Personally I don't think there's any doubt that Google's search quality has fallen down over the last few years.
There have been a few instances where what I was looking for was not found on Google and I gave up looking for it. Later (after a few months!) when by chance I tried the same query on Bing, the results showed up right on the first page. Surprised by this, I rechecked it on Google and it appears either on the 3rd or 4th page - something I would never check earlier.
Since then I started always doing a backup search on Bing for anything important, to see results I might have missed on Google. By now, I'm using them 50:50.
Also attended a lecture on Bing search, and learnt that their approach is a little different, which could acount for this observation.
Well comparing GINI across similar sized countries: India (36.8), Russia (39.9), US (40.8), China (46.9), Brazil (49.3), India is the lowest of the group.
While its true that most european countries have slightly lower GINI, they also have a higher 10% ratio (highest to lowest) than India.
So it's pretty hard to argue from the actual statistics that inequality is the outstanding problem of India as it is often made out to be.
But it's perhaps true that the contrast is more visible in India than elsewhere - with slums next to high rises.
I think the reason for this is that growth is relatively narrowly focussed around a few metros, which then attracts a big influx of job seeking rural population. The other big countries never had such a big rural population to begin with.
Nor should it try, because it's an objective measure, whereas HPI is completely subjective measure. Apples and oranges.
I'm also not convinced self-reported happiness is accurate across cultures. How do you control for cultural variations in the question "are you happy?" Diverse cultures have deep differences of understanding when approaching that question.
What's subjective to you is pretty objective to me - the health impact of unhappiness, for example, will reflect in healthcare costs. Which btw makes up 15% of US GDP. Now is that even real GDP or just a manufactured problem - with doctors and lawers and insurance guys all making money off of health problems of consumers.
For the same baseline level of internal well-being, people will respond to the question "how happy are you?" differently depending on their culture. Do you understand how this presents a problem when measuring happiness across cultures? That is why I refer to it as subjective. Cultures change over time, so a change in the HPI might simply be a reflection of that.
That being said, I do not believe that just because a measure is subjective, it is useless. Of course it's useful. It's just important to understand what exactly you're measuring.
I'm sorry but you sound very presumptuous - you could'nt bring yourself to stay a single day in situations where people have stayed their lifetime - or clean the toilet yourself - and you presume to dictate what is best for them ?
About the shift in perceptions about Manmohan Singh: a person who is an A player in one position may well be a C player in a different position. It is a fact that despite RTI which only affected the lower levels of the govt, the corruption on the higher levels has only increased in the last few years. The oratory you miss also affects the effectiveness of the government itself.
I think if you are interested in the subject it behoves you find out more about the what and why before sounding off confusedly on the topic. More like Kejriwal and less like Manmohan.
I agree with you on your second point. A person good for situation A may not be good for the position B. But that doesn't give a license to rubbish all of the person's achievements. As people at large seem to be doing the past few days.
You caught me in one of my several weaknesses (your first point). But you must at-least acknowledge that I said it myself.
Don't agree with your last para. Now you are presuming, I have not made an effort. I did not read the bill. But I made efforts - right from looking up wikipedia a few months back on 'Ombudsman' and many other things (articles/views etc.) ...
And second point in your last para: Please distinguish between ambivalence or (admission of confusion) regarding somebody else's action and accusing me of being confused. I spent 45 minutes, trying to articulate my views (it did tax my articulation capabilities) and re-read it before posting. I am not confused at all about what I am saying. I am only not sure, if what's happening is making sense in the right way. My hunch is that it does not.
Well props to you for truthfulness. I don't think anyone is rubbishing the PM personally.
I was reading the Progress Principle today. It makes the point that setbacks have an outsized influence on one's mental makeup - much more than progress does. Check it out.
What corruption leads to is a set of daily setbacks to individuals. On the one hand the govt says this problem is impossible to solve. On the other the protestors say they have researched the issue and here is a way to solve it.
Which one do you pick and support ? It's a no contest to me.
I may have been ambivalent in April. But now in Aug, seeing that the govt has watered down their version of the bill so much that their lokpal won't even accept allegations of corruption from the general public ... it is clear they have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. That made me more interested in the topic and I read the bill and both sides of the argument. My conclusion is that this is the chance to grab. Even if it reduces corruption by a few percentage points it will be a victory, and will release energy for the tasks that you mention so urgently need to get done.
