Why do British people have such a pathetic attitude ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
@pmaitra

Regarding insurance, I have zero dep policy on my car ie no matter how many times I bang it, or whatever happens they will take care off it. I have had a hard time getting any claims on it. Plenty of harassment.
In fact, we often joke that insurance companies try to overwhelm the customer with too much paperwork in the hope that he will give up and spend for the repairs out of his pockets.
 

JayATL

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
1,775
Likes
190
I clearly understand what the issue is here. The typical NehruGandhi era attitude of a Desi for whom everything that is associated with "India" has to be inferior, shitty or 'low quality'. No matter how much one tries to explain, present arguments, etc., this feeling is so deep-rooted, that it just doesn't get out of the head.

It also has an aspect of attempting to be more American than American.
aactually is an attitude mired in intelligent thought and common sense that tells me to ROFL at people who think a developing country compares its standard of living to be higher than that of a developed country. It's the let's get real bhai attitude. It's the , you must be on the proverbial crack pipe to think it. It's the , yeah good aspirations but check that ego with some facts.

Its the as long as you drive by people taking a crap in the streets on the way to work , or have to keep boiling your tap water or the very many facts of life you seem to forget about India, you even being filthy rich don't have the same standard of living across the board when compared to a developed country! ...

Speaking the truth does not make anyone more American or less, it just reminds you that your " sher" is a pipe dream for now .
 

KS

Bye bye DFI
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
8,005
Likes
5,758
only the poor and extremely rich (while maintaning investments in India)...not the middle class.
It is the people from middle class and specifically the upper middle class that make up the bylk of the students/professionals going to US.

But not all go for emigration, many nowadays prefer to return back to India for a variety of reasons after making some decent money there.
 

JayATL

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
1,775
Likes
190
In west "socialism" means making the poor as rich so that they can afford a decent lifestyle on par with others..in India socialism is keeping the poor as poor and making the rich also as poor so that everyone is equal.

100% right . YOU hit on the nail. Bravo! ... thank you for this post.
 

trackwhack

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2011
Messages
3,757
Likes
2,590
When USAs debt reached 99% of GDP they said it is theoretically reached a point it cant repay back but UK with so much debt how will it repay and how are they not rioting like Greece and no austerity measures?

We need a thread on this to get better understanding on the issue.
The 99% of GDP for the US is government debt. The 510% of GDP for the UK is government + corporate + household + bank debt. Everything put together. The equivalent number for the US is 280%, China is 184%, India is 122% and Russia is 72%, France 346%, Spain 363%, Germany 278%, Italy and South Korea both 314% and Japan 512%.

Only Japan and UK have more than 500% of GFP as debt. But there is a big difference in terms of who holds Japanese and UK debt. UK borrowing is mostly external, while Japanese debt is mostly internal. This apart Japan has more than a trillion in dollar reserves and close to a trillion in other government asset investments and bond instruments. effectively bringing down the debt closer to 400%, again most of which is owed to its own people.

Overall, there is no country in as big a hole as the UK and there is no way to sustain their current lifestyle without borrowing. In the 60% the UK devalued their currency overnight by some 25% to tackle debt. They will probably do that again by maybe 25%, which means that anyone holding UK currency or assets will lose their savings by 25% overnight. Good fun. :lol:

22 years after the Berlin wall collapsed, Russia is the least indebted country in the world. Hmm... What goes around comes around. Anyone want to bet Warsaw coming back to life within the decade. I predict Georgia has about 3 years before it becomes an autonomous region of Russia. The rest will slowly follow.

data source http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/01/daily-chart-8
 
Last edited:

Bangalorean

Ambassador
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
6,233
Likes
6,854
Country flag
aactually is an attitude mired in intelligent thought and common sense that tells me to ROFL at people who think a developing country compares its standard of living to be higher than that of a developed country. It's the let's get real bhai attitude. It's the , you must be on the proverbial crack pipe to think it. It's the , yeah good aspirations but check that ego with some facts.

Its the as long as you drive by people taking a crap in the streets on the way to work , or have to keep boiling your tap water or the very many facts of life you seem to forget about India, you even being filthy rich don't have the same standard of living across the board when compared to a developed country! ...

