I read an interesting article on Zopag.com titled "HAVE YOUR SAY: Say yes to United States of India". I have been for splitting Indian states for a long time. States are too powerful. Every very thing at state level is centralized, hence more indifferent and corrupt. Which has helped to further weaken the central government. And people are disenfranchised even though they elect some 10 layers of governments.
The argument against creating smaller states many times comes from peoples need/desire/nature to maintain the status quo. And in old civilizations like India, the pressure to maintain status quo is more and fear of change is even bigger. This is not about change for the sake of change, it is about delivering good governance to everyone and not just for some folks in Chennai or Bangalore. We need more local access and representation. Our society and leaders either don't want and/or not capable of producing a decentralized decision making system. When "Potti Sriramulu" wanted to break up the Madras State the arguments were the same.
The article explains how better justice will be delivered when states split. There are so many cases where judgment has gone in favor of the right people but too late. But the present political system has not bothered to add more judges or courts to make the process faster. So this is peoples way of making it happen, create more states and hence more high courts.
Again look at the lopsided development projects. One part of Chennai has almost 24 hours water supply while others has none. We can only imagine the plight of folks in say southern town like Ravanasamudram. Chennai gets Rs.14,000+ Cr metro and some bus depot near Rameshwaram is not running buses due to lack of Rs.140 spare parts. Look at Pondicherry/Delhi because the state is small services delivered well...
That's why Tamil Nadu should be also split for example into two/three states and with capitals in cities that are not business centers.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody
This is a little story about four people named Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody.
There was an important job to be done and Everybody was asked to do it.
But Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it.
Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did.
Somebody got angry about that, because it was Everybody's job.
Everybody thought Anybody could do it, but Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn't do it.
It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have done.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Western conservative conundrum
I am treading into dangerous territory here. Actions of politicians (at least in public), makes me believe that a decent majority of American's believe that Bible is the word of god and that it is historically correct and its predictions will become true. Especially self proclaimed conservatives don't hide the fact that they believe in the second coming of Christ and the day is not far. Based on that belief, they argue that it is OK to use up all the resources and trash the planet. After, they claim, God gave man this earth to "Be fruitful and multiply". So we have multiply, defends our right to carry arms and to shoot wolves from airplanes.
But these same people turn around and warn us, that the liberal democratic government is putting the lives of future generations in jeopardy. By doing what ? borrowing and spending too much and leaving it to the future generations to pay. I am asking why not, Judgement day is just around the corner anyways. All these tree hugging dems are going to be juded so they better enjoy whatever is left of their lives. And they should be live a life as flashy and conspicuous as possible. Produce mountains of trash, wipe out rain forests and God created specieses. When these are are perfectly fine things to do, what's the big deal about some paper money ?
While I find this conservative double talk interesting, I am for smaller and more focused "government" that does its job well. So I am not in favor of the current, out of control government spending. It is doing in America, by weakening it financially and hence reducing its power and influence.
But these same people turn around and warn us, that the liberal democratic government is putting the lives of future generations in jeopardy. By doing what ? borrowing and spending too much and leaving it to the future generations to pay. I am asking why not, Judgement day is just around the corner anyways. All these tree hugging dems are going to be juded so they better enjoy whatever is left of their lives. And they should be live a life as flashy and conspicuous as possible. Produce mountains of trash, wipe out rain forests and God created specieses. When these are are perfectly fine things to do, what's the big deal about some paper money ?
While I find this conservative double talk interesting, I am for smaller and more focused "government" that does its job well. So I am not in favor of the current, out of control government spending. It is doing in America, by weakening it financially and hence reducing its power and influence.
