It's crazy to me that if we disregard all of the historical importance, the government still doesn't have the foresight to invest in maintaining it's number one tourist destination in the country. However, I fear throwing money at the problem is a temporary solution for the actual structure where fixing the surrounding pollution is more important.
Money is thrown at issues in India when there’s a direct individual (or a few) beneficiary from that money throwing and the solving of that problem was not even the last point on the agenda.
So I’ll present an example. Let’s talk about a 10km road that needs repair. The discussion would start at points like how much the contractors would make, what will be the cut of tie engineer, chief engineer, MLA, MP, district administration if they are involved. Whether a cut has to go to the CM too? Or tje party fund. Things of practical interests.
How strong the road will be, how safe it would be, quality assurance etc are a matter of formality and routine which also ensures there’s another repair after a year or two and everyone is happy again.
However if the intention is to really solve a problem then it takes years - committee after committee, studies after studies - became no one is interested.
Though maintenance is an issue, I’ve been told another issue is craftsmanship. It was slapped together by slaves to serve as a tomb for the third wife of an emperor who had a harem of 2000 women yet saw it fit to drag his favorite into the battlefield for his comfort (she succumbed to complications bearing no. 14 in the 19th year of her marriage). They might as well let it crumble. It's a grotesque monument which tourists adore.
Shoddy construction or not, it is a beautiful design. Can you recommend a source for that? I can imagine that he was in a hurry to have it built before he died.
Not really. Just a comment by a visitor. It’s said it took thousands of slaves about 20 years to build but aside from the architect they may not have had expertise.
This is idiotic comment at some level, sorry to say.
Any historical monument should be preserved not only because it is beautiful but because it captures history. It is the history which is not written in textbooks, it is the history which is right in front of you to see.
Taj is just a building but it tells so many stories about architecture, mogul empire, passion and what not.
Regarding the Pyramid of Giza, the current best understanding is:
> .. that they were paid laborers who took great pride in their work and were not slaves, as was previously thought. Evidence from the tombs indicates that a workforce of 10,000 laborers working in three-month shifts took around 30 years to build a pyramid. Most of the workers appear to have come from poor families. Specialists such as architects, masons, metalworkers and carpenters, were permanently employed by the king to fill positions that required the most skill. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giza_pyramid_complex#Tombs_of_...
Seems surprising to me that the supreme court is so involved in this issue. In the United States, the supreme court tries its hardest to avoid answering a question if it can, and certainly tries to avoid anything that looks like it's writing a new law.
Can someone who is more knowledgeable comment on this?
Interesting that you bring it up. The Indian Supreme court has always been very active and seems to provide a sense of "balance" to the political chaos that is persistent. There was a very good (albeit very west-centric) article in NYT about this - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/27/world/asia/india-supreme-...
I remember, back in 1995, reading a big banner hung up on a very prominent intersection in the downtown Mumbai area, that celebrated a supreme court decision on a controversial political corruption case by declaring "Thanks to the supreme court, India survives despite it's politicians. That, at that time, summed up the feelings of many urban middle class residents.
Partly, it is because the US Constitution and Indian Constitution are very different documents. Look especially at Part IV of the Indian Constitution, "Directive Principles of State Policy". See for example Article 43 which requires the Indian government to endeavour to provide a living wage. So, the Indian Supreme Court gets to evaluate (if it wants to) whether the Indian government is doing enough to provide a living wage. By contrast, the US Constitution says nothing about a living wage, so the US Supreme Court has very little constitutional justification to get involved in wage policy.
(Part IV is non-justiciable – you can't sue the government for violating it per se; but, nevertheless, the Courts are supposed to keep it in mind in their decision making, and so I think it does contribute to some of the substantial differences between Indian and American constitutional and judicial cultures.)
"The Taj is so wasteful, so decadent and in the end so cruel that it is painful to be there for very long. This is an extravagance that speaks of the blood of the people." VS Naipaul
Irrespective whether it bankrupted the Moghuls and made the successor of the throne, epitome of rape, pillage and plunder.. those dues have been paid, and there is no un-turning.
As repulsive the history behind the Taj and its consequences are, ruining it with a cocktail of incompetence, corruption and apathy is not the step forward.
The Taj Mahal was the highlight of my trip to India. It surpassed all expectations. I hope that the Indian government can figure out how to save it before it's too late, but this article gives me little to no faith.
This is a phase Europe went through as well - many of the great Medieval and Renaissance cathedrals were badly damaged by the pollution of industrialization, and had to be restored after pollution got under control. Luckily, that seems to have worked out (at great expense), and was a major rallying symbol for the environmentalist movement.
So, the marble is deteriorating because of acid rain, I presume? At least it hasn't been looted like so many wonders of the world. I imagine the pyramids must have been breathtaking with their original sheathing.
"Incredible India", as the country's tourism slogan claims, is fast disappearing. I know this may get downvoted by fans of India, but I'm just saying it as I see it. If it matters, I'm of Indian origin too.
First of all, India has everything it needs to be amazing. A young workforce, driven, technical people, a nice selection of flourishing industries, bucket loads of natural resources and abundant sources of renewable energy. Yet it seems to make use of those things poorly.
Whenever I step into Delhi, or any major Indian city, I feel like I'm stepping into chaos. The buildings are blackened and poorly planned. The sky, perpetually grey with pollution. The traffic is idiotic. I'm convinced the volume of cars is not the problem, but instead lack of road etiquette is to blame. Every car, whether it be a cheap Honda or an expensive S-class has a dent or two in it. Everyone's beeping horns for no apparent reason, and crawling forward at ten meters a minute. It's a great metaphor for the country as a whole - it appears loud and active, but the actual activity is somewhat unsubstantial.
While I was in Delhi about 2 weeks ago, my father asked me to advise the 17 year old son of one of his employees. I met the guy - a studious, fiercly competitive lad, but pleasant nonetheless. He wanted to become a doctor; I asked him "why a doctor?". His response was that he could make a lot of money in that field, specifically because people come to you when they're in need and in trouble. I then asked him "What about helping people? Interest in the subject itself? Passion?". He fobbed those questions off like they simply didn't matter. (Aside: the medical system in India is ruthless - if you're ill, you will likely be taken advantage of, and it can bring you and your family to your knees very, very quickly. Even my own grandfather's gold rings and dental filings mysteriously disappeared when he passed away in the most reputable hospital in Delhi).
