From: giand@opencon.com (Deepak S. Gianchandani)
Subject: Re: Re : Devaluation
Summary: Who died and left you ...... 
Keywords: RIGHTS ARE RELATIVE
Organization: OpenCon Systems, Inc.
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 17:51:36 GMT

In article <1992Aug6.224809.17003@massey.ac.nz> J.Ainikkal@massey.ac.nz (J. Ainikkal) writes:
>
> 
> .....................
> .....................
>|><IMHO all parents with 2 or more childern should be sterilised in 
>|><India. 
> 
> 
>Your argument has merit if and only if a> we have enough resources to 
>educate the  masses-but the sad truth is we do not, assuming we do have 
>resources - the benefits of education will still take a few
>decades, b> if every child born had adequate health care and a definite 
>chance for an education and a 'better life' (more purchasing power
>- I am using wealth as a synonym to 'better life' only because the truth
>is that there are people who are terribly unhappy only 'cause they do
>not get their daily 2 meals - I know I would be unhappy in such a
>situation). 
>

--------- Sorry but I have to speak after listeing to such biased
opinions.  The resources as you speak of in india are present the
problem is using them.  We are supposed to be a democracy (i.e., India
is). That is, a country run by the people for the people.  Unfortunately 
that does not get done in india -- the Rich families, which the
majority of us come from, (to be able to send their children to good
schools, to the U.S. for education costs a lot of money, even if one
is on scholarship), controll majority of the resources.  The Rich have
the polictical power to controll education, distribution of wealth,
etc. And since they don't want to share the wealth they don't want to
educate the poor. Remember the Indian mentality and cast system.  We
still treat our servants vastly different than our society equals.  We
pay less repect to them because they "earn" less than us.  So the
problem, from my point of view is that the country is controlled by the
RICH people who do not what to give up their power and want the masses
to be uneducated.  Education is the biggest power a human being has.
Through it he can do anything. Without education, he is left "stupid".
India's education system has not been changed for the masses.  If the
resource are present for the RICH to send their children to PRIVATE
schools, why not for the poor.  
	Let me re-instate, the RICH class controll the government.
That's why in India even a CAR has the same old design which is atleast
30 years old.  Why can't they change the design, because that require
patent's -- More Government Controll (i.e. RICH people controlling, for
example Indian Motors, FIAT, etc.). Even the most simplest things require a 
lot of bureaucracy and thus one has a lot of waiting time to make changes.  
The indian system has to change -- NOT by controlling the number of babies
one produces.  That is the biggest Political BRAIN WASHING PROPAGANDA
that the Indian Government puts out -- Oh! the population is too large
so WE CAN'T DO ANY THING. What does that have to do with getting new
car designs passed for example??? OR getting Computer exported or
imported into the Contry or getting any new technology into the
country.  LOOK at Japan and learn  -- The markets of world have changed
-- It is a Global economy now -- No longer can India state that it is
an ISLAND -- or as Pandith Neru stated to the UN almost 40 years ago
that we are a NEUTRAL country and we are NOT going to be aligned with any
super world power (i.e. the U.S.A or NATO).  Yet India was associated 
with RUSSIA, which now no longer is a supper power.

	Agreed that in the past twenty years India's middle class has
grown, which means more people are getting educated.  But so has the
RICH class who controll the polictial power allowing NO growth in the
contry except when they can get more richer from it. It is the old
staying that Power Corupts absolutely.  The Rich have had power in
india for a very long time and they don't want to give it up.  Why
should they -- who is going to make them?? Remember, the people need
to educated to pick the correct leaders BUT how does one generate good
leader's when the whole polictical system doesn't want to change.


>We have not reached such a state (meeting requirement a> & b>). Our greatest
>'violence' at home is poverty. One way of reducing poverty and
>misery is by NOT GIVING BIRTH to people who will/might live miserable 
>lives (in some cases a life not worth living - here again I am using my
>prejudices as to what a life not worth living for is). We are commiting a bigger
>crime against the innocent, yet to be born, with these 'rights'. When our
>society has evolved to a more affluent one we could reinstate these 
>'rights'. At this point in time they are a 'violation of human rights'.
>What might be a basic human right in one country/society might be a violation 
>of basic human rights in another. Comparisons with American rights
>(or any other developed countries rights) would be far from appropriate.
>I sincerely hope that U are not one of those who 'listens to Indian
>classical music and cooks Indian food', therefore know all about
>what is good or bad for India using American values (sorry I had
>to add that as I hear such silly things on the net- no offence
>intended).
>
>>Bijoy 
>
>John Ainikkal
>'Aotearoa' - Land of the long white cloud 
> 

	Again, poverty is controlled (basic study of economics).  
India is a very wealthy in resources, i.e., people power.  Using that
power is upto the people.  Having more controls, in this example,
having the number of babies, will not solve the problem.  As a matter
of fact where is the proof if one has less babies that the contries
problems would get solved.  Look at the American situation, for
example, American's now have less babies than before. Yet, look at the
Yuppie syndrome, less babies more expensive stuff for the two babies,
the basics now are more expensive, such as food, or even sneakers,
which for a child how cost around $30.00 a pair. I am a father, and
trust me, reducing  the number of babies is a Theory -- in paractice
the economics works the other way, i.e. economies of scale.

	I think I have said enough, and have given valid examples to
back up my ideas :-) Please don't take anything personnally.  If you
have some facts on backing up the fact that India would some how
change suddenly if it had less people please let me know.  I think
what will happen in india is what has happened in America less kids,
more expensive stuff for the fewer kids, and the poor who couldn't
afford things in the first place are now even more worse off.  We
should learn from the American experience or from the other countries,
even Japan -- look at their kids and their economy -- less kids but
things over all are still expensive -- more work they have to do :-).

	Deepak