Awared Indian

  • Home
  • Awared Indian

Awared Indian Awaring India about what is going on here and there,so that they can see what is being hidden from t

27/04/2017
Special atrocity court gives first conviction - Ahmedabad Mirror

Fight for justice for the victims of Una incident last year has not been an easy one. A Special Atrocity Court set up in October 2016 made its first conviction by handing out life sentence to a 31-year-old man, Niteshkumar Rajput, for murdering Minaben Nagarbhai Parmar (47), a Dalit from the Meghaninagar area of the city, in 2013

Though I doubt how much hope one conviction can give amid the everyday reality of caste atrocities!!

Man gets life term for murder of Dalit woman in Meghaninagar in 2013; activists claim provision for special courts was made in 1989 and it took state government 27 years to implement it; welcome the development but say it’s just a drop in the ocean

20/03/2017
Why Narendra Modi and Amit Shah picked Yogi Adityanath as Uttar Pradesh CM - Times of India

Reasons why Yogi Aadityanath was picked.-
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/elections/news/why-narendra-modi-and-amit-shah-picked-yogi-adityanath-as-uttar-pradesh-cm/articleshow/57725891.cms

That Yogi Adityanath’s stature as a star campaigner helped his case has been mentioned. But that he showed “great discipline” in combating dissent in his stronghold of eastern UP is less well known, another senior BJP leader said.

09/03/2017
12 Amazing Achievements of Modi Government by 2016

Acheivement of Modi Govt till 2016

A lot is said politically and many accusations are made against Narendra Modi and his government. But the facts are unequivocal. Its a Thumbs up all the way!

02/03/2017

The Economic Survey 2016-17 tabled in Parliament last month has proposed introducing a universal basic income in India, and has devoted an entire chapter to this new idea. A universal and unconditional income transfer to all citizens in order to address the twin problems of poverty and unemployment is undoubtedly a proposal that merits serious consideration. The Economic Survey , however, gets it all wrong. It gets it wrong in terms of the alternative welfare measures available to a government, in terms of the purpose of such a measure, and in terms of the redistributive intent of such a measure (and correspondingly, of the role of taxation).

The experiment in Europe

In recent years, the strongest proponent of the idea of basic income has been the left-liberal political philosopher Philippe Van Parijs. In his book, Real Freedom for All , Mr. Parijs argues that the basis for universal basic income is the “fair distribution of real freedom to pursue the realization of one’s conception of the good life”. The main features of universal basic income are that it is provided by the state to all citizens on an individual basis, without a means test and without a work requirement.

An example of universal basic income is the Finnish proposal to provide unemployed citizens between the ages of 25 and 58 a monthly income of €560. In the experiment currently under way, the monthly income is being provided to 2,000 randomly selected unemployed persons irrespective of other income and whether that falls below a certain minimum (that is, the “means test”) and irrespective of whether they are seeking work, in job-related training, or even find part-time employment (that is, the “work requirement”).

In other words, universal basic income, as proposed and discussed in Europe, is a substitute for means-tested income benefits, with certain work requirements (such as undergoing job training). Existing guaranteed incomes schemes are usually targeted or means-tested, that is, dependent on level of income and only available to those below a threshold level of income. It is often linked to employment status. The core of the concept of basic income is the “absence of the means test and the absence of the work test”, that is, it separates the income benefit from eligibility based on current levels of income and from employment status.

The most commonly discussed alternative to universal basic income is a negative income tax. This is a scheme in which, for individuals below a certain income threshold, not only is the income of a household not taxed, but the household receives a tax credit that is the difference between the basic income or guaranteed income and tax liability. Mr. Parijs and other scholars suggest that universal basic income may be cheaper to operate than a negative income tax. The negative income tax, of course, assumes a country where all citizens file tax returns.

Distortions in Indian proposal

The first wrong committed by the Economic Survey is that its proposal constitutes an attack on welfare schemes. Witness the statement that “a number of implementation challenges lie ahead, especially the risk that universal basic income would become an add-on to, rather than a replacement of, current anti-poverty and social programmes (Chapter 9).” In other words, the Economic Survey wants universal basic income not to supplement, but to replace, all existing anti-poverty and social welfare programmes.

