• C++ Programming for Financial Engineering
    Highly recommended by thousands of MFE students. Covers essential C++ topics with applications to financial engineering. Learn more Join!
    Python for Finance with Intro to Data Science
    Gain practical understanding of Python to read, understand, and write professional Python code for your first day on the job. Learn more Join!
    An Intuition-Based Options Primer for FE
    Ideal for entry level positions interviews and graduate studies, specializing in options trading arbitrage and options valuation models. Learn more Join!

Corruption in India

And how many students are able to get admitted to govt. colleges? An engineering, private college, can charge anywhere between 1.5l/2l per annum. B-schools and medical colleges can also be very expensive ( non-govt ones). Add to this amount the cost of living. You might talk about quta for admission, but unfortunately, this does NOT take into account income, rather it takes into account one's caste. This sort of division is disgusting IMO.

Security (SBI site)

Amount

For loans upto Rs. 10.00 lacs for Studies inIndia and upto Rs. 20.00 lacs for studies abroad

Upto Rs. 4 lacs

No Security

Above Rs. 4 lacs to Rs. 7.50 lacs

Collateral security in the form of suitable third party guarantee. The bank may, at its discretion, in exceptional cases, weive third party guarantee if satisfied with the net-worth/means of parent/s who would be executing the documents as "joint borrower".

Above Rs. 7.50 lacs.

Tangible collateral security of suitable value, along with the assignment of future income of the student for payment of installments.
You are mistaken that you can get loans of 7 lac easily. One of my poor unfortunate friends got his loan denied because his father's pension wasn't much, and his mother was a house wife.

I agree with you that you can get loans upto 4 lac without collateral. After that they demand third party guarantee. Now if you do NOT have high income ( NOT collateral), you are pretty much doomed, particularly if you make $2.5 a day (less than 4k rupees/month). Keep in mind 90% Indians live below this amount.
 
I think I have asked this question before but... What is "lac"?
 
I feel pity to say that the analytical skills of these (would be) quants are at best mediocre.

First off, the British ruled India for 190 years, not 300.

Second off, according to the logic of the above people, Switzerland is poorer than India. Compare apples with apples and not apples with oranges. India's population is 1.2 billion; therefore, it is but obvious it would have higher GDP than Switserland. Similarly, according to your logic, India is richer than Australia/Canada/Singapore. This is but laughable. Also, you forget to mention the massive population explosion that happened in Europe and in the Americas from 1800 to 1950's. In 1947, for instance US population was 144 million. India was 300 million, and US didn't even exist in 1600's. The fact is India's share of world population declined dramatically to about 10%.Probably 50% of the world lived in India back in 1700's. As far as I remember, massive number of people died in Europe due to black death back in 1400 (anywhere between 40-60%). By the the European population would have recovered, India's population would have risen a lot- to make European contribution to would population negligible.

Next time, mention per capita income, not rubbish GDP. It is a massively flawed way of comparing standard of living in 2 countries.

And no the British didn't rip-off Indians. Stop blaming the British. The Indians themselves are responsible for fighting among themselves and allowing British to rule. I never hear Americans complaining that the Britishers ripped them off. Further, Indians were so closed minded that they never allowed Industrialization, resulting in extremely high prices of goods in India (hand made). Whereas, the British produced cheap goods (not because of cheap labor but because of extremely efficient industries at that time).

Infact, I'd say that British gaveIndians a legal system, without which it would be in even bigger chaos. They abolished sati (the act of women burning themselves when their husband died, a very inhumane act). The British gave Indians railroads; ironically, many trains in India continue to run on those some 150 year old tracks, which haven't been replaced- courtesy corruption in India.

But the biggest contribution of the British was the English language; as a result of which many Indians can get jobs in many American multinationals- these jobs though mundane are still better than being unemployed (there are no benefits in India).

Yes, the British did exploit India, but it was nowhere near to what the mughals did- the muslims. They were the true villains. They forced people to convert into Islam, in many cases killing people. There are numerous historical accounts on this, particularly on what Aurangzeb did. They robbed the temples. Also, in a way they converted our open society into a highly closed one. They couldn't tolerate other religions. The couldn't tolerate any change, and when you stop change, the society becomes stagnant.Yes, the British sent mercenaries, but they didn't force people, by threatening to kill them, to convert their religion. In fact, India stagnated the day Muslims started their rule here.

India's peak was in the Vedic times. It ended with the end of the rule of the Mauryan's and the Gupta's.

If British were bad, then the muslims too were NOT any better.

