I have a few things to say in response to your posts so far--
I have mainly restricted myself to Indian side of philanthropy only. I have not commented about Buffet or Gates. please see my posts.
- dated 28 march 2011 2.32 pm- the article in question posted.
-dated 28 march 2011 8.49 pm
- dated 28 march 9.22 pm
- dated 29 march 10.06 am
- dated 29 march 9.58 pm
-dated 29 march 10.43 pm
-dated 29 march 10.48 pm
8 ) viewtopic.php?p=1057854#p1057854
-dated 30 march 3.38 pm
-dated 28 march 9.31 pm in Indian Interests thread.
-dated 28 march 9.33 pm in Indian Interests thread.
-dated 29 march 9.58 pm in Indian Interets thread.
-dated 29 march 2011 10.10 pm in Indian Interests thread.
I am sure you would like to clarify it. I take it that you might have missed reading it. If you feel I have not done so on my part I will clarify it.
Unanswered questions from your side-
1) You have commentated on both sides( Indians and americans) - Indians with out back up. You dont accept google or wikipedia. But you dont give your sources about how you came to the conclusion that Indians in question do not do philanthropy.
2) I asked you if you accept Indians do philanthropy- you did not answer it.
3) I have asked you the sources to back up your claim that the said Indians did not give their wealth-something to back up your statements.
3) You did not read the fine print of Bains pdf you mentioned. I wanted you to highlight it. It is only 6 pages or so. Instead you only highlighted the big numbers hiding the rest. In this context I asked you. But you did not want to do it.
4)In all your posts you keep talking about author (and other brfites)denigrating Buffet and Gates. I have been talking more of Indian side of it. My only contention was the author did not denigrate them. It could be a difference in perception.I have mentioned that I do not know much about these aspects amd went by your posts about the americans.
But you did not do it, instead you pooh poohed the Indians which I thought was in distaste.
5)You pooh poohed the author in saying that Buffet and Gates do not have tax havens, but did not give sources to back it up. But instantly said that Indians have tax havens.
6)you did not give answers/sources to the very statements that you made to authenticate it.
7) I commented about you behaving like a MUTU ( with a simile to highlight the non seriousness of it) is because of the reasons mentioned above- you were pretty strong in saying Buffet and Gates were philanthorpists but not Indians. It is well known that Indians were philanthorpists also. Check the fine print in Bains PDF which you believe in. Only problem is that the Bains PDF does not talk about past in India except in indirect way.
8 ) I am commneting for the first time on americans here with backing of data- The bains pdf which you mentioned, but failed to say more on it. US foundations play a critical role thanks to the country's tax laws. Please read it and post the important points it. This is because you did not mention the full report -you posted only what you wanted to see and hide the rest from us despite me asking you. Also mention the unique Indian problems in it.
9) About google and wikipedia- Bains pdf has sources which are on google and the pdf is also on google. Then how can we not mention these as sources.
It is really mindboggling your way.
Last but not the least-
when some one says something on an open forum one should back it up or say the inability to do so. Both sides should learn from each other. One should not hammer his side of the story only and completely ignore the other side of the story.
There is no harm in saying if one cannot comment or accept it. It is a joy for everyone of us to learn from the other side and move on in life with greater understanding. we have to make internet friends- who knows we may meet in person someday. It will be nice to acknowledge and exchange pleasantries with each other.
Hope both of us understand each other and move on.