Bangladesh migrants, the citizens of no man's land

Sakal Gharelu Ustad

Detests Jholawalas
Ambassador
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
7,114
Likes
7,761
No, we should not leave out quality.

Machines improve quality, efficiency and speed of getting a task done. So, I am ok with replacing Indians by machines but not by immigrants.

We are in a messy society. Bringing immigrants will keep the mess intact. Mechanization and use of automation, computers, etc. will improve things.

I would like to reiterate: for me, "letting water find its own level" means, "let labour costs increase". It does not mean, "allow immigrants in and keep labour costs down". Labour should eventually become expensive, like in the West. That is when labourers and those who do manual work will have dignity and a dignified existence. That is when society will improve.

That is why I am against immigration - I am not even talking about socio-cultural issues here. We all agree that BDeshis are the last people we want in India, in general.
pmaitra said:
By quality, what he meant is we cannot compare two products that are significantly different in quality, because difference in quality makes them different products, but this is subjective, and we can say that efficiency includes improving the quality of products. More or less, this is a gray and subjective area.
The above answers why quality is a different parameter. You may choose a machine just because it provides better quality output, which is a totally different reason to prefer mechanization. If people prefer quality they might choose one over the other.

I do not understand the causation you imply with west here. So labor became expansive => and manual work became dignified. How does that work? Which historical theory shows this causation? Half of europe has more than 20% youth unemployment, that should pretty much free up the labor and kill dignity for manual work.
 

Sakal Gharelu Ustad

Detests Jholawalas
Ambassador
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
7,114
Likes
7,761
Lots of unsupported assumptions here.

How will a person become a tour guide if that person, after looking for a job of a tour guide, discovers that he still has to compete with immigrant tour guides?

Also, those who are buying cheap clothes, are themselves producing something. Say they are producing dairy products, which they have to sell to those making clothes. If those making clothes are getting paid less, they will buy less dairy products, and those dairy producers will not make enough money to save enough for a vacation. So, no new job for a tour guide.

An economic model can be seen as a system of multiple nodes, and money keeps circulating between the nodes. If money supply becomes less, then money velocity will also tend to become less. This will drive down GDP, and increase the risks of deflation.
It was an example. We are not talking of a fixed economic pie here.
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
I would like to reiterate: for me, "letting water find its own level" means, "let labour costs increase". It does not mean, "allow immigrants in and keep labour costs down". Labour should eventually become expensive, like in the West. That is when labourers and those who do manual work will have dignity and a dignified existence. That is when society will improve.
.
I will add more to @Sakal Gharelu Ustad 's argument , on why your argument is wrong. For ex. by extension/similarity of your argument, if we dont have mechanisation of labor, which also reduces the no. of jobs and the cost of labor(just like how the immigration does), we will have no decrease in the no. of jobs and the labor prices will rise and will also cause increase in dignity for manual work yes? So if we dont allow mechanisation of labor, then we will develop our economy faster than with mechanisation yes(just like how you argue we will develop our poor faster without immigration)?!?!?!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
I will add more to @Sakal Gharelu Ustad 's argument , on why your argument is wrong. For ex. by extension/similarity of your argument, if we dont have mechanisation of labor, which also reduces the no. of jobs and the cost of labor(just like how the immigration does), we will have no decrease in the no. of jobs and the labor prices will rise and will also cause increase in dignity for manual work yes? So if we dont allow mechanisation of labor, then we will develop our economy faster than with mechanisation yes(just like how you argue we will develop our poor faster without immigration)?!?!?!
If there is decrease in the number of available jobs, and the supply of labour remains constant, labour cost will not rise, but will go down.
If there is an increase in the number of available jobs, and the supply of labour remains constant, labour cost will rise.

So, I disagree with the emboldened part.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
If there is decrease in the number of available jobs, and the supply of labour remains constant, labour cost will not rise, but will go down.
If there is an increase in the number of available jobs, and the supply of labour remains constant, labour cost will rise.

So, I disagree with the emboldened part.
:dude:?? I said, if there is no decrease in the no. of jobs(as brought by mechanisation of labor), then labor prices should go up faster with growing economy, by the logic given by @Bangalorean that immigrants taking up labor decreases the no. of jobs and so decreases the dignity for manual work by decreasing the wage for the manual labor. Sorry, you dint actually understand why I wrote and you have taken my point completely out of context
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
:dude:?? I said, if there is no decrease in the no. of jobs(as brought by mechanisation of labor), then labor prices should go up faster with growing economy, by the logic given by @Bangalorean that immigrants taking up labor decreases the no. of jobs and so decreases the dignity for manual work by decreasing the wage for the manual labor. Sorry, you dint actually understand why I wrote and you have taken my point completely out of context
Ok, I might have misunderstood you. Got your point this time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

PredictablyMalicious

Punjabi
Banned
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
1,715
Likes
648
This is actually a huge misconception. When immigrants take up jobs, then it means extra hands for work and not loss of opportunity. For example, hundreds of Indian engineers/doctors emigrate to US. Does it make US more prosperous or less? Who is the loser due to that emigration- US or India?. Shy should this case be any different? From an economic viewpoint, immigrants are a good news overall for indian economy while they are a bad news from a religio-political one.
You're assuming that most of these immigrants are hardworking productive people who look for jobs. Why have you made that assumption? Most Bangladeshi illegals are probably just begging in India and aren't contributing to the economy in any significant way, or even worse taking to a life of crime. The Indians who go to America are intelligent and industrious people. You're not getting that kind of immigration here. Bangladesh is not so much worse off than India that their cream would come to India looking for jobs. That's not how it works. You're just adding to your population which further puts strain on the economy and disadvantages the Indian citizens who you have more of an obligation to, in the first place. Even if they take up jobs, they're replacing Indians who need those jobs. India is not a developed nation like the US where you have expensive domestic labour and people not willing to work the hard jobs. India does not need Bangladeshi immigration to meet its needs. It might be able to handle legal immigration where you pick and choose who gets to immigrate. The precise terms and procedure would have to be fleshed out but sure I can see how legal immigration could benefit India. Right now you're scraping the bottom of the barrel as far as immigrants go and this isn't beneficial in any way.

I haven't even addressed the impact of illegal immigration on the social fabric of India, which is a whole different beast altogether. You're getting culture/religious clashes when those illegals reach a threshold and decide to make residence in cities all over India. They stick together like a cohesive unit, which gives them a good amount of power on the street to challenge the locals as they see fit. This creates a precarious situation on the streets where violence rules the day. Take the example of Assam and the impact that muslim illegals have had there. You're looking at large amounts of havoc here. At the end of the day, illegals just aren't worth it.
 
