertisements looking for people who
have H1B visas? The new employer can sponsor. The old employer can't
block.
No -employers ask for H1Bs because they are cheaper to hire. It doesn't
mean employers want them to be free and be paid heavily. To the
contrary, it means they like them because of the restricted rights
under which they work.
Sorry, the H1B can go apply to anyone who advertises for an applicant who
already has an H1B visa. And, I'm sorry, I have no sympathy if a H1B does
something wrong to make an employer unhappy.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
All rights for the H1B's stay
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
in the country are wholly and solely with the employer.
And, the employer can be anyone who wants to employ that H1B.
H1B sponsor can only be a green card holder or US citizen.
Wrong.

I know of
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
some H1B colleagues of mine who wanted to do unto others, what others
did to them i.e. open a bodyshop and cater to american companies.
Fine, I think many have already done this.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
That is what
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
makes for a captive labour force.
Untrue.
If labour is not 100% free -then by definition, it is captive. How can
it be untrue?
H1Bs move around to other employers. I have seen the advertisements for
only H1Bs can apply. You are confused about what "captive" means.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
In order to break free from this, one
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
has to go in for a green card
I can tell you for a fact that I had a Chinese woman on a student visa who
ended up working for an employer in the capacity of a CS/IT employee. They
don't have to go for a green card. She even told me this in followup
correspondence after she was on her new job.
yeah -student visa holders have something like 1 yr after completing
their graduation to work in the US as apprentice or something like
that.
Big deal, they can become students again, and get student visas easy.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
-which requires employer to certify that
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
beneficiary of the green card application has contributed to his
business satisfactorily and hence is deserving of a green card.
Irrelevant.
If
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
someone waits for 5 yrs to earn his liberation -he will be off the hook
else will remain captive.
Go talk to your lawyer. They can do anything. It just takes time.
they can't. Your politicians can do anything one likes -but it costs
money to get them to do something.
All it takes is money and time. I know many who have done this.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
For hispanics, one can
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
dump goods and destroy self-sustained communities in rural mexico
forcing them to give up their civic rights [as enjoyed in their own
country] and become illegals in the USA -wherein their presence is
illegal, but the services they provide are legal and benefit society
and businesses alike.
Wrong. It is illegal to hire but enforcement is weak. Employers are
breaking the law to hire people who do not have a legal right to work in
the USA, AND are here illegally. Yet it happens.
No -the enforcement is weak on purpose and all loopholes in law are
intentional and not accidental.
All the law provides is mental _pressure_. It is just common for
foreigners to come in legally, and then stay illegally. So, they take
their chances to get caught, which is very rare. Our population of
foreigners is growing some 1-2 million per year. Of course more come in
than get deported.
as long as the jobs are there -they will keep streaming in.
They come anyway. In Europe it is a big problem in Italy; tons of people
are coming up from Africa. Cross on anything that floats.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
It takes 1 hr for the INS to round up
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
workers at any major employer of hispanics.
Its very rare. A manager at the local chicken plant told me that 90% of
their workers are illegal. They dont' get deported. But the employer pays
a fine.
why don't they just stop employing illegals
b/c they can pay the illegals less.

or why doesn't the govt
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
force employers to stop employing illegals?
its cheaper for the company to pay less wages to the illegals and pay the
fines than to pay legals.

Its really simple for law
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
enforcement to act on large companies.
I'm telling you it only happens to a small fraction of the large
companies.

The only reason I can think of
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
is that both employers and their customers do want the benefits of
cheaper services that these illegals provide.
Most customers don't care and the companies are all competing with each
other. Its called a race to the bottom.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Your own statements
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
indicate that the entire food processing industry employs illegals.
Yeah, so what?
so -it is not difficult to enforce the law, if they really want to do
that.
Look, the illegals come in by the millions and you can't hire
50,000-100,000 policemen to find them without spending $billions more
money. Pols don't want to raise taxes.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
What exactly is difficult about going to a food processing factory and
lining up all workers at 10 am and checking who is or is not legal?
See above.
The
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
only difficulty I see is the loss of slave labour to the employers and
their customers.
It has not happened.
- because you are unwilling to disown the benefits of slavery.
Its so funny to me that you see things that just don't exist.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
For students, one can create visas which make it illegal to work off
campus and so they are forced to accept campus jobs which pay less than
min wage.
The students can avail themselves of lawyers to get on the green card
path. And, you lie again about "forced to accept ...jobs that pay less"
They cannot file for green cards while on student visas.
Who needs a green card to work here?
you said she applied for a green card or that one can file for a green
card directly.
I said she got a job. I'm sure it was not a job that required a green
card. That takes more time. I'm sure it was a NIV and what she does in the
future is her business. Go read above: she was not _forced_ to take a
campus job paying less than min wage. I paid her a lot more than min wage,
and she got a full time job paying more than I paid her.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
They need to
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
be employed to file for a green card and it can only be done by the
employer -not by the employee.
No, I have been asked, and in some cases, actually helped by writing
letters for people who are NOT working for me, to get a green card. You
are misinformed.
you cannot sponsor any individual other than those working for you -for
a green catd..
Not true. I wrote letters so they could get a green card. Some of them got
their green card.

Exceptions would be relatives, spouses, parents etc. I
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
am quoting your own country's law here -not twisting anything.
There is a process and it takes time. Its true.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
because the laws are written in a way that some jobs will always pay less
than min wage no matter who you are.
The jobs will always pay less -but the students on a visa rather than
free labour will accept the jobs because the law constrains them to do
so.
There are tons of jobs here that pay less than min wage because these jobs
fall below the thresholds. Doesn't matter who takes the jobs. I myself
have hired people born in the US on jobs that paid less than min wage.
Part time jobs almost always are missed by the min wage laws. Even Walmart
likes to hire more people at part time than fewer at full time because
then they don't have to pay benefits, SS, insurance, pension, taxes, and
makes labor cheaper. Its all about how big US corporations can cheat
employees born in the USA (in addition to foreigners).
there are certainly native individuals in the food chain so low down,
that even enslaved labour has a better economic status than natives.
Yes, they are called homeless. And, I saw one in Moscow and one in
Germany, and my Russian friends said they have a word for homeless in
Russia, too. It means "person without flat". At least a slave gets a place
to sleep and the owner has to provide food.

It
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
doesn't mean they aren't enslaved -just that slavery can happen at
various pts in the food chain, many a times involving educated people.
Fine.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
So, you have your continuous story of twisting facts around to fit your
prejudice.
I have pointed to facts
A lot of them are wrong and misinformed.
and what would that be?
A lot of them. I explained many times.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
and to portions of legislation enacted by the
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
US govt.
You don't know the details and you don't know the cheats.
text of legislation is text. Either I have not quoted properly or have
quoted properly. There can't be something in between. The statements
about:-
See below.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
-employer can cancel visa and ask INS to deport H1B visa holder
And, what about if there is a reason for this such as the H1B commits a
crime against the company? Or, do you think an H1B should just be free to
break the law or not work?
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
-employer needs to certify that beneficiary of green card application
has satisfactorily contributed to the business and consequently to
national interest
And, so what on this?
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
is very much straight out of the legislation enacted by the US govt.
And, how often does this happen? Very rarely.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
the USA has a history of indentured labour.
Yeah -slavery is a pillar of the american economy.
Yeah, India is where you should really be looking; child slave labor in
the rug factories exists today and anyone can prove it with a search
engine. However, despite me telling you and anyone else who is reading
this, you still prefer to lie.
Im telling you the truth. There are lots of bad things happening in
India, not limited to child labour. We are a country where blood flows
cheap, and the right to remain silent (5th amenndment) when in police
custody does not apply.
Fine, we have a lot of bad things in the USA, too.
That doesn't mean there is no slavery in the US
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
or that slavery isn't a msinstay of the US economy.
If you want to call it exploitation, then I will agree with you. But its
not slavery and its not the mainstay of the US economy. 99.999999% of the
population does not have chains around its arms and legs. The others are
smuggled in and they have to be hidden. The 4 percent or so that are here
illegally and are ignorant and can't speak or understand english are good
targets for exploitation and unscrupulous employers will exploit them.
Their civic rights are curtailed as it happens for any other slaves.
First, again, its not slavery. Second, why should a foreigner come here
and get off the plane and get the same rights as a citizen?
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
All of those 12 million hispanics live under the threat of the gun i.e
of law enforcement, just as slave labour in plantations used to.
Big exageration.

On
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
paper, they aren't supposed to be working in the US -but in reality
they will not be deported or more importantly prevented from working,
unless they aren't doing a good job and the business owner asks law
enforcement aka the govt for help.
I think it is fine to deport people if they don't work and do a good job.

Every visa type issued by the US
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
govt comes with constraints aka restricted rights -to the extent the
situation permits, in order to create captive labour.
Sorry, I have no sympathy with you on this. They came by their own free
choice. Nobody sent guys with guns to India to kidnap you to come here.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Without it,
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
americans won't be able to live the kind of lifestyle they currently
do.
With 88% of the people in the USA as people who were born and raised here,
and a workforce of about 140 miillion, it is a fact that WE really do work
to support ourselves and the non-US born people come here to get a better
No -you have others to support your lifestyle, and that others happens
to be 12% of your population (your own words above) which is HUGE.
60% of that 12% is illegal and here of their own free will. The other 40%
of that 12% is here legally and of their own free will. They only support
free will is not entirely free.
Nobody goes to Mexico and captures them and puts them in chains.

There are many constraints which the US
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
govt exploits to land them in their situation.
I have no sympathy for Hispanics who come here and can't or won't learn
english first but expect to be handed a free life on a silver platter.

Think of your govt as a
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
profit making corporation that provides services to businesses.
OK, lets talk about your wonderful government which has yet to make the
rupee convertible, has not opened its market to the outside, and is
backslidding on reforms.