Speaking the truth does not make anyone more American or less, it just reminds you that your " sher" is a pipe dream for now .
I don't know why you keep making the same stubborn arguments - are you not able to comprehend what people are saying here? Can you not understand the argument here? Your posts make it more and more obvious that you are not intelligent as you think. Let alone intelligent - you don't even have basic reasoning skills. Really, you must be crazy to talk like this after 13 pages of discussion (with several posts having been deleted when I was asleep).

"Developing country compares its standards of living to be higher than developed country" my ass!!! Who said that, really?

What part of "living a middle class life in India" don't you understand? Since yesterday, you have been pasting images of poor people's child marriage, poor people not getting adequate healthcare in hospitals, and so on.

Stop being a stubborn mule and try to understand what is being said here. It sucks that we have people crapping on the streets, or unclean water. But the middle class Indian does not crap on the streets or drink unclean water. How is it relevant to the discussion here, if some poor people crap on the streets in India?

The only thing that people said here is that a middle class existence in India is either more comfortable than, or at par with, middle class existence in the West. The middle class Indian can afford cooks, maids, drivers here. Contrary to what you think, we don't drink dirty water. All of us have UV electric water purifiers at home - its a one-time purchase, around 4000 bucks.

Try to understand this - we don't expect the government to provide stuff here. Like Singh said some posts above:

The issue as I see it is this, we Indians have come to expect nothing from our government. That is why we hate paying taxes. Most people prefer relying on private schools, hospitals, security, infrastructural arrangements. Nobody wants to go the legal route.

In the West everyone feels they are entitled to a decent standard of living. Here money buys you a decent standard of living. You can get the best schools, cars, luxuries, hospitals, care, if you have the moolah.

In a way West is more egalitarian/socialist/welfare-centric than us.
JayATL, this is what you are just not able to comprehend. When you speak of India, you are stuck on looking at what the government provides, and you keep repeating like s stuck record, that life in India sucks because the government provides nothing good.

You are not able to differentiate between the life of a poor person in India and that of a middle class Indian.

Even after all this discussion, if you come up with a statement like: "ROFL at people who think a developing country compares its standard of living to be higher than that of a developed country", god help you - go and get a test done at some good mental health institution.

The real issue with your thinking here, I reiterate, is that you immediately spring up with "hey, how can anything in India be good or comparable to anything in the West? What bullshit!" and instinctively start arguing with cliches, without reading or comprehending what others are saying.
 
Last edited:

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
In west "socialism" means making the poor as rich so that they can afford a decent lifestyle on par with others..in India socialism is keeping the poor as poor and making the rich also as poor so that everyone is equal.
Excellent post.

I'll make it simple


A - Hard working tax paying citizens.
B - Lazy, pot smoking, beer guzzling, jobless yet shamelessly simpering retards.

Socialism in the West = A --$--> Social Security and Food Stamps --$--> B

A + B + C = Total Population (100%), where C are genuinely jobless and are not exploiting the system.

Unfortunately, % of C -> 0.

Edit:

Now, many of the people who post hateful comments, such as, but not limited to, those in the link provided in the opening post, hail from the group B. A very few infinitesimal hail from group C.
 

Bangalorean

Ambassador
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
6,233
Likes
6,854
Country flag
In west "socialism" means making the poor as rich so that they can afford a decent lifestyle on par with others..in India socialism is keeping the poor as poor and making the rich also as poor so that everyone is equal.
Perfectly right. This is another legacy of the NehruGandhi era. The asinine "socialist politicians" of India want 'equality of poverty'. Thankfully, fewer and fewer people subscribe to their ideas nowadays. I have hopes that this species of quasi-socialist intellectuals and politicians become extinct by 2025.

100% right . YOU hit on the nail. Bravo! ... thank you for this post.
Yes, he is right, but I hope you realize that his post is completely unrelated to the inaccurate arguments you have been making, and does not vindicate your stubborn "argue for the sake of it" attitude in any way.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
Perfectly right. This is another legacy of the NehruGandhi era. The asinine "socialist politicians" of India want 'equality of poverty'. Thankfully, fewer and fewer people subscribe to their ideas nowadays. I have hopes that this species of quasi-socialist intellectuals and politicians become extinct by 2025.
Within limits.