Adjusting to humans victory over natural selection
As humans we have pretty eliminated natural as a selection factor in population growth. Our safety nets ensures that virtually every one of has, an opportunity to pass their genes on, in spite of, any genetic frailties, plain old stupidity etc. In fact we have turned natural selection on it head. Educated and affluent population, which seems to have an advantage, fails miserably when it comes procreation. At the same time, scientific (and social) advances has also resulted in ballooning population, around the world. Tilting the balance to those, who seem to want to turn the development clock backwards. In my opinion, this is paving the way for natural selection process to come back to power.
Our current social systems are failing in many ways and ensuring misery for those who don't genetically fit into it.
Example 1: Each individuals burns calories differently, but some how we universal 2000 calories a day recommendation. Here ideally we would have a system which empowers individuals to take advantage of, or overcome his/her genetic disposition to have an optimal life.
Example 2: Due population growth and lack of sufficient awareness, there is rampant over fishing and dramatic falls in fisheries around the globe. What is growing, the super trawlers with 100s of crew members, barbaric practices like culling millions of sharks for just their fins. Ideally we would have growth in population of individuals, who would not only seek benefit from the environment, but also ensure that it is available for future generations to enjoy.
What can we change or do we need to here ?
I think, the factory model, the one thing fits all model, has to go. What do I mean by the factory model ? Here is an example, each kid learns differently. But our education system resembles a factory. If you can't absorb information through the preferred text book medium in bland class rooms setting, sorry you are out of luck. Countless number of kids, who can be called extremely smart, are failed by the system. These kids are supposed to have a genetic advantage, instead many of them land up on the wrong side of the society. Another example the "correction" system, which takes in petty criminals and produce hardened criminals out of them. Even though we are long winded while exalting individuality, we provide every one with a square pant and say good luck.
I also posted this @ Facebook :Evolution is NOT a theory: it's scientific fact!.
Our current social systems are failing in many ways and ensuring misery for those who don't genetically fit into it.
Example 1: Each individuals burns calories differently, but some how we universal 2000 calories a day recommendation. Here ideally we would have a system which empowers individuals to take advantage of, or overcome his/her genetic disposition to have an optimal life.
Example 2: Due population growth and lack of sufficient awareness, there is rampant over fishing and dramatic falls in fisheries around the globe. What is growing, the super trawlers with 100s of crew members, barbaric practices like culling millions of sharks for just their fins. Ideally we would have growth in population of individuals, who would not only seek benefit from the environment, but also ensure that it is available for future generations to enjoy.
What can we change or do we need to here ?
I think, the factory model, the one thing fits all model, has to go. What do I mean by the factory model ? Here is an example, each kid learns differently. But our education system resembles a factory. If you can't absorb information through the preferred text book medium in bland class rooms setting, sorry you are out of luck. Countless number of kids, who can be called extremely smart, are failed by the system. These kids are supposed to have a genetic advantage, instead many of them land up on the wrong side of the society. Another example the "correction" system, which takes in petty criminals and produce hardened criminals out of them. Even though we are long winded while exalting individuality, we provide every one with a square pant and say good luck.
I also posted this @ Facebook :Evolution is NOT a theory: it's scientific fact!.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Say cheeze .. in chinese
This is one of the most hilarious and ridiculous excuse I have heard in my life. "(Chinese) Prison officers initially claimed he died while playing a game of hide-and-seek with other inmates."
Give me a break. 24 year old prisoner was playing hide and seek with who ? the guards wife ? If he was playing hide and seek at the age of 24 may be he should not have been in a prison in the first place. Or he wasn't playing hide and seek in that dumpster after all his bones where broken. Then the same government calls Dalai Lama a terrorist.
Give me a break. 24 year old prisoner was playing hide and seek with who ? the guards wife ? If he was playing hide and seek at the age of 24 may be he should not have been in a prison in the first place. Or he wasn't playing hide and seek in that dumpster after all his bones where broken. Then the same government calls Dalai Lama a terrorist.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Puppet journalists
During Rumsfeld era, it was "eye-rack". Then it changed to "ir-rack". So did "Eye-ran" a more correct sounding "ir-ron". Now it is south Asia's turn. It was "Pack-is-tan" and "Af-gan-is-tan" ("a" in afganistan is pronounced like in the word "tan") to Obama pronunciation of "Pock-is-tawn" and "Af-gan-is-tan" (still a sounds like it does in sun tan).