Why am I telling you the above story? Well, because I see this mindset almost everywhere in India. Cold hearted profiteering is killing passion and genuine interest amongst vast swathes of society. It's horribly unpleasant, and it doesn't surprise me that things of cultural importance are taking such a back seat. In the case of the Taj, I bet the money was available, but improperly used or swindled away (adminstrative government officials in India are known for their corruption - it's one of the perks of the job apparently). Anyway, the crumbling Taj is simply another metaphor for the crumbling culture of India, and it really does make me rather sad.
>While I was in Delhi about 2 weeks ago, my father asked me to advise the 17 year old son of one of his employees. I met the guy - a studious, fiercly competitive lad, but pleasant nonetheless. He wanted to become a doctor; I asked him "why a doctor?". His response was that he could make a lot of money in that field, specifically because people come to you when they're in need and in trouble. I then asked him "What about helping people? Interest in the subject itself? Passion?". He fobbed those questions off like they simply didn't matter.
You have to have a certain level of wealth before you care about "passion". Sometimes if you grow up seeing the consequences of being poor, the desire to never go through that again becomes your passion. That is why you then optimize your career to make money rather than follow your "passion".
I don't disagree with you, however, the individual in my story was not "poor" - he was part of India's middle class. His father was being paid reasonably well at my dad's firm for the last 20+ years.
So, while his father was being paid reasonably well according to you - he is employed by your father's firm, which leads me to believe you grew up with considerably more resources to be able to pursue your passions then the child in question. As such, the argument still applies that not everyone has an ability or an opportunity to pursue their passions.
My personal situation, on a relative scale, is rather more tragic. I would suggest you not to make that assumption about my upbringing, for you would be quite incorrect.
I don't think you understand what I'm saying. In a sense, I'm agreeing with you.
Passion is a luxury in India, yes, but because of the way society has been set up. We need to change things so as to nurture the passions of our people, rather than have them scrambling for basic necessities. I believe we have all the ingredients to make it happen, but seem to lack the will or a plan.
I think where I'm disagreeing with you is I believe passion is a luxury due to economic constraints rather than an artifact of societal setup, at least in the modern times.
In historic times, and to a lesser extent even now, careers were decided based on family, so there yes societal setup led to suppression of passion. However, even then how much of that was due to economic reasons and how much societal if a difficult question to answer, at least for me.
But, OTOH, I do agree that India has all the ingredients to become much greater - how do we get there is a much more complicated topic.
You are ratifying my point, especially in your deleted comment. The rest of this response was originally for your deleted comment. I think it makes sense here as well:
A poorly funded school is a governmental/societal failing. As is the inability to afford basic necessities. It should simply never be that way. We produce enough food to feed c. 10bn people, yet parts of the world go hungry. We can cheaply disseminate education almost anywhere today, yet large portions of the world remain uneducated. In a country like India, these things can now be addressed, if only there was a plan and a sincere effort to execute that plan.
I did not mean to hurt you and I sincerely hope you escape/have escaped your hell, but more importantly, that you don't create hell for others once you do escape. Perhaps even try to alleviate the hell of others when you are able to do so.
My point is, given the resources we have, life doesn't need to be hell. It can be good, if we manage things properly.
It is easy to moralize when you don't know where the shoe bites. It might look decent to you from the outside but even decently paid struggle to keep up because of the following factors:
1. India does not have a social safety net so every man or family is for themselves. This just forces people to give first priority to accumulation of money.
2. Even a decent life style in India is not affordable unless you are a business which is either insanely profitable or knows how to hide profits. Even the top bracket earners can't afford decent life style unless they are willing to live hand to mouth or on credit.
3. Suburbs and small cities are so under developed that you can't live there unless you have made a decision to compromise your Children future.
Fun fact: My salary is in top 10-20% range of what you can get in India but the moment I step into India my savings rate drop to almost close to zero due to following factors:
Taxes: You salary is taxed at 35% effectively. This is money you are paying with no returns to be seen. Remember there is no social safety net. If you are saving for modest future via Employee provident fund, your in-hand income drops to 50% of the stated salary.
Rent or Mortgage: Unless you were lucky or have an ancestral property in the right place, you will be paying a decent chunk of your income to rent seekers who will push for a 10% increases Y-o-Y unless you are willing to move bases every 11 months. With Kids going to school, it's not easy to switch every year. You can save this money only when you are willing to put up in shady neighborhood or travel from out skirts for 2-3 hours each side.
Schools & Education: There are only a few good state run Schools so putting kids into Private Schools (which are ironically called Public School) is the only option. This costs significant chunk of your remaining income.
Transportation: You have to buy a car to get anywhere as public transport is overcrowded and not very comfortable especially for Children and elderly. Even then you don't save much as travel from your home to these public transport will still cost you decent money as you just can't walk to public transport.
If you dare to save, the interest earned is taxed. If you try to spend, the spending is taxed - buy a house or a car or a motorcycle, all luxury items by Indian government's standards, you are taxed heavily. The bribes collected by the government officials increase the tax burden. By the way, bribes are now expected and people refusing to take or give are looked down upon:
https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/current-affairs/21111...
All this while the mega rich are enjoying tax breaks.
> rent seekers who will push for a 10% increases Y-o-Y unless
Most landlords have owned properties through inheritance which suddenly jumped in value when business grew around them. This in turn happened because Governments were complicit.
You are redefining investing. It is investing when you are deliberately holding on to something with an expectation of higher returns in future. You are implying that ancestors of these landlords knew business will suddenly bump up in late 90s.
It's sheer luck,government complacency and nothing else. If you want to call it investing, fine with me.
> Also a lot of middle class can and does invest.
Yes the little they can save gets invested in already inflated properties or gold. Average middle class would not like to venture our into investing in unknown because they do not have the will to lose the little they have saved.