Mr. Dhar you seem to be the epitome of the quintessential fawning poodle of the Raj. How unmistakable is the tone in which you eulogize the British while ascribing every ills to (as your parochial mind would say) 'Muslims'. Doesnt sound too different from the infamous policies of the imperial rule which culminated in the partition of the country and which is unfortunately still propagated by venomous minds like yours. When you are employing the highly flawed reasonings to stereotype the entire ('Them Muslims') for the actions of a lunatic ruler, perhaps you forget that by that time Muslims had been living in India for more than 700 years,with their roots as firm in India as anybody else's. And certainly more than yours anyway.

Secondly, you have a very poor grasp of history which you tend to use for your convenience. If there was a monarchy in India which could be credited with making India an economic superpower in the middle ages, It was the Mughals. According to Dominique Lapierre and Larry Collins (Freedom at Midnight) , before Jahangir, Sir Thomas Roe was an emissary from the ruler of a small province compared to the economic and military might of the Indian emperor. If you could have guessed, the ruler of the small province being discussed is the great Queen Victoria. If there was anything which could have led to the degradation of India, it was abundance of resources which obviated the need for an immediate scientific advancements. On the other hand, the Industrial revolution in Europe was in response to the extreme wretched conditions of its citizens.

The idea of vilifying particularly the Muslims for a closed society is an incredulous one. The Hindu clergy was as limited in its outlook as the Muslim, with their firmly established casteist hierarchy and ludicrous ideas like Sati and disavowing anybody stepping on foreign shores. However, this is not to suggest that the Muslims could be exonerated for their extreme restrictions on women.

Thankfully you are a part of a miniscule voice which excludes the presence of the Muslim rule from the study of Indian culture, tending to forget their immense contribution in arts and architecture. India is a great idea of pluralism : an idea engraved in the Vedas, ornated by the Taj and nurtured by its people-everybody.India survived an onslaught of the British, it survived the onslaught of lunatics of partition on both sides (though it was amputated) and it will survive specious arguments by fascists like you, emerging stronger.

PS. If you have something stronger to say, I would suggest a chat in private. Being somewhat more respectful of India's image before the world, I would not prefer washing our dirty linen in public. One more request..Please grow up and think mature..
 
There are hundreds of history books, in fact NCERT books, which clearly stated how muslims came from Afganistan and robbed temples in India. It is because of the tolerance of Indians that Muslims stay in India. Tell me what Pakistan did at Independence. Such were the heinous crimes committed against Hindus to make Pakistan a Muslim majority nation that I do NOT even want to talk about it. Similarly, what about Kashmir? The Kashmiri Pandits were forced to leave their homeland because of such people. What about WTC attacks?

Wikipedia source:
While Sunni Islam was the state religion, there was not widespread pressure to convert; indeed, Jahangir specifically warned his nobles that they "should not force Islam on anyone."[citation needed] In the first century of Islamic expansion this attitude was taken partially because of concerns that an absence of non-Muslims would deprive the state of a valuable source of revenue.

At the start of his(Jahangir's) regime many staunch Sunnis were hopeful, because he seemed less tolerant to other faiths than his father had been. At the time of his accession and the elimination of Abu'l Fazl, his father's chief minister and architect of his eclectic religious stance, a strong orthodox nucleus of noblemen had gained power in administration."[citation needed] Jahangir did not always benevolently regard some Hindu customs and rituals. On visiting a Hindu temple, he found a statue of a man with a pig's head, which was supposed to represent God, so he "ordered them to break that hideous form and throw it in the tank." If the Tuzuk is reliable on this subject (and there is no reason to suspect that it is not), then this was an isolated case.

And no, Aurangzeb was NOT an exception. It was an example.

For a more thorough account from leading contributors at Stanford and other prestigious universities.

http://www.historyofjihad.org/india.html

Unlike the complete Islamization of Persia, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Turkey, North Africa, the Islamization of India was never complete. After more than one millennium of Muslim Tyranny from 715 up to 1761, more than 70 percent of the population of India remained Hindu. This was NOT due to any Muslim charity or benevolence, since the murderous and savage beastlike Muslims have none of these characteristics.
The Muslim tyranny in India was as blood-thirsty and insidious as it was in all parts of the globe that were unfortunate to be trampled by the Jihadis. The Hindus suffered initial setbacks due to the innocuous but ill-founded belief amongst them, as amongst all other non-Muslims, that the Muslims too were normal human beings, who would after a victory, settle down to govern the defeated population. But the Muslims were, and still are, compulsively paranoid mass murderers who can be outmatched only by someone who are themselves doubly compulsively paranoid mass murderers as compared to the Muslims.