It is amazing how "suggestable" journalists are. They are not only affected by the sound bytes, they get from the political spin factories, it is evident that they are even affected by the pronunciation. If they are so "suggestible" can we ever expect real objective reporting ?
It is amazing how "suggestable" journalists are. They are not only affected by the sound bytes, they get from the political spin factories, it is evident that they are even affected by the pronunciation. If they are so "suggestible" can we ever expect real objective reporting ?
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Directed Tax per use
Cold medicine seems to be triggering my creative juices, so I decided to write. Anyway, we hear or read often about how unfair our tax system it is, many of us think, if only there was a better system. Conservatives say people at top 20%, those who earn through hard work and innovation, pay 80% of the tax. Liberals say people become become rich by taking advantage of the system and services (government funded universities, infrastructure, low cost labor covered by medicare etc) need to pay their fair share and help out the unfortunate ones.
"I am paying too much" or "you are not paying for what you use" can be resolved by pay for what each entity uses. The problem here is multi-fold. For example a company mines for coal/oil they are "supposed" to pay royalty. Now that revenue is too fungible i.e. it goes to what ever programs the government deems necessary. This allows the government to create wasteful programs, under funded programs for political gains, budget deficits sitting on top of an unfair tax system. So the collection system is unfair and the distribution is unfair and corrupt. Here is a way to fix the collection part. We have pay-per-view boxing matches, pay-as-you-go cell phone, why can't we create a "tax per use" system. And to fix the distribution side we tie each source to a target service that created the tax revenue, followed by investments for the programs and so on. And voila we have "Directed tax per use". And to fund basic government services like defense, law enforcement, judiciary, immigration, emergency management etc the existing tax has to reduced to a graduated but lower base tax regime that nets every one.
We already have many examples Directed tax per use:
The system will help in many ways.
It will also help us eventually get rid of some meaningless connections that exist now, like house tax funding schools in many school districts. Income tax from hard working people going to social security programs for people who have and will never contribute into the program. The tax system will hopefully lag behind new and emerging industries and hence allowing for an automatic low/no tax regime for innovative new industries.
The main point here is to create a direct channels of income between programs and the beneficiaries. It can be complemented by a well thought out VAT and a tax percentage ceiling for a well balanced and a fair tax system. Most of the tax collected will be backward looking i.e. so are most of the expenses. We need to employ some creative thinking to create funds for forward looking programs.
"I am paying too much" or "you are not paying for what you use" can be resolved by pay for what each entity uses. The problem here is multi-fold. For example a company mines for coal/oil they are "supposed" to pay royalty. Now that revenue is too fungible i.e. it goes to what ever programs the government deems necessary. This allows the government to create wasteful programs, under funded programs for political gains, budget deficits sitting on top of an unfair tax system. So the collection system is unfair and the distribution is unfair and corrupt. Here is a way to fix the collection part. We have pay-per-view boxing matches, pay-as-you-go cell phone, why can't we create a "tax per use" system. And to fix the distribution side we tie each source to a target service that created the tax revenue, followed by investments for the programs and so on. And voila we have "Directed tax per use". And to fund basic government services like defense, law enforcement, judiciary, immigration, emergency management etc the existing tax has to reduced to a graduated but lower base tax regime that nets every one.
We already have many examples Directed tax per use:
- Cigarette taxes fund expenses caused by smoking related illnesses.
- Skilled worker H1B visa fees funding education programs for US citizens.
- Restaurants and bar taxes funding sports stadiums.
- Tolls and gas tax funding roads, bridges etc
- Coal mines could found global warming related and mitigation projects.
- Road maintenance funded miles driven per annum.
