Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: energyplay who wrote (22619)	12/16/2004 11:31:27 AM
From: kodiak_bull	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23153

Ep and Bruce, The discussion of India is interesting. On the one hand we have an onsite visit by Bruce and a very interesting historical review, and on the other we have the economic growth, real growth, that the "world's largest democracy" is experiencing. GDP seems to be predicted to grow 6.3% next year, and perhaps 6.8% the year after. economictimes.indiatimes.com It apparently tripled its GDP between 1983 and 2003. worldbank.org Services are now more than 50% of the economy, and agriculture has shrunk from over 1/3 to less than 1/4 of the economy. It may very well continue to fracture (since 1947 it has already fractured into Pakistan, India and Bangladesh) politically. Will things such as poor legal protections of individuals and corporate corruption stifle its economic growth? Probably, to some extent. It all depends on how the corruption plays out. If you have a Philippine (Indonesia, maybe Russian) style corruption, then you're doomed. If you can keep it to a Japan, Korea, European (some might say American) level of corruption, then you're probably going to grow nicely. One thing that is sure, compared to the economic basket case that India was during most of my life, this new development phase is a step in the right direction. Kb

To: energyplay who wrote (22619)	12/20/2004 12:14:43 AM
From: Bruce L	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

"Olympics - Contrast this with Indian achievements in science and mathematics. Could it be that most physical acitivity is not well regarded ? " Good question. (Sorry about the delay in responding; off on my first ski trip of the year.(g)) The answer has to be yes, that just like pre-1947 China where scholar-officials ("shih") had social primacy, physical activity literally stigmatized an individual as lower class. In China, "gentlemen" grew long fingernails and wore their sleeves long, so as to demonstrate to the world their social status. If athletics were valued, a nation of at least 1.1 billion would necessarily win more than 2 Olympic medals. In my opinion, I think there is more to it though. On the one hand (and you addessed his when you asked if India were really a "nation"), the very number of languages, dialects, ethnic groups etc., the absence of any commonality, would militates against a unified Olympic effort. On the other hand, there is an element of resignation: if the most significant fact in an individual's life is the station he was born into (e.g., level 28 of the Brahman caste), why bother with anything as ephemeral as athletics? You are correct that Indians are passionate about cricket; it is the only sport highlighted in Indian newspapers and the only one I ever saw children playing. It could be that because of their colonial past they associate it with what British "gentlemen" do. Bruce