Dr.JP is Not Accessible to Kukatpally People

Instead of worrying about the agriculture issues in the state and fighting with the government,
Instead of worrying about the societies acts and fighting in the courts opposing the government,
Instead of worrying about the lokpal bill and presenting his opinions to the parliamentary committee,

If Dr.JP decides to worry about the drainage, garbage or street lights in Kukatpally, I would not support him or Lok Satta.

I would prefer to have a leader, who would use his/her complete power in developing the entire country. If the leader has so much power, but, sticks to only very limited area and uses very less powers for the people, then probably, he/she would be better suited in philosophy and may be an ideal example of a monk. But, never in politics or business.

If everyone in the state wants their MLAs and MPs to work for their local issues, then there won't be anybody to worry about the state issues or country issues.

If Dr.JP spends more effort to solve their local problems, so that he can win in the next elections, then his whole life would be spent in that only, and there will never be any end.

I believe, and I feel Lok Satta also believes that, the actual change that we need to bring is, make people aware that, their vote can change their life, and only their vote can change their life. Winning in the elections is never a primary.

If Kukatpally people think that, there is somebody else who can better serve them, let them elect them instead of Dr.JP. I don't have any issues and I strongly feel that, even Dr.JP does not have any issues on that.

FDI in Retail

I cannot understand the issue with Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in retail. I don't know whether the protesters are clear on what they are protesting.

Is it issue with Foreign Money?

If it is the issue with foreign money, then won't the same problems be there, if the money is invested by the Indians? How does it matter whether the profits are earned by Indians or foreigners? Indians are already buying enough foreign goods to give profits to the foreigners. Are you going to stop buying foreign goods to save Indian industry?

Is it the issue with Super Markets, because of which Retail business would be effected?

Any kind of development would have impact in many people. Many people may have to move to different kind of jobs as part of the evolution. If everyone wants to do the same kind of work everyday for whole life, then obviously there won't be any development.

Those who are worried about employment, instead of fighting to ban FDI, if they fight to ban ATMs in India, that would create lot of employment.

Why Indians are not investing in Super Markets significantly

I don't think any domain where free market is allowed, one can earn lot of profits. If there are many opportunities to earn profits, then many people would be there in the field already and would make the entire domain saturated. Best examples are Telecommunications, Airlines and TV Channels. Many of them are not in profits or having marginal profits. I don't think super markets is a best option to get lot of profits.

If there are no profits, then Why foreign companies are coming?

If there is minimum guarantee to the investment, there are many Indians who are ready to invest. But, if there are losses, or one has to wait for a long time to get profits, then not that many Indians are ready to invest. Whereas, the US companies are ready to take lot of risk. They are ready to wait for a long time to get the returns and they don't mind investing a lot in research, where the returns are not guaranteed. They may invest in India for the returns they may get in the future.

If the foreign companies are coming and going to make losses in India, then we should invite them with red carpet and should allow 100% investment, because, if they are making losses, it means Indians are making profits.

Right now, is there any cost advantage in Retail?

I don't see any cost advantage in super markets. Most of the regular commodities are sold at MRP. Vegetables and fruits etc., are more expensive in super markets than the road side shops. But, in road side shops, one may have to bargain to reduce the price. Even for expensive items like Mobile phones also, if you go to small shops, you may get it little cheaper than the shops in the big malls.

Many people (including myself) prefer malls/super markets, because, one can buy everything at one place, browse through the items and can check new products, pay by credit card/food coupons without extra charge, and there is no need to bargain. There may be indirect price advantage, because while browsing, one can see less expensive alternate products, and buy them.

Is it a way to convert to Black money to White?

India would be at advantage, if the black money is invested in India rather than saving in foreign banks.

Monopoly

Irrespective of what all happens, if the government does not encourage open competition (i.e., if it puts restrictions to the new players), then it would lead to monopoly and everyone would suffer. If government ensures that, any person/organization can enter into this business without much hassle, then everyone would be benefited.