> It's the people with inability to defer instant gratification or just lazy are the ones at peril here.
You think having a car, living close to school and work in good neighborhood is instant gratification. I have lived in shady neighborhoods with narrow dusty street without any trees and boy it's not fun at all. If you think moving out of those places is called instant gratification then it's hard to argue.
>>You are implying that ancestors of these landlords
'Ancestors' makes it feel they are from the 15th century. In reality these are people from 1960s/1970s. In most cities at that time buying a property was a no-brainer investment. There were public sector companies springing up all over the place, and the first round of urbanization was well in progress.
Also you don't even have to go that far, even in the 1990s, during the peak of onsite-money techies in Bangalore were swimming in, most currently high valued properties in the vicinity of ring-road today were available for almost free(Comparative to IT salaries of the day). Like 75 - 200 rupees/psqft.
The real problem is. Property hunting and buying is a long drawn process, that spawns over a year. Everything from scouting for opportunities, to negotiating, getting legal work done, raising money through loans, paying taxes, registration, long term care and maintenance are high effort consuming activities, that will drain your energy and stretch you will power to water film thinness.
Most of the crowd either does not have what it takes to think in terms of such long durations of time. Or even if they do, they have to undergo that process several times to build a decent portfolio of properties. That means weekends, and other holidays all go away towards this. This is above beyond any other maintenance you have to do. That is far away from opportunities being invisible. These are issues related to personal enterprise.
That's one big reason why Mutual funds have taken off so well.
But big returns await for those people who can scale the real estate mountain even today.
>>If you think moving out of those places is called instant gratification then it's hard to argue.
The good part is you will get what you want. So everybody will get what they want.
If some one wants properties as investment they will get it, and if some one wants to spend that money for a good quality of living they will get that too.
Those decisions have consequences. You just have to understand them and be fine with it.
Most of the landlords are not the IT guys mind you. They are mostly the former farmers who have held large pieces of land around towns. I don't know about Bangalore, but farmer communities around Delhi have grown rich by coming together as vote bank and getting compensated multiple times for the same pieces of lad they.
> Also you don't even have to go that far, even in the 1990s, during the peak of onsite-money techies in Bangalore were swimming in, most currently high valued properties in the vicinity of ring-road today were available for almost free(Comparative to IT salaries of the day).
How many were employed in IT during that time? As far as I remember, IT scene exploded circa 2000 onward when likes of TCS, and Infosys started recruiting via truckload. Like 75 - 200 rupees/psqft.
You are implying that every single IT guy had the opportunity to earn mighty. Those few who had the opportunity have done exceptionally anyways but that is a minority.
> Most of the crowd either does not have what it takes to think in terms of such long durations of time.
Yes hence they think of the short term i.e. earning as much as possible via whatever means necessary. My original comment was an answer to GP's moralistic attitude. If that 18 year old kid wants to be a Doctor to earn as much as possible that is because he has seen dumb ass people around him getting richer.
How that is any immoral then someone profiting insanely from something their grandfathers hoarded?
>>Most of the landlords are not the IT guys mind you.
Yes, that exactly what I'm saying. If you have a 20+ year timescale you don't have to earn very high to make these investments.
>>but farmer communities around Delhi have grown rich by coming together as vote bank and getting compensated multiple times for the same pieces of lad they.
They have a right to. Getting rich isn't exactly a crime.
>>How many were employed in IT during that time? As far as I remember, IT scene exploded circa 2000 onward when likes of TCS, and Infosys started recruiting via truckload. Like 75 - 200 rupees/psqft.
Plenty. There was also Gulf money. The real issue is, again, very few people can think on a 20+ year timescale.
>>You are implying that every single IT guy had the opportunity to earn mighty.
To be super frank with you. These were throwaway prices even back then. Most investors turn out be people with retirement money, many times Auto drivers, small kirana shop owners etc. Which is why there is so much resentment now. There are people who had 100x advantage over these people, and there has been drastic reshuffling of seats.
>>If that 18 year old kid wants to be a Doctor to earn as much as possible that is because he has seen dumb ass people around him getting richer.
There is nothing dumb about making long term investment decisions.
>>How that is any immoral then someone profiting insanely from something their grandfathers hoarded?
Nothing immoral going on here. Somebody decided to work hard, invest in lands, and ensure their grandkids are well off. If you don't want to invest and do all this, it's really your choice. Why do you suggest others make the same mistake?
Then we agree that moralize the choice kid is making is completely uncalled for. Capitalism is driven by greed of money so bringing any other criteria except money does not make sense unless it is applied uniformly.
Income tax is ridiculous. Especially in India with the stats I presented.
How exactly are tenants getting the better end of the deal? It is the tenenat who:
- pays the rent which is arbitrarily high and increases every year thereby offsetting the puny salary hikes
- bears the burden of excess tax because the landlord refuses to pay taxes on money earned from rent
- has nothing to show for the money spent in rent
- loses a large part or whole of the "security desposit" when shifting.
Taxes are high because a minister decides to charter a plane and fly thousands of miles to meet another minister for 30 minutes. Taxes are high because when they meet they decide to exchange bouquets that cost tens of thousands of rupees. I can go on and on...
Almost any economy where buying is expensive, renting works out cheaper.
From the perspective of owning a property. You have far higher costs. That starts with firstly buying land and developing it. Money doesn't grow on trees, so you need take out loan, and pay inflation standard interests to do that. This is while you weather lay off risks, and other deprecation costs. At this point in time, in any major city in India, you need 2+ crores to build a decent rental property.
Then come maintenance costs, long term costs of holding the property(Property taxes), holding the risks of encroachment etc.
Secondly your point on taxes on rent is not entirely right. You will be surprised how easy it is to attract audit and raids. It happens all the time.
Lastly. In case of renting you have no loan risk, you have no encroachment risk, you have mobility advantage, you can look for newly developed properties and stay there. You can shift every time you find amenities of a different property to be better. All of this in a pay-as-you-go model.
Completely agree. I know people who claim their Net Revenue is less than the amount I pay in taxes and yet they have bigger cars, keep multiple servants, and enjoy foreign holidays.