Last edited:

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
You're assuming that most of these immigrants are hardworking productive people who look for jobs. Why have you made that assumption? Most Bangladeshi illegals are probably just begging in India and aren't contributing to the economy in any significant way, or even worse taking to a life of crime. The Indians who go to America are intelligent and industrious people. You're not getting that kind of immigration here. Bangladesh is not so much worse off than India that their cream would come to India looking for jobs. That's not how it works. You're just adding to your population which further puts strain on the economy and disadvantages the Indian citizens who you have more of an obligation to, in the first place. Even if they take up jobs, they're replacing Indians who need those jobs. India is not a developed nation like the US where you have expensive domestic labour and people not willing to work the hard jobs. India does not need Bangladeshi immigration to meet its needs. It might be able to handle legal immigration where you pick and choose who gets to immigrate. The precise terms and procedure would have to be fleshed out but sure I can see how legal immigration could benefit India. Right now you're scraping the bottom of the barrel as far as immigrants go and this isn't beneficial in any way.

I haven't even addressed the impact of illegal immigration on the social fabric of India, which is a whole different beast altogether. You're getting culture/religious clashes when those illegals reach a threshold and decide to make residence in cities all over India. They stick together like a cohesive unit, which gives them a good amount of power on the street to challenge the locals as they see fit. This creates a precarious situation on the streets where violence rules the day. Take the example of Assam and the impact that muslim illegals have had there. You're looking at large amounts of havoc here. At the end of the day, illegals just aren't worth it.
@Ray

thats a very competent post, indeed :ranger:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
You're assuming that most of these immigrants are hardworking productive people who look for jobs. Why have you made that assumption? Most Bangladeshi illegals are probably just begging in India and aren't contributing to the economy in any significant way, or even worse taking to a life of crime. The Indians who go to America are intelligent and industrious people. You're not getting that kind of immigration here. Bangladesh is not so much worse off than India that their cream would come to India looking for jobs. That's not how it works. You're just adding to your population which further puts strain on the economy and disadvantages the Indian citizens who you have more of an obligation to, in the first place. Even if they take up jobs, they're replacing Indians who need those jobs. India is not a developed nation like the US where you have expensive domestic labour and people not willing to work the hard jobs. India does not need Bangladeshi immigration to meet its needs. It might be able to handle legal immigration where you pick and choose who gets to immigrate. The precise terms and procedure would have to be fleshed out but sure I can see how legal immigration could benefit India. Right now you're scraping the bottom of the barrel as far as immigrants go and this isn't beneficial in any way.

I haven't even addressed the impact of illegal immigration on the social fabric of India, which is a whole different beast altogether. You're getting culture/religious clashes when those illegals reach a threshold and decide to make residence in cities all over India. They stick together like a cohesive unit, which gives them a good amount of power on the street to challenge the locals as they see fit. This creates a precarious situation on the streets where violence rules the day. Take the example of Assam and the impact that muslim illegals have had there. You're looking at large amounts of havoc here. At the end of the day, illegals just aren't worth it.
@Ray

thats a very competent post, indeed :ranger:

=>

Few Basics for the Bangladeshi illegal migrants

few points i may summarize as below:-

1st: as in the above post, is this how the Indian professionals go to US/UK/Australia etc, like how Bangladeshis take bag and cross the border? is it so easy to get even a 'Transit Visa' in US/UK/Australia on the way to somewhere else? check and get it confirmed..... :ranger:

2nd: and here, why does the India with 1.25billion population need illiterate workers from this highly populated country, where minority Hindu-Buddhist never had secured life? what exactly they may do for this country, and do Indian civilians need extra burden on economy, to lose un-skilled jobs to these unwanted people, in place of our own people living below poverty line, and why?

3rd; we have example of North East region, as discussed in the thread as below too. and its simply because, illiterate people mainly fight for religion-race, whether poor Indians or Bangladeshis, they aren't like even the educated Bangladeshis who do politics on forums. why to invite those very poor, illiterate of world, who would only create problems for this country? if India itself has over 400million people below poverty line?
//defenceforumindia.com/forum/internal-security/63875-bangladeshi-criminal-gangs-new-challenge-delhi-police.html
4th; im also running a thread based on, "Population Based on Resource Sufficiency Evaluation", and here, why would we let others come here, if India isn't prepared yet to reduce its population to be fed by the limited resources it has? how will we build confidence among the Indian civilians to reduce overall population, if we let extra burden come here from this very high populated, Islamic Fanatic country?
//defenceforumindia.com/forum/economy-infrastructure/64029-sustainable-world-population-based-resource-sufficiency-evaluation.html
5th; we always favor Bangladeshis to be provided with extra assess to the new continents like North America, South America, Asia Pacific region, mainly to the Muslim countries who would be more happy with inflow of Muslim migrants/workers. but how inviting destruction to this country is advised for any reason, and why are we wrong to defend ourselves in India, our homes, our family based here?

6th; and at the end, whole world know that partition of India occurred on religious basis, even if India remained a non-religious country, as compare to the birth of Islamic Pakistan. and East Pakistan, the current Bangladesh, got its land after scoring over 10,000 Hindu people in Kolkatta city, mass murder-rapes they did to get their East Pakistan separated from India in 1947, when Mr Gandhi refused the partition of India in beginning. and once you have got what you wanted, why do you wish to create problems for us, our family based in remaining India, again?

(the great Calcutta Killing of 1946, the capital of India that time, is known to whole world. while that time Muslim population was hardly around 23million in East Pakistan(Bangladesh) in 1947, with 11million Hindus, at the time of freedom. while now Hindu population in Bangladesh(East Pakistan) has been reduced from 32% in 1947 to less than 10% of today's Bangladesh's population.....while in India, Hindu population reduced from 88% to below 80% at present, while Muslims population in today's non-religious India increased from 7.8% in 1947 to over 16% at present, the facts we all know on the world's platform....)

we have every right to defend ourselves. if the Indian government free Sri Lanka, Burma, Nepal type countries, its a very different issue because of very small non-Muslim population in these countries. even if Burma and Nepal also fall among the Least Developed Countries of world, similar to Bangladesh, who are dependent on Humanitarian Aids to run the country.
nationsonline.org/oneworld/least_developed_countries.htm
we are simply threatened with these 2 very densely populated Muslim countries, the Pakistan and Bangladesh, and we have every right to defend ourselves, our families based here, true.

over 1.0million murders resulted during the Hindu-Muslim-Sikh riots on the eastern and western Pakistan border during the 1947 Independence. and as population of Pakistan and East Pakistan (Bangladesh) have risen from 34million and 36 million respectively to closed to around 200million+ each, with too poor state of minorities religious groups there, we simply dont want to invite destruction to the remaining India we have at present......

with that, we request rest of the world to invite those hard working Bangladeshis, who believe they may contribute good in their countries. India is already over populated, we simply can't feed even the current Indian population with the limited resources we have, until we start reducing population from now.....