One
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
such service is creation of a captive labour pool, some others would be
invading oil rich countries.
Yeah, how about your 250 million Dalits that get less in life than the 10
million Mexicans illegally in the USA.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
part of "our" lifestyle, and all of their own. I never heard of any
significant number even trying to leave.
if they can leave -then the procedure for creating captive labour has
gone dysfunctional and the purpose for which businesses pay your govt
money would be lost.
Fine, if you didn't like it here, you were free to go back to India and
you did that. Go and complain about it on your Indian NGs and the
immigration NGs.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
It
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
could mean illegals, or educated work permit holders or top notch
technocrats hired with lucrative prospects -but without an influx of
alien manpower, you just don't stand a chance at sustaining your living
std/purchasing power.
I'm sorry, I don't agree. They can all go anytime they want as far as I'm
concerned. If they don't like it here, they can go back to where they came
from. I see they all want to stay. I don't see chains around their legs or
arms. I see them all sitting out on their front porches, happily talking
on free minutes to their relatives in Mexico on cell phones, and even the
newspapers tell about them sending $20 billion back to their families
where they came from.
yeah -inflated currency is one of the means of retaining slave labour.
Oh, inflated currency? Well, I don't care what the reason is, everyone
still wants to come to the USA for any reason. I never invited any of
them.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
The other would be to destroy self-sustained rural communities in their
home country, or assasinating popular politicians there so that they
can all gatecrash into the US for livelihood.
We're all doing probably better than 80-85% of the rest of the world. You
want to go some other place besides India or stay in India, then fine with
me.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
You make up a big fantasy fairy tale of falsehood based on nothing but an
anti-US atitude.
well -you can look at facts mentioned by me
All a bunch of anti-US bashing. You've got tons of problems in India, too.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
and decide for yourself.
I have no interest in going to India. If you are happier there, then fine
with me. Most people come here and stay.

If
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
you say you like slavery and want it to continue for another 300 yrs
-there is nothing I can do about it.
The real slavery is in India, not the USA.

Im just trying to create awareness
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
amongst people who don't want such a thing to continue.
Go to the other NGs and tell them you mixture of truth and lies.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
life than where they came from. And, I'm waiting for any real search
engine results that show there is any slavery in the USA like the child
slave labor that really does exist in India.
Its done by sleight of hand -and the reason why Im talking about it is
coz if I don't, lots of prospective H1Bs/F1s etc will fall into the
trap.
Sorry, but the employers just love the H1B, and from what I'm reading
yeah -they do love captive labour, which is why they pay politicians
money to bring in more captive labour and keep it captive.
Funny thing is that most of that H1B labor seems to be pretty happy here.
I am never hearing about Indians or anyone running away from a job after a
few days or weeks of work.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
there are people all over the world who love to come here on H1Bs and see
depends on the options on hand. A war-torn country doesn't provide any
options. A country with politicial stability, and reasonable amt of
domestic industry does provide some options. I have an option to find
employment that isn't as good as the ones in the US -but good enough to
meet my economic requirements. And so, I have opted out of H1B and
really don't want to be in the US.
Fine, as I said before.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
what life here is like and decide whether to stay or go back. I see mostly
Russians here in restaurants, cash registers in lots of stores now, and I
talk to almost all of them. Some want to stay, others want to go back. Its
their choice. No slavery. They freely talk with me.
Slavery
Exploitation, not slavery.

is practised by the employer, not by the customer. At one pt,
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
the US had lots of irish immigrants who were disliked by the citizenry.
It is a fact of history that all new immigrants were exploited and
especially if they were uneducated and could not speak the language. What
good is a worker if they can't speak the language? What good is a worker
if they are uneducated? What do you want? Some ignorant guy to get
$30/hour for doing nothing?
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Then, Bill Clinton brokered peace in N Ireland and domestic
oppurtunities increased, which gave them an option to go back and lots
of them did go back. So, if there are individuals who are furious about
the influx of foreigners -the best thing to do is to take away their
jobs in the US and stop meddling in their local economies or even
better help them create a better country of their homeland -so that
they won't gatecrash/inconvenience americans.
Blah, blah, blah......
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
Post by Straydog
I think all readers of these posts by Kamal need to understand their
rights and read the "fine print" on their contracts BEFORE they move to
The fine print isn't available for one to read.
You have to learn to dig around for the laws, yourself. You have to ask
questions. You have to learn to expand your mind.
I was referring to others being able to read the fine print.
Same answer.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
It can only be gathered
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
from experience.
Then you have to ask other people and get the story from those who have
gone before you.
which is what I am (the guy who has gone and come back before some
H1B/F1 applicants). Im telling them their experience -hope they read
this -before they land in the US. Once they land and buy immovable
property, their fate is sealed.
Fine, go tell them. I read on a.c.c all the time. Where are you telling
them what to do? Go on the immigration newsgroups and tell them anything
you want, I don't care. Just don't lie about facts.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Show me where the fine print states that the US govt
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
accepts money to perpetuate slavery,
I can take you to almost any community public library in the USA and
within minutes show you sections where there are shelves that explain this.
There are also newspapers which often explain these things. And, lastly,
there are a lot of people in the USA who don't bother, because they are
either stupid or ignorant about the laws and the practices.
so you accept that the US govt accepts money to perpetuate slavery?
That is not what I said. You call it slavery, it is not. But the fine
print is out there and the exploiter does not have to tell you about it.
That is why it is called fine print. Anyone in the USA who has heard about
this, knows what it is about. The fine print is always a trap. But, it is
not slavery. YOu have to read the fine print before you sign your name.
I
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
thought you are denying its very existence in the USA.
I am. You take something I say and make it into whatever you want. Its
your big defect.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
that all rules and the law
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
enforcement mechanism are there to remind slaves of their status and to
ensure they do a good job on the work front?
See above.
Or show me where the fine
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
print says that one should contribute to the profits of american
businesses
A large fraction of the people already knwo they have no power over how
they are hired, what they are paid, or what they are offered.
they have no power over the demand/supply curve -yes. But many have the
power to look for better oppurtunities or not put up with harassment
-and those on restricted rights don't have those rights.
I'm sorry, I have no sympathy for people who want to just come here and
have everything handed to them on a silver platter for free just like born
citizens who have citizenship as a birthright. You have no claim over
There is no such thing as native or immigrant.
You are born in a country or you are not born in a country. Physical Fact.

All humans were born to
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
the same set of biological parents 60000 yrs back in africa and moved
out of it.
Sorry, children of rich parents usually get inheritances of money.
Children of poor parents usually get nothing. Or, why should an immigrant
get the same rights as citizens?

Every country's native population is a result of human
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
migration and there is no divine decree that gives them rights over the
land on which they settled.
Oh, this is part of YOUR idea that YOU want to decide that an Indian
immigrant gets US rights when he gets off a plane AND a US citizen has no
rights. That is YOUR idea of a free ride handed to you on a silver
platter.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
that. If you want to get a green card, there are procedures. If you want
to become a citizen, there are procedures, too.
and all those procedures are there to extract something from the
newcomer by denying them their civic rights.
Too bad, no sympathy for you. Yes, the world is unfair, isn't it? Just
like you have no sympathy for the US guys who get their jobs taken away
and given to Indians. So, just for you: no sympathy for you and your
problems.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
or pay royalty to good-for-nothing citizens to earn freedom.
This is just blatant anti-US namecalling as well as a big lie that you
keep telling everyone when the fact of the matter is that most of the
people here actualy work to support themselves and quite a few foreigners
come here to be the ones who freeload on our govt services and exploit
even their own kind when they import them into their own shops and
businesses. I know many examples.
No -every american who expects businesses to reward them with jobs in
return for hiring foreigners, or who expects a good salary on account
of his citizenship/race is a parasite (good-for-nothing).
The real parasites are the executives who do nothing for their high
salaries, and the real parasites are the foreigners who come here and
expect to get jobs, money, govt services, free hospital treatment all for
just gate crashing.
No -the real parasites are those who want others to work for them,
Only the executives (and criminals).
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Employers like foreigners in the US coz they deliver better return on
investment.
And, the foreigners don't care who they steal anything from. 60% are
illegal just as they cross the border. Then they go on to steal more from
there.

They hold their nose when hiring many a native coz they
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
know he wouldn't deliver good returns -but have got to hire some so as
not to create public backlash.
Whatever.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
And, besides, a lot of them are theives, too.
are they? how about you categorize them as terrorists too and tell the
way Bill Frist(?) did that we cannot give them citizenship coz they
could be a threat to national security.
Oh, I think its just fine if we slow down giving citizenship to anyone who
wants it.

So, lets ensure they remain on
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
restricted rights till we feel confident of giving them citizenship.
Come to think of it, how many of those 12 million can afford to be in
the US without income to support their existence?
Fine, I am against handing a free ride to guys who just come over and want
jobs on a sliver platter.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
You can find
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
lots of posters claiming this right of theirs on usenet. These are
their own words and I do not have to extrapolate on that.
And, you just say that Americans don't have a right to a job and all that
means is that you consider it OK to steal someone else's livlihood. Fine,
The job isn't yours to be stolen.
OK, your whole country under the British, wasn't your country either. So,
now maybe I'm sorry the British left. Maybe you would be quiet. Esp since
you are ungrateful that they left on their own free will.

It belongs to the investor who puts
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
money to create a job. If the job does belong to any american,
The country belongs to the people, its in our constitution.

then by
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
extension the capital that creates the job is also his -in which case,
he won't be in the working class, but will be in the investor class and
can stop slogging it out for his living.
All executive theives.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
lets send the British back into India and run the country and take out of
it whatever they want. Because then you, as Indians born in your own
country, don't own your rights either.
They cannot run the country, coz one needs to stand for election to do
that -and by law foreigners cannot stand for election coz they may be
at odds with national interest.
Just bring back Imperialism.

But that doesn't mean they cannot work
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
in India. Blore [and maybe soon some other export zones] has a hufe
influx of whites who have followed their job to India.
I strongly doubt this. Most of the very few are either transfered, or just
want to visit India, or want India on their resume. They followed nothing.

They can live as
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
long as they like, and there is no requirement that employers offer
jobs to natives before they hire any of these newcomers.
Its in all the papers I read that your employers want high caste Hindus.

The govt is
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
more than glad to collect taxes from such higher income people -and no
matter how poor people are, they do not have anything against these
newcomers. If the govt does want to confer citizenship on them, it will
do so absolutely free of cost -and the question of working for one's
freedom doesn't arise.
I have zero interest in becoming a citizen of India. What does India have
to offer me? A pile of dust? A world of corruption, bribes, and bad roads
and electricity that goes out pretty often?