Under this system everyone would like to hoard as much money as possible. Even if it results in squeezing the others unfairly.
Agreed wholeheartedly. The word passion is over hyped. And it makes very less sense especially when we are from a poor country like India where people run to make their ends meet.
Are we really poor? Or are we just badly managing ourselves? Seriously, in a country as naturally rich as India, there is no reason for people to be emaciated with poverty during peacetime. If only we had more passionate people willing to stamp out inefficiency and corruption. And btw, passion is not over-hyped - in my experience, it's almost vital when trying to improve your own or society's situation.
I'm not sure what you mean? Being naturally rich in resources is pretty much what makes you rich in the material sense. Other countries would kill/have killed for India's resources.
I don't think you're quite right. The Bay Area is not a nation! It benefits from being part of the United States.
I also see no cogency in your oil example. Just because you need to process oil to put it to use, are you suggesting it has no value!? That seems wholly incorrect!
Anyway, I'm not here to argue. My bottom line is, India can and should be run better, because currently, it's run badly.
> . And btw, passion is not over-hyped - in my experience
I think people who are passionate in CS/I.T field are lucky that it also happens to be one of the highest paying fields in India. I don't think that applies to all sectors. Even people who are passionate about CS/IT and are not from a good college struggle to find a job in India. I consider myself lucky to have my passion lie in programming and passing out from a good college.
He has probably already seen everything he wants for himself or hopes his family to have comes with a lot money. He has, as he is 17, already experienced his one clean shot at one of those things being within his reach is one of those backbreaking and ruthlessly competitive entrance exams for which he has been probably preparing since class 8-9.
Whenever I step into Delhi, or any major Indian city, I feel like I'm stepping into chaos. The buildings are blackened and poorly planned. The sky, perpetually grey with pollution - India is more then few metro cities. It’s vast and varied.
I agree. I am a resident Indian who has lived and travelled outside.
But what you have described - the ruthlessness - is universal. In EU, SG, JP, SK, AU, UK etc and yes of course definitely in USA. Just that that ruthlessness is garbed in nicer clothes there.
In India medical sector pushing families to bankruptcy is seen as ruthlessness and abroad it’s called “oh, they didn’t have (the right) medical insurance” among many things. It becomes process, it becomes something of a “technical” aspect and it’s conveniently brushed aside as not being a social issue at all. Both are horrible.
And oh yes, the rich and the privileged are fine everywhere. They have passion, they have an unflinching desire to help others.
A rich friend of mine (from a boarding school I was in on a scholarship) used to volunteer in Africa during her college breaks. The expense was born by her father of course and the expense of one summer would often be more than what was my yearly salary for couple of years initially in my career.
What you see is not crumbling culture of India. Because if we go with this definition towards any change then every culture is constantly crumbling. What it is, I’d say, is rapid change in every aspect of this country. People rapidly trying to come out of poverty, trying to get big, and bigger.
I don’t claim to understand all this, because I don’t. This is too complex of a topic (a bunch of topics really) to be explained in a matter of a comment. I often see many nuances of this place, which are not even nuances to us, missed when seen from a romantically nostalgic lenses.
As for the Taj itself it’s a victim of a melee of things ranging for religious politics to rampant corruption. A lot of people in the current state and central Govt would rather see it razed to the ground and I’m not exaggerating. There’s been precedence for such phenomena in our country. And the experience of Taj, at least for me, has been filthy, crowded, smelly, hurried, and anything but romantic. It’s far from what all see in the glorified pictures when, usually when world leaders visit, probably the entire place is off limits for public and the compound was made photo ready just for the show.
> But what you have described - the ruthlessness - is universal. In EU, SG, JP, SK, AU, UK etc ... abroad it’s called “oh, they didn’t have (the right) medical insurance” among many things
This doesn’t match my experience of “free at point of use” systems at all. I would be curious to hear more about how you’ve come to this conclusion
Disagree. The NHS in the UK is free. And they don't stop till you're either better or dead. The US health system is messy, but that's no example to go by.
In India, they're not just nitpicking your insurance policy, but doing underhand things like pumping warm water into clinically dead victims to give their families false hope, so they keep paying the ICU fees (anecdote from a friend - he was eventually alerted to this hogwash by an upstanding admin clerk in the hospital).
this completely ignores the massive progress made by india mostly in the last four years on the cleanliness drive, making toilets available to most households to prevent open defecation, electricity and internet link up to all villages, massive jump in mobile data consumption, doubling the road length laid per day, switching the poor from coal and wood stoves to gas, switching massively to led lights, huge push in solar power, connecting up the national electricity grid, hugely stepping up building airports and city metros, massive spread of banking and cards to all households, massive program of health insurance to 500 million people, massive reduction in corruption and wastage of gov funds by direct benefit transfer and subsidy programs, big jumps in ease of business rankings, huge reforms of the indirect tax system and removal of transport and logistics hindrances etc
Your handle says it all - I hate Taj Mahal BBC, and your comment reads like a bullet list from a government apologist.
Addressing basic needs are not massive progress, the government is expected to do these things in response to the growing taxation, it's not a favor but their duty. India's whole problem is mismanagement and corruption, and the current culture placing profiteering over everything else and the parent explains these very issues.
Breaking the site guidelines will get your account banned regardless of how wrong someone else was. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules when posting here.
But you realise that actually doing things like this versus the expectation that it is their duty to do it is progress right? For a country like India where a million things need to be balanced every day, and governments of both parties have come and gone without tending to these basic needs, it's a good thing that there as been progress.
Life isn't black and white, you can't discount some good because of something you don't like on the other side (whether you're right or wrong).
Cold hearted profiteering isn't evil. If done properly it will save India. Even with "socialist principles" guiding our governments, cold hearted profiteering has survived and thrived. Rather than using this natural impulse for good, the socialist idiocy has instead resulted in crony thievery.
It might be under-repaired, but entering "Taj Mahal maintenance" into Google shows there are tons of travel articles on their maintenance efforts, and which parts will be under repair when. It seems a bit questionable that this is totally omitted.