=> with that, on my personal level, i favor direct citizenship to those kids of Bangladeshi migrants, whose at least one parent, either father or mother, was an Indian citizen by birth. preferably to Gandhian Caste of Hindus, the caste adopted by the second PM of India, Mr LB Shastri too.....

and for those who have entered here without any visa, would be put on the trial first. and yes, good character people, in a limited number, may be allowed to continue staying here in India. as displaced people aren't considered criminals in world, if they come to any country on their true Identifications, in tough circumstances. and rest of those, India doesn't need, would be deported back to Bangladesh, a general practice done by most of countries of world. with putting a proper case on those, who were part of any wrong activities in India, while their illegal stay here too....
 
Last edited by a moderator:

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
@Ray

sir, its really a joke of the day, Bangladeshi people cross borders and enter India in the same way as Indian Professionals migrate to US/West :rofl:. is this how people get green card in US? :tsk:

just to complete state of Bangladesh in world, few basics about the current state of Bangladesh as below:-

1st; Bangladesh 'qualify' among the most poor LDCs members as below, the Least Developed Countries, a list where even half of the African countries don't get a place, to receive humanitarian aids to run their country, as below. read it as below
nationsonline.org/oneworld/least_developed_countries.htm
2nd; one more to compare living standard of Bangladesh, the nation as whole. Bangladesh is generally used as a 'benchmark' to compare US with the least of the world, as below. its a good note for Bangladesh, in fact, but it does show them a real picture in world, how much energy do you use as compare to rest of world? comparison of living standard of a child born in US with the least of the world as below. in response to the above post :ranger:
The size of the carbon legacy is closely tied to consumption patterns. Under current conditions, a child born in the United States will be responsible for almost seven times the carbon emissions of a child born in China and 168 times the impact of a child born in Bangladesh. :thumb:

biologicaldiversity.org/programs/population_and_sustainability/climate/
3rd;- Pakistan, which doesn't fall among the LDCs, does so many missile tests, 300+ fighters aircraft they have, a proper military base, along with nuclear too. here, how many missiles Bangladesh have tested, as compare to Hatf series of Pakistan? just one????? they do have around 10-12 Mig29s to fly, can they face a 'face to face', like how Pakistan keep around 100 F16s with among the best pilots too, with 100+ Jf17s, 100+ old mirages too, with a pool of submarines and other military arms? their only strength is to get help from US/UK and enter here as false ID people, and get high positions, on false Hindu names, from back door... :wave:

4th; any list of infrastructure developments, like electricity production/world class ports/airport etc? too poor state, not to mention. here again they fall among the LDCs member of Africa, only :wave:

5th; whats the literacy rate of these people crossing the border? more than half of the population of Bangladesh are illiterates, only fight for religion, do any job they get here, the least paid people in the eastern region of India.....

US has a policy to keep these people hopeful in India. and as a so big population, they do are a 'people power' with closed to 200million+, a very united Muslim population on the name of Bangla language too. crushing Buddhist and Hindu population in numbers of tens of thousand in unity, is also discussed in this thread.... they have entered here from back door, trying for the wealth of this country somehow, with support from the US/UK too, and this is their only hope for a prosper future :wave:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Scorpio69

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2015
Messages
19
Likes
3
Bangladeshi migrants may alter demographics in Assam, W Bengal, and Tripura in favour of Muslims and could trigger communal clashes. It is imperative that India constructs something similar to the Berlin Wall on the Bangladeshi border, however I believe India should grant immediate citizenship to Bangladeshi Hindus and Buddhists, provided they have no criminal record, because the are threatened in Bangladesh.
 

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
.
Partition of India Occurred on the Religious Ground

here, this issue of Bangladeshi infiltrators and they sanctuary providers in India, like Mamata Banarjee, is directly related to the lessons we have from the circumstances of partition in 1947, as below

The Great Calcutta Killings

The Calcutta Riots of 1946, also known as the "Great Calcutta Killing," were four days of massive Hindu-Muslim riots in the capital of Bengal, India, resulting in 5,000 to 10,000 dead, and some 15,000 wounded, between August 16 and 19, 1946. These riots are probably the most notorious single massacre of the 1946-47 period, during which large-scale violence occurred in many parts of India. However, the "Great Calcutta Killing" stands out somewhat in the history of Calcutta, given that it was by far the most deadly episode in the recent history of the city. Although it received its name very soon after the events, it remains a very controversial episode, and different views or interpretations of it were put forward from Britain, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. While there is a certain degree of consensus on the magnitude of the killings (although no precise casualty figures are available), including their short-term consequences, controversy remains regarding the exact sequence of events, various actors' responsibility, and the long-term political consequences.

The event must be situated in two different, yet interrelated contexts: firstly the all-India context, and secondly the Bengal one. The former was marked by growing tension between the Congress Party, the main Indian nationalist organization with a base mostly (but not exclusively) among the Hindu population of the country, and the Muslim League, the main organization representative of the Muslim minority, which comprised almost 25% of India's population. Tensions were largely due to the fact that both groups were gearing up for a transfer of power from the British, which Prime Minister Clement Attlee had announced in March 1946, without fixing a date, however. Each group had very different ideas regarding the future shape of the subcontinent. In 1940, the Muslim League passed a resolution in favor of the creation of Pakistan. It was not clear, however, whether it was meant to be a separate Muslim state or a part of a confederation with the rest of India (Jalal, 1985). The British still hoped that a partition of India could be avoided and were trying to come to an agreement with both the Congress and the League. In a statement on May 16, 1946, a British Cabinet Mission proposed a plan for the formation of an interim government composed of representatives from the Congress, the League, and other forces. This plan gave the Congress one more seat than the League. After weeks of behind-the-scene negotiations, on July 29, 1946, at the prompting of its leader Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the Muslim League adopted a resolution rejecting the May 16th plan and called on Muslims throughout India to observe a "Direct Action Day" in protest on August 16.