If you have extremely rich living side by side with extremely poor, the poor will try to steal or rob.

It is something like heat transfer. The more the temperature gradient, faster is the heat transfer. It is the law of nature.

Most things he said are forgettable, but one thing George Bush said is worth a million: A poor neighbour is bound to be a bad neighbour!

Think of the Naxalite problem in India. Money is not trickling down as quickly as it should.
 

Bangalorean

Ambassador
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
6,233
Likes
6,854
Country flag
Within limits.

If you have extremely rich living side by side with extremely poor, the poor will try to steal or rob.

It is something like heat transfer. The more the temperature gradient, faster is the heat transfer. It is the law of nature.

Most things he said are forgettable, but one thing George Bush said is worth a million: A poor neighbour is bound to be a bad neighbour!

Think of the Naxalite problem in India. Money is not trickling down as quickly as it should.
The mechanisms to bring about the "net" to have these within limits is totally flawed in India, and the approach needs to change completely.

Let discuss that on another thread - our Desi American has diverted and derailed this topic beyond measure. :tsk:

I think this thread can be locked now. :lock:
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,594
^^

It isn't very unpleasant now, so I think I'll leave it open and go to bed. If people start fighting again, I am sure someone will close this thread.
 

amitkriit

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
2,463
Likes
1,927
British gave us railways, bureaucracy, parliament building. We must kiss their a$$, that's all they want. What could we do without them?
 

trackwhack

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2011
Messages
3,757
Likes
2,590
It amuses me how the British and some posters on this forum think the British played a constructive role in Indian society. There is an obvious reason why British would claim that - to justify their imperialism and looting of this country. But how retarded must one be as an Indian to say the 200 years of British rule was good for India? Who cares if India would not have been one nation and instead have been 5 or 15 continuing with the princely states. At the end of the day, these 15 states would still account for 20% of the worlds wealth if not for the British.
 
Last edited:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
I am intrigued to learn that all those who came to India, as conquerors or even as imperialists, contributed nothing to India!

When the Chinese attacked India in 1962, they too contributed to India.

They woke us up from the Rip Van Winkle slumber encompassed in fruitless dreams of grandeur and made us smell coffee.

We shed quicktime the silly notion that we are the 'saviours' of the evil world with Gandhian love and compassion!

That is why today we are a nation that cannot be taken for granted and fooled around with.

So, even a negative issue like being attacked, also has its value!

One must learn to take the thick with the thin and also learn that even a black cloud has a silver lining.

Blind nationalism causes nations to live in a void and day dreams that leads to catastrophes!

Just my thoughts!
 

trackwhack

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2011
Messages
3,757
Likes
2,590
Contributed nothing to India and played a constructive role in India are not the same thing.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Maybe my outlook is a bit different.

I would be surprised if the British did not contribute anything.

One should just see how the other colonials operated in their colonies and see what the British did. Maybe they did something that we cannot accept because of the negativity of their rules. Just maybe.
 

trackwhack

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2011
Messages
3,757
Likes
2,590
Maybe my outlook is a bit different.

I would be surprised if the British did not contribute anything.

One should just see how the other colonials operated in their colonies and see what the British did. Maybe they did something that we cannot accept because of the negativity of their rules. Just maybe.
A structure to the armed forces, the foundations to a railway system, a legislature and judiciary that is mimicked all are contributions. However, these are dwarfed by the carnage of their rule. The British did not come to India to do social service. And all these contributions were systems they setup to administer and exploit, its just that when they left, we made some use of it.

Yes, I guess my views differ from yours quite a bit.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
I thank all for small mercies!

It takes a very high form of humanity which works selflessly without motives!

Even Mother Teresa, whom the world acclaims as a selfless person, had her motives for the work she did.

The Mahatma was not without his warts either.

Perceptions!

We must accept the world and people for what they are worth and try to be at peace.

As Cato said - An angry man opens his mouth and shuts his eyes.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top