As I have explained, in its original conception, universal basic income was meant to replace only income guarantee programmes. “A basic income is provided in cash”, and as Mr. Parijs notes, “it supplements, rather than substitutes, existing in-kind transfers such as free education or basic health insurance (“Basic Income: A simple and powerful idea for the twenty-first century”, in B. Ackerman, A. Alstott and P. Van Parijs (eds.), Redesigning Distribution, The Real Utopias Project, vol V , 2005).” In the Indian context, one would obviously add in-kind food transfers. Mr. Parijs writes, “fighting… towards greater income security should of course not make one neglect the prior importance of providing every child with quality basic education and every person with quality basic health care (Parijs, 2005).”

It is thus technically and ethically wrong to compare the costs and benefits of universal basic income with those from a range of subsidies relating to food and nutrition (public distribution, school meals, Integrated Child Development Services), education, and sanitation, as is done in the Economic Survey . The second wrong is thus the argument that the universal basic income should replace all current in-kind and cash transfers.

The third wrong, and one that goes against the core philosophy of universal basic income, is the Economic Survey ’s assertion that “universal basic income is not framed as a transfer payment from the rich to the poor.”

A basic income needs resources. As Mr. Parijs shows, if a basic income is added to existing tax-benefit schemes, “the comparatively rich would need to pay both for their own basic income and for much of the basic income of the comparatively poor (Parijs, 2005).” The literature discusses different ways that funds for the universal basic income could be raised, such as through progressive taxation or a specific earmarked tax, or even a consumption tax. The bottom line, whichever way, is that the rich have to pay for this universal provision.

In terms of the level of basic income, the higher it is, the “higher the average rate of income tax, and, therefore the greater the redistribution from the comparatively rich to the comparatively poor (Parijs, 2005).” While the basic income is given to all, the manner in which the basic income is funded has to ensure that society transfers resources from the rich to the poor.

The philosophy behind universal basic income is clearly one of redistribution. It is not one of taking existing benefits, whether in the form of in-kind (such as food subsidies) or in cash transfers (such as maternity benefit), and dividing it up among all individuals as cash.

No resource road map

The Economic Survey , however, does not propose any new resource mobilisation or taxation to meet the goal of universal basic income. On the contrary, it talks of universal basic income replacing other schemes at various places. It also — ominously — states that “any government will have to decide on what programmes/expenditure to prioritize in order to finance a universal basic income”. In short, existing programmes will have to be cut to fund the universal basic income. There is no intention of making the rich pay for the basic income.

To sum up, the main features of universal basic income are that it should be universal and not targeted, it should be unconditional and not tied to work or employment, and it should be in cash. Universal basic income has been proposed internationally in lieu of employment or income guarantee schemes. It is envisaged as a method of redistribution of resources from the rich to the poor. It is envisaged as providing all persons (the poor, in particular) with an income to lead a dignified life, after basic needs such as education, health, and basic food consumption are taken care of. The universal basic income proposed in the Economic Survey is hostile to each of these objectives.

Let me end with an illustration of what a genuine universal basic income would entail. As a rough approximation, let us assume the universal basic income provides an income equivalent to 100 days of MGNREGA employment. Assuming a daily wage rate of Rs. 170, a basic income would comprise Rs. 17,000 per household. With a simple assumption of four members per household, universal coverage requires the basic income to be provided to 300 million households. In other words, universal basic income equivalent to the expected income transfer under MGNREGA would cost Rs. 510,000 crore. This is more than 10 times the allocation in the current Budget for MGNREGA (Rs. 48,000 crore).

Resource mobilisation has to increase ten-fold for India to afford the universal basic income without cutting back on other social welfare programmes. India has one of the lowest tax-to-GDP ratios in the world. Unless the government seriously increases tax resources, the proposal for a universal basic income is at best a diversion from our current economic and social problems and at worst a means of reducing and ending funding for a host of welfare programmes. The current proposal needs to be rejected in toto.

09/01/2017

Why more than note-ban, India needs a Big Bad Bank

03/01/2017

Awared Indian's cover photo

03/01/2017

Awared Indian

03/01/2017

Not Just About Reservations
A new survey called SARI, Social Attitudes Research for India, was recently conducted in India. The survey investigated what people in cities, towns, and villages think about reservations. SARI used a sampling frame based on mobile phone subscriptions, random digit dialling, within-household sample selection, and statistical weights to build representative samples of adults 18-65 years old.