Wrong. BBC is as much fair on this issue as Indian Media state or Supreme Court. https://www.indiatoday.in/mail-today/story/sc-holds-asi-resp...
Also, BBC is quite fair, unlike Indian Media which doesn't have the guts to take Modi in to account for not holding a single press conference in his 4 year rule.
The problem with maintenance in India is lack of will power in local governments (not national government).
State and local governments in India are filled with incompetent fools (pardon my French) who only want the power and fame. They're often uneducated, often unexposed to the rest of the world and have the ego of a supreme emperor to do anything that would improve their citizen's lives.
Education is a major problem in India. Until they achieve an entire generation of great education all the way down to villages, this will not improve.
Hinduism is not a religion like Islam or Christianity. People in India behave as if it is. Our past was glorious. It, however, cannot guarantee a similar future unless people wake up.
I don't know about the other guy, but hopefully you'll bear with me since I've been on HN for a while now and wasn't paid by a government IT cell to comment (since you seem to be implying that).
I am not sure what the parent commenter means by "Hinduism is not a religion like Islam or Christianity". Do they mean that Hindus don't practice Abrahamic principles? Because other than that, I'm not able to understand what they mean.
Apparently most of the Maratha forts built by "Hindus" are also being neglected. The forts that I visited didn't even have presence of officials, let alone repairs(which is being pursued by the current government).
> my opinion this should be left to private muslim groups who might be interested in its preservation
What does it say about a country when a large number of its people don't want to maintain its most famous monument because it happens to have been built by a king of the minority religion?
What about other monuments - should the maintenance of India Gate be left to private Christian groups?
> hindus found out its history which was suppressed by marxists and are not likely to keep paying for it
What was this history? I hope you are not referring to something like https://www.booksfact.com/archeology/taj-mahal-original-name... a theory being pushed by charlatan historians, and eagerly lapped up by internet hindus who suffer from a deep insecurity that India's most famous monument happens to be a "Muslim" monument.
What a shame, it's literally falling apart. I remember visiting the Taj Mahal back in the day (15-20 years ago) on a full moon night, do they still open on certain nights? Imagine how it would shimmer in the dark, if they still had all the precious stones encrusted in the marble!
>In 1998 the Supreme Court established a special exclusion area to keep heavy industry at a distance from the monument. The Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ) covers an area of more than 10,400 sq km.
How was this ever going to be workable in a country like India, with so much unemployment and massive requirement for industry, power, infrastructure etc. In these scant conditions, obviously there will be little resources for cleaner, greener alternatives to fulfill economic requirements. And because people are resourceful they will make do with whatever is at hand which for example are, unfortunately, the dirtier diesel generators, coal fired plants, and polluting vehicles. All this is tragec to be sure, but people will choose their own livelihoods over a beautiful mausoleum.
The need to maintain Taj is not new, in fact just a couple of decades after its construction in 17th century, the dome leaked and it had to be repaired. As Mughal reign fell into decline, the plunder began and the British were not left behind. The precious stones were removed from inlays, furniture was plundered and even plans were made to dismantle and auction the marble.
One must evaluate the decline of Taj in this broader context. It is currently maintained by ASI and they have replaced many precious stones abd repaired the Taj as much as they can. Unfortunately they do not always follow the same medival construction methods and do not have adequate funds, so repairs do fail.
Polloution is terrible in Delhi- Agra corridor but one must balance the needs of the poor to earn a living vs. the needs of the tourists to see the Taj in pristine condition. For this reason a blanket ban will not work in practice.
I think the BBC article is one sided, and the complexity of the situation needs to be taken into account before painting a pessimistic picture.
Aga Khan trust has done excellent work in Humayun's tomb and I think it is a better model for moving forward.
95 comments
[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 180 ms ] threadSo I’ll present an example. Let’s talk about a 10km road that needs repair. The discussion would start at points like how much the contractors would make, what will be the cut of tie engineer, chief engineer, MLA, MP, district administration if they are involved. Whether a cut has to go to the CM too? Or tje party fund. Things of practical interests.
How strong the road will be, how safe it would be, quality assurance etc are a matter of formality and routine which also ensures there’s another repair after a year or two and everyone is happy again.
However if the intention is to really solve a problem then it takes years - committee after committee, studies after studies - became no one is interested.
Any historical monument should be preserved not only because it is beautiful but because it captures history. It is the history which is not written in textbooks, it is the history which is right in front of you to see.
Taj is just a building but it tells so many stories about architecture, mogul empire, passion and what not.
>>They might as well let it crumble. It's a grotesque monument which tourists adore.
How do you think they built the Pyramids of Giza or the Colosseum of Rome?
> .. that they were paid laborers who took great pride in their work and were not slaves, as was previously thought. Evidence from the tombs indicates that a workforce of 10,000 laborers working in three-month shifts took around 30 years to build a pyramid. Most of the workers appear to have come from poor families. Specialists such as architects, masons, metalworkers and carpenters, were permanently employed by the king to fill positions that required the most skill. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giza_pyramid_complex#Tombs_of_...
Can someone who is more knowledgeable comment on this?
(Part IV is non-justiciable – you can't sue the government for violating it per se; but, nevertheless, the Courts are supposed to keep it in mind in their decision making, and so I think it does contribute to some of the substantial differences between Indian and American constitutional and judicial cultures.)
As repulsive the history behind the Taj and its consequences are, ruining it with a cocktail of incompetence, corruption and apathy is not the step forward.
First of all, India has everything it needs to be amazing. A young workforce, driven, technical people, a nice selection of flourishing industries, bucket loads of natural resources and abundant sources of renewable energy. Yet it seems to make use of those things poorly.
Whenever I step into Delhi, or any major Indian city, I feel like I'm stepping into chaos. The buildings are blackened and poorly planned. The sky, perpetually grey with pollution. The traffic is idiotic. I'm convinced the volume of cars is not the problem, but instead lack of road etiquette is to blame. Every car, whether it be a cheap Honda or an expensive S-class has a dent or two in it. Everyone's beeping horns for no apparent reason, and crawling forward at ten meters a minute. It's a great metaphor for the country as a whole - it appears loud and active, but the actual activity is somewhat unsubstantial.
