Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 20 Feb 2014 20:22

Sridhar

I have taken a quick look at the data posted by you and others and I fail to see the "worse" part as being claimed by you and as far as the ranking that you are posting I guess you are doing it personally on excel and putting that up here. No problem with that only one question, did you rank Gujarat with states equal in population/size ???

You say that On key measures of education and even income, the performance is sub-par. It is downright appalling in the case of education on multiple measures.. Whatever data has been posted by you I have surely failed to see the "sub-par" performance as being claimed by you and if that was so then I wonder why didn't the opposition which is braying for Modi's blood doesn't level the same allegation as you. To top that you are indirectly saying that people of Gujarat are fools to have voted Modi to power not once not twice but thrice without him performing and lying through his teeth as you claim.

All these are pretty tall "claims" which you make directly or indirectly but none of the data or anywhere in the national stage any organization has made such claims regarding Gujarat performance being "appalling" and "sub-par" regarding education. Obviously their is room for improvement but you are accusing Gujarat government of having done nothing and claiming everything under the sun. Yes such claims will require hard data so as to be able to stand scrutiny.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 20:25

Neela wrote:
Sridhar wrote:Neela,
You had pointed to his being elected. That was irrelevant. I agree that this is not any evidence of being a development champion because otherwise Laloo should qualify. Now you are saying that there are other metrics. So provide them, so that all of us can reduce our confirmatory biases. Deal?
You misunderstood.
Being elected 3 times + development efforts must be seen together. You are isolating causes and effects.
In other words, Modi has been re-elected and the state has shown improvements across several development parameters. The same cannot be said of Laloo , who incidentally has been convicted and went to jail. He cannot contest until 2019.

It is nobody's argument that Laloo is a development messiah. Not even his, I think.

The point is whether Modi is. At least so far, none of the numbers seem to support that. As I said, GSDP does, but we should examine that number too (and I will in the next couple of days). Other than that, what is the hard number any of you has seen - with the source being a credible and verifiable one. Not some statement of somebody's or some second hand report. But hard data with an original source. So far what little you and others have provided has not stood up to even a brief scrutiny, I am afraid.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Feb 2014 20:30

If BRF standards, on which ostensibly some members are shedding so many tears, were being followed, discussing NaMo repeatedly, despite, requests, rebukes and suggestions to the contrary by nearly all members would be considered blatant trolling.

The mods have clearly said, that since the pol threads are in gray zone they dont intended policing it to the most rigrous standards, however, it hardly means that the essential act of trolling stops being trolling.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 20 Feb 2014 20:34

Sridhar:

How many times will you burn the strawman?

Your claim is that because the "rank" of Gujarat dropped in some metric, Modi has not done a good job. No one doubts your stat; what people are questioning is its relevance in judging Modi's ability to be an effective administrator.

Now here is your reaction:

I have given you some data-points on how Gujarat has attacked some key problems, like the drop out rates among girls; but you chose to ignore that.

I have also asked you to look at overall central funding levels, the role of NGOs & churches, but you chose to ignore that.

I have asked you about even the basic definition of literacy used in the stats you cited (is a 30 yr old able to write his name literate); but you chose to ignore that.

Even a person with marginal intelligence can understand that education levels are strongly tied to financial well-being. Give a person a job, and his children will get educated. But you fail to see the connections.

Further, I personally question your motives: Modi's focus on building toilets is well known. But when I point out he investigated the root cause of girl drop-outs, and worked hard to build toilets for girls, you dismiss it as propaganda.

When a person continues to harp on some stat, while ignoring the context, or the dynamics of how a system operates, and ignore other's questions about a claim, AND continues to harp about how he is "right", he will get what he deserves: => Unadulterated Contempt.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 20 Feb 2014 20:38

Some useful resources regards to above

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 1#p1597681

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 20 Feb 2014 20:39

Sridhar

A bit dated report I will quote one specific part

Gujarat needs to do more on social sector: Montek Singh Ahluwalia; Narendra Modi retorts

Ahluwalia stated that Gujarat needs special attention towards its social sector performance so that it can commensurate with state's size of economy. "Gujarat is one of our better performing states. In terms of economic growth we have noted that the performance has been good in Gujarat," he added.
The Plan size was finalised here at a meeting between the Commission's Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia and Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi. The Planning Commission had approved a Plan outlay of Rs 51,000 crore for the 2012-13 for the state.