The announcement of a transfer of power in the near future had further exacerbated a situation that was already very tense in India. It intensified a growing polarization between the two main political parties and the two major religious communities. In the 1945-46 elections, both at the national and at the provincial level, Congress had won most of the seats in the Hindu majority areas and the Muslim League in the Muslim majority areas. The League had not, however, been able to gain a majority in the Punjab, the richest Muslim majority province, and therefore was tempted to use extra-constitutional means to reach its goals. Given that the country had a long history of "communal" riots flaring up regularly since 1926 between Hindus and Muslims, there was understandably great fear of an outburst of violence, but the presence of the British Army in relatively large numbers, although resented by most, seemed to offer some guarantee of a peaceful transition. However, it was not to be, and the August 1946 events in Calcutta were to play a major role in triggering a whole spiral of violence that would engulf parts of India for many months.

The situation in Bengal was particularly complex. In the province, Muslims represented the majority of the population (54%, as against 44% of Hindus) and were mostly concentrated in the Eastern part (present-day Bangladesh). As a result of this demographic structure and specific developments, this province was the only one in which a Muslim League government was in power (under a regime of provincial autonomy introduced in 1935), in coalition with Europeans, and in the face of strong opposition from the Congress Party and from a Hindu nationalist party. The latter, the Hindu Mahasabha was supported by many members of the rich Marwari trading community, composed of immigrants from Rajasthan, who largely dominated the economy of Calcutta and of Bengal (although European capital was still important). The leader of the Muslim League in Bengal and Chief Minister of the province was Hussain Suhrawardy. Suhrawardy, a rival of Jinnah for the leadership of the League, was a controversial, albeit colorful personality who became very unpopular amongst large sections of the Hindu population for his alleged responsibility in the great Bengal famine of 1943, which had resulted in the death of two to three million people. However, he was idolized by many Muslims in Bengal, particularly by the Urdu-speaking Muslims from Northern India, who formed the majority of Calcutta's Muslim population (Bengali Muslims, who accounted for the bulk of the Muslim population in the province, were mostly concentrated in the countryside). Calcutta itself had a clear Hindu majority (73% of the population according to the 1941 Census) and a significant Muslim minority (23% of the population). Given the tendency of the population in urban areas to congregate in neighborhoods dominated by one community, most Muslims lived in areas of Northern Calcutta, while Central and Southern Calcutta were almost exclusively Hindu (with a sprinkling of Europeans). Another characteristic of Calcutta's Muslim population was that it was largely composed of poor people, mostly artisans, factory workers, rickshaw pullers and domestic servants. The Muslim middle class in Calcutta was small, in contrast to the much larger Hindu middle class. Big Muslim merchants and capitalists were few, and could not compete with the rich Marwari Hindus. Although Muslims were clearly a minority in Calcutta and occupied a peripheral position in the economic, social and cultural life of the city, the capital was the only large city in the province, and therefore occupied a privileged position in all provincial politics, whether Muslim or Hindu. Suhrawardy had a particularly large following amongst the poor Muslims of the city, and was also rumored to have close links to the Muslim underworld, which played a significant role in the parallel economy, based on smuggling, gambling and prostitution, which flourished in the great port-city.

Jinnah had called for peaceful demonstrations all over India on Direct Action Day, and most of India, including the Muslim-majority provinces of the Punjab and Sind (in the latter the Muslim League was part of a coalition government) remained calm. In Bengal, however, and specifically in Calcutta, the events took a violent turn, and quickly spun completely out of control.

Their exact number is not and will never be known. Authorities have compiled various official estimates on the basis of a rough body count, but none appear too reliable. The most widely accepted figure of dead is situated between a minimum of 5,000 and a maximum of 10,000 (Chatterjee, 1991), and the number of wounded is generally put at around 15,000, but it is not clear on what this figure is based, apart from guess work. In any case, such uncertainty is a common feature of most massacres in India. The reasons for this uncertainty are complex, ranging from the low degree of penetration of State institutions in society, to the absence of reliable registration of deaths. To these structural reasons, we must add a more temporary factor, the disorganization of public administration in a period of rapid political change and turmoil.

massviolence.org/the-calcutta-riots-of-1946

=> also, we have a news about the above riot of 1946 as below. hence British Government was more responsible to provide security to those who were paying them taxes :ranger:

Few events of the 1940s are still as contested as the large scale communal riots in August 1946. What do people remember of it? What was reported at the time? Contradictions, and contested accounts are not unusual.

The human tragedy of it all is undeniable though as is the fact that Calcutta and even India as a whole was never the same again.

In Bengal, where Hindus are only 43% of the population, they pay 85% of the taxes.

//gypsyscholar.com/31626historiceventskillingst.html]Introduction
 

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
You're assuming that most of these immigrants are hardworking productive people who look for jobs. Why have you made that assumption? Most Bangladeshi illegals are probably just begging in India and aren't contributing to the economy in any significant way, or even worse taking to a life of crime. The Indians who go to America are intelligent and industrious people. You're not getting that kind of immigration here. Bangladesh is not so much worse off than India that their cream would come to India looking for jobs. That's not how it works. You're just adding to your population which further puts strain on the economy and disadvantages the Indian citizens who you have more of an obligation to, in the first place. Even if they take up jobs, they're replacing Indians who need those jobs. India is not a developed nation like the US where you have expensive domestic labour and people not willing to work the hard jobs. India does not need Bangladeshi immigration to meet its needs. It might be able to handle legal immigration where you pick and choose who gets to immigrate. The precise terms and procedure would have to be fleshed out but sure I can see how legal immigration could benefit India. Right now you're scraping the bottom of the barrel as far as immigrants go and this isn't beneficial in any way.

I haven't even addressed the impact of illegal immigration on the social fabric of India, which is a whole different beast altogether. You're getting culture/religious clashes when those illegals reach a threshold and decide to make residence in cities all over India. They stick together like a cohesive unit, which gives them a good amount of power on the street to challenge the locals as they see fit. This creates a precarious situation on the streets where violence rules the day. Take the example of Assam and the impact that muslim illegals have had there. You're looking at large amounts of havoc here. At the end of the day, illegals just aren't worth it.