The foreign investment should not be allowed in cases of security, agriculture lands, or any other thing which is limited in India. In all other fields, we should allow foreign investment.

If the FDI bill is not passed in the parliament for whatever reasons, I would consider that as the failure of BJP and nobody else.

I Support Y.S.Jagan, KCR and Mamatha Banerjee

Y.S.Jagan says, sun rises in the east. I agree to him. So, I am supporting Y.S.Jagan.

KCR says, the capital of Andhra Pradesh is Hyderabad. I agree to him as well. So, I am supporting KCR as well.

Mamatha Banerjee says, West Bengal is a state in India. I agree to her also. So, I am also supporting Mamatha Banerjee.

The media people are no way better than this. If a leader, say, Dr.JP says, he is supporting something, and if some other popular leader, say, Chandrababu is also supporting the same, their statement would be, "Dr.JP is supporting Chandrababu", as if Dr.JP is supporting everything that Chandrababu says. Let's say, if Chandrababu is opposing the same, their statement would be, "Dr.JP is opposing Chandrababu", as if Dr.JP is opposing everything.

I feel frustrated to see this kind of statements even from the so called intellectuals. If you take any four people in this world, then atleast two of them would be on the same side, (assuming that there are three options, supporting, opposing and neutral). It does not mean that, the two, who are on the same side are supporting each other in everything.

The media won't change anyway. I would be happy, if atleast those who feel themselves as intellectuals write/say properly.

I am frustrated to read the statements of the so-called supporters of Lok Satta on Dr.JP's stand on no-confidence motion. He is neutral to No-Confidence Motion. Period.

Quote of the Day - Failure of Woman

Because I am a woman, I must make unusual efforts to succeed. If I fail, no one will say, "She doesn't have what it takes"; They will say, "Women don't have what it takes"

Courtesy: Udaya Reddy

Are Protests and Satyagraha Constitutional?

Taken from http://acorn.nationalinterest.in/2011/08/14/faq-why-is-anna-hazare-wrong-and-lok-pal-a-bad-idea/

We have the right to protest peacefully. But it’s not about whether we have the right or not. It’s about are we using that right wisely. (You have the freedom of speech but that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to blast Eminem using a loudspeaker at 2am in a residential district.)

As Ambedkar said while introducing the Constitution in November 1949, once the Constitution came into force, we should avoid all non-constitutional methods like protests and satyagraha, for they are the grammar of anarchy. If two persons go on fasts until death for two opposing reasons, we cannot decide the issue by allowing one person to die first.

Fast until death is political blackmail. It is a form of theatre engaged in to coerce the government into doing something that the agitators want. Whatever may be the cause, a single person cannot be allowed to dictate laws to the whole nation.


Another note from the same

Mahatma Gandhi used civil disobedience against laws imposed on India by the British government. Indians had no say in how the laws were made and how they were implemented. Indians could not repeal laws we didn’t want. Civil disobedience was justified in this context.

Gandhi also used it to coerce Indian nationalist leaders too, including Ambedkar and the Indian National Congress, into accepting his views. Whatever might be the wisdom of Gandhi’s intentions, this was undemocratic and created a culture of ‘high command’ that lives on to this day. Fasting was not justified in this context. This part of Gandhi receives little attention in the dominant narrative of Indian history.


Dr.Ambedkar on this issue. - http://pragati.nationalinterest.in/2010/08/the-grammar-of-anarchy/

If we wish to maintain democracy not merely in form, but also in fact, what must we do? The first thing in my judgement we must do is to hold fast to constitutional methods of achieving our social and economic objectives. It means we must abandon the bloody methods of revolution. It means that we must abandon the method of civil disobedience, non-cooperation and satyagraha. When there was no way left for constitutional methods for achieving economic and social objectives, there was a great deal of justification for unconstitutional methods. But where constitutional methods are open, there can be no justification for these unconstitutional methods. These methods are nothing but the Grammar of Anarchy and the sooner they are abandoned, the better for us.