Singapore Lokpal Bill

In 1982, In Singapore, LOKPAL BILL was implemented and 142 Corrupt Ministers & Officers were arrested in one single day. Today Singapore has only 1% poor people & no taxes are paid by the people to the government, 92% Literacy Rate, Better Medical Facilities, Cheaper Prices, 90% Money is white & Only 1% Unemployment exists.

I have seen many people sharing the above message. But, this is a hoax. You can search in google for more information. My post is not about whether it is hoax or not.


Those whoever created the above message wanted to say, Since, Singapore has strong Lokpal Bill and it is highly developed, and if we bring it in India also, we also becomes highly developed.

In the exact same way, I would say, since the rich person infront of my house has a watchman, and he had become very rich, and If I also hire a watchman, I also become very rich.


For a person to become rich, or an organization to grow, they need to do something to create wealth, by doing business, developing something, or inventing something new etc. Once, they get enough wealth, they can hire security to protect the wealth. But, if the security becomes too serious, and in the name of protecting Rs.1 Lakh, if they stop a customer who can generate a profit of Rs.1 crore, then they will soon loose everything.

When India has so many restrictions in doing business in many sectors including education, transport, agriculture, electricity etc., without bringing reforms in those areas, if we are going to bring strong anti-corruption laws, it is like, hiring more security personnel without doing anything to create wealth.

According to Heritage Foundation and Transparency International, in 2010, seven of the wolrd's ten 'least corrupt' countries were ranked among the top ten in 'business freedom'. Singapore is one country which is in top 10 in both. The ten most corrupt countries on the average had a business freedom rank of 154. India's rank was 167.

Picking up the Best Among the Available

Assume you are picking fast bowlers for Indian cricket team. What is the point of getting angry at Zaheer for being worse than Akram or Steyn. What matters for selection is whether he is better than the rest of Indian fast bowlers. As simple as that. 

Since Zaheer is worse than Dale Steyn, we have to go back in time and pick Debashish Mohanty.

This is exactly how people vote during the elections. Since, the candidate proposed by a good party is not as good as Mahathma Gandhi, so, we are going to vote for the leader who has lot of criminal charges.

First part is taken from http://www.quora.com/India/Why-do-people-who-support-Narendra-Modi-choose-to-pardon-ignore-forget-his-alleged-role-in-the-Gujarat-riots/answer/Balaji-Viswanathan-2

Intentionally Under Performing Vs Spot Fixing

Two dominating countries in cricket are playing world cup final. The best bowler of one team is bowling to the best batsman of the other team. In the first over of the match, the bowler intentionally bowled in such a way that, the batsman can hit four. And, the batsman hit four.

Is this fair? Can we criticize the bowler for intentionally under-performing?

During that time, spot fixing was unaware. But, is it possible that, there was spot fixing?

Do we consider it as fair or unfair, based on whether the bowler got money or not, or whether the bowler bowled a bad ball intentionally or not?

Let's suppose, before the match, the bowler decided to bowl a bad ball in a particular over. Now, a bookie came and offered some money to bowl a bad ball in the same over. Now, will it be unfair on the part of the bowler, because, he has taken money for something, for which, he was planning to do anyway?


Another instance.

There are two neighbor countries, and any match between them is a very big thing in both the countries. They are playing in a world cup final. During the last over, when one team needs 13 runs in 6 balls, a moderately good batsman is batting, and a new bowler is bowling on the other side. That bowler has intentionally bowled in such a way that, the batsman can hit six, and the batsman hit six. He also bowled one wide before that. He gave 7 runs in 2 balls intentionally, when the opponent needs 13 runs in 6 balls.

If we ask the same questions, will the answers vary?


Third instance.

One country has two good bowlers, who played together in matches for their country. One of them intentionally bowls in such a way that, he can never get wickets with that kind of bowling. Other one bowls in such a way that, he can get wickets. If we look at the scorecard at the end of the match, one of them would have worse scores.

If we ask the same questions, what would be the answers?


In the first and second instances, let's suppose, if the batsman gets out for the next ball, will the answers vary?

In the third instance, if it is their strategy to tempt batsmen and take wickets, will the answers vary?


First Instance. The match was between India and Australia in 2003 world cup final. McGrath bowled to Sachin. After Sachin hit four, for the next ball, he was out, and match has taken a big turn in the very first over.

Second Instance. The match was between India and Pakistan in 2007 T20 world cup final. Joginder Sharma was bowling to Misbah-ul-Haq. First ball was wide, and then no run. Second ball was six, and third ball was out, and India won in the match.

Third Instance. The bowlers were Kumble and Srinath, and Kumble said this after he retired from cricket.

Do we praise them, just because, their strategy was successful? Let's suppose, if they were not successful for the exact same strategy, are we going to criticize them?

Ram Charan Teja and the Software Engineers

Few days back, Ram Charan Teja's security people beaten two software engineers. Both have given their version of stories, and it is very interesting to compare them.

Version of Ram Charan Teja is taken from his press release video, and version of software engineers is taken from different news papers. For better clarity, the following is written in first person.

SW Eng: We were waiting at a red signal, and Ram Charan honked to make way for him. We could not give way due to red signal.

Ram Charan: There was one car with L board, and they did not move even after green signal.

SW Eng: At green signal, we moved, and Ram Charan overtook us and while overtaking, he yelled at us.

Ram Charan: While overtaking, I told them with signs that, "Don't practice driving at this busy road with L board."

SW Eng: Before the next signal, he stopped the car in front of our car, and did not let us go.

Ram Charan: At the next signal, I was waiting for red signal, and these people were repeatedly honking.

SW Eng: When we checked them, we saw Ram Charan making a phone call.

Ram Charan: Then, one person came and knocked on the glass window on my wife's side. His hair was not combed properly, and he does not have sandals or shoes. I don't know in which situation he was there, and I don't know what kind of threat is there.

SW Eng: In few mins, his security came and had beaten us.

Ram Charan: I called my security and asked them to deal with them. In that scuffle, their shirt might have torn.

News Papers say that, the software engineers did not file any complaint, because, it is of no use to file complaint against a celebrity, who is a son of another big celebrity and union minister.

Ram Charan: I did not complain, keeping in view of their careers. If a cycle hits car or car hits cycle, it is the mistake of the car.