They have full rights on landing legally - other
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
than voting rights or the right to hold an Indian passport. For
political refugees, there is a grey area -but we do have lots of them
in our country, mostly those who have nothing to offer in return for
asylum.
If you are happy there, fine with me.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by anon
unfortunately, the fine print is not available to the employee, unless one
reads the immigration laws. these people are programmers, not lawyers.
The immigration laws provide only some insight as to how bad things can
get. To know how bad they will get, you need to experience it first
hand and pass on the info to others.
Since the H1B is NOT a slave, the H1B can quit anytime and go back where
he came from. Real slaves have chains around their wrists and legs and
can't quit and can't go back to where they came from.
In theory -they can quit and go back. In practice, they cannot after
having bought immovable property in the US.
Well, I'm sorry if you don't have enough money to put your immovable
property in storage so you can sell it and get some of your money back. Do
you think this does never happen to US people in the USA? Why should I
have more sympathy for you than for US people here that this happens to?
because natives have freedom and H1Bs don't. They cannot opt out of the
H1B scam after buying immovable property.
Sorry, no sympathy for you.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Before they get to the US
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
-they can opt not to enter the US and so cannot be considered enslaved.
That is THEIR problem, not MY problem.
yeah -and to fix their and not your problem, I am stating how things
work in the US.
I'd like to fix the H1B by eliminating it.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
If americans make it explicit to potential visa holders as to what to
expect, they will create choice and pre-empt slavery.
Sorry, the laws are written and go into books. Everyone has to beware of
the laws. If I go to India, then the moment I get off the plane, the
Indian government does not put into my hands many large boxes of all
Indian laws for me to read about. And, it does not happen to Indians that
get off the plane when it lands in the USA, either. You have to talk to
people and ask questions.
if they keep mum
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
or encourage them to come to the US, it indicates a desire to profit
from slavery.
Yes.
glad you agree on this.
I agree with you about 5% of the time, yes.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
regards
-kamal
Straydog
2006-08-22 11:20:08 UTC
Permalink
India: Government Brutality, Injustice, and
Questionable Democracy.

A sellection of quotes from the book "An Ordinary Person's Guide to
Empire" by Arundhati Roy (the author of The God of Small Things, on the
NYT best seller list for 49 weeks, and she lives in New
Delhi); ISBN 0896087271, c 2004.

Parts of the book criticise US foreign policy, and other parts criticise
Indian foreign and domestic policy. All of the chapters were originally
given as speeches or were published as articles in major printed media.
The book contains hundreds of sources for details about which statements
were made. The book gives substantial detail about the internal political
and social components of modern India and India's problems and changes
while undergoing modernisation. At one point the author identifies fascist
themes in some government policy and especially in connection with
globalization. The book is easy to read and contains a great deal of
information about the political situation in India, today. If you are a
corporate goon-parasite, then all this doesn't matter. If you care about
democracy, ethics, morals, and people, then read on.

Quotes:

page 12
"According to the State, when victims refuse to be victims, they become
terrorists and are dealt with as such. They're either killed or arrested
under POTA (Prevention of Terrorism Act). In states like Orissa, Bihar,
and Jharkhand, which are rich in mineral resources and, therefore,
vulneralble to ruthless corporations on the hunt, hundreds of villagers,
including minors, have been arrested under POTA and are being held in jail
without trial. Some states have special police battalions for
'anti-development' activity. This is quite apart from the other use that
POTA is being put to--terrorizing Muslims, particularly in states
like Jammu and Kashmir and Gujarat. The space for genuine nonviolent civil
disobediance is atrophying. In the era of corporate globalization, poverty
is a crime, and protesting against further impoverishment is terrorism. In
teh era of the War on Terror, poverty is being slyly conflated with
terrorism." I have sellected just a few passages to show the message that
this book offers and that it is important to everyone, not just India or
Indians.

***
page 13:
"Vast parts of the country are already more or less beyond the control of
the Indian state--Kashmir, the North East, large parts of Madhya Pradesh,
Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand."
***
"The real issue is that the privatization of essential infrastructure is
essentially undemocratic. The real issue is the towering mass of
incriminating evidence against big dams. The real issue is the fact that
over the last fifty years in India alone big dams have displaced more
than 33 million people.... The real issue is the fact that the Supreme
Court of India ordered the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam to
proceed even though it is aware that it violates the fundamental rights to
life and livelihood of the citizens of India."

I should point out that dam construction and other Army Corps of Engineer
projects in the USA have been seriously criticised by environmentalists in
the USA at least as far back as 50 years ago. Many dam construction
projects in the USA have been declared failures and Jared Diamond, in his
book "Collapse" mentioned at least one US dam that was blown up to restore
water flows back to their original nature without loss of non-existent
benefits but with the restoration of the fishing industry in the area.

page 45:
"Never mind that forty years ago, the CIA, under President John F.
Kennedy, orchestrated a regime change in Baghdad. In 1963, after a
succesful coup, the Ba'ath party came to power in Iraq. Using lists
provided by the CIA, the new Ba'ath regime systematically eliminated
hundreds of doctors, teachers, lawyers, and political figures known to be
leftists [reference given]. An entire intellectual community was
slaughtered. (The same technique was used to massacre hundreds of
thousands of people in Indonesia and East Timor.[reference given])....In
1980...[the US said] 'We see no fundamental incompatibility of
interests between the United States and Iraq [reference given].'"

page 55:
"In South Africa, after three hundred years of brutal domination of the
black majority by a white minority through colonialism and apartheid, a
nonracial, multi-party democracy came to power in 1994. It was a
phenomenal acheivement. Within two years of coming to power, the African
National Congress had genuflected with no caveats to the Market God. Its
massive program of structural adjustment, privatization, and
liberalization has only increased the hideous disparities between the
rich and the poor. Official unemployment among blacks has increased from
forty percent to fifty percent since the end of Apartheid [reference
given]. The corporatization of basic services-- electricity, water, and
housing-- has meant that ten million South Africans, almost a quarter of
the population, have been disconnected from water and electricity
[reference given]."

Now how does propaganda work?

page 57:
"...Clear Channel Communications is the largest radio station owner in the
country. It runs more than twelve hundred channels, which together
account for nine percent fo the market [reference given]. When hundreds of
thousands of American citizens took to the streets to protest against
the war on Iraq, Clear Channel orgaized pro-war patriotic "Rallies for
America" across the country [reference given]. It used its radio stations
to advertise the events and then sent correspondents to cover them as
though they were breaking news."

It should be noted that consolidation in the broadcast radio and TV
business continues, today. Same for the book publishing business. Soon,
only a few entities will control all media.

page 71:

This deals with Hindu nationalism. Many passages in the book talk about
this with parallels with the development of Nazi power in Germany in the
1930s.

"On August 15, 2003, Independence Day he [Cheif Minister of Gujarat,
Narendra Modi] hoisted the Indian flag before thousands of cheering
people. In a gesture of menacing symbolism, he wore the black RSS
cap--which proclaims him as a member of the Hindu nationalist guild that
has not been shy of admiring Hitler and his methods [reference
given]."

"One hundred and thirty million Muslims--not to mention the other
minorities, Dalits, Christians, Sikhs, Adivasis--live in India under the
shaddow of Hindu nationalism."

page 85:

Additional text documenting thousands of people killed and hundreds of
thousands of people displaced by Indian police.

page 91:

"Gandhi's Salt March was not just political theater. When, in a simple act
of defiance, thousands of Indians marched to the sea and made their own
salt, they broke the salt tax laws."

page 97:

"The U.S. government used the lies and disinformation generated around the
September 11 attacks to invade no just one country, but two.... The Indian
government uses the same strategy not with other countries, but against
its own people. Over the last decade the number of people who have been
killed by the police and security forces runs into the thousands. Recently
several Bombay policemen spoke openly to the press about how many
'gangsters' they had eliminated on 'orders' from their senior officers
[reference given]. Andhra Pradesh chalks up an average of about two
hundred 'extremists' in 'encounter' deaths a year [reference given]. In
Kashmir in a situation that almost amounts to war, an estimated eighty
thousand people have been killed since 1989. Thousands have simply
'disappeared' [reference given]. According to the records of the
Association of Parents of Disappeared People (APDP), more than three
thousand people were killed in 2003, of which four hundred and sixty-
three were soldiers [reference given]."

The text goes on to say things are getting worse.

page 102:

"Fourty-seven percent of India's children below three suffer from
malnutrition, forty-six percent are stunted [reference given]."

page 103:
"Today, an average rural family eats about one hundred killograms [about
220 lbs.] less food in a year than it did in the early 1990s [refernce
given]."

"But in urban India, wherever you go--shops, restaurants, railway
stations, airports...--you have TV monitors in which election promises
have already come true. India's Shining, Feeling Good."

page 104:

The thing that is happening is that much infrastructure (eg. water
supplies, electricity, transport, telecommunications, health services,
education, etc, that the government was "supposed to hold in trust for the
people it represents, assets that have been built and maintained with
public money over decades--are sold by the state to private corporations."
Guess where that leads?

The book ends with a short glossary of terms, names, etc., that define or
explain political parties, important people, important historical
events, and a long list of information sources (21 pages), and an index.

If you want to see how globalization is affecting the so-called
"developing countries" this is one good book to start with.
Mohd Kaffir
2006-08-22 16:45:23 UTC
Permalink
And how Straydog is so balanced in his views.
http://www.rainbowbody.net/Ongwhehonwhe/roystopwar.htm
Excerpt:
When he announced the air strikes, President George Bush said: "We're a
peaceful nation." America¹s favourite ambassador, Tony Blair, (who
also holds the portfolio of prime minister of the UK), echoed him:
"We're a peaceful people."

So now we know. Pigs are horses. Girls are boys. War is peace.

Speaking at the FBI headquarters a few days later, President Bush said:
"This is our calling. This is the calling of the United States of
America. The most free nation in the world. A nation built on
fundamental values that reject hate, reject violence, rejects murderers
and rejects evil. We will not tire."

Here is a list of the countries that America has been at war with - and
bombed - since the second world war: China (1945-46, 1950-53), Korea
(1950-53), Guatemala (1954, 1967-69), Indonesia (1958), Cuba (1959-60),
the Belgian Congo (1964), Peru (1965), Laos (1964-73), Vietnam
(1961-73), Cambodia (1969-70), Grenada (1983), Libya (1986), El
Salvador (1980s), Nicaragua (1980s), Panama (1989), Iraq (1991-99),
Bosnia (1995), Sudan (1998), Yugoslavia (1999). And now Afghanistan.

Certainly it does not tire - this, the most free nation in the world.

What freedoms does it uphold? Within its borders, the freedoms of
speech, religion, thought; of artistic expression, food habits, sexual
preferences (well, to some extent) and many other exemplary, wonderful
things.

Outside its borders, the freedom to dominate, humiliate and subjugate
­ usually in the service of America¹s real religion, the "free
market". So when the US government christens a war "Operation Infinite
Justice", or "Operation Enduring Freedom", we in the third world feel
more than a tremor of fear.