So if everything about Modi's claim is fake why is then the planning commission chief praising Gujarat government for good economic growth ??? I agree with the title of the article that more needs to be done but how come you are claiming that everything about Gujarat growth is bunkum ??? Do you claim to have more access to data than the planning commission chief ???

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 20:40

VikramS

On the specific issue of dropouts, I clearly said that I will look at the hard data and get back. Yet you lie and say that I am ignoring it, or that I have called it Modi's propaganda, when I have not. The posts are there for anybody to see on the previous page.

On other specific points, present some data. Any hard data on NGOs, central funding etc.

The rest of your post is worthless vitriol and I am going to ignore it.

Sanku: please take up any issues you have with moderation directly with the moderators. I have adhered to forum rules and moderator instructions, and will continue to do so even if others like yourself do not.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 20 Feb 2014 20:50

Sridhar:

Yes ignore it, as you ignore the connection between income levels and education....

Your exact words are : "but all we have in the link you have provided is Modi's word for it"

The way you construct that sentence pretty much shows your state of mind.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 20 Feb 2014 20:55

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/sli ... 607956.cms Nice

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 20 Feb 2014 21:01

Sridhar wrote:You might have some divine powers of mind deduction. I don't.

Pray do tell us about the connection between income and education and how they make any of the education related stats look better.

Sridhar: You do just need marginal levels of intelligence, not divine powers to understand how a family with a stable job is a lot more likely to be able to provide for good education to their children.

As others have said, the rank stat in itself is meaningless in inferring conclusions about Modi government's effectiveness; there are a lot of other variables including measurement bias which affects it.

But since you feel that understanding the connection between income & education requires divine intervention, I have serious doubts in your ability to interpret a statistical data-point.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 21:04

SagarG,

If you have a counterpoint about who the comparison is being made with, the onus is on you to provide the evidence for the counterpoint. We can discuss it then - if it is convincing, I will be happy to concede.

On what anybody says, I have found that it can be very misleading since they have their own motivations and contexts for saying it. On the other thread, I showed an example of how a renowned economist like Bibek Debroy can be economical with the truth (or the reporter reporting it can be). Rather than going by what Montek Singh or somebody else is saying, I try, as far as possible, to get to the answers using data from original sources. And no, I don't presume that Montek Singh always speaks the truth. Do you?

vivek.rao · Post by **vivek.rao** » 20 Feb 2014 21:04

Sridhar wrote:
Pray do tell us about the connection between income and education and how they make any of the education related stats look better.

Is this a joke or are you trying to be condescending?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Feb 2014 21:06

you folks might as well stop the Sridhar conversion drive here and harvest some other souls

under 1 man 1 vote its not worth having another fight on this thread to convert just one individual I think. if you resist the urge to get into to and fro contest the exchanges will die down.

disha · Post by **disha** » 20 Feb 2014 21:11

Singha'ji, what works on Sridhar will also work on "converted" delusional folks to be re-converted. So this is a strategic game. Request to play it out, as long as it does not get personal (except in the Nuclear thread

)

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Feb 2014 21:12

ok...I will radio back to #21 "wolves" blackjack sqdn in yelehanka to hold off on strategic nuclear weapons delivery mission. over n out.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 20 Feb 2014 21:12

Arjun wrote:
Sridhar wrote:I don't think this is anywhere close to being the kind of evidence that would convince anybody that Modi has done wonders with development in Gujarat. That is my point.
Sridhar, if you've had any experience at all in economic debates you would realize that the terms 'development' and 'growth' as used by Modi and by all economic right-wingers is primarily from the perspectives of economy, infrastructure, job creation & economic opportunities. There is a separate set of metrics normally classified under HDI which are the favourite of the Amartya Sen crowd - that includes metrics in education / healthcare that you are focused on. HDI growth has been proven to be correlated to economic strength but with a bit of a lag. So improvement in HDI parameters would generally take a few years to catch up with the growth in economic metrics.

This is a good point. I would also say that, experience tells us that HDI improvements don't happen by themselves but require some sort of political action. Same is the case, (though perhaps it is less political) for spreading of entrepreneurial opportunity in an equitable way.

If we look past the craziness and the corruption and the undue focus on individual personalities, perhaps we might explain AAP, and to some extent INC as representing the feelings of resentment and entitlement that frequently drive political action towards more equitable distribution of wealth.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 20 Feb 2014 21:23

Arjun wrote:
Sridhar wrote:The mods will decide who is trolling, not you. Please stop the attacks in the meantime.
Yes they will.