While I was in Delhi about 2 weeks ago, my father asked me to advise the 17 year old son of one of his employees. I met the guy - a studious, fiercly competitive lad, but pleasant nonetheless. He wanted to become a doctor; I asked him "why a doctor?". His response was that he could make a lot of money in that field, specifically because people come to you when they're in need and in trouble. I then asked him "What about helping people? Interest in the subject itself? Passion?". He fobbed those questions off like they simply didn't matter. (Aside: the medical system in India is ruthless - if you're ill, you will likely be taken advantage of, and it can bring you and your family to your knees very, very quickly. Even my own grandfather's gold rings and dental filings mysteriously disappeared when he passed away in the most reputable hospital in Delhi).
Why am I telling you the above story? Well, because I see this mindset almost everywhere in India. Cold hearted profiteering is killing passion and genuine interest amongst vast swathes of society. It's horribly unpleasant, and it doesn't surprise me that things of cultural importance are taking such a back seat. In the case of the Taj, I bet the money was available, but improperly used or swindled away (adminstrative government officials in India are known for their corruption - it's one of the perks of the job apparently). Anyway, the crumbling Taj is simply another metaphor for the crumbling culture of India, and it really does make me rather sad.
You have to have a certain level of wealth before you care about "passion". Sometimes if you grow up seeing the consequences of being poor, the desire to never go through that again becomes your passion. That is why you then optimize your career to make money rather than follow your "passion".
However, my argument (stated differently) that passion is a luxury that not everyone can afford, still stands.
Passion is a luxury in India, yes, but because of the way society has been set up. We need to change things so as to nurture the passions of our people, rather than have them scrambling for basic necessities. I believe we have all the ingredients to make it happen, but seem to lack the will or a plan.
In historic times, and to a lesser extent even now, careers were decided based on family, so there yes societal setup led to suppression of passion. However, even then how much of that was due to economic reasons and how much societal if a difficult question to answer, at least for me.
But, OTOH, I do agree that India has all the ingredients to become much greater - how do we get there is a much more complicated topic.
Everybody's is.
Imagine what goes in the mind of a boy, who is living and watching crores of people starving in his country.
Unless you have abundance for everyone, every ones gathers what they can for themselves.
A poorly funded school is a governmental/societal failing. As is the inability to afford basic necessities. It should simply never be that way. We produce enough food to feed c. 10bn people, yet parts of the world go hungry. We can cheaply disseminate education almost anywhere today, yet large portions of the world remain uneducated. In a country like India, these things can now be addressed, if only there was a plan and a sincere effort to execute that plan.
I did not mean to hurt you and I sincerely hope you escape/have escaped your hell, but more importantly, that you don't create hell for others once you do escape. Perhaps even try to alleviate the hell of others when you are able to do so.
My point is, given the resources we have, life doesn't need to be hell. It can be good, if we manage things properly.
People here still fight elections on the basis of religion and caste.
1. India does not have a social safety net so every man or family is for themselves. This just forces people to give first priority to accumulation of money.
2. Even a decent life style in India is not affordable unless you are a business which is either insanely profitable or knows how to hide profits. Even the top bracket earners can't afford decent life style unless they are willing to live hand to mouth or on credit.
3. Suburbs and small cities are so under developed that you can't live there unless you have made a decision to compromise your Children future.
Fun fact: My salary is in top 10-20% range of what you can get in India but the moment I step into India my savings rate drop to almost close to zero due to following factors:
Taxes: You salary is taxed at 35% effectively. This is money you are paying with no returns to be seen. Remember there is no social safety net. If you are saving for modest future via Employee provident fund, your in-hand income drops to 50% of the stated salary.
Rent or Mortgage: Unless you were lucky or have an ancestral property in the right place, you will be paying a decent chunk of your income to rent seekers who will push for a 10% increases Y-o-Y unless you are willing to move bases every 11 months. With Kids going to school, it's not easy to switch every year. You can save this money only when you are willing to put up in shady neighborhood or travel from out skirts for 2-3 hours each side.
Schools & Education: There are only a few good state run Schools so putting kids into Private Schools (which are ironically called Public School) is the only option. This costs significant chunk of your remaining income.
Transportation: You have to buy a car to get anywhere as public transport is overcrowded and not very comfortable especially for Children and elderly. Even then you don't save much as travel from your home to these public transport will still cost you decent money as you just can't walk to public transport.
This is what is directly visible. Less than 3% of the population pays income tax while tax is deducted at source for the salaried class:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/policy/why...
If you dare to save, the interest earned is taxed. If you try to spend, the spending is taxed - buy a house or a car or a motorcycle, all luxury items by Indian government's standards, you are taxed heavily. The bribes collected by the government officials increase the tax burden. By the way, bribes are now expected and people refusing to take or give are looked down upon: https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/current-affairs/21111...
All this while the mega rich are enjoying tax breaks.
> rent seekers who will push for a 10% increases Y-o-Y unless
The landlords are fleecing tenants. However, it is the tenants' responsibility to make sure the landowner pays tax: https://www.livemint.com/Money/hfutqMoI7miJYiIidCNV4M/If-mon...
There is also a suggestion that they do away income taxes completely, and may be tax petrol by additional 30 rupees/liter.
>>The landlords are fleecing tenants.
As of now it takes savings of a life time to afford a home in big cities. Its tenants who are getting the better end of the deal.
You have to become a land lord if you are saving up for grandchildren(many do).
You can start now. Or wait for the next 20 years, and complain that others did and you didn't.
Also a lot of middle class can and does invest. It's the people with inability to defer instant gratification or just lazy are the ones at peril here.
It's sheer luck,government complacency and nothing else. If you want to call it investing, fine with me.
> Also a lot of middle class can and does invest.
Yes the little they can save gets invested in already inflated properties or gold. Average middle class would not like to venture our into investing in unknown because they do not have the will to lose the little they have saved.
> It's the people with inability to defer instant gratification or just lazy are the ones at peril here.
You think having a car, living close to school and work in good neighborhood is instant gratification. I have lived in shady neighborhoods with narrow dusty street without any trees and boy it's not fun at all. If you think moving out of those places is called instant gratification then it's hard to argue.