Living Standard of Indian Professional Migrants

hmmm not begging, but doing the least paid jobs of Eastern India region :ranger:

your this post really hurt me and my friends who were migrated to US and Australia by 2005. i have been a topic of discussion, and with reference to the literacy rate of Bangladesh,hovering around 50% hardly, and these lower end people of world try to sneak into India...

how i was migrated to Australia, also my friends to US studying with me there? i did my two Masters from University of Technology Sydney, first one is 'Master of Engineering Management' and the second one was the 'Master of Engineering' in Manufacturing Engineering and then migrated under the point test there, similar to my friends.
UTS is the only Sydney city university of this financial capital of Australia. i got admission there with high marks in my BE from India, with character certificate excellent from my that government engineering college of India. its a very high ranked technical institute of world, QS Global put 5 star label on UTS, which none of IITs or IIMs of India have. thats the tower building of UTS in the Sydney city, we had all the engineering subject's classes here, in the picture of Matrix movie as below
progsoc.uts.edu.au/~whophd/fd/matrix5.jpg
=> "at the time of my citizenship of Australia in September 2008", i was employed with an MNC, WMA Ltd, in Perth. their production line is based in Bangalore too, as Projects Engineer/assistant Project Manager. i was the only engineering professional from the engineering/projects department who used to attend management meeting there, in absence of my boss Mr KJ Lawrence. as i was the most qualified person of their Perth branch, my business card was the main reason behind my position.....
few things are not to mention, but, as now people know me, "whenever the company arrange my inter-state visits, only the recommended 5 star hotels used to be allotted for me, i never been to 3 star hotel, for the people part of management team. but yes, we do used to have usual official parties in Perth sometimes in 3 star hotels too..... automatic drive Ford sedan was offered to me, as this is what the company offer there....." my friend generally use luxury cars......

now Ray sir too is informed about me. is this the living standard, qualifications, of the illiterate shiits straight cross the border? forget me, just check the status of my close friends like Jim Marat, Reetam Gogoi, Muneet Singh, and all those who studied with me during 2003-05, and migrated to US and Australia with me. is this how Indian professionals migrated to western countries during the last decade?

few people are put in India on false Indian IDs, mainly having Hindu names. and then they think that they are now 'owning' this country. while on my side, as per the laws of world, these infiltrators on the government position are just at a distance of death penalty, surviving until the US/UK wish for that :wave:

they might be in number hardly upto 50,000, as compare to 1.2billion+ Indian population :fishing:
 
Last edited:

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
Partition of India

The Partition of India was the partition of the British Indian Empire[1] that led to the creation of the sovereign states of the Dominion of Pakistan (it later split into the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the People's Republic of Bangladesh) and the Union of India (later Republic of India) on 15 August 1947. "Partition" here refers not only to the division of the Bengal province of British India into East Pakistan and West Bengal (India), and the similar partition of the Punjab province into Punjab (West Pakistan) and Punjab, India, but also to the respective divisions of other assets, including the British Indian Army, the Indian Civil Service and other administrative services, the railways, and the central treasury.

In the riots which preceded the partition in the Punjab region, between 200,000 to 500,000 people were killed in the retributive genocide.[2][3] UNHCR estimates 14 million Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims were displaced during the partition; it was the largest mass migration in human history.

The secession of Bangladesh from Pakistan in 1971 is not covered by the term Partition of India, nor is the earlier separation of Burma (now Myanmar) from the administration of British India, or the even earlier separation of Ceylon (now Sri Lanka). Ceylon was part of the Madras Presidency of British India from 1795 until 1798 when it became a separate Crown Colony of the Empire. Burma, gradually annexed by the British during 1826–86 and governed as a part of the British Indian administration until 1937, was directly administered thereafter.[7] Burma was granted independence on 4 January 1948 and Ceylon on 4 February 1948. (See History of Sri Lanka and History of Burma.)

Bhutan, Nepal and the Maldives, the remaining countries of present-day South Asia, were unaffected by the partition. The first two, Nepal and Bhutan, having signed treaties with the British designating them as independent states, were never a part of the British Indian Empire, and therefore their borders were unaffected by the partition of India.[8] The Maldives, which had become a protectorate of the British crown in 1887 and gained its independence in 1965, was also unaffected by the partition.

Independence, population transfer, and violence

Massive population exchanges occurred between the two newly formed states in the months immediately following Partition. The population of undivided India in 1947 was approx 390 million. After partition, there were 330 million people in India, 30 million in Pakistan, and 30 million people in Bangladesh (then East Pakistan). Once the lines were established, about 14.5 million people crossed the borders to what they hoped was the relative safety of religious majority. The 1951 Census of Pakistan identified the number of displaced persons in Pakistan at 7,226,600, presumably all Muslims who had entered Pakistan from India. Similarly, the 1951 Census of India enumerated 7,295,870 displaced persons, apparently all Hindus and Sikhs who had moved to India from Pakistan immediately after the Partition.[citation needed] The two numbers add up to 14.5 million. Since both censuses were held about 3.6 years after the Partition, the enumeration included net population increase after the mass migration.

About 11.2 million ( 77.4% of the displaced persons) were in the west, with the Punjab accounting for most of it: 6.5 million Muslims moved from India to West Pakistan, and 4.7 million Hindus and Sikhs moved from West Pakistan to India; thus the net migration in the west from India to West Pakistan (now Pakistan) was 1.8 million.

The remaining 3.3 million (22.6% of the displaced persons) were in the east: 2.6 million moved from East Pakistan to India and 0.7 million moved from India to East Pakistan (now Bangladesh); thus net migration in the east was 1.9 million into India. The newly formed governments were completely unequipped to deal with migrations of such staggering magnitude, and massive violence and slaughter occurred on both sides of the border. Estimates of the number of deaths vary, with low estimates at 200,000 and high estimates at 1,000,000. :ranger:

Punjab

The Indian state of East Punjab was created in 1947, when the Partition of India split the former British province of Punjab between India and Pakistan. The mostly Muslim western part of the province became Pakistan's Punjab province; the mostly Sikh and Hindu eastern part became India's East Punjab state. Many Hindus and Sikhs lived in the west, and many Muslims lived in the east, and the fears of all such minorities were so great that the Partition saw many people displaced and much intercommunal violence.

Lahore and Amritsar were at the centre of the problem; the Boundary Commission was not sure where to place them – to make them part of India or Pakistan. The Commission decided to give Lahore to Pakistan, whilst Amritsar became part of India. Some areas in Punjab, including Lahore, Rawalpindi, Multan, and Gujrat, had a large Sikh and Hindu population, and many of the residents were attacked or killed. On the other side, in East Punjab, cities such as Amritsar, Ludhiana, Gurdaspur, and Jalandhar had a majority Muslim population, of which thousands were killed or emigrated.

Bengal

The province of Bengal was divided into the two separate entities of West Bengal belonging to India, and East Bengal belonging to Pakistan. East Bengal was renamed East Pakistan in 1955, and later became the independent nation of Bangladesh after the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971.