Let me state again that since you are the one challenging conventional wisdom you need to either (i) explain why you disagree with the list of parameters I have presented OR (ii) show that on the basis of these parameters Modi does not come out on top in comparison with other alternatives. This is straightforward logic. And yes, you would qualify as a troll, in my eyes, if you follow through on neither option.

Arjun, both your set of metrics and Sridhar's are accepted as standard by global bodies including UN, and economics fora. They also both appeal to common sense which is important. They complement each other. I find it hard to understand claims that only one set of metrics are valid.

Debaters' contributions will be more valuable if they learn to set their egos aside.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 21:24

VikramS:

The mind deduction part refers to your claim to be able to read my state of mind. Not to the education/income connection.

In any case, my point is that the income/education connection makes the stats look worse for Gujarat, not better.

KLNMurthy: I have not once disputed the validity of the measures that Arjun has mentioned. I have only asked him to provide credible data for these measures. He has been refusing to do that, and instead insisting that I accept that his measures are mainstream fimplication mine are not mainstream and are instead revisionist. And to provide his numbers for him. It is an absurd way to conduct a discussion.

I have said this before - I will examine the claims on those measures too. Or at least those measures where there is hard data and which are sensible to examine. you have to start somewhere, and I started with HDI since it already includes economic factors. It is a misconception that it is a social measure - it is an economic measure of development, with each component consisting of hard economic data. There is nothing fuzzy or non-economic about it. It was devised by economists to overcome some of the drawbacks of looking only at GDP growth. It is not perfect, but is a starting point. I have gone well beyond that as of now. Unless it is shut down, I intend to continue this analysis on the other thread. Not to prove that Modi's claims are false by any means possible. It is a hypothesis, I must admit, that not all the claims regarding his record in Gujarat will hold up to scrutiny. But I will explore the data to test the hypothesis. If there is any data point that goes against the hypothesis, I will not hesitate to share that as well. My record already shows that.

Finally, I will move my comments henceforth to the Narendra Modi thread, since it has partly moved there anyway and at least one of the mods has expressed that this thread should not continue as it is.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 20 Feb 2014 21:28

Sridhar

Funny that you self stamp your point as being the right one and then go on asking others to counter that point, this strategy of your's might work with other's but ain't going to fool me. None of the reports that you and other's have posted blame anywhere that the performance of Gujarat is "sub-par" and "appalling" as you claim to be and no national organization has come up with such a claim other than you and you are neither any authority of truth who has to be countered nor do you have any undeniable credibility that we have to swallow your point lock stock and barrel.

The onus is on you to prove that Gujarat's performance has been "sub-par" and "appalling" and nothing you have posted say's the same other than your own twisted conclusions.

You accuse other's of being "economical with truth" while at the same time doing the same thing by denying the rightful credit to Gujarat government for performing in areas like infrastructure, women safety, roads, non-stop electricity etc. etc. Instead you hang on to your pet biases and raise up strawmen argument regarding education when none of the reports suggest anything near to your accusation of "sub-par" and "appalling".

I will take the words of Planning Commission Chief over a stranger on internet ranting about his pet biases anyday and to add to that I trust the wisdom of the people of Gujarat that without some solid performance they wouldn't have elected the same person thrice. Obviously you will claim now that Montek is lying otherwise how else will you peddle your BS around huh ??? Funny thing that you are basing your argument on data given out by the same commission whose chief you are accusing of lying, that tells a lot of things about you.

If you have some "hard" data (as you so much love that thing) regarding what you claim and that being explicitly stated in that report then reply otherwise waste somebody else's time.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 20 Feb 2014 21:30

After seeing Sushma and AJ did this week I am not sure there are no more back stabbers in BJP for NM. Hope Amit Shah is careful in UP and feed back i am getting here is UP is quite a Hindu-Muslim voting this time cadidate selection is critical for wins. Life and death question now after losing CBN and TDP and some 25-30 seats in AP, every seat now counts.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 20 Feb 2014 21:37

25-30 seats in AP for BJP !!! Yeah sure

I don't remember seeing any report or survey giving anything like that, neither was there any news coming out from AP BJP unit about something like that.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 20 Feb 2014 21:39

Deleted

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 20 Feb 2014 21:41

I said with CBN. If nothing is being gained why NM is actively scouting for/attempting to rope in TDP gurus. Is it because he likes black and white beard of CBN. Sushma had spoiled this chance this week.

muraliravi · Post by **muraliravi** » 20 Feb 2014 21:41

Narayana Rao wrote:After seeing Sushma and AJ did this week I am not sure there are no more back stabbers in BJP for NM. Hope Amit Shah is careful in UP and feed back i am getting here is UP is quite a Hindu-Muslim voting this time cadidate selection is critical for wins. Life and death question now after losing CBN and TDP and some 25-30 seats in AP, every seat now counts.

