I am sure many of you might have already addressed this in the previous comments-which I haven't read so I am going to reiterate again about the ignotance of the writer. Meenakshi Radhakrishnan-Swami mentions in the first line that a few centuries ago Indians were rich, had bundant food and no worries. I can't believe an Indian would write that. Meenakshi, this is common knowledge that only the kings' household had all the money while the others were there to serve him and his lands. Haven't we all seen countless stories on those subjects on TV? Although this is irrelevant, but I have seen this kind of ignorance only in non-asian(READ:America) countries where people have asked me stupid questions like" are there stray cows on the street" "do kids stay with their parents after getting married" For god's sake YES!!! what kind of hole do these people live in?
RE:''indian history 101'' anyone?
by anup sharma on May 22, 2007 11:07 PM Permalink
Naina everything is relative. When author says that India was Bird of Gold a few centuries ago then it is not just an simple exaggeration. You know when Industrial Revolution was in its prime in late eighteenth century, India and China with out any of the fruits of Industrial Revolution together had a share of more than 50% in world trade with India herself cornering around 28% of that alone. Today this position is not even held by US of A. So you can easily imagine India's economic status in those days. If we talk about Per Capita Income then a country's mega cities is the best parameter to judge that. You will find innumerable accounts by first of the westerners when they arrived in India about how Calcutta was better than Paris or London of that time. Understood that income spread was not uniform but when you compare it with other Western nations of that time, India's situation was lot better than theirs. Just to end with a statement and this is no exaggeration (supported by BBC only), there was a time when rich is England were identified as ones who used to have tea in bone-china wares and used to wear good quality cotton.
RE:''indian history 101'' anyone?
by ravi kumar on May 22, 2007 04:09 PM Permalink
naina by acting oversmart you are not able to prove uor point. The author talks about gdp and not about the income distribution. and rajah maharajah may be super rich but there not tyranniccal rule you should understand that. if you see todays siotuation and try to intrapolate that 500-600 years back you might not get the complete picture because last few centuries indians have been slaves and very little progress. ya we do stay with their parents because we have rich cultural ethos doesn't mean that indians do have healthy sex life and some westerners are just ignorant. So nothing to get embarassed about. those people who ask such Q's shud firstly know that a basic function like sex also they had to be told by indians, leave spectrum of philosophy which has contributed to all major religions dominant today in the world. So just try looking at some good things and hope is infective believe me.
RE:''indian history 101'' anyone?
by naina kaur on May 23, 2007 08:13 AM Permalink
Ravi, by calling me oversmart just because I gave my opinion, you have proved you under-intelligence. But, you are right though. I am oversmart, smarter than you!
RE:''indian history 101'' anyone?
by dev dath on May 22, 2007 05:55 PM Permalink
which world u live ravi
what naina said is correct. the kings n theruling class had the money and when mckinsky talk about gdp and ndp and per cap income the averages dont matter
the average pci of uae , saudi, america is very high but do u think all get minimum that amt no mckinsky gives a rosy picture and makes people feel good about it because has to serve the masters when u bring out a feel good positive report the people get rubbed off with the positive aspect and they go invest in stock market, flats, land and when thereis a down turn the funds will take their money but leave the losses to the public
so we dont need a prediction from mckinsky , it is like astrology/palmistry we need a govt which is clear in its vision to set goals and make aaction plan and implement it
otherwise in 2025 we will have the same mess
what we have now
singapore, hongkong did not get mckinsky report done and after 20 years they didi not become what hey are today