- Each educated worker employed, discoveries and inventions from government funded research programs to education and research programs.
- Number of medicare supported employees and families to medicare tax.
- Part of customs duties could fund programs help create jobs for those displaced workers.
The system will help in many ways.
- It ensures each entity pays for and pays only for, the services/resources that it uses or depletes.
- It will help sustain services that help existing and useful services.
- It will also help create replacement or modernize acquisition depleting resources.
- It will help find ways to find remedies to industrial activities that damage the environment.
- It does not tax the grandma who only drives her car 2000 miles a year at the same level as the commuter who drives 1000 miles a month.
It will also help us eventually get rid of some meaningless connections that exist now, like house tax funding schools in many school districts. Income tax from hard working people going to social security programs for people who have and will never contribute into the program. The tax system will hopefully lag behind new and emerging industries and hence allowing for an automatic low/no tax regime for innovative new industries.
The main point here is to create a direct channels of income between programs and the beneficiaries. It can be complemented by a well thought out VAT and a tax percentage ceiling for a well balanced and a fair tax system. Most of the tax collected will be backward looking i.e. so are most of the expenses. We need to employ some creative thinking to create funds for forward looking programs.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Gandhi is squirming in is his grave
Gandhi's personal effects auctioned off for a whopping USD 1.8 million to a pompous self promoting liquor baron. The irony doesn't end there, he wanted to buy it on behalf of who ? the Indian politicians, the new self appointed saviors of Indian heritage. The ultimate receivers are even farther removed from Gandhi than the guy who won the bid. Even though I am disgusted by this whole thing there is a silver lining. The proceeds went to a well known Pacifist, who admires Gandhi and his principles.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
The government blows it again
I can't believe how the government can totally blow a simple thing like DTV transition. They blew the following:
* Estimate the number of people who would elect to get the box.
* Process claims in a timely manner
* Get funds allocated to handle additional demand.
Now lets apply this same scenario to government run health care system.
* Can we trust them to estimate number of a flu cases this season
* Can they be trusted to process Rx claims in case of an large outbreak, at least the first one. And we afford such a failure ?
* Will they get resources allocated, in time, when they found out they screwed up ?
I am still waiting to see how much of the DTV program was actually wasted in administrative costs. I know they already run medicare, medicaid and VA health system. And everyone knows they aren't models of success either. Still, I am amazed how many people argue-for/promote government run health care programs for "everyone". Can anyone expect anything other than universally lousy/horrible healthcare ?
* Estimate the number of people who would elect to get the box.
* Process claims in a timely manner
* Get funds allocated to handle additional demand.
Now lets apply this same scenario to government run health care system.
* Can we trust them to estimate number of a flu cases this season
* Can they be trusted to process Rx claims in case of an large outbreak, at least the first one. And we afford such a failure ?
* Will they get resources allocated, in time, when they found out they screwed up ?
I am still waiting to see how much of the DTV program was actually wasted in administrative costs. I know they already run medicare, medicaid and VA health system. And everyone knows they aren't models of success either. Still, I am amazed how many people argue-for/promote government run health care programs for "everyone". Can anyone expect anything other than universally lousy/horrible healthcare ?
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Religiosity
Time and again I see perfectly smart, pragmatic and logical people, people that I lookup to, amaze me by fervently defending religion. For millennia religions have greatly enhanced civilization across the world. As I look back in my own short and uneventful life I see lots of occasions where religion has help me and continuous to do so. I am sure there many thousands who can say the same. But what bothers me is the baggage religions come with, Mumbai massacre, Israeli Palestinian conflict etc...
My doubts are many layered but the root of which is the question If god created time space and mass/energy, what was there before, and who created that. Some people argue that god does not need to be created he is eternal, omnipotent. Then why does universe need creator then ? May be universe is god then ?