The survey yielded the following results:

About half of the respondents said they do not support reservation. However, support for reservation was more common among people from reserved categories.
The lowest opposition to reservation was observed among respondents from the Scheduled Castes (SC) and Other Backward Classes (OBC), while the highest opposition is found among general caste respondents.
The survey concluded that a majority of the most educated and historically well-to-do communities do not feel that people from marginalised groups should get government support for representation in social and public spheres.


Respondents from well-to-do communities are against reservation mainly for the following reasons?

People from unreserved categories feel that people from reserved categories are often given a concession of a few points on exams and in interviews. This, according to them, distorts the playing field.
Some of the respondents said that they opposed reservation because they believe in equality.
Also, some people say that they oppose today’s reservations because they believe reservation should be made on the basis of income rather than social background.


What are the main intentions behind reservations/quotas?

People from reserved categories face many disadvantages in going to school or getting a job today. Reservation is a useful tool to level the playing field. This is also necessary because these groups have been historically deprived of education, skills, and access to other means of economic mobility and they suddenly cannot start competing with those from groups who have had access to these means for centuries.
Social transformation and building of economic and cultural capital takes time to be passed on from one generation to another. Children who grew up in a dominant caste household are often encouraged, supported, and helped to succeed by other members of their caste groups, while reserved category students rarely have such networks to draw on.
It is also worth noting that many reserved candidates have reached schools and jobs in spite of economic and social disadvantage as well as overt exclusion and discrimination. Because they have succeeded in the face of adversity, they bring a different and desirable kind of merit to a school or workplace. Hence, reservation is necessary for further push.
Reservation is a policy tool that aims to ensure representation of all social groups in positions of power. When people from all social groups are represented in government, higher education, and in business, it is less likely that traditionally marginalised groups will continue to be denied fundamental rights and access to their fair share of society’s resources.
Also, reservation is provided to only a few groups like Dalits, backward Muslims, and Adivasis as they face social discrimination and exclusion that people from general caste backgrounds do not face.


Way ahead:

Questions surrounding reservation have long evoked strong and passionate responses. People come to the debate with preconceived ideas and stands, and rarely change their minds. As a result, India is left with little consensus on the reasons for reservations and whether or not reservation is a useful policy. However, the time is now ripe for informed and logical discussions. The government’s responsibility now is to conduct regular surveys and re-examine the reservation policy in the present scenario. The government can ensure wider reach of the policy if necessary and also limit its usage wherever its necessary.



Conclusion:

Reservation is a policy tool that is used not only in India. In many countries, reservation or other types of affirmative action are used to try to overcome human prejudice based on race, gender, ethnicity, religion, caste or any other group identity, and to encourage representation of and participation by groups traditionally excluded and discriminated against. One way to make these measures more acceptable and help people better understand the historic, social and cultural background behind reservation would be to educate children in schools about caste, ethnic, gender and regional diversities and the need for public policy interventions to make society more equal and fair.

10/11/2016

Timeline Photos

18/06/2016

1. Which of the following statement(s) about Startup Indian is/are correct?

On 16 January, 2016 in New Delhi, the Prime Minister has launched the Action Plan under Startup India.
A startup India hub is a single point of contact for interactions with the Government.
80% rebate on filing patent applications by startups.
(a) Only 1

(b) Both 1 and3

(c) Both 2 and 3

(d) All of these.

03/03/2015

Events, when seen through the prism of history, often take on an aura of inevitability. But they are usually far from inevitable. So it was with the initial war in Afghanistan that began after 9/11 — the war we fleetingly won.

I was the senior C.I.A. officer in the region from 1999 to 2002 and I know that things could have turned out very differently. Unfortunately, few American leaders have thought to ask what would have happened if the two Pashtun tribal leaders who were willing and able in 2001 to lead a successful American-backed rebellion against the Taliban had failed. They easily could have, and they nearly did.

Both Hamid Karzai, the future president of his country, and Gul Agha Shirzai narrowly escaped death at Taliban hands on multiple occasions. Even after the fall of Kabul, the slightest twist of fate could have left a sullen and determined Taliban in control of over half the country, and the Americans deprived of any effective local allies to root them out.