Sir, with all due respect, what is 25-30 seats, i am seeing all over the place. Please, BJP WAS never going to win any seat in Andhra region anyway. CBN may have won 15/25, now he may win 10. So the loss at best is 5 seats. Next in Telangana, BJP was going to win at best 2-3 seats. I dont think that has changed much. If TRS merges with congress, then maybe we lost 7-8 seats that TRS can give NDA in a post poll scenario. But even that looks bleak at the moment, TRS may not merge after all. So why blow them 5 seat loss in Andhra and a possible 7-8 seat loss in Telangana into a 25-30 blunder. Moreover, what TRS will not do is not in BJP's hands at all.

Next, Sushma can go all over town and claim that it was only because of BJP, telangana bill was passed. Please do me a favour and look into the LS member list in the lok sabha site. BJP has its lowest tally in the last 20 years ( a meager 112 MP's) and congress at 202/206 seats. Do you really think that BJP could have stopped T formation. Just with UPA allies congress has 225-230 seats. If you add their usual B teams, they can easily pass the bill without BJP. Same in Rajya Sabha also.

Of course, BJP can take credit, but it is just a smoke screen. Congress can muster 272 MP's to pass any bill with BJP's support.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 20 Feb 2014 21:52

muraliravi wrote:If you add their usual B teams, they can easily pass the bill without BJP. Same in Rajya Sabha also.

Are you sure about RS saar cause I have always read the exact opposite that in RS BJP has the numbers to stall bills and that's why congress always talks with BJP before passing bills so that it doesn't get stalled in RS though I have never looked at the numbers.

EDIT :- You are right saar I looked at the numbers and congress can pass bills in RS without BJP's support.

muraliravi · Post by **muraliravi** » 20 Feb 2014 22:02

Sagar G wrote:
muraliravi wrote:If you add their usual B teams, they can easily pass the bill without BJP. Same in Rajya Sabha also.
Are you sure about RS saar cause I have always read the exact opposite that in RS BJP has the numbers to stall bills and that's why congress always talks with BJP before passing bills so that it doesn't get stalled in RS though I have never looked at the numbers.

EDIT :- You are right saar I looked at the numbers and congress can pass bills in RS without BJP's support.

http://164.100.47.5/Newmembers/partymemberlist.aspx

Majority in RS is 123. Congress has 72. Bodo-1, JKNC -2, JDU-9, BSP-15, IND (congress can get 6/9), JMM-1, LJP-1, Kerala Congress-1, NCP-6, Nominated (all 9 are pure congress chamchas), RJD-1, SP-9, Left -13, DMK-6

Even without SP, left and DMK, the rest add up to 52. SP, Left and DMK will support congress at the drop of a hat if needed. BJP with 47 seats is irrelevant here.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 20 Feb 2014 22:12

this debate is useless without really good data that can be interpreted easily without spending time keying them in spreadsheets.

perception is reality. perception is - modi has delivered on governance and development etc.

for me personally, i look at available options and believe modi to be the best available. so i support him, knowing fully well that i don't know him fully well, but enough to trust him to deliver what i think is good for nation.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 22:23

Sagar G wrote:to add to that I trust the wisdom of the people of Gujarat that without some solid performance they wouldn't have elected the same person thrice.

Let me address one specific point that many people make and that you have made above. So by extension you distrust the people of Bihar who elected Laloo thrice? Or the people of India as a whole, who voted the UPA to power twice in a row.? Or the other corollary of your post. People voted Laloo thrice, so his claims should be believed otherwise they would not have voted him? What kind of logic is this?

There is very little evidence for any of the claims being made. If they convinces you regardless, well and good. It does not convince me, and it is perfectly legitimate for me to share the results of whatever analysis I do. I am under no illusion that people who have made up their minds will be convinced by my arguments. But the fact that it is contrary to the common viewpoint of the forum does not make it illegitimate.