Let us agree for a moment that God does exist. Why would 1 or more entities that existed before time, space or mass/energy exited, be so much interested in what spec (human) among billions on specs (earth) among billions of specs (milkyway) in this universe, which could be one of billions of alternate universes. So I my significance to to god is .000000000......000000000000000000000......00000000000000....1 to 1.
Let us also agree god is interested, then it rises the question that why are gods actions are so biased. Like for example as per the God of Christians anyone who doesn't become a christian is going to hell, including the people he chose leaving rest of the humanity. God if Islam ensures all the infidels, subordination and/or death @ the hands of the holly warriors followed by hell. While promising 19 virgins to martyrs at his private abode Jannath. The gods of the Vedas seem to prefer the minority uppercaste over rest for liberation (Moksha) from the cycle of life and death. They all unite in one point though, giving second class citizenship to women.
And lastly why is god interested in, where and how much hair you can grow, Muslims, Jews, Sikhs and Brahmins have specific instruction on how much hair one can or cannot have. Is it because God doesn't have hair ? And also about clothing, food etc. And then comes the prayer. You almost always to go by some book. And even mindlessly rant some ancient text is acceptable over not doing so. Holding some postures, offer some things only a human would need to survive, smokey substances, some specially dressed "special" individuals (likes of Osho, Khomenei) and finally offerings for their holy cause (TD Jakes, John Hagee). This sounds like social engineering to me.
Back to the topic, you wouldn't have to go too far to find scientifically trained, very logical and pragmatic individuals who would defend their religion fervently. Some of the common reason given in defense of religion are:
"It gives meaning to life"
"It explains the unexplainable".
My humble question, doesn't the explanation have to be true ? Is it possible that we were influenced by those power feelings when we were young and impressionable. Are we simply falling to feeling of "good old days" or our favorite childhood memories/emotions clouding our vision ? Are the answers give by the religion worth the price ? I am not asking to throw baby with the bath water. Religion/traditional culture contains a lots of lessons learned by humanity over many millennia that makes human life more enjoyable or less miserable depending. I am sure society and science has evolved enough to be able separate those learnings and pass it on.
Is the spontaneous defense of something some large as religion arising in spite of their own reasoning or the lack of an encouragement to do so. I highly suspect the later because of most religions give little space for reason. There is also liberal use fear/intimidation and unreasonable rewards after once death. Its interesting to note that the pay day for bad deeds almost always sold as instantaneous in contrast what one gets for good deeds. I find it funny that, the immediacy of punishment is reserved for the most honest sincere believers, because most Hitlers, Saddams, Stalins, Polpots, Castros' never get punished. Look @ the king/queen of England, under her throne the ruthless British empire sucked the lifeblood of almost a billion people. British people are doing just fine.
Call me an atheist but the more I think about this topic, the more questions I get. And most of the saints and prophets claim the opposite ;) They all went off onto some mountains or into a forest and come back with more of the same. I can't believe they did not not have some other interests.
My doubts are many layered but the root of which is the question If god created time space and mass/energy, what was there before, and who created that. Some people argue that god does not need to be created he is eternal, omnipotent. Then why does universe need creator then ? May be universe is god then ?
Let us agree for a moment that God does exist. Why would 1 or more entities that existed before time, space or mass/energy exited, be so much interested in what spec (human) among billions on specs (earth) among billions of specs (milkyway) in this universe, which could be one of billions of alternate universes. So I my significance to to god is .000000000......000000000000000000000......00000000000000....1 to 1.
Let us also agree god is interested, then it rises the question that why are gods actions are so biased. Like for example as per the God of Christians anyone who doesn't become a christian is going to hell, including the people he chose leaving rest of the humanity. God if Islam ensures all the infidels, subordination and/or death @ the hands of the holly warriors followed by hell. While promising 19 virgins to martyrs at his private abode Jannath. The gods of the Vedas seem to prefer the minority uppercaste over rest for liberation (Moksha) from the cycle of life and death. They all unite in one point though, giving second class citizenship to women.