Because we know that Infinite Justice for some means Infinite Injustice
for others. And Enduring Freedom for some means Enduring Subjugation
for others.

The International Coalition Against Terror is a largely cabal of the
richest countries in the world. Between them, they manufacture and sell
almost all of the world's weapons, they possess the largest stockpile
of weapons of mass destruction - chemical, biological and nuclear. They
have fought the most wars, account for most of the genocide,
subjection, ethnic cleansing and human rights violations in modern
history, and have sponsored, armed and financed untold numbers of
dictators and despots. Between them, they have worshipped, almost
deified, the cult of violence and war. For all its appalling sins, the
Taliban just isn't in the same league.

<<<
Post by Straydog
India: Government Brutality, Injustice, and
Questionable Democracy.
A sellection of quotes from the book "An Ordinary Person's Guide to
Empire" by Arundhati Roy (the author of The God of Small Things, on the
NYT best seller list for 49 weeks, and she lives in New
Delhi); ISBN 0896087271, c 2004.
Parts of the book criticise US foreign policy, and other parts criticise
Indian foreign and domestic policy. All of the chapters were originally
given as speeches or were published as articles in major printed media.
The book contains hundreds of sources for details about which statements
were made. The book gives substantial detail about the internal political
and social components of modern India and India's problems and changes
while undergoing modernisation. At one point the author identifies fascist
themes in some government policy and especially in connection with
globalization. The book is easy to read and contains a great deal of
information about the political situation in India, today. If you are a
corporate goon-parasite, then all this doesn't matter. If you care about
democracy, ethics, morals, and people, then read on.
page 12
"According to the State, when victims refuse to be victims, they become
terrorists and are dealt with as such. They're either killed or arrested
under POTA (Prevention of Terrorism Act). In states like Orissa, Bihar,
and Jharkhand, which are rich in mineral resources and, therefore,
vulneralble to ruthless corporations on the hunt, hundreds of villagers,
including minors, have been arrested under POTA and are being held in jail
without trial. Some states have special police battalions for
'anti-development' activity. This is quite apart from the other use that
POTA is being put to--terrorizing Muslims, particularly in states
like Jammu and Kashmir and Gujarat. The space for genuine nonviolent civil
disobediance is atrophying. In the era of corporate globalization, poverty
is a crime, and protesting against further impoverishment is terrorism. In
teh era of the War on Terror, poverty is being slyly conflated with
terrorism." I have sellected just a few passages to show the message that
this book offers and that it is important to everyone, not just India or
Indians.
***
"Vast parts of the country are already more or less beyond the control of
the Indian state--Kashmir, the North East, large parts of Madhya Pradesh,
Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand."
***
"The real issue is that the privatization of essential infrastructure is
essentially undemocratic. The real issue is the towering mass of
incriminating evidence against big dams. The real issue is the fact that
over the last fifty years in India alone big dams have displaced more
than 33 million people.... The real issue is the fact that the Supreme
Court of India ordered the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam to
proceed even though it is aware that it violates the fundamental rights to
life and livelihood of the citizens of India."
I should point out that dam construction and other Army Corps of Engineer
projects in the USA have been seriously criticised by environmentalists in
the USA at least as far back as 50 years ago. Many dam construction
projects in the USA have been declared failures and Jared Diamond, in his
book "Collapse" mentioned at least one US dam that was blown up to restore
water flows back to their original nature without loss of non-existent
benefits but with the restoration of the fishing industry in the area.
"Never mind that forty years ago, the CIA, under President John F.
Kennedy, orchestrated a regime change in Baghdad. In 1963, after a
succesful coup, the Ba'ath party came to power in Iraq. Using lists
provided by the CIA, the new Ba'ath regime systematically eliminated
hundreds of doctors, teachers, lawyers, and political figures known to be
leftists [reference given]. An entire intellectual community was
slaughtered. (The same technique was used to massacre hundreds of
thousands of people in Indonesia and East Timor.[reference given])....In
1980...[the US said] 'We see no fundamental incompatibility of
interests between the United States and Iraq [reference given].'"
"In South Africa, after three hundred years of brutal domination of the
black majority by a white minority through colonialism and apartheid, a
nonracial, multi-party democracy came to power in 1994. It was a
phenomenal acheivement. Within two years of coming to power, the African
National Congress had genuflected with no caveats to the Market God. Its
massive program of structural adjustment, privatization, and
liberalization has only increased the hideous disparities between the
rich and the poor. Official unemployment among blacks has increased from
forty percent to fifty percent since the end of Apartheid [reference
given]. The corporatization of basic services-- electricity, water, and
housing-- has meant that ten million South Africans, almost a quarter of
the population, have been disconnected from water and electricity
[reference given]."
Now how does propaganda work?
"...Clear Channel Communications is the largest radio station owner in the
country. It runs more than twelve hundred channels, which together
account for nine percent fo the market [reference given]. When hundreds of
thousands of American citizens took to the streets to protest against
the war on Iraq, Clear Channel orgaized pro-war patriotic "Rallies for
America" across the country [reference given]. It used its radio stations
to advertise the events and then sent correspondents to cover them as
though they were breaking news."
It should be noted that consolidation in the broadcast radio and TV
business continues, today. Same for the book publishing business. Soon,
only a few entities will control all media.
This deals with Hindu nationalism. Many passages in the book talk about
this with parallels with the development of Nazi power in Germany in the
1930s.
"On August 15, 2003, Independence Day he [Cheif Minister of Gujarat,
Narendra Modi] hoisted the Indian flag before thousands of cheering
people. In a gesture of menacing symbolism, he wore the black RSS
cap--which proclaims him as a member of the Hindu nationalist guild that
has not been shy of admiring Hitler and his methods [reference
given]."
"One hundred and thirty million Muslims--not to mention the other
minorities, Dalits, Christians, Sikhs, Adivasis--live in India under the
shaddow of Hindu nationalism."
Additional text documenting thousands of people killed and hundreds of
thousands of people displaced by Indian police.
"Gandhi's Salt March was not just political theater. When, in a simple act
of defiance, thousands of Indians marched to the sea and made their own
salt, they broke the salt tax laws."
"The U.S. government used the lies and disinformation generated around the
September 11 attacks to invade no just one country, but two.... The Indian
government uses the same strategy not with other countries, but against
its own people. Over the last decade the number of people who have been
killed by the police and security forces runs into the thousands. Recently
several Bombay policemen spoke openly to the press about how many
'gangsters' they had eliminated on 'orders' from their senior officers
[reference given]. Andhra Pradesh chalks up an average of about two
hundred 'extremists' in 'encounter' deaths a year [reference given]. In
Kashmir in a situation that almost amounts to war, an estimated eighty
thousand people have been killed since 1989. Thousands have simply
'disappeared' [reference given]. According to the records of the
Association of Parents of Disappeared People (APDP), more than three
thousand people were killed in 2003, of which four hundred and sixty-
three were soldiers [reference given]."
The text goes on to say things are getting worse.
"Fourty-seven percent of India's children below three suffer from
malnutrition, forty-six percent are stunted [reference given]."
"Today, an average rural family eats about one hundred killograms [about
220 lbs.] less food in a year than it did in the early 1990s [refernce
given]."
"But in urban India, wherever you go--shops, restaurants, railway
stations, airports...--you have TV monitors in which election promises
have already come true. India's Shining, Feeling Good."
The thing that is happening is that much infrastructure (eg. water
supplies, electricity, transport, telecommunications, health services,
education, etc, that the government was "supposed to hold in trust for the
people it represents, assets that have been built and maintained with
public money over decades--are sold by the state to private corporations."
Guess where that leads?
The book ends with a short glossary of terms, names, etc., that define or
explain political parties, important people, important historical
events, and a long list of information sources (21 pages), and an index.
If you want to see how globalization is affecting the so-called
"developing countries" this is one good book to start with.
alexy
2006-08-11 12:34:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Not having the same rights doesn't make it slavery.
Before you make an authoritative statement, you need to be sure of what
you are saying.
Do you know anything about the economics of slavery? From an economic
perspective, every human imported on restricted rights is a slave. How
they bring and retain captive labour is the modus operandi -which can
change over time. If the labour was not captive -it could not be
considered enslaved and would not deliver better returns than free
labour.
Well, before you start making up your own definitions for words
willy-nilly, to force them into a situation where they don't fit with
normal usage, you need to think a little about the nonstandard
definition you are proposing.