While the Muslim majority districts of Murshidabad and Malda were given to India, the Hindu majority district of Khulna and the majority Buddhist, but sparsely populated Chittagong Hill Tracts was given to Pakistan by the award.

Sindh

Hindu Sindhis were expected to stay in Sindh following Partition, as there were good relations between Hindu and Muslim Sindhis. At the time of Partition there were 1,400,000 Hindu Sindhis, though most were concentrated in cities such as Hyderabad, Karachi, Shikarpur, and Sukkur. However, because of an uncertain future in a Muslim country, a sense of better opportunities in India, and most of all a sudden influx of Muslim refugees from Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajputana (Rajasthan) and other parts of India, many Sindhi Hindus decided to leave for India.

Problems were further aggravated when incidents of violence instigated by Muslim refugees broke out in Karachi and Hyderabad. According to the 1951 Census of India, nearly 776,000 Sindhi Hindus fled to India.[46] Unlike the Punjabi Hindus and Sikhs, Sindhi Hindus did not have to witness any massive scale rioting; however, their entire province had gone to Pakistan and thus they felt like a homeless community. Despite this migration, a significant Sindhi Hindu population still resides in Pakistan's Sindh province where they number at around 2.28 million as per Pakistan's 1998 census; the Sindhi Hindus in India were at 2.57 million as per India's 2001 Census. Some bordering districts in Sindh were Hindu Majority like Tharparkar District, Umerkot, Mirpurkhas, Sanghar and Badin, but their population is decreasing and they consider themselves a minority in decline. In fact, only Umerkot still has a majority of Hindus in the district. :ranger:

Resettlement of refugees in India: 1947–1957

Many Sikhs and Hindu Punjabis fled Western Punjab and settled in the Indian parts of Punjab and Delhi. Hindus fleeing from East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) settled across Eastern India and Northeastern India, many ending up in neighboring Indian states such as West Bengal, Assam, and Tripura. Some migrants were sent to the Andaman islands where Bengalis today form the largest linguistic group.

Delhi received the largest number of refugees for a single city – the population of Delhi grew rapidly in 1947 from under 1 million (917,939) to a little less than 2 million (1,744,072) during the period 1941–1951. The refugees were housed in various historical and military locations such as the Purana Qila, Red Fort, and military barracks in Kingsway Camp (around the present Delhi University). The latter became the site of one of the largest refugee camps in northern India with more than 35,000 refugees at any given time besides Kurukshetra camp near Panipat. The camp sites were later converted into permanent housing through extensive building projects undertaken by the Government of India from 1948 onwards. A number of housing colonies in Delhi came up around this period like Lajpat Nagar, Rajinder Nagar, Nizamuddin East, Punjabi Bagh, Rehgar Pura, Jangpura and Kingsway Camp. A number of schemes such as the provision of education, employment opportunities, and easy loans to start businesses were provided for the refugees at the all-India level.

Resettlement of refugees in Pakistan: 1947–1957

In the aftermath of partition, a huge population exchange occurred between the two newly formed states. About 14.5 million people crossed the borders, including 7,226,000 Muslims who came to Pakistan from India while 7,295,000 Hindus and Sikhs moved to India from Pakistan. Of the 6.5 million Muslims that came to West Pakistan (now Pakistan), about 5.3 million settled in Punjab, Pakistan and around 1.2 million settled in Sindh. The other 0.7 million Muslims went to East Pakistan (now Bangladesh).

Most of those migrants who settled in Punjab, Pakistan came from the neighbouring Indian regions of Punjab, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh while others were from Jammu and Kashmir and Rajasthan. On the other hand, most of those migrants who arrived in Sindh were primarily of Urdu-speaking background (termed the Muhajir people) and came from the northern and central urban centres of India, such as Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and Rajasthan via the Wahgah and Munabao borders; however a limited number of Muhajirs also arrived by air and on ships. People who wished to go to India from all over Sindh awaited their departure to India by ship at the Swaminarayan temple in Karachi and were visited by Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan.[50]

Later in 1950s, the majority of Urdu speaking refugees who migrated after the independence were settled in the port city of Karachi in southern Sindh and in the metropolitan cities of Hyderabad, Sukkur, Nawabshah and Mirpurkhas. In addition, some Urdu-speakers settled in the cities of Punjab, mainly in Lahore, Multan, Bahawalpur and Rawalpindi. The number of migrants in Sindh was placed at over 1,167,000 of whom 617,000 went to Karachi alone. Karachi grew from a population of around 400,000 in 1947 into more than 1.3 million in 1953.

Rehabilitation of women

Both sides promised each other that they would try to restore women abducted during the riots. The Indian government claimed that 33,000 Hindu and Sikh women were abducted, and the Pakistani government claimed that 50,000 Muslim women were abducted during riots. By 1949, there were governmental claims that 12,000 women had been recovered in India and 6,000 in Pakistan.[51] By 1954 there were 20,728 recovered Muslim women and 9,032 Hindu and Sikh women recovered from Pakistan.[52] Most of the Hindu and Sikh women refused to go back to India fearing that they would never be accepted by their family; similarly, the families of some Muslim women refused to take back their relatives.
 

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
How Immigration Has Impoverished Britain:

75% of Pakistani and Bangladeshi Children Live in Poverty

Claims that immigration is economically beneficial for Britain have been destroyed by news that three-quarters of Pakistani and Bangladeshi children in the UK are being brought up in families that are living on poverty-level income. :ranger:

The report, issued by Millennium Cohort Study, which is tracking children born between 2000 and 2002, has found that 73 per cent of the Pakistani and Bangladeshi seven-year olds were in families estimated to be living on less than 60 per cent of the average national household income.

Just over half of the black children (51 percent) in the Millennium cohort were in such low-income families, compared with one in four white (26 percent) and Indian (25percent) children, said an official press release.

Predictably, low income was strongly linked to joblessness among parents, say researchers at the Institute of Education, University of London, who collected information from almost 14,000 families in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in 2008/9.

According to the report, among fathers, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis had the highest unemployment rate (15 percent) well above the UK average of 6 per cent. Unemployment among black fathers was also high (11 percent) but Indians were less likely to be unemployed (4 percent) than whites (5.5 percent).

Almost two-thirds (64 percent) of white and Indian mothers had jobs :thumb:, compared with half (52 percent) of black mothers and only 17 per cent of Pakistani and Bangladeshi mothers.