'Ancestors' makes it feel they are from the 15th century. In reality these are people from 1960s/1970s. In most cities at that time buying a property was a no-brainer investment. There were public sector companies springing up all over the place, and the first round of urbanization was well in progress.
Also you don't even have to go that far, even in the 1990s, during the peak of onsite-money techies in Bangalore were swimming in, most currently high valued properties in the vicinity of ring-road today were available for almost free(Comparative to IT salaries of the day). Like 75 - 200 rupees/psqft.
The real problem is. Property hunting and buying is a long drawn process, that spawns over a year. Everything from scouting for opportunities, to negotiating, getting legal work done, raising money through loans, paying taxes, registration, long term care and maintenance are high effort consuming activities, that will drain your energy and stretch you will power to water film thinness.
Most of the crowd either does not have what it takes to think in terms of such long durations of time. Or even if they do, they have to undergo that process several times to build a decent portfolio of properties. That means weekends, and other holidays all go away towards this. This is above beyond any other maintenance you have to do. That is far away from opportunities being invisible. These are issues related to personal enterprise.
That's one big reason why Mutual funds have taken off so well.
But big returns await for those people who can scale the real estate mountain even today.
>>If you think moving out of those places is called instant gratification then it's hard to argue.
The good part is you will get what you want. So everybody will get what they want.
If some one wants properties as investment they will get it, and if some one wants to spend that money for a good quality of living they will get that too.
Those decisions have consequences. You just have to understand them and be fine with it.
> Also you don't even have to go that far, even in the 1990s, during the peak of onsite-money techies in Bangalore were swimming in, most currently high valued properties in the vicinity of ring-road today were available for almost free(Comparative to IT salaries of the day).
How many were employed in IT during that time? As far as I remember, IT scene exploded circa 2000 onward when likes of TCS, and Infosys started recruiting via truckload. Like 75 - 200 rupees/psqft.
You are implying that every single IT guy had the opportunity to earn mighty. Those few who had the opportunity have done exceptionally anyways but that is a minority.
> Most of the crowd either does not have what it takes to think in terms of such long durations of time.
Yes hence they think of the short term i.e. earning as much as possible via whatever means necessary. My original comment was an answer to GP's moralistic attitude. If that 18 year old kid wants to be a Doctor to earn as much as possible that is because he has seen dumb ass people around him getting richer.
How that is any immoral then someone profiting insanely from something their grandfathers hoarded?
Yes, that exactly what I'm saying. If you have a 20+ year timescale you don't have to earn very high to make these investments.
>>but farmer communities around Delhi have grown rich by coming together as vote bank and getting compensated multiple times for the same pieces of lad they.
They have a right to. Getting rich isn't exactly a crime.
>>How many were employed in IT during that time? As far as I remember, IT scene exploded circa 2000 onward when likes of TCS, and Infosys started recruiting via truckload. Like 75 - 200 rupees/psqft.
Plenty. There was also Gulf money. The real issue is, again, very few people can think on a 20+ year timescale.
>>You are implying that every single IT guy had the opportunity to earn mighty.
To be super frank with you. These were throwaway prices even back then. Most investors turn out be people with retirement money, many times Auto drivers, small kirana shop owners etc. Which is why there is so much resentment now. There are people who had 100x advantage over these people, and there has been drastic reshuffling of seats.
>>If that 18 year old kid wants to be a Doctor to earn as much as possible that is because he has seen dumb ass people around him getting richer.
There is nothing dumb about making long term investment decisions.
>>How that is any immoral then someone profiting insanely from something their grandfathers hoarded?
Nothing immoral going on here. Somebody decided to work hard, invest in lands, and ensure their grandkids are well off. If you don't want to invest and do all this, it's really your choice. Why do you suggest others make the same mistake?
Then we agree that moralize the choice kid is making is completely uncalled for. Capitalism is driven by greed of money so bringing any other criteria except money does not make sense unless it is applied uniformly.
How exactly are tenants getting the better end of the deal? It is the tenenat who:
- pays the rent which is arbitrarily high and increases every year thereby offsetting the puny salary hikes
- bears the burden of excess tax because the landlord refuses to pay taxes on money earned from rent
- has nothing to show for the money spent in rent
- loses a large part or whole of the "security desposit" when shifting.
Taxes are high because a minister decides to charter a plane and fly thousands of miles to meet another minister for 30 minutes. Taxes are high because when they meet they decide to exchange bouquets that cost tens of thousands of rupees. I can go on and on...
From the perspective of owning a property. You have far higher costs. That starts with firstly buying land and developing it. Money doesn't grow on trees, so you need take out loan, and pay inflation standard interests to do that. This is while you weather lay off risks, and other deprecation costs. At this point in time, in any major city in India, you need 2+ crores to build a decent rental property.
Then come maintenance costs, long term costs of holding the property(Property taxes), holding the risks of encroachment etc.
Secondly your point on taxes on rent is not entirely right. You will be surprised how easy it is to attract audit and raids. It happens all the time.
Lastly. In case of renting you have no loan risk, you have no encroachment risk, you have mobility advantage, you can look for newly developed properties and stay there. You can shift every time you find amenities of a different property to be better. All of this in a pay-as-you-go model.
Cheaper than buying. In the short term, maybe.
You make property ownership look like slavery while renters seem to be just enjoying the ride.
If it is so hard and unrewarding to build rental properties it seems landlords are just addicted to losing money.
Different people like to look at the situation differently. I gave you a perspective on buying a home.
Under this system everyone would like to hoard as much money as possible. Even if it results in squeezing the others unfairly.
India is not a rich country. Natural resources are not what make one rich. Its human resources.
The human resources development project has been abandoned ever since Jawaharlal Nehru died.
Human resources are the most important natural resource any country will by and far ever own.
That's also the reason why the 60 mile radius around Bay Area, a barren desert, has an economic output higher than several countries.
I also see no cogency in your oil example. Just because you need to process oil to put it to use, are you suggesting it has no value!? That seems wholly incorrect!