Using your definition, every executive who has an incentive plan with
"golden handcuff" provisions is a slave, since they lose the right to
that money if they leave the current employer (just as an H-1B would
suffer economic loss if they left their current employer and had to
move back home). In fact, everyone participating in a remitment or
savings plan in which payout of employer-contributed money is
conditioned on certain period of service (vesting schedule) is a slave
with your definition. Real slaves don't have the options to chose to
suffer those economic hardships.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
alexy
2006-08-11 12:45:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by alexy
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Not having the same rights doesn't make it slavery.
Before you make an authoritative statement, you need to be sure of what
you are saying.
Do you know anything about the economics of slavery? From an economic
perspective, every human imported on restricted rights is a slave. How
they bring and retain captive labour is the modus operandi -which can
change over time. If the labour was not captive -it could not be
considered enslaved and would not deliver better returns than free
labour.
Well, before you start making up your own definitions for words
willy-nilly, to force them into a situation where they don't fit with
normal usage, you need to think a little about the nonstandard
definition you are proposing.
Using your definition, every executive who has an incentive plan with
"golden handcuff" provisions is a slave, since they lose the right to
that money if they leave the current employer (just as an H-1B would
suffer economic loss if they left their current employer and had to
move back home). In fact, everyone participating in a remitment or
^^^^^^^^^
"retirement" [That's what happens when you accept spellchecker's
correction of your typo too quickly!<g>]
Post by alexy
savings plan in which payout of employer-contributed money is
conditioned on certain period of service (vesting schedule) is a slave
with your definition. Real slaves don't have the options to chose to
suffer those economic hardships.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-08-11 14:40:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by alexy
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Not having the same rights doesn't make it slavery.
Before you make an authoritative statement, you need to be sure of what
you are saying.
Do you know anything about the economics of slavery? From an economic
perspective, every human imported on restricted rights is a slave. How
they bring and retain captive labour is the modus operandi -which can
change over time. If the labour was not captive -it could not be
considered enslaved and would not deliver better returns than free
labour.
Well, before you start making up your own definitions for words
willy-nilly, to force them into a situation where they don't fit with
normal usage, you need to think a little about the nonstandard
definition you are proposing.
From an economic perspective, it is the same as slavery. The
implementation as is traditionally defined -isn't the same. There are
no whips or nets involved. The employer doesn't beat up slaves -but it
does form a captive labour market from an economic perspective. They
just remind the slaves of their status as captive labour by way of
legal clauses enacted by the US govt and something that is to be taken
care of by the INS/law enforcement. For H1Bs -the reminder comes subtly
coz they are well educated and can return home in the worst case. For
illegals from mexico, the reminder comes bluntly. Even illegals aren't
enslaved by your definition. But ask any and all of them, not a single
one of them will deny that they live in the shadows under threat of
deportation should the employer inform law enforcement about their not
doing a good job. The law enforcement which will take them to task is
the same one that is finding it difficult to locate them as long as
their employers are happy with their work. Im talking of 12 million
people as evidence of my claim and its not something that can be
refuted so easily..
Post by alexy
Using your definition, every executive who has an incentive plan with
"golden handcuff" provisions is a slave, since they lose the right to
that money if they leave the current employer (just as an H-1B would
suffer economic loss if they left their current employer and had to
move back home). In fact, everyone participating in a remitment or
Not exactly. The golden handcuff is an incentive to stick with an
employer. But a conflict with the visa sponser jeopardizes one's legal
status to seek alternative employment or be physically present in the
US. I have broken golden handcuffs and taken up alternative employment
and it kind of compensated me for the loss incurred. It didn't
endanger my legal status and or my right to seek alternative employment
which I consider suitable. In India, one doesn't have to earn the right
to change employers or be physically present by working from an
employer. The right comes by default -not just to citizens but even to
foreigners on a work permit. In contrast, the US govt has created a
legislation so that workers earn their bearings aka liberation by
contributing to an employer. Even the green card process requires
employer to certify that green card applicant has contributed to the
business and consequently to the economy before he can be rewarded with
a green card. Further, H1B visa sponsor can veto transfer or recommend
to the INS to deport a person coz he didn't leave on good terms. The
INS has powers to deport any H1B applicant on 24 hrs notice without
reason and termination of employment (if informed to the INS) does
require H1b visa holder to leave within 24 hrs of being terminated
-failing which the visa holder would be in violation of the law and
subject to punishment/forcible removal. All of this is legal jargon
which can be verified and which I am not exagerrating. The thing that
is not mentioned is that the matter will become relevant only if the
employer has business reasons to do so.
Post by alexy
savings plan in which payout of employer-contributed money is
conditioned on certain period of service (vesting schedule) is a slave
One isn't a slave by that definition. The thing that defines slavery is
taking away civic rights. If I don't like an employer in India -I can
dump him and his options and take up another job. Im 100% free to do
so. In the US -that freedom is not present. If it looks like it is
present -that is because of how well the legislation is worded.
Post by alexy
with your definition. Real slaves don't have the options to chose to
suffer those economic hardships.
H1Bs do have the option to choose whether to work on an H1B or not -but
once they come over to the US, take a car loan, buy furniture etc..
that ability is lost either partially or completely. To give my own
example. I dumped a toyota camry le when leaving the US. The only
person I know of having a camry is my last company's CEO [didn't check
current workplace for car ownership] and he is so freaking rich -he can
retire any moment. So, if a person comes in and 6 mtsh later decides he
wants out -he won't be able to get out easily if you understand the
diff in salaries between the 2 countries and the amt the H1B will have
to write off or pay back.
Im trying to tell them before they land -as to what to expect from
the US govt, coz telling them after they land is not much different
from telling that after their having fallen into a ditch.

regards
-kamal
Post by alexy
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
alexy
2006-08-11 16:29:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by alexy
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Not having the same rights doesn't make it slavery.
Before you make an authoritative statement, you need to be sure of what
you are saying.
Do you know anything about the economics of slavery? From an economic
perspective, every human imported on restricted rights is a slave. How
they bring and retain captive labour is the modus operandi -which can
change over time. If the labour was not captive -it could not be
considered enslaved and would not deliver better returns than free
labour.
Well, before you start making up your own definitions for words
willy-nilly, to force them into a situation where they don't fit with
normal usage, you need to think a little about the nonstandard
definition you are proposing.
From an economic perspective, it is the same as slavery. The
implementation as is traditionally defined -isn't the same. There are
no whips or nets involved. The employer doesn't beat up slaves -but it
does form a captive labour market from an economic perspective. They
just remind the slaves of their status as captive labour by way of
legal clauses enacted by the US govt and something that is to be taken
care of by the INS/law enforcement. For H1Bs -the reminder comes subtly
coz they are well educated and can return home in the worst case. For
illegals from mexico, the reminder comes bluntly. Even illegals aren't
enslaved by your definition. But ask any and all of them, not a single
one of them will deny that they live in the shadows under threat of
deportation should the employer inform law enforcement about their not
doing a good job. The law enforcement which will take them to task is
the same one that is finding it difficult to locate them as long as
their employers are happy with their work. Im talking of 12 million
people as evidence of my claim and its not something that can be
refuted so easily..
Post by alexy
Using your definition, every executive who has an incentive plan with
"golden handcuff" provisions is a slave, since they lose the right to
that money if they leave the current employer (just as an H-1B would
suffer economic loss if they left their current employer and had to
move back home). In fact, everyone participating in a remitment or
Not exactly. The golden handcuff is an incentive to stick with an
employer. But a conflict with the visa sponser jeopardizes one's legal
status to seek alternative employment or be physically present in the
US. I have broken golden handcuffs and taken up alternative employment
and it kind of compensated me for the loss incurred. It didn't
endanger my legal status and or my right to seek alternative employment
which I consider suitable. In India, one doesn't have to earn the right
to change employers or be physically present by working from an
employer. The right comes by default -not just to citizens but even to
foreigners on a work permit.
Your work permits for foreigners are totally unrestricted? That's
weird. And totally contradicts what was found by the US Committee on
Refugees and Immigrants:
:Right to Earn a Livelihood India did not permit most refugees to work,
:open bank accounts, rent houses, or run businesses. Although some
:Myanmarese refugees worked in the informal sector, they did so without
:the protection of the law and were subject to arrest, detention, and
:deportation. Refugees reported workplace violations including harassment
:by Indian nationals, unpaid overtime, and sexual and gender-based violence.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
In contrast, the US govt has created a
legislation so that workers earn their bearings aka liberation by
contributing to an employer. Even the green card process requires
employer to certify that green card applicant has contributed to the
business and consequently to the economy before he can be rewarded with
a green card. Further, H1B visa sponsor can veto transfer or recommend
to the INS to deport a person coz he didn't leave on good terms. The
INS has powers to deport any H1B applicant on 24 hrs notice without
reason and termination of employment (if informed to the INS) does
require H1b visa holder to leave within 24 hrs of being terminated
-failing which the visa holder would be in violation of the law and
subject to punishment/forcible removal. All of this is legal jargon
which can be verified and which I am not exagerrating. The thing that
is not mentioned is that the matter will become relevant only if the
employer has business reasons to do so.
Having to play by rules you don't like, and might not have had the
sense to determine before you agreed to them, does not constitute
slavery. If I go to France on a tourist visa, I don't have a "civic
right" to earn a living, but that doesn't make me a slave.