The Mughal empire never matched the glory of the Mauryan empire which spread from Iran to South-East Asia. You can see relics related to Hindu gods even in South-East Asia. In fact, India was the center of innovation, both cultural and scientific. Think of the great Mathematicians such as Aryabhatta. Similarly, Yoga. The Vadas, the source of eternal knowledge, were also written in that age. Infact, the so called Arabic numerals spread to Europe by Arabs were infact created by Indian Mathematicians. The list is endless.

You'd be a fool to compare that golden age to the Muslim rule. The Muslims were busy infesting the rich nation of ours, robbing temples and taking gold back to Afganistan.
 
though i dont agree entirely with the jan lokpal bill, i feel that this kinda people's movement is necessary to let this UPA know that they cant always take people for a ride.. this truly is the show of strength of THE INDIAN MIDDLE CLASS :D
 
Yep. We have to show the govt. the power of people. This is one chance that Indians cannot afford to squabble. For first time since Independence, the people of India have awoken from their long sleep and joined in unison to fight the war against corruption, especially that done by bureaucrats. However, this is just the beginning. A lot needs to be done.
 
I would request the moderator to close the thread because of highly polarizing and anti-secular comments posted on this thread defying the entire purpose of this thread (according to me). Comment is not addressed to any particular person commenting on the thread (though could have been targeted to specific individuals who make sure to take the forum to new lows in every thread they get involved in. Personally, I would have banned them a long time ago).

Just my opinion, if you do not agree with it, please ignore it with your "open and tolerant minds"
 
R
There are hundreds of history books, in fact NCERT books, which clearly stated how muslims came from Afganistan and robbed temples in India. It is because of the tolerance of Indians that Muslims stay in India. Tell me what Pakistan did at Independence. Such were the heinous crimes committed against Hindus to make Pakistan a Muslim majority nation that I do NOT even want to talk about it. Similarly, what about Kashmir? The Kashmiri Pandits were forced to leave their homeland because of such people. What about WTC attacks?

Wikipedia source:

And no, Aurangzeb was NOT an exception. It was an example.

For a more thorough account from leading contributors at Stanford and other prestigious universities.

http://www.historyofjihad.org/india.html

The Mughal empire never matched the glory of the Mauryan empire which spread from Iran to South-East Asia. You can see relics related to Hindu gods even in South-East Asia. In fact, India was the center of innovation, both cultural and scientific. Think of the great Mathematicians such as Aryabhatta. Similarly, Yoga. The Vadas, the source of eternal knowledge, were also written in that age. Infact, the so called Arabic numerals spread to Europe by Arabs were infact created by Indian Mathematicians. The list is endless.

You'd be a fool to compare that golden age to the Muslim rule. The Muslims were busy infesting the rich nation of ours, robbing temples and taking gold back to Afganistan.

Rishabh you have an extremely corrupt and a fascist mindset which one would not expect from an educated person. You are directing me to a paranoid and obnoxious website which offers solutions which are 'more blood thirsty'. Further, you quote venomous sentences claiming them to be scholarly work, none of which are supported by any evidences to back the claim of being the 'contributions of faculty from Stanford and all..'. The blood boils equally on the opposite side of the Muslim fundamentalists too. The end result is just annihilation..Rather, as an Indian I can only ask you to work together to build the country.

Its no wonder that with your attitude, you would exclude the Muslims from the term Indians and claim that Muslims are staying only due to tolerance of your definition of 'Indians'. Perhaps you might not have had the fortune of living so, but let me assure you that 138 million Muslims are living in peaceful co-existence with Hindus, save for minor skirmishes. And its not because of some favours but because they consider this land as dear to them as anybody else and as imperative to defend the sovereignty of India as the people of other faiths. Its people like you who provide fodder of hate to the other side of our border to recruit imbeciles in the name of religion. For the sake of India, I can hope for better sense to prevail because people like you are laughed at in India.

When you are intentionally demeaning the Mughal Empire when compared to Mauryan Empire, it just reflects your parochial mindset-perhaps you chose to refute the fact that both were great Indian empires in their respective ages and a source of pride for their contemporary denizens as well as for us centuries later. Unlike you, I do not see my history in terms of a 'Hindu' India or a 'Muslim' India. Neither do I ascribe our progress in science as Hindu progress or in architecture as Muslim progress. I see an India which was flourishing but has impeded due the degradation of own values which results in corruption-both in monetary and spiritual terms.

I am quite strong and on the correct side of history, hence there is no need for me to quote flawed sites to cite instances of Muslim contribution to the country..If you are residing in India, I can only lament for such people who try to decry the foundations on which Modern India has been established.

