Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was in South India until a week ago and found a tremendous contrast between Tamil Nadu and Kerala.
Chennai was in bad shape but was recovering from the effects of hurricane. Trees were fallen and cut haphazardly with chainsaws. But what was sad was that the locals used the head of fallen branches to add household waste doubling th epile in size and making it unsightly. The same throwing of trash on to the streets was seen all over Tamil Nadu.
But the streets of Kerala were much cleaner. The trash level was only a couple of steps above my state of SC. People were courteous. I think sanitation needs to be improved and also the road width and traffic sense. But it has much better potential to develop that Tamil Nadu.
The reason I was given was foreigners were coming to enjoy the backwaters of Kerala and the money was used to develop the state. But then I have the question for Tamil Nadu - if you do not develop basic infrastructure why would foreigners come to your state.
Had to chip in.
Not sure if you know, but the hurricane had way more impact on Tamil Nadu (TN) than Kerala. When more trees are destroyed, you will obviously see more debris on the road and streets.
TN is relying more on the IT industry (that is now well entrenched in the state) than tourism. An additional factor is that Kerala is, in general, has better natural scenery than TN.
Had to chip in.
Not sure if you know, but the hurricane had way more impact on Tamil Nadu (TN) than Kerala. When more trees are destroyed, you will obviously see more debris on the road and streets.
TN is relying more on the IT industry (that is now well entrenched in the state) than tourism. An additional factor is that Kerala is, in general, has better natural scenery than TN.
Chennai was hit directly just 5 days before we landed. So I can understand the tree branches by the side of the road.
But the lack of civic sense of the people made them throw bad household trash, some in plastic bags, on top of the tree limbs making it very ugly and unsanitary. I was appealed at that callous attitude to environment. On the other hand the same people sweep their houses twice a day and also put a Kollam in front of the house.
I feel as though India when you compare it with China is underperforming. They were both about equal in the 60s, probably India was better in some aspects. Very similar countries - large land masses, populations, rich in history and culture and both suffered at the hands of colonialism in the early 20th century.
Yes, China has it's issues and big issues to boot, but they just seem at the moment, and at least on the surface an overall better country compared to India. Which poses the question, would India would have benefitted with an authoritarian dictatorship like South Korea and Taiwan's before slowly evolving to a multi party, vibrant democracy? Things just seem to go very slowly in India, and whilst it still has the basic British setup, they can't seem to be able to convert that materially.
India is not tough like China. Indians believe in being politically correct than ruthless.
Kerala has some sort of "working" communist government, according to them. There's almost no povert and iliteracy. I don't think is cmmunist, because it works.
Because India is democratic country while china is not.
Indeed. In fact China did not explode economically until it freed up it's exclusive government-planned (i.e. communist) economy in favor of a more free-market economy seen in democracies.
But of course calling China communist is like calling India (or the US) a democracy. It's simplistic. India is a consititutional parliamentary republic, China is authoritative one-party state (that party happens to be the communist party). The economy is mixed - elements of both state runned planned and private enterprise.
Indeed. In fact China did not explode economically until it freed up it's exclusive government-planned (i.e. communist) economy in favor of a more free-market economy seen in democracies.
But of course calling China communist is like calling India (or the US) a democracy. It's simplistic. India is a consititutional parliamentary republic, China is authoritative one-party state (that party happens to be the communist party). The economy is mixed - elements of both state runned planned and private enterprise.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Democratic