I think a lot of people would be sympathetic to a discussion of the
unfairness or ill effects of the rules of H-1B. Many or most of them
will say "tough shit" in response to whining about having to abide by
the rules under which you accepted the visa and calling this
requirement that you abide by the rules you agreed to "slavery".
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-08-11 18:31:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by alexy
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by alexy
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Not having the same rights doesn't make it slavery.
Before you make an authoritative statement, you need to be sure of what
you are saying.
Do you know anything about the economics of slavery? From an economic
perspective, every human imported on restricted rights is a slave. How
they bring and retain captive labour is the modus operandi -which can
change over time. If the labour was not captive -it could not be
considered enslaved and would not deliver better returns than free
labour.
Well, before you start making up your own definitions for words
willy-nilly, to force them into a situation where they don't fit with
normal usage, you need to think a little about the nonstandard
definition you are proposing.
From an economic perspective, it is the same as slavery. The
implementation as is traditionally defined -isn't the same. There are
no whips or nets involved. The employer doesn't beat up slaves -but it
does form a captive labour market from an economic perspective. They
just remind the slaves of their status as captive labour by way of
legal clauses enacted by the US govt and something that is to be taken
care of by the INS/law enforcement. For H1Bs -the reminder comes subtly
coz they are well educated and can return home in the worst case. For
illegals from mexico, the reminder comes bluntly. Even illegals aren't
enslaved by your definition. But ask any and all of them, not a single
one of them will deny that they live in the shadows under threat of
deportation should the employer inform law enforcement about their not
doing a good job. The law enforcement which will take them to task is
the same one that is finding it difficult to locate them as long as
their employers are happy with their work. Im talking of 12 million
people as evidence of my claim and its not something that can be
refuted so easily..
Post by alexy
Using your definition, every executive who has an incentive plan with
"golden handcuff" provisions is a slave, since they lose the right to
that money if they leave the current employer (just as an H-1B would
suffer economic loss if they left their current employer and had to
move back home). In fact, everyone participating in a remitment or
Not exactly. The golden handcuff is an incentive to stick with an
employer. But a conflict with the visa sponser jeopardizes one's legal
status to seek alternative employment or be physically present in the
US. I have broken golden handcuffs and taken up alternative employment
and it kind of compensated me for the loss incurred. It didn't
endanger my legal status and or my right to seek alternative employment
which I consider suitable. In India, one doesn't have to earn the right
to change employers or be physically present by working from an
employer. The right comes by default -not just to citizens but even to
foreigners on a work permit.
Your work permits for foreigners are totally unrestricted? That's
weird. And totally contradicts what was found by the US Committee on
Firstly, you are talking of political refugees and Im talking of work
permit holders in India.
Secondly, the US govt's statements need not represent the truth. To
convince me of the statute, you would need to point me to the Indian
govt's statements.
Thirdly, I can tell you that lots of refugees in India do work legally.
Tibetans are employed by the Indian army. I have come across Iranian
refugees [escaping the cultural revolution] working in some Indian govt
departments too. India is like a Noah's ark for people fleeing
religious and political persecution. I can count parsis (unconverted
Iranians), armenian and syrian christians, tibetans and burmese
people, hippies/drug addicts disowned by their society from the west,
semetic jews as some of the people who migrated to India -never to
return or to to flee persecution. The oinly community that didn't
integrate but was segregated was muslims (both native and central
asian/arab) and thats because of a culture clash/doctrine for forcible
conversion.
Post by alexy
:Right to Earn a Livelihood India did not permit most refugees to work,
:open bank accounts, rent houses, or run businesses. Although some
:Myanmarese refugees worked in the informal sector, they did so without
:the protection of the law and were subject to arrest, detention, and
:deportation. Refugees reported workplace violations including harassment
:by Indian nationals, unpaid overtime, and sexual and gender-based violence.
there are always businesses and people in authority who want to take
advantage of refugees. The statute and the general public is clear that
all individuals will be treated at par. In the US, one can buy a green
card by becoming an investor. In India, either the govt will grant
citizenship for free or will not grant no matter what one is willing to
pay. Most of those who become citizens happen to be v poor or
penniless. Neither does the govt nor do the people gain anything by
their becoming citizens and its essentially a hand out because the
situation in their own country is bad. In contrast, the US is stinking
rich and yet they will grant green card either after working for it, or
on investing or as a national interest waiver i.e some technocrat
brings value to the table and that will help to improve the std of
living of the citizenry. So, its always because there is something to
be obtained and its like a trade and not a hand out.
Post by alexy
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
In contrast, the US govt has created a
legislation so that workers earn their bearings aka liberation by
contributing to an employer. Even the green card process requires
employer to certify that green card applicant has contributed to the
business and consequently to the economy before he can be rewarded with
a green card. Further, H1B visa sponsor can veto transfer or recommend
to the INS to deport a person coz he didn't leave on good terms. The
INS has powers to deport any H1B applicant on 24 hrs notice without
reason and termination of employment (if informed to the INS) does
require H1b visa holder to leave within 24 hrs of being terminated
-failing which the visa holder would be in violation of the law and
subject to punishment/forcible removal. All of this is legal jargon
which can be verified and which I am not exagerrating. The thing that
is not mentioned is that the matter will become relevant only if the
employer has business reasons to do so.
Having to play by rules you don't like, and might not have had the
sense to determine before you agreed to them, does not constitute
What i am sating is not that you should change the rules to my liking,
but inform every potential newcomer that this is what the rules say
both explicitly and implicitly by way of caveats/loopholes etc. I have
decided that i do not like your rules and so do not want to go to the
US on an H1B under any circumstance. It doesn't mean I want you to
change the rules for me, or that I have a grudge against americans for
having constructed rules to benefit them.
Post by alexy
slavery. If I go to France on a tourist visa, I don't have a "civic
right" to earn a living, but that doesn't make me a slave.
because ur going as a tourist. If you go to work, and they tie you up
in regulations -that is a different case.
Post by alexy
I think a lot of people would be sympathetic to a discussion of the
unfairness or ill effects of the rules of H-1B. Many or most of them
will say "tough shit" in response to whining about having to abide by
the rules under which you accepted the visa and calling this
requirement that you abide by the rules you agreed to "slavery".
If I accept to go on an h1B today after knowing everything about it, I
will not be whining about it.Im sayign those who don't know what the
regulations imply ought to be told about it. If you do not wish to
profit by landing them ina trap aka slavery, you shouldn't have a
problem informing them upfront that this is what it boils down to.
Conversely, if americans want to keep mum and bring in H1Bs and then
let them figure out the facts -that indicates a desire to benefit from
slavery. And by slavery, i mean creating a captive labour market. Its
captive in practice but doesn't appear to be so in theory coz ur
politicians have done a good job of wording legislatio.

regards
-kamal
Post by alexy
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
Straydog
2006-08-11 19:16:18 UTC
Permalink
Financial Times, Aug 10, 2006, page 3 (big article)

-------------------------------

title "Drought-stricken Europe verging on 'natural disaster'"

Data Temp Rainfall

UK up 2.9 C down 27%

Nethers up 4.9 C down 64%

Belgium up 5.9 C down 35%

Germany up 5.2 C down 42%

Poland up 4.5 C down 72%

France not given 10% higher overal, but down 50% july

Italy up 2-3C heterogeneous, but down 10-50%

Spain hotst m for 35 yrs, down 30%

--------

Plants will grow at higher temperatures, but not without water. Anyone for
crash irrigation projects? Article says crop shortfalls are going to be
massive (around 20% +/-).

Next question: how much heat-induced Oxygen depletion in water will cause
fish kills (poof, there goes the seafood industry).
Straydog
2006-08-10 20:19:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you
keep talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its
practice of slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is
in Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
The slavery in Indian rug factories is against the law -and requires
better enforcement.
Slavery in the USA is supported implicitly by the law. Your politicians
receive money for ensuring that there is a steady stream of manpower on
restricted rights. If americans have a heterogenity of opinion about
doing away with illegals, H1Bs and numerous other workers on restricted
rights -it is because they are not willing to disown the benefits of
slavery in entirety.
Restricted rights is not slavery. H1Bs are free to return to India.
it is slavery because while in the US, you do not have the same rights
as you had in India
You can go back any time you want to India and get those Indian rights.
Slaves can't do that.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
or americans have in their own country.
It is our _guaranteed_ and _real_ birthright, why should you think you
should get the same thing?
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
To return to India, one has to dispose off all immovable property like
a car, furniture etc..
Nah, you can just abandon it and leave anytime.

If the employer provides relocation -that is
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
fine. Otherwise, there is a lumpsum to be written off in going back.
And given that H1B salaries are not all that great, most will be
inclined to return only as a last resort. If they were told about
restricted rights before coming to the US, they have a better chance of
opting out and probably will.
You can also very easily have chosen to become an illegal and stay as long
as you want, just like all the other illegals over here.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
The key pt is to tell every potential visa holder to the US that
the US govt is conniving with visa sponsors to perpetuate slavery.
Only stupid people believe this. 13% of people here now were born somplace
else, and 60% of those 13% are illegal.

Once
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
they know the govt that is supposed to uphold the law has other things
on its mind -they will be in a better position to take a decision.
The USA is basically a free ride for guys like you. 60% of foreigners here
are illegal. Almost all have been illegal all the time they are here.
And, if the Hispanics get deported, they just come back.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Nope. Its pretty much a given that skin colour determines economic
status in the US barring a few exceptions like athletes, movie stars
etc.
An American coworker, an amateur sociologist, once told me that Americans
recognize 3 skin colors - green, white and black [; those with much money
being green people].
yeah -no doubt about that.
And, if you are illegal, there are lots of lawyers to help you become
legal, but you might go into debt.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
regards
-kamal
harmony
2006-08-21 18:59:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you
keep talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its
practice of slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is
in Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
The slavery in Indian rug factories is against the law -and requires
better enforcement.
Slavery in the USA is supported implicitly by the law. Your politicians
receive money for ensuring that there is a steady stream of manpower on
restricted rights. If americans have a heterogenity of opinion about
doing away with illegals, H1Bs and numerous other workers on restricted
rights -it is because they are not willing to disown the benefits of
slavery in entirety.
Restricted rights is not slavery. H1Bs are free to return to India.
it is slavery because while in the US, you do not have the same rights
as you had in India
You can go back any time you want to India and get those Indian rights.
Slaves can't do that.
actually, even the illegals have all kinds of basic rights in usa. eg, in
south texas, it is quite common for the illegals to sue hospitals and
doctors for "faulty health care" despite the fact that the illegals
routinely receive health care free.

i suspect the hindus don't have good lawyers to help them with "slavery"
issues.
but why are the hindus complaining, anyway? just look at india's own govt
that is playing possum with the people ravaged by flood just this week and
the last week. the indian govt is letting its own people die of hunger and
thirst. it is renegging on its promise to give moeny-aid to the affected
states. i think the term "indian giver" originated in india.
Straydog
2006-08-21 19:14:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by harmony
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you
keep talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its
practice of slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is
in Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
The slavery in Indian rug factories is against the law -and requires
better enforcement.
Slavery in the USA is supported implicitly by the law. Your politicians
receive money for ensuring that there is a steady stream of manpower on
restricted rights. If americans have a heterogenity of opinion about
doing away with illegals, H1Bs and numerous other workers on restricted
rights -it is because they are not willing to disown the benefits of
slavery in entirety.
Restricted rights is not slavery. H1Bs are free to return to India.
it is slavery because while in the US, you do not have the same rights
as you had in India
You can go back any time you want to India and get those Indian rights.
Slaves can't do that.
actually, even the illegals have all kinds of basic rights in usa. eg, in
south texas, it is quite common for the illegals to sue hospitals and
doctors for "faulty health care" despite the fact that the illegals
routinely receive health care free.
And, of course, we have lots of lawyers who will be happy to sue anyone
with money no matter who the victim is, either.

But, yes, I've heard tons of stories about people just dumping themselves
into the USA and helping themselves to all kinds of free services and lots
of this is unavailable to the citizens. See also below...
Post by harmony
i suspect the hindus don't have good lawyers to help them with "slavery"
issues.
I think, but I'm not sure, but Dalits are not even _in_ the caste system,
and thus, traditionally get zero "recognition" that even the lowest caste
Hindus get. I'm not sure where the non-Hindus who are also non-Dalits (ie.
the Muslims, Budhists, etc.) fit into the socio-economic matrix, but I
hear the Hindu nationalists have a higher-than-normal opinion of
themselves.
Post by harmony
but why are the hindus complaining, anyway? just look at india's own govt
that is playing possum with the people ravaged by flood just this week and
the last week. the indian govt is letting its own people die of hunger and
thirst. it is renegging on its promise to give moeny-aid to the affected
states. i think the term "indian giver" originated in india.
Hah! "Indian" is a funny word. It can be applied to many more peoples than
I originally was taught. As a kid, "indian" with a small "i" was one of
those savage "redskins" running around the USA before "white people" came
from Europe, but Indians from (real) India got a capital I, for respect.
My, we have come a long way.

I just wonder if citizens can get the respect that they deserve in terms
of needing a job (if they are willing to work) since one just about can't
live without money, thus the money has to come from somewhere since
goods/services are not free (like in pre-civilized society where eveyrone
was a hunter/gatherer).