(And I thought Fascism was dead post World War!!)
 
I would request the moderator to close the thread because of highly polarizing and anti-secular comments posted on this thread defying the entire purpose of this thread (according to me). Comment is not addressed to any particular person commenting on the thread (though could have been targeted to specific individuals who make sure to take the forum to new lows in every thread they get involved in. Personally, I would have banned them a long time ago).

Just my opinion, if you do not agree with it, please ignore it with your "open and tolerant minds"
I am really sorry if I have taken a wrong recourse to this issue. My conscience is clear as is my commitment to an open minded society with peaceful coexistence ,especially concerning India. I assure you that my further comments would not be digressing from the broader issue of quantitative finance and I would chose to ignore flagrant comments.
 
Perhaps you might not have had the fortune of living so, but let me assure you that 138 million Muslims are living in peaceful co-existence with Hindus, save for minor skirmishes.

You think that Kashmir issue is a minor skirmish? The Hindus were forced to leave their livelihood, rendering them homeless, to save their lives. Such extreme steps are NOT taken if the situation were anything close to what you described. Kashmiri Pandits were willing to be homeless and hungry but NOT willing to return to Kashmir.

Think about it.

P.S This is the end of discussion on this topic from my side, as the thread is on corruption and NOT this.
 
India is corrupt. I feel very saddened that many poor students who are otherwise very smart are never given a chance to study in top colleges because they don't have the funds. My family even supports 5 other students who can't afford to go to colleges. Many Universities have seats allocated to NRIs and these seats are generally bought. I recall my uncle saying that he had to pay close to 20000 dollars just so his daughter could be admitted to a top medical college in India. The problem is India has over 1 billion population. It becomes a supply demand issue. Lack of seats, huge demand, lets raise prices. That would be fine if it ended there. Even getting jobs is corrupt. Birla company for instance, there is a human resource president there who takes 10 thousand dollars to hire someone. Literally. If you want the job, you need to pay him 10 grand to be given the job. its sad but true
 
and to add another point. the rich well off people will never understand this. the middle class talk about this at homes in their family circle. Politicians raise this as an issue to win elections. But many politicians don't walk the talk. They become easily corrupt once they get the seat. Even the seats in the parliament are bought. Manmohan sigh is probably the most useless leader India has ever had. Ever since he has taken over, prices of agricultural products have risen, which doesnt make sense. India is producing more than 10 times the agriculture products compared to 1940s. However, prices has still risen. Before, 20 rupees = 1 dollar, but today it is around 40. so purchasing power has declined significantly.
 
Though it has to be stressed that corruption is not uniquely Indian. At the risk of digressing, here is a 2002 article by Matthew Parris in The Times describing his experience with the "WaBenzi" (Parris I think used to be PPS to Maggie Thatcher and had his own program -- "Weekend World" -- on BBC2 on Sundays in the late '80s):

My fellow passengers at Gatwick struck me as worth describing less as an exercise in travel writing (we all have our airport stories) than as an object lesson in the politics of development. For this was the elite, the commercial and administrative class through whom (short of the reimposition of colonial rule) both aid and advice from countries such as ours must be channelled. These were the rich. They must have been. They were able to fly to and from Europe. Some were from Gabon, many from Congo, and all had been shopping.

The word “shopping” hardly does justice to the industrial scale of this little crowd´s acquisitions. I have seldom in one place seen a collection of luggage at the same time so ostentatious, so expensive and so gross. They were leather or fabric-covered suitcases as high as a child, and more cube-shaped than case- shaped.

And everyone kept pushing in. We started in a queue — three whites scattered among the Africans — but by the time the whites got anywhere near the check-in desk we were the last three in the line. The man in skirt and trainers and his enormous wife simply barged. Others sidled. Some struck up loud conversations with those at the front of the queue, then pretended to be positioned there.
 
I disagree. A few economists or journalists might carry that obsession, but India is so different from China in most aspects (size, scale, governance, systems, culture, religion, diversity etc), that it is impossible to compare growth, rate of progress, or underlying systems. Even culturally there is so much difference that China is rarely discussed in normal walks of life, and there is hardly any culture and knowledge sharing between the two countries currently. Broadly speaking, South Asia is a bit detached from East Asia. It is an "obsession" of the West to include India in the same context as China.

Also I would reiterate that the problems discussed in this thread exist to some extent in most countries and in a country like India, it sometimes takes years to reach a consensus and make little ground, but rest assured, progress (even if invisible to some people) is happening everyday. Its very easy to pick negatives as there are so many, and ignore the positive inroads being made.
 
Back
Top