One last thing. I have not violated any forum rules - have not been abusive to anybody or called anybody any names. If you cannot be civil, please go ahead and ignore my posts. But stop the name calling and insulting words.

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 20 Feb 2014 22:30

You have provided very little data to convincingly prove that Modi has been a failure. It is similar to the argument over malnutrition data. You are also conveniently overlooking the numerous evidences provided on this forum for at least the last one year where numerous successes have been attributed to Gujrat under Modi.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 20 Feb 2014 22:31

Sridhar wrote:Let me address one specific point that many people make. So by extension you distrust the people of Bihar who elected Laloo thrice? Or the people of India as a whole, who voted the UPA to power twice in a row.? Or the other corollary of your post. People voted Laloo thrice, so his claims should be believed otherwise they would not have voted him? What kind of logic is this?

Hah a guy doing equal equal between Lalu and Modi is talking about logic

Modi has performance to show and faith of planning commission chief in the performance of Gujarat Lalu has chara and Rabri. Your desperation is now showing though nothing surprising about it.

Sridhar wrote:There is very little evidence for any of the claims being made. If that convinces you, well and good. It does not convince me, and it is perfectly legitimate for me to share whatever data/evidence I have on this thread on Narendra Modi. You can continue with your abuses and name calling.

You can continue to live in your own la la land of self righteousness and "hard" reports and good luck in trying to play the victim card.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 22:36

You are also conveniently overlooking the numerous evidences provided on this forum for at least the last one year

Without much hard data and without anybody really asking tough questions, frankly.

On my giving data - I have barely started the process. It was in response to a post by KaranM yesterday on the other thread. I did not initiate this - but I wanted to test some of his claims. And I have not predetermined the outcome of the analysis, as so many on the other side seem to do. I won't hide my prior biases, but I am looking at the data with an open mind. So far both the data I have looked at on my own, and data that a couple of others tried to provide to prove Modi's record (and which were, in both cases, shoddy attempt frankly and therefore very easy to demolish), have shown that the record is largely nothing spectacular at best, and quite bad at its worst.

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 20 Feb 2014 22:42

Sridhar wrote: Without much hard data and without anybody really asking tough questions, frankly.
On my giving data - I have barely started the process. It was in response to a post by KaranM yesterday on the other thread. I did not initiate this - but I wanted to test some of his claims. And I have not predetermined the outcome of the analysis, as so many on the other side seem to do. I won't hide my prior biases, but I am looking at the data with an open mind. So far both the data I have looked at on my own, and data that a couple of others tried to provide to prove Modi's record (and which were, in both cases, shoddy attempt frankly and therefore very easy to demolish), have shown that the record is largely nothing spectacular at best, and quite bad at its worst.

We are highly educated people on this forum. So you are mistaken if you think we base our opinion on flimsy grounds. So far we have seen some data on education which "does not" suggest that Gujrat has not made good progress. We have already said on this forum that Gujrat needs to do better on HDI. This not something new that you discovered. We are waiting with baited breath your revelations on the failure of Modi and that how he is no better than Laloo according to your own inferences.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 22:44

Sagar G wrote:
Sridhar wrote:Let me address one specific point that many people make. So by extension you distrust the people of Bihar who elected Laloo thrice? Or the people of India as a whole, who voted the UPA to power twice in a row.? Or the other corollary of your post. People voted Laloo thrice, so his claims should be believed otherwise they would not have voted him? What kind of logic is this?
Hah a guy doing equal equal between Lalu and Modi is talking about logic

I am happy to have given you your laugh for the day, but the fact remains that this is a direct outcome of your own flawed logic. You have proved my point, that the fact that he was re-elected thrice is completely irrelevant to the question of his record. Unless you make the claim that Gujarati voters are intelligent and that Biharis are fools. I hope that is not your position. Because without that position, the only logical conclusion is that re-election can happen due to variety of reasons, including record, but also other reasons.

In the language of logic, which you know more than me:

A leads to C but also B can lead to C. If you observe C, you cannot conclude that A has happened. You cannot rule out that C was caused by B.

If you are unable to understand this, let me make it even more clear

A = development record
B = other factors e.g. mobilization on the basis of caste, religion, quality of opponents, etc.
C = re-election thrice.

member_28397 · Post by **member_28397** » 20 Feb 2014 22:44

Wrong Thread Deleting

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 22:44

Supratik wrote:how he is no better than Laloo according to your own inferences.