A much higher proportion of children in lone-parent families (63 percent) were living below the study's poverty line than those with married (16percent) or cohabiting (30 percent) parents. :facepalm:

The incidence of income poverty for the Millennium cohort families has not changed appreciably over the first seven years of the children's lives, says Professor Heather Joshi, the study's director.

Despite government efforts to eradicate child poverty almost three in 10 children are still in poor families at age 7. It's particularly disappointing that around one in five seven-year-olds is in severe poverty on incomes below half the national average.

The findings appear in a report published today by the Institute of Education's Centre for Longitudinal Studies: Millennium Cohort Study, Fourth Survey: A User's Guide to Initial Findings. Copies of the report can be downloaded here.

bnp.org.uk/news/how-immigration-has-impoverished-britain-75-pakistani-and-bangladeshi-children-%E2%80%9Clive-poverty%E2%80%9D
=>
You're assuming that most of these immigrants are hardworking productive people who look for jobs. Why have you made that assumption? Most Bangladeshi illegals are probably just begging in India and aren't contributing to the economy in any significant way, or even worse taking to a life of crime. The Indians who go to America are intelligent and industrious people. You're not getting that kind of immigration here. Bangladesh is not so much worse off than India that their cream would come to India looking for jobs. That's not how it works. You're just adding to your population which further puts strain on the economy and disadvantages the Indian citizens who you have more of an obligation to, in the first place. Even if they take up jobs, they're replacing Indians who need those jobs. India is not a developed nation like the US where you have expensive domestic labour and people not willing to work the hard jobs. India does not need Bangladeshi immigration to meet its needs. It might be able to handle legal immigration where you pick and choose who gets to immigrate. The precise terms and procedure would have to be fleshed out but sure I can see how legal immigration could benefit India. Right now you're scraping the bottom of the barrel as far as immigrants go and this isn't beneficial in any way.

I haven't even addressed the impact of illegal immigration on the social fabric of India, which is a whole different beast altogether. You're getting culture/religious clashes when those illegals reach a threshold and decide to make residence in cities all over India. They stick together like a cohesive unit, which gives them a good amount of power on the street to challenge the locals as they see fit. This creates a precarious situation on the streets where violence rules the day. Take the example of Assam and the impact that muslim illegals have had there. You're looking at large amounts of havoc here. At the end of the day, illegals just aren't worth it.

along with the above news, we have a similar news as below too. and this what these shiits want to do in India :toilet:
:tsk:

irr.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Poverty_1.jpg
 

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
@Ray

with that, Bangladesh has increasing become a source of import of Islamic Terrorism into India too, as below :ranger:

ISI funding insurgency in North East, says ex-ISI chief

Bangladesh is a hot destination for the ISI in its attempt to wage a full-fledged battle against India, reports Vicky Nanjappa.

Pakistan's former Inter-Services Intelligence chief Assad Durani has made a startling before the Pakistan Supreme Court. Durani told the court that the Pakistan spy agency had been meddling with India's affairs in the North East.

India has been claiming what the former ISI chief has stated since a very long time. India has also said that the operations in the North East, which have several instances of insurgencies, are all being funded by the ISI. The Harkat-ul-Jihadi in particular has been causing a great deal of trouble in both the North Eastern states. According to Durrani, the ISI had paid Rs 50 crore to former prime minister Khaleeda Zia during the 1991 elections.

The nexus between the ISI and the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence in Bangladesh is not new. The Indian intelligence had termed the DGFI as the cousin of the ISI which works with the Jamait-e-Islami, which used to be a political ally of the BNP government that Durrani claims to have funded. During the last ten years, according to Intelligence Bureau sources, nearly 9,000 trained jihadis from various countries like Pakistan and the Middle East were sent to Bangladesh from where they were to launch operations against India and other western countries. :ranger:

rediff.com/news/slide-show/slide-show-1-isi-funding-insurgency-in-north-east-says-ex-isi-chief/20120320.htm
.
=>
'Activities against India in Bangladesh on the rise'

The DGFI in partnership even brought in the Al Qaeda in the earlier half and later went on to create the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami, which is the sister concern of the Lashkar-e-Tayiba.

The two agencies had very often worked hand in hand when it came to destabilising India. The North Eastern states have reeled under insurgency for quite some time and the ISI through the DGFI has been quick to support such groups in carrying out subversive activities against India. :ranger:

Sources in the Intelligence Bureau say that over the past couple of years, especially between 2004 and 2006, activities against India in Bangladesh have been particularly high. It has become a preferred border for terror groups when compared to the border on Pakistan. Look at even the recent spate of arrests like that of terrorist T Nasir and the rest of the Indian Mujahideen operatives. Each one had a Bangladesh connection and all of them spoke about the ease with which they crossed over into India.

The busting of the Bihar module is also another example of how elements in Bangladesh are working against the country. The ISI is well aware of the illegal immigrant problem in India, especially in the North East, Bihar and West Bengal, and they have used this problem to their advantage. :facepalm:

However, the ISI has used Bangladesh in creating problems in the North East. Many say that the problem in the North East is immense but has never received much focus due to the magnitude of the problem India faces in Kashmir and other parts of the country.

In Assam there are 36 terror groups that operate under various names. The United Liberation Front of Asom, National Democratic Front of Bodoland, United Peoples Democratic Solidarity, Kamtapur Liberation Organisation, Bodo Liberation Tiger Force, Dima Halam Daogah , Karbi National Volunteers , Rabha National Security Force , Koch-Rajbongshi Liberation Organisation , KPF, BTF, ASF, Revolutionary Muslim Commandos, Muslim Tiger Force, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, HuJI among others are the major terror networks that operate in Assam.

In Manipur there are 39 active terror groups in all which include the United National Liberation Front , People's Liberation Army Northeast, Kangleipak Communist Party, Islamic National Front, Islamic Revolutionary Front (IRF) among others.
.
=>
'ISI funded Rs 50 cr to B'desh for activities against India'

Meghalaya and Nagaland have six terror groups in all which are the Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council (HNLC), Achik National Volunteer Council (ANVC), People's Liberation Front of Meghalaya (PLF-M) National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Isak-Muivah) – NSCN(IM) and the National Socialist Council of Nagaland.

Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh have 33 terror groups in all which are the NLFT, Tripura Tribal Volunteer Force (TTVF), All Tripura Liberation Organisation (ATLO) and Arunachal Dragon Force (ADF) among others. :ranger:

In the last six years 1,542 civilians have died in terror strikes. In the year 2006 there were 232 deaths while in 2007 and 2008 the death count due to terror strikes was 457 and 404 respectively. The years 2009, 2010 and 2011 saw 270, 77 and 80 deaths respectively. The year 2012 has seen 22 civilian deaths so far.