Anyway, I'm not here to argue. My bottom line is, India can and should be run better, because currently, it's run badly.
I think people who are passionate in CS/I.T field are lucky that it also happens to be one of the highest paying fields in India. I don't think that applies to all sectors. Even people who are passionate about CS/IT and are not from a good college struggle to find a job in India. I consider myself lucky to have my passion lie in programming and passing out from a good college.
I always have this impression that kids are usually driven more by interest. But maybe it is only me.
He has probably already seen everything he wants for himself or hopes his family to have comes with a lot money. He has, as he is 17, already experienced his one clean shot at one of those things being within his reach is one of those backbreaking and ruthlessly competitive entrance exams for which he has been probably preparing since class 8-9.
But what you have described - the ruthlessness - is universal. In EU, SG, JP, SK, AU, UK etc and yes of course definitely in USA. Just that that ruthlessness is garbed in nicer clothes there.
In India medical sector pushing families to bankruptcy is seen as ruthlessness and abroad it’s called “oh, they didn’t have (the right) medical insurance” among many things. It becomes process, it becomes something of a “technical” aspect and it’s conveniently brushed aside as not being a social issue at all. Both are horrible.
And oh yes, the rich and the privileged are fine everywhere. They have passion, they have an unflinching desire to help others.
A rich friend of mine (from a boarding school I was in on a scholarship) used to volunteer in Africa during her college breaks. The expense was born by her father of course and the expense of one summer would often be more than what was my yearly salary for couple of years initially in my career.
What you see is not crumbling culture of India. Because if we go with this definition towards any change then every culture is constantly crumbling. What it is, I’d say, is rapid change in every aspect of this country. People rapidly trying to come out of poverty, trying to get big, and bigger.
I don’t claim to understand all this, because I don’t. This is too complex of a topic (a bunch of topics really) to be explained in a matter of a comment. I often see many nuances of this place, which are not even nuances to us, missed when seen from a romantically nostalgic lenses.
As for the Taj itself it’s a victim of a melee of things ranging for religious politics to rampant corruption. A lot of people in the current state and central Govt would rather see it razed to the ground and I’m not exaggerating. There’s been precedence for such phenomena in our country. And the experience of Taj, at least for me, has been filthy, crowded, smelly, hurried, and anything but romantic. It’s far from what all see in the glorified pictures when, usually when world leaders visit, probably the entire place is off limits for public and the compound was made photo ready just for the show.
This doesn’t match my experience of “free at point of use” systems at all. I would be curious to hear more about how you’ve come to this conclusion
In India, they're not just nitpicking your insurance policy, but doing underhand things like pumping warm water into clinically dead victims to give their families false hope, so they keep paying the ICU fees (anecdote from a friend - he was eventually alerted to this hogwash by an upstanding admin clerk in the hospital).
Addressing basic needs are not massive progress, the government is expected to do these things in response to the growing taxation, it's not a favor but their duty. India's whole problem is mismanagement and corruption, and the current culture placing profiteering over everything else and the parent explains these very issues.
a label created for us by marxists
A handle made 3 hours back, just to reply to comments.
How do you get paid? Per hour? Per comment?
Life isn't black and white, you can't discount some good because of something you don't like on the other side (whether you're right or wrong).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2sc9A2aVtM
State and local governments in India are filled with incompetent fools (pardon my French) who only want the power and fame. They're often uneducated, often unexposed to the rest of the world and have the ego of a supreme emperor to do anything that would improve their citizen's lives.
Education is a major problem in India. Until they achieve an entire generation of great education all the way down to villages, this will not improve.
Hinduism is not a religion like Islam or Christianity. People in India behave as if it is. Our past was glorious. It, however, cannot guarantee a similar future unless people wake up.
What do you mean by this?
Curious, what are list which is created by Hindus which is well maintained and valued by government?
How frequently do you people monitor forums like HN? How many people work on this? Must be a dream job to get paid to read HN all day.
I am not sure what the parent commenter means by "Hinduism is not a religion like Islam or Christianity". Do they mean that Hindus don't practice Abrahamic principles? Because other than that, I'm not able to understand what they mean.
1. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/22/world/asia/taj-mahal-indi...
my opinion this should be left to private muslim groups who might be interested in its preservation
hindus found out its history which was suppressed by marxists and are not likely to keep paying for it
cultural death by tourists of the kind seen in japan nowadays is not desirable either
What does it say about a country when a large number of its people don't want to maintain its most famous monument because it happens to have been built by a king of the minority religion?
What about other monuments - should the maintenance of India Gate be left to private Christian groups?
> hindus found out its history which was suppressed by marxists and are not likely to keep paying for it
What was this history? I hope you are not referring to something like https://www.booksfact.com/archeology/taj-mahal-original-name... a theory being pushed by charlatan historians, and eagerly lapped up by internet hindus who suffer from a deep insecurity that India's most famous monument happens to be a "Muslim" monument.
same for the european colonial loot and plunder
christians didnt even apologize for goa inquisition
How was this ever going to be workable in a country like India, with so much unemployment and massive requirement for industry, power, infrastructure etc. In these scant conditions, obviously there will be little resources for cleaner, greener alternatives to fulfill economic requirements. And because people are resourceful they will make do with whatever is at hand which for example are, unfortunately, the dirtier diesel generators, coal fired plants, and polluting vehicles. All this is tragec to be sure, but people will choose their own livelihoods over a beautiful mausoleum.
One must evaluate the decline of Taj in this broader context. It is currently maintained by ASI and they have replaced many precious stones abd repaired the Taj as much as they can. Unfortunately they do not always follow the same medival construction methods and do not have adequate funds, so repairs do fail.
Polloution is terrible in Delhi- Agra corridor but one must balance the needs of the poor to earn a living vs. the needs of the tourists to see the Taj in pristine condition. For this reason a blanket ban will not work in practice.
I think the BBC article is one sided, and the complexity of the situation needs to be taken into account before painting a pessimistic picture.
Aga Khan trust has done excellent work in Humayun's tomb and I think it is a better model for moving forward.
https://youtu.be/eCLEFJU1p5A