That is your inference, not mine.

disha · Post by **disha** » 20 Feb 2014 22:46

Sridhar wrote:
You are also conveniently overlooking the numerous evidences provided on this forum for at least the last one year
Without much hard data and without anybody really asking tough questions, frankly.

Sir, is the above bolded statement an accusation or an opinion?

If that is an accusation., then you must read all 600+ pages and then only post.

If it is an opinion., then request you to please read all 600+ pages and then only post.

Personally, I will consider your above statement retracted if you post further on NaMo/Gujarat.

Now coming to hard data., I have researched and presented data (incl. links), facts, and my personal opinions on "Jal Yudh" series to a question posted by Kumarn'ji. Please post counter data to the above - preferably GOI papers/awards/contracts/news items etc. Links and opinions from any of the #mediapimps does not count (the expanded list of #mediapimps is in the media watch thread).

Looking forward to your counter data on Jal yudh - series. Go through my posts and present your counter points.

disha · Post by **disha** » 20 Feb 2014 22:47

[And folks - and adding a reminder to myself, please do not get nuked!]

Supratik · Post by **Supratik** » 20 Feb 2014 22:51

Since this forum is full of fools kindly provide us with your critique. Jagdish Bhagwati and Arvind Pangariya have already studied Gujrat under Modi. You will find it with some research. Let us know where they have gone wrong.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 20 Feb 2014 22:54

Rahul Mehta wrote:RSS-apex has also supported Rajasthan High Court decision to say that "it is legal for temple murti to own land" !!

Rahul Mehta,
So, you are opposed to this decision of Rajasthan high court? (I am not aware of the decision, but I am highly delighted to know about it. Because I believe that the Temple and its lands do belong to the God/Goddess of the temple. It is not people's property or community property. Temple funds can be used to perform Dharmik deeds but to argue that the funds belong to the people or community is perverse/atheistic in my view.)

Rahul Mehta wrote: And RSS-apex has opposed the proposed laws to make temples community property of Hindus (Hindus, not govt) and run it like Sikh Gurudwara are run.

Could you please elaborate what are the benefits of running Hindhu temples like Sikh Gurudhwaras are run? And what are the objections raised by 'Rss-apex' to such an arrangement?

ShyamSP wrote:
Jayalalitha has all the chance to become next PM. NaMo/BJP is no good in the South. TDP is now against alliance with BJP as if it campaigns well can get 20 seats in Seemandhra. If Jaya sweeps Tamilnadu, she is most likely to become PM. Telugus like her a lot anyway.

As far as I see, there is no such chance, saar. Even if Jaya sweeps TN and CBN sweeps the Thelugu seats, it will still amount to only 80 odd seats. Then, KTK & Maha will either go to the kongis or lotus. Central and west Bhaarath will go to lotus. Odisha and Vangal will give regional parties( 60 seats). If all of them unite(highly unlikely), it still amounts to only 150 seats. Another 100 seats are required and for that one will need the kongis. And the major portion of the kongi seats of 100 need to come from Maha & KTK. All in all, it is very unlikely.

On the other hand, Lotus is expected to perform very well and get 200 on its own.

Ultimately, when the TN and Thelugu(the coastal & Seema) politicians realize that they are destined to wait for the crumbs from the hightable of dilli, it will lead to the re-arrangement plans in which the southern regions would want to come together to form some kind of a block. As long as coastal & seema are separate from T, there is high likeliness that coastal & seema will ally with TN, perhaps later south KTK might also want to join, to demand more privileges from Dilli.

I think what is stopping this regrouping so far is that there is love lost between all these regions.(Both Kannadigas and Thelugus of coastal & seema seem to feel threatened by the Thamil nationalism). Disputes like Cauvery seem to be an excuse masking real distrust.

But, as and when, this distrust is overcome(if there is a TN politician who can play the statesman or stateswoman), then this re-organization can come about.

On the other hand, if such a re-organization does not happen, then T and Coastal & Seema will come together after 20/30 yrs regardless of whether both regions develop or not. Thats how, it looks to me.

johneeG wrote:Sridhar,
I request you to please summarize your stance into following categories:
a) Gujarath was developed before Modi.
b) Gujarath is not developed and Modi is wrong.
c) Guj is developed but not as developed as Modi claims.
d) Guj is developed but there are other developed states.
e) Guj is developed but not because of Modi.
f) Guj has good economic indicators but not impressive social indicators.
g) Others.