And lastly why is god interested in, where and how much hair you can grow, Muslims, Jews, Sikhs and Brahmins have specific instruction on how much hair one can or cannot have. Is it because God doesn't have hair ? And also about clothing, food etc. And then comes the prayer. You almost always to go by some book. And even mindlessly rant some ancient text is acceptable over not doing so. Holding some postures, offer some things only a human would need to survive, smokey substances, some specially dressed "special" individuals (likes of Osho, Khomenei) and finally offerings for their holy cause (TD Jakes, John Hagee). This sounds like social engineering to me.
Back to the topic, you wouldn't have to go too far to find scientifically trained, very logical and pragmatic individuals who would defend their religion fervently. Some of the common reason given in defense of religion are:
"It gives meaning to life"
"It explains the unexplainable".
My humble question, doesn't the explanation have to be true ? Is it possible that we were influenced by those power feelings when we were young and impressionable. Are we simply falling to feeling of "good old days" or our favorite childhood memories/emotions clouding our vision ? Are the answers give by the religion worth the price ? I am not asking to throw baby with the bath water. Religion/traditional culture contains a lots of lessons learned by humanity over many millennia that makes human life more enjoyable or less miserable depending. I am sure society and science has evolved enough to be able separate those learnings and pass it on.
Is the spontaneous defense of something some large as religion arising in spite of their own reasoning or the lack of an encouragement to do so. I highly suspect the later because of most religions give little space for reason. There is also liberal use fear/intimidation and unreasonable rewards after once death. Its interesting to note that the pay day for bad deeds almost always sold as instantaneous in contrast what one gets for good deeds. I find it funny that, the immediacy of punishment is reserved for the most honest sincere believers, because most Hitlers, Saddams, Stalins, Polpots, Castros' never get punished. Look @ the king/queen of England, under her throne the ruthless British empire sucked the lifeblood of almost a billion people. British people are doing just fine.
Call me an atheist but the more I think about this topic, the more questions I get. And most of the saints and prophets claim the opposite ;) They all went off onto some mountains or into a forest and come back with more of the same. I can't believe they did not not have some other interests.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Embarassing or awkward or may be nothing.
This is the first time I am writing about a topic like this. But I had to write because it happened twice.
This afternoon when I was going down in the elevator, there were already 5 other women (working a different company above) involved in a giggly conversation. I was greeted by an unusual blush and smile by a south Asian looking female. I couldn't help but over hear the conversation. That is when I understood the reason behind the greeting, they were talking about tan marks and some details of how they avoid it. Trust me the door couldn't have opened any slower.
Again this evening I was @ the gym. Again 5-6 ladies around me but mostly senior citizen and a TV in front playing inside edition. And then comes the moment, a closeup shot of oversized stretch marks filled middle section and a doctor drawing out the portions that could be removed to make her look pretty again. The two ladies next to me gasped for a second before starring @ each other and giggling. I guess that was the first instance when I actually was relieved @ an ad break.
May be I am just old school, it at least awkward and weird that it happened twice today.
This afternoon when I was going down in the elevator, there were already 5 other women (working a different company above) involved in a giggly conversation. I was greeted by an unusual blush and smile by a south Asian looking female. I couldn't help but over hear the conversation. That is when I understood the reason behind the greeting, they were talking about tan marks and some details of how they avoid it. Trust me the door couldn't have opened any slower.
Again this evening I was @ the gym. Again 5-6 ladies around me but mostly senior citizen and a TV in front playing inside edition. And then comes the moment, a closeup shot of oversized stretch marks filled middle section and a doctor drawing out the portions that could be removed to make her look pretty again. The two ladies next to me gasped for a second before starring @ each other and giggling. I guess that was the first instance when I actually was relieved @ an ad break.
May be I am just old school, it at least awkward and weird that it happened twice today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)