Of course I have been trying for some time, mostly unsuccessfully, to get
Kamal Prasad to understand that there are other valid and reasonable
viewpoints to various world situations. I'll meet almost anyone, on almost
any topic, halfway.
alexy
2006-08-11 12:38:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
To return to India, one has to dispose off all immovable property like
a car, furniture etc.. If the employer provides relocation -that is
fine. Otherwise, there is a lumpsum to be written off in going back.
And given that H1B salaries are not all that great, most will be
inclined to return only as a last resort. If they were told about
restricted rights before coming to the US, they have a better chance of
opting out and probably will.
I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe that all the folks coming
here on H-1Bs are as stupid as the India-bashers and you make them out
to be. Packing up and moving half-way around the world without finding
out the rules under which you would be working? How stupid could
someone get? Do you really think there are many H-1B's that dumb?
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-08-11 14:07:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by alexy
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
To return to India, one has to dispose off all immovable property like
a car, furniture etc.. If the employer provides relocation -that is
fine. Otherwise, there is a lumpsum to be written off in going back.
And given that H1B salaries are not all that great, most will be
inclined to return only as a last resort. If they were told about
restricted rights before coming to the US, they have a better chance of
opting out and probably will.
I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe that all the folks coming
here on H-1Bs are as stupid as the India-bashers and you make them out
to be. Packing up and moving half-way around the world without finding
out the rules under which you would be working? How stupid could
someone get? Do you really think there are many H-1B's that dumb?
I don't know if they have to be dumb to believe that things will work
out just fine for them.
Most H1Bs from my experience think of the USA as depicted in hollywood
movies. They would expect tall skyscrappers, zero poverty, blondes
floating around in bikini etc..
They really need to be made aware that the US govt creates legislation
to suit a business purpose and it has other things on its mind besides
law enforcement. I doubt if any of them knew of K street when they took
a flight to the US. I didn't - for sure.
Regardless of whether it is in their best interest to stay out of the
US, how can you have 2 sets of opinion -one saying that H1Bs take away
jobs and other saying they shouldn't be discouraged or warned about
coming in to the US?

regards
-kamal
Post by alexy
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
alexy
2006-08-11 15:55:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by alexy
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
To return to India, one has to dispose off all immovable property like
a car, furniture etc.. If the employer provides relocation -that is
fine. Otherwise, there is a lumpsum to be written off in going back.
And given that H1B salaries are not all that great, most will be
inclined to return only as a last resort. If they were told about
restricted rights before coming to the US, they have a better chance of
opting out and probably will.
I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe that all the folks coming
here on H-1Bs are as stupid as the India-bashers and you make them out
to be. Packing up and moving half-way around the world without finding
out the rules under which you would be working? How stupid could
someone get? Do you really think there are many H-1B's that dumb?
I don't know if they have to be dumb to believe that things will work
out just fine for them.
Okay, how about pathetically naive.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Most H1Bs from my experience think of the USA as depicted in hollywood
movies. They would expect tall skyscrappers, zero poverty, blondes
floating around in bikini etc..
They really need to be made aware that the US govt creates legislation
to suit a business purpose and it has other things on its mind besides
law enforcement. I doubt if any of them knew of K street when they took
a flight to the US. I didn't - for sure.
Regardless of whether it is in their best interest to stay out of the
US, how can you have 2 sets of opinion -one saying that H1Bs take away
jobs and other saying they shouldn't be discouraged or warned about
coming in to the US?
regards
-kamal
Post by alexy
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.
anon
2006-08-12 02:33:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by alexy
I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe that all the folks coming
here on H-1Bs are as stupid as the India-bashers and you make them out
to be. Packing up and moving half-way around the world without finding
out the rules under which you would be working? How stupid could
someone get? Do you really think there are many H-1B's that dumb?
the downsides to the h1b employee are almost never mentioned in the media.
even today, a search on google almost never shows any articles to warn h1s
of what awaits them. the media survives on selling dreams, just as fake as
the american (debt slave) dreams. to find the downsides before coming to the
US, one would need to contact a US lawyer, or some on h1. both are usually
difficult.

read the fine print or be screwed - one learns this on coming to the US.
Straydog
2006-08-10 12:23:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
I won't deny anything of what Arundhati has written. But since you keep
talking of dalits as an excuse for the US to continue its practice of
slavery,
Well, we've been over this before and the fact is that the slavery is in
Indian rug factories, today, and there is no slavery in the USA. As
The slavery in Indian rug factories is against the law -and requires
better enforcement.
Sometime, if ever, decades and decades from now.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Slavery in the USA is supported implicitly by the law.
There is no de facto slavery in the USA.

Your politicians
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
receive money for ensuring that there is a steady stream of manpower on
restricted rights.
And, a lot of it comes from Indian lobbyists who are happy to see all that
USD coming into India. And, it helps them keep Indian wages down, too.

If americans have a heterogenity of opinion about
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
doing away with illegals, H1Bs and numerous other workers on restricted
rights -it is because they are not willing to disown the benefits of
slavery in entirety.
And, we don't have very good enforcement of anti-illegal laws, either.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Straydog
another matter of fact, it was only recently that child labor was outlawed
you your country.
Indentured labour was outlawed maybe 50 yrs back -but recently, the
govt came out with specific legislation to prosecute individuals hiring
child labour in specific circumstances.
All that I read, there is no enforcement.

Labour when free, is labour and
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
not slavery. You need to understand the difference between child labour
and child slavery.
You need to understand that probably the children in India, besides being
malnourished, are NOT getting the money that they work for. AND, child
labor is not in the child's interest.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Child labor is not necessarily slavery any more than adult labor is
necessarily slavery.
it boils down to whether the govt has restricted civic rights of
individuals or not. Whether the labour is below age 12 or 18 is not
relevant to the case.
It boils down to whether the govt looks the other way instead of looking
for crimes to prosecute. Bribery and corruption is rampant in India.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Straydog
So, in fact, it is YOUR country that has a long way to
go yet.
Sure, but how? When (Chief Minister) Chandrababu Naidu threatened to
prosecute parents who sent their children to work rather than to school, he
got an adverse reaction from those parents and their supporters and was
forced to back down. Governments can't enforce child labor laws in an
environment where it looks like vote blocs will unseat any government that
tries to enforce the law.
yeah -people send their children to work because they are poor, not
because they dislike them or because they are lesser humans or because
the govt is conniving with businesses to perpetuate slavery i.e. hold
them back against their will.
And, so, a big fraction of the country does not want to change.

I have even seen a shop keeper tell a kid
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
working in a shop that if he doesn't work properly -he will tell his
father about it. You can find lots of children working in India -doing
mostly menial work in return for money. To change that, you need better
employment oppurtunities for their guardians.
YOU can tell them that.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Straydog
I have read about many of the protests against your "reservations" by the
higher castes. Its just fine with me if you want to have a few decades of
social upheaval just like we did with "civil rights" and "affirmative
action". Maybe someday some good will come out of it and maybe there will
reservations are not a means to bring civil rights to lower caste
people. They are a ploy to get votes by pitting lower caste people
against upper caste people.
Oh, you can always come up with a different distraction to change the
subject.

The folks who advocate it are either
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
politicians who want votes -or people who want to benefit from the same
i.e. get a free ride on the basis of 3000 yrs of exploitation.
And, other people in the country want to sweep a lot of dust under the rug
instead of changing a wrong to a right.