Although Durrani claimed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan that the ISI had funded Rs 50 crore to Bangladesh to carry out subversive activities against India, the Indian intelligence feels that the amount could have easily surpassed Rs 300 crore by now. Bangladesh is a hot destination for the ISI in its attemptto wage a full fledged battle against India. They would want the whole of North East to remain unstable so that they have more control over India. Most of the terror strikes in the North East are carried out by homegrown elements and this actually serves ISI's purpose, as infighting is something that causes more unstability than an external attack.

While this is one part of the problem the other issue is the emergence of a terror group known as the HuJI which has managed to spread its tentacles into India, especially down south. There was a spate of attacks witnessed, especially in Bangalore and Hyderabad, which was primarily the job of the HuJI. It is being managed well says the IB and the sister concern of the Lashkar-e-Tayiba has managed to create a solid base in India thanks to ISI funding.

'Activities against India in Bangladesh on the rise' - Rediff.com News
'Activities against India in Bangladesh on the rise' - Rediff.com News

=>
'IM growing stronger in northeast, Bangladesh'
Aug 5, 2013

NEW DELHI: Even as National Investigation Agency (NIA) has linked the Bodh Gaya blasts to Assam, intelligence agencies have found that Indian Mujahideen (IM) may have grown strong footprints in the north-east and Bangladesh. In fact, agencies have credible information that IM played a significant role in providing relief to displaced Muslims in the June 2012 Bodo-Muslim riots in Assam.

Sources said during the 2012 strife, IM operatives used the network of certain mosques to mobilize funds from across the Hindi heartland and certain other areas to Assam to help victims from the minority community.

"There are reports of them having developed contacts with some religious groups in Assam and their activity has been significant in areas such as Dhubri. They have also developed footprints in Sylhet region of Bangladesh and are suspected to have developed pockets of influence in Myanmar-Bangladesh border region through LeT," said an intelligence official. :ranger:


"The objective of participating in relief operations in Assam seemed to be aimed at creation of an IM constitution and radicalization of Muslim youth at the wrong end of justice in the state," he added.

Notably, NIA investigations have found that the Lotus brand clocks used in the Bodh Gaya blasts were bought from a shop in Assam. Investigations also point out that these clocks were bought about a year before the blasts. That was precisely the time that riots broke out in Assam and relief operations were underway.

Arrested IM operatives Syed Maqbool and Imran Khan had revealed to investigating agencies in October last year that Bodh Gaya was one of the targets of IM to avenge atrocities on Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar. Though these developments point to an IM hand behind the July 7 blasts in Bodh Gaya, agencies say it could be a confluence of different forces including disaffected Rohingya Muslim groups which have been on the radar of groups such as LeT for recruitment.

Significantly, the Rakhine Buddhist-Rohingya Muslim confrontation of last year, which has been the trigger for a larger Buddhist-Muslim confrontation in several parts of Asia, had coincided with the Bodo-Muslim confrontation in lower Assam.

Intelligence agencies had then expressed fear that Rohingya refugees could add another insurgency to an already volatile mix of Assam. It was also said that the outflow of Rohingya refugees could lead to stronger contacts between Myanmar Muslims and regional Islamist militants. Such militants could recruit disaffected Rohingyas to their own cause.

"It is difficult to pinpoint any group at the moment as several forces have motive to harm Buddhists or their symbols. Though we have found that 13 clocks were bought from a shop in Assam, we cannot yet be sure if they were the same clocks used in the 13 bombs placed in the Bodh Gaya temple complex. We have also found evidence of some 50 Lotus clocks bought from another place. Why would a bomber buy exactly 13 clocks for 13 bombs? Why not more for contingency," asked an NIA officer.

//timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/IM-growing-stronger-in-northeast-Bangladesh/articleshow/21608922.cms
 
Last edited by a moderator:

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
the short story of "Import of Poverty and Terrorism from Bangladesh" and its consequences on India ..... :tsk:

when i have a look on the state of these 2 rouge neighbors of India, and its consequences on India, the nation, as whole, i always remember statement of a former Indian PM as below :facepalm:

"We can change history but not geography. We can change our friends but not our neighbors." - Atal Bihari Vajpayee
:toilet:
 
Last edited:

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,311
Likes
8,403
Country flag
Immigrants bring a lot of other problems with them. Read the thread properly.

We are debating whether throwing out immigrants citing economic reasons makes sense or not.
Unfortunately I did read your post.

The assumption is that the illegal immigrants are actually improving efficiency.

I presented facts to the contrary.

And no Indian companies are far far less mechanized than Chinese companies.
 

Mad Indian

Proud Bigot
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
12,835
Likes
7,762
Country flag
:rofl:

I love the way the people who are anti immigration have continuously changed the goal posts from the start of this debate.

This all started with I making a claim that you can never have enough labor and that immigration is fine on a purely economic standpoint even if it is a low end job.
@Bangalorean countered that with the claim that Immigrant workers take up low skilled jobs of the Indians due to their lower wages and so will cause increased poverty.

So my specific response was specific to that context that "immigrants taking up jobs for low wages" do not cause poverty just like how machines, whose cost is lower than manual labor do no cause poverty. This does not include the immigrants who engage in crime and for heaven's sake, I already accepted the problems of immigration caused by socio political angles.

Now, we have moved onto quality, efficiency and societal problems and what not because the position that "immigrants taking up jobs for low wages cause poverty" is indefensible by logic.

Anyway, I will counter the arguments made in this thread regarding the supposed economic problems caused by immigration when I have time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

santosh10

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,666
Likes
177
Unfortunately I did read your post.

The assumption is that the illegal immigrants are actually improving efficiency.

I presented facts to the contrary.

And no Indian companies are far far less mechanized than Chinese companies.
@Ray @Mad Indian


one more tale of these "Efficient Migrants" is as below..... isn't it a good idea to send them to US/UK itself, to help them have a better life? :ranger:

State of the nationreport: poverty, worklessness andwelfare dependencyin the UK

Risk of poverty is unevenly spread in terms of region, ethnicity, household structure and disability status. Over half (52%) of Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are in relative poverty, while children living in families with at least one disabled member have a 29% chance of living in poverty, compared with 20% for those living in families with no disabled member. The additional costs associated with (Religious) disability mean that a narrow focus on incomes does not fully capture the levels of disadvantage experienced.

bristol.ac.uk/poverty/downloads/keyofficialdocuments/CONDEM%20-poverty-report.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top