I am impressed that you read the bill, and then decided to support it.
I did not like the process of getting it done, for one thing. We are having this discussion in a much more civil way. But please look across the Internet (just a twitter search on 'Anna' will give you all colors of tweets). Particularly, in the earlier part of the fast. People are ready to bulldoze/dominate/abuse others...
The 'I am Anna', 'You are Anna' irritates me. No body can have such a steep rise in stock, in just four months ...
Wearing a black hat for a moment. The big suspicion I have is:
1) Anna was used as a tool by Mr. Kejriwal and Ms. Bedi. This is very different than what Gandhiji would have allowed to be done of himself.
2) Anna also did it primarily for fame a retired activist, getting his time in the sun at last ...
Now again wearing my grey hat: I do believe that Arvind Kejrival and Kiran Bedi are good people, basically. But good people also can be misled (they have to be more careful.)
I think, my note above is written in a sober tone. I have just hinted (or even stopped before that) some of my fears/concerns without going into some specific dark doubts that I have illustrated in this comment.
It is not adding another layer, it is refactoring the system based on good evidence that this has worked before.
People talking about real cause and root cause are welcome to start a movement to solve that. When you are able to convince a few friends and gather a few followers, please let us know.
What is there in those videos besides some Anna-glorification ?
And to talk about supporters, yes, there are a large number of people that think like me, it is just that they are not firing from shoulders of an good intentioned old man.
What he is actually saying is that people are supporting Anna without necessarily understanding the reasons why - then he proceeds to lay down the reasons how we got to this situation after 43 years of the bill and the recent increase in public pilfering.
Also given is the example of the cleanup of Hong Kong corruption using an independant body with powers.
Interesting links. But the constitution does not say government should be small. And flip side of great business freedom is potential for greater exploitation. So you'd likely face headwinds as strong as Anna is facing if you were in his position.
Constitution does not say government should be small but common sense does. Also, wasting taxpayer's money over soap factories and airlines (not even 5% of India's population uses them) is also exploitation which has lead to abject poverty. A million children in India die every year just because of lack of food.
An open economy is certainly not free from faults but it at least helps us get rid of some basic problems. The new problems that arise that need to be addressed then. Our primary objective must to end that acute poverty which then leads to people selling their votes for a bag of rice.
Corruption exists for historical reasons and because the Govt has not had the spine to go after pilfered assets and corrupt officials as it was perceived as too big a problem.
Similar problem existed in Hong Kong and was solved using similar means as this bill.
The reflection argument only works when the people have visibility into the government machine, which did not exist until recently, with greater mass media, RTI and even youtube/facebook etc. Even people from villages are on these channels.
The janlokpal bill is as good an example of people shaping their government as anything else.
these early wins were against muslim rulers who did not have that much support of their majority populace because of taxation issues and also suffered from lost revenues due to the new trade routes.
the hardest wars were against the hindu/sikh rulers - marattas, rajputs and sikhs who were not subdued until 1850s with great effort.
While it is true that India tolerated a variety of cultural norms amongst its many people before the British, practices like those you mention were fringe practices and by no means mainstream. It was Indian reformers like Ram Mohan Roy who asked for British for help in removing them. The British being the much stronger party do deserve credit for heeding these demands, but in relation to the widespread damage Indian industry suffered under them, these were things that made for good press rather than something that bought about a systematic positive change. It was only after the 1857 war/mutiny fought by the Indians which ended the 257 year old East India Company that Indians were given greater share and responsibility in self governance. Not doing that would have been a fundamentally unstable government system. This very limited civil governmant participation is what eventually grew to a movement which led to independance. You only need to read the writings of Lord Curzon to see that the British never intended to leave India and on the contrary wanted to expand their control over China and Japan as well.
There have been a few instances where what I was looking for was not found on Google and I gave up looking for it. Later (after a few months!) when by chance I tried the same query on Bing, the results showed up right on the first page. Surprised by this, I rechecked it on Google and it appears either on the 3rd or 4th page - something I would never check earlier.
Since then I started always doing a backup search on Bing for anything important, to see results I might have missed on Google. By now, I'm using them 50:50.
Also attended a lecture on Bing search, and learnt that their approach is a little different, which could acount for this observation.