They
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
will talk of 3000 yrs back because the current situation does not
justify that compensation. And americans will talk of it so that they
can justify their own version of slavery.
All your own idea of keeping poor people poor.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
Post by Straydog
be more justice in India for more people. Right now, I think even black
people today are in a much better situation in the USA than Dalits in
India.
looks like a drastic statement. I saw Larry Kind LIve discuss the fact
that blacks are being turned away from voting booths, or their votes
not fully accounted for -either by a dysfunctional voting mechanism or
by keeping too few personnel so that they keep standing in line till
midnight and then walk away due to time out.
How many Dalits in India vote? Why?
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by me
How about the situation of whites? Have there been any observations or
claims that affirmative action for blacks caused some whites to become
cottonpickers or servants in black households?
Nope. Its pretty much a given that skin colour determines economic
status in the US barring a few exceptions like athletes, movie stars
etc.
I happen to have a personal friend who worked all his life, now retired,
in one of the welfare agencies in the USA and he told me, quite frankly,
that his agency had data that actually more white people were on welfare
than black people.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
regards
-kamal
V***@tcq.net
2006-08-10 04:10:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
India: Government Brutality, Injustice, and
Questionable Democracy.
A sellection of quotes from the book "An Ordinary Person's Guide to
Empire" by Arundhati Roy (the author of The God of Small Things, on the
NYT best seller list for 49 weeks, and she lives in New
Delhi); ISBN 0896087271, c 2004.
Parts of the book criticise US foreign policy, and other parts criticise
Indian foreign and domestic policy. All of the chapters were originally
given as speeches or were published as articles in major printed media.
The book contains hundreds of sources for details about which statements
were made. The book gives substantial detail about the internal political
and social components of modern India and India's problems and changes
while undergoing modernisation. At one point the author identifies fascist
themes in some government policy and especially in connection with
globalization. The book is easy to read and contains a great deal of
information about the political situation in India, today. If you are a
corporate goon-parasite, then all this doesn't matter. If you care about
democracy, ethics, morals, and people, then read on.
page 12
"According to the State, when victims refuse to be victims, they become
terrorists and are dealt with as such. They're either killed or arrested
under POTA (Prevention of Terrorism Act). In states like Orissa, Bihar,
and Jharkhand, which are rich in mineral resources and, therefore,
vulneralble to ruthless corporations on the hunt, hundreds of villagers,
including minors, have been arrested under POTA and are being held in jail
without trial. Some states have special police battalions for
'anti-development' activity. This is quite apart from the other use that
POTA is being put to--terrorizing Muslims, particularly in states
like Jammu and Kashmir and Gujarat. The space for genuine nonviolent civil
disobediance is atrophying. In the era of corporate globalization, poverty
is a crime, and protesting against further impoverishment is terrorism. In
teh era of the War on Terror, poverty is being slyly conflated with
terrorism." I have sellected just a few passages to show the message that
this book offers and that it is important to everyone, not just India or
Indians.
***
"Vast parts of the country are already more or less beyond the control of
the Indian state--Kashmir, the North East, large parts of Madhya Pradesh,
Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand."
***
"The real issue is that the privatization of essential infrastructure is
essentially undemocratic. The real issue is the towering mass of
incriminating evidence against big dams. The real issue is the fact that
over the last fifty years in India alone big dams have displaced more
than 33 million people.... The real issue is the fact that the Supreme
Court of India ordered the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam to
proceed even though it is aware that it violates the fundamental rights to
life and livelihood of the citizens of India."
I should point out that dam construction and other Army Corps of Engineer
projects in the USA have been seriously criticised by environmentalists in
the USA at least as far back as 50 years ago. Many dam construction
projects in the USA have been declared failures and Jared Diamond, in his
book "Collapse" mentioned at least one US dam that was blown up to restore
water flows back to their original nature without loss of non-existent
benefits but with the restoration of the fishing industry in the area.
"Never mind that forty years ago, the CIA, under President John F.
Kennedy, orchestrated a regime change in Baghdad. In 1963, after a
succesful coup, the Ba'ath party came to power in Iraq. Using lists
provided by the CIA, the new Ba'ath regime systematically eliminated
hundreds of doctors, teachers, lawyers, and political figures known to be
leftists [reference given]. An entire intellectual community was
slaughtered. (The same technique was used to massacre hundreds of
thousands of people in Indonesia and East Timor.[reference given])....In
1980...[the US said] 'We see no fundamental incompatibility of
interests between the United States and Iraq [reference given].'"
"In South Africa, after three hundred years of brutal domination of the
black majority by a white minority through colonialism and apartheid, a
nonracial, multi-party democracy came to power in 1994. It was a
phenomenal acheivement. Within two years of coming to power, the African
National Congress had genuflected with no caveats to the Market God. Its
massive program of structural adjustment, privatization, and
liberalization has only increased the hideous disparities between the
rich and the poor. Official unemployment among blacks has increased from
forty percent to fifty percent since the end of Apartheid [reference
given]. The corporatization of basic services-- electricity, water, and
housing-- has meant that ten million South Africans, almost a quarter of
the population, have been disconnected from water and electricity
[reference given]."
Now how does propaganda work?
"...Clear Channel Communications is the largest radio station owner in the
country. It runs more than twelve hundred channels, which together
account for nine percent fo the market [reference given]. When hundreds of
thousands of American citizens took to the streets to protest against
the war on Iraq, Clear Channel orgaized pro-war patriotic "Rallies for
America" across the country [reference given]. It used its radio stations
to advertise the events and then sent correspondents to cover them as
though they were breaking news."
It should be noted that consolidation in the broadcast radio and TV
business continues, today. Same for the book publishing business. Soon,
only a few entities will control all media.
This deals with Hindu nationalism. Many passages in the book talk about
this with parallels with the development of Nazi power in Germany in the
1930s.
"On August 15, 2003, Independence Day he [Cheif Minister of Gujarat,
Narendra Modi] hoisted the Indian flag before thousands of cheering
people. In a gesture of menacing symbolism, he wore the black RSS
cap--which proclaims him as a member of the Hindu nationalist guild that
has not been shy of admiring Hitler and his methods [reference
given]."
"One hundred and thirty million Muslims--not to mention the other
minorities, Dalits, Christians, Sikhs, Adivasis--live in India under the
shaddow of Hindu nationalism."
Additional text documenting thousands of people killed and hundreds of
thousands of people displaced by Indian police.
"Gandhi's Salt March was not just political theater. When, in a simple act
of defiance, thousands of Indians marched to the sea and made their own
salt, they broke the salt tax laws."
"The U.S. government used the lies and disinformation generated around the
September 11 attacks to invade no just one country, but two.... The Indian
government uses the same strategy not with other countries, but against
its own people. Over the last decade the number of people who have been
killed by the police and security forces runs into the thousands. Recently
several Bombay policemen spoke openly to the press about how many
'gangsters' they had eliminated on 'orders' from their senior officers
[reference given]. Andhra Pradesh chalks up an average of about two
hundred 'extremists' in 'encounter' deaths a year [reference given]. In
Kashmir in a situation that almost amounts to war, an estimated eighty
thousand people have been killed since 1989. Thousands have simply
'disappeared' [reference given]. According to the records of the
Association of Parents of Disappeared People (APDP), more than three
thousand people were killed in 2003, of which four hundred and sixty-
three were soldiers [reference given]."
The text goes on to say things are getting worse.
"Fourty-seven percent of India's children below three suffer from
malnutrition, forty-six percent are stunted [reference given]."
"Today, an average rural family eats about one hundred killograms [about
220 lbs.] less food in a year than it did in the early 1990s [refernce
given]."
"But in urban India, wherever you go--shops, restaurants, railway
stations, airports...--you have TV monitors in which election promises
have already come true. India's Shining, Feeling Good."
The thing that is happening is that much infrastructure (eg. water
supplies, electricity, transport, telecommunications, health services,
education, etc, that the government was "supposed to hold in trust for the
people it represents, assets that have been built and maintained with
public money over decades--are sold by the state to private corporations."
Guess where that leads?
The book ends with a short glossary of terms, names, etc., that define or
explain political parties, important people, important historical
events, and a long list of information sources (21 pages), and an index.
If you want to see how globalization is affecting the so-called
"developing countries" this is one good book to start with.
thanks straydog for all of this good info. i to have posted that a
free market is not natural, and that it is enforced by brutal
coersion(brute force for the benefit of a few).
it is the neo-liberal way, they are not to be confused by american
liberalism, these cretins are a mixture of
aristocrats/fascists/totalitarians/imperialists/racists, they are
hiding in huge numbers(almost all members) in the republicon party, and
to some extent about 1/3rd of the democratic party. globalism is not
natural, it destroys democracy, and it undermines a countries
constitution, and soveirnity. turning almost all decisions over to
corporations. but some form of trade is to some extent natural.
Straydog
2006-07-21 13:09:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Old Pif
end belongs to one of the stable themes. A classical example of that is
the Goodwin law which is a universal attractor for any discussion. For
our group the stable topics are Indian supremacy, stupid management and
the decline of the Western civilization.
...not to mention false ideas of the origin of wealth, intellect and
everything good as inherently belonging to the master race. Did anyone
from India ever suggest that Indians are superior?
Anyone who looks into the archives of these newgroups will find many
statements by you that discredit "Americans" as well as anything
Americans, and you have made many statements saying Indians are more
productive and sometimes even do better work. On top of that, practially
all of your posts have neglected the other 2 billion people in the world
who are neither Indian nor American.

I would only go so
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
far as to suggest that comparable manpower can be found in India, and
it costs a lot less to hire a person of a given calibre in India than
in the US.
Only to the credit of the exchange rate and besides that, most of your
people are still living in dust and my opinion is that it will continue to
be that way for a long time. One day in the future China will eat India.
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
regards
-kamal
Kamal R. Prasad
2006-07-21 13:36:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Straydog
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
Post by Old Pif
end belongs to one of the stable themes. A classical example of that is
the Goodwin law which is a universal attractor for any discussion. For
our group the stable topics are Indian supremacy, stupid management and
the decline of the Western civilization.
...not to mention false ideas of the origin of wealth, intellect and
everything good as inherently belonging to the master race. Did anyone
from India ever suggest that Indians are superior?
Anyone who looks into the archives of these newgroups will find many
statements by you that discredit "Americans" as well as anything
depends on what you mean by dis-credit. I never tried to convince
anybody that any of the achievements of americans in the field of S&T
are not for real, other than saying the landing on moon couldn't have
taken place [coz it has never been attempted by anybody else due to the
technological problems involved]. The US had produced lots of
inventors/inventions and if you believe that white-skinned people from
the other side of the atlantic -along with you, comprise the master
race, I would agree that there have been a disproportionate number of
such inventors on both side of the pond in the post-industrial era,
There hasn't been an Indian equivalent of Einstein (who btw fled the US
for being ostracized) or Isaac Newton. But to say that anyone belonging
to a certain race/nationality has got to be of good calibre is
something of an exagerration -commonly used by those who are very much
in need of a free ride.
Most of my dis-crediting is wrt fraud(strong dollar policy), theft
(of mid-east oil) and murder of civilians for the sake of it, the
practice of slavery or racism or soon-to-come liquidation or some such
thing. I don't intend to use these criticisms to take away credit for
any inventions that have come about from the US.
Post by Straydog
Americans, and you have made many statements saying Indians are more
productive and sometimes even do better work. On top of that, practially
all of your posts have neglected the other 2 billion people in the world
who are neither Indian nor American.
I haven't neglected the other 2 billion people (actually 4+ billion)
-just that I do not have first hand information about other economies
to make a statement and defend it when faced with a hostile audience.
Post by Straydog
I would only go so
Post by Kamal R. Prasad
far as to suggest that comparable manpower can be found in India, and
it costs a lot less to hire a person of a given calibre in India than
in the US.
Only to the credit of the exchange rate and besides that, most of your
people are still living in dust and my opinion is that it will continue to
if they don't acquire purchasing power, they will continue to live in
dust. But it looks like with free enterprise, we just might witness
organic growth in the domestic industry.
Post by Straydog
be that way for a long time. One day in the future China will eat India.
You mean militarily? I dunno how they will cope with the numerous
militias that the govt is battling. Its like americans trying to take
control or assuming they have done so -after defeating the Iraqi army
in conventional warfare.

regards
-kamal
Maulana Sattian
2006-07-21 05:12:24 UTC
Permalink
28 or 228 of jero percent is still jero...

here is original 100 percent Indian invented, manufactured and
promoted vehicle.

Loading Image...
Post by TwistyCreek
Sunday, 16 July , 2006, 12:09
New Delhi: Passenger car exports from India jumped by 27.97 per cent in the first quarter of the fiscal 2006-07 on the back of impressive figures from Korean car major Hyundai Motors along with car market leader Maruti Udyog and Tata Motors.
Overall auto exports from the country also registered a healthy growth of 27.32 per cent at 2,47,847 units during the quarter, which also witnessed overseas shipments of motorcycles registering a whopping 45.30 per cent jump while that of scooters, fell by 42.89 per cent.
According to figures released by the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM), passenger car exports from India in the April-June period this fiscal stood at 49,132 units as against 38,393 units in the corresponding fiscal previous year.
Infy's silver jubilee smash: A special
Leading the export pack was Hyundai Motor India Ltd, which clocked a total of 30,842 units during the quarter as against 24,372 units in the same quarter a year ago, up 26.54 per cent.
Maruti Udyog also managed to improve its exports performance by 12.93 per cent at 7,544 units in the quarter as against 6,680 units in the corresponding period previous year. Tata Motors also increased its shipments to 4,865 units from 3,292.
http://samachar.com/openbin/redirect_new.vs?H/20060716/walletwatch_business/1,http://sify.com/finance/fullstory.php?id=14250589&headline=Car~exports~surge~28%,~bikes~zoom~45%
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...