I have not followed the entire exchange between you and others but it seems like its rambling all over the place and is difficult to follow. Your posts that I have read seem to have started with the gas price issue raised by Fordri and from there to lotus not taking up the issue strongly and from there it went to Modi and then to opinions on his ethics and now the discussion seems to be about developmental claims of Guj. So, I feel the rambling nature is distracting. Please summarize your views, so that people can agree or disagree with you once they understand your stance properly. Having said that I don't understand why Modi is being discussed in Fordriwal thread? I can understand that these topics get intermixed but it seems that Fordriwal discussion has taken backseat in this exchange and the topic seems to have shifted to Modi and his PM candidature.

If you remember, I had initially agreed with you on gas prices issue. Anyway, it seems that there is already a report by a committee headed by YS which opposed the gas prices. So, the point is not whether lotus supports or opposes the present gas price situation but rather why they are not making a more visible campaign on this crucial and vote-catching issue. If the Fordriwal can do that, then certainly the lotus can also do that.

Sridhar wrote:JohneeG:

It is unfair to ask me to summarize all my posts. Are you asking anybody on any thread to do that? Lots of threads are long and ramble.

On why Modi is being discussed here, I raised the attention of the mods but it was the call of a mod to let this Modi related discussion run its course. Better still - why not rename the thread title? Its substantive content, even long before I started participating again, has nothing to do with the title.

Sridhar,
you are free to post in any which way that you want to. I am not asking to you to stop posting rambling posts. All I am saying is please specify/summarize what your stand is because its confusing to me as to what your exact stand is. Without knowing your stand, I don't even know whether to agree or disagree with you.

You seem to be reluctant to specify/summarize your stand which is strange. Are you yourself confused or do you want to deliberately be non-committal as a strategy, so that you don't have to defend anything while continuing to poke holes into what others present. If thats a deliberate strategical move, its a good move.

----
Anyway, so far, you seem to be saying that education/literacy/enrollment figures for the Guj are not impressive because it slipped two places. Is that all? Or are you saying that there are other areas where Guj slipped up? For the sake of ease of discussion, why not put up all the areas in which you think Guj did a shoddy job?

Link to your post

This post of your mentions some areas. Is that the complete list or are you going to add more areas to that list?

I am inclined to ignore HDI because Amartya Sen's name is attached to it.

Health Index
The performance in the Health Index was better than the overall HDI but still nothing stellar. Gujarat increased its Health Index during the period by 12.6% vs. 13.3% for India as a whole. A sub-par performance. It was ranked 9th best on this score in 2000, and moved up to 8th position in 2008.

So, you are saying Guj did well, but not great, right?

3. Income Index
This was a surprise, since a lot has been touted about Gujarat's economic growth. However, at least in this period, this does not get reflected in a stellar performance in the income index. Gujarat was slightly sub-par in terms of % increase in the income index, with a growth of 14.9% vs. 15.3% for India as a whole.

To summarize, Guj did not perform as well as it is being advertized as, right?

Education Index
This was where Gujarat did miserably.

In summary, Guj slipped up.

So, of the 3 sectors you mentioned. Guj did reasonably well in two and slipped up in 1. Are there other sectors where Guj slipped up according to you?

But, what is most important point is(and which has already been pointed by others is) that the data you are making all the conclusions from is dated. It is particularly obsolete because after 2009, there was another term which the UPA got. And it is generally accepted that the country slipped up on all fronts in this period 2009 to 2014. (Are you challenging this part that UPA slipped up from 2009 to 2014?). And therefore the averages for the country would go down.

Then, 2002 to 2007 was the proper term of Modi. So, 2008 averages are only going to reflect the job that his Govt did in one proper term. Modi came to power in 2001 and there were elections in 2002. So, much of the time would be spent in electioneering. The state also saw a massive earth quake and riots very early in Modi's tenure. Despite these challenges, with in one term, Modi did reasonably well according to you, right? He only slipped up in education/enrollment from 2002-2007/2008, right?

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 20 Feb 2014 22:59

disha:

If you can provide me the link to the specific set of posts you are referring to, it will speed the process and be helpful. Will be glad to read through them. I have followed the thread even though I have not participated until now. But cannot claim to have read or to remember every single part of it.