At the outset of the war in 2001, I argued that it was critical for Afghans to lead the anti-Taliban campaign. My advice was followed at the time because we were initially successful. Even if Mr. Karzai and Mr. Shirzai had failed, though, my advice would have been the same — though I doubt anyone in Washington would have listened to me. I would have counseled strategic patience: Do not try to do in place of Afghans what only Afghans can sustain over the long term. In the fevered post-9/11 political environment, patience would have been a nonstarter.

Looking back at 2001 now matters because the policy conundrum we face in Iraq and Syria is nearly identical to what we almost confronted in Afghanistan. If the initial war in Afghanistan had been fought differently, the results could have been disastrous, with southern Pashtuns seeing Americans as invaders rather than as supporters of their Afghan liberators. To any who doubt this, just look where we are now.

After 2005, as the Taliban began to return, impatience with America’s imperfect Afghan allies led Washington to abandon the “Afghans-first” strategy in favor of an American-led effort, culminating in the “surge” of 2010. As a result of that blunder, we have reprised the bitter experience of the British and the Soviets before us. And like those defeated empires, we are withdrawing.

Sadly, America has learned very little from the experience in Afghanistan. Just listen now to the impatient voices emanating from the right concerning the Islamic State. Our allies in Iraq, they say, are hopelessly ineffective, and our allies in Syria practically nonexistent. ISIS poses a clear threat to American security, they insist: If others will not, or cannot defeat it, we should not be afraid to step forward ourselves to crush it.

These sentiments play to the instincts of many Americans, and they must be resisted at all cost. If the United States were to take the lead in the ground war in Iraq and perhaps eventually in Syria by introducing conventional combat forces, we would feed into a radical Islamist narrative that pits the invading armies of the crusader against the committed defenders of Islam. In the process we would only strengthen the appeal and the morale of our enemies, while weakening and demoralizing our friends.

But that is not to counsel disengagement or timidity. Many of those on the left who claim to have learned the lesson of Afghanistan have learned the wrong one; they advocate isolationism. The Obama administration, with an eye on domestic politics, attempts to have it both ways: employing strident rhetoric about “degrading and destroying” ISIS, while strenuously avoiding American casualties. Having learned hard lessons in trying to do too much in Afghanistan, the administration is compounding its errors by doing too little there now, ceding much of the country to the Taliban and abandoning our would-be allies. The same risk-aversion infects our efforts in Iraq, where ground personnel are kept away from the fighting, though limited numbers of specialized American forces are badly needed to provide guidance and to direct air support for local forces on the front lines.

The war against radical Islamic militancy is not our fight. It is a struggle among Muslims for the soul and the future of the Muslim world. In the end, only Muslims can determine the outcome. Make no mistake: We in the United States and the West have an important national security stake in that outcome. But we should not try to win on our own what only local forces can sustain, particularly when our effort to help only makes their success less likely. The United States has a compelling national interest in providing limited but critical support to Muslim allies who are pursuing their own interests, but must avoid playing into the hands of those who would paint those allies as quislings who serve American interests.

In the course of exercising such strategic patience we should remember that the threat posed to us by radical Islam, while real, is not an existential one. The extremists may pose a fundamental danger to the moderate majority in much of the Muslim world; but very few American civilians have fallen victim to Islamic terror since 9/11, and Shariah is unlikely to be imposed in Texas.

The greatest difficulty in pursuing a moderate course against radical Islamic extremism is that it is a domestic political loser. Popular American notions of war are still tied to a World War II-era model. When forced to resort to arms, they seem to think, the United States should marshal overwhelming force, win decisive victory and get out quickly. Americans don’t like playing for a tie, and they don’t like open-ended engagements. For many Americans, failure in war should not be an option; America, they believe, can unilaterally determine its own fate. These notions are antithetical to the principles governing the global struggle in which we are now engaged.

Ultimate victory in the fight against violent extremism inspired by Islam will require wisdom and patience of an unaccustomed sort. The question is whether, as a government and as a people, Americans are capable of it.
Robert Grenier was C.I.A. station chief in Islamabad from 1999 to 2002 and is the author of “88 Days to Kandahar: A C.I.A. Diary.”

10/12/2014
The Logical Indian

Sargy Mann is no ordinary man. Born in 1937, Sargy has been an artist all his life. He was an art teacher and then became a professional artist who turned his eye to landscape painting.
But early on in his career, a series of health misfortunes took away what an artist would most prize, his sight.
Sargy Mann suffered from cataracts on both of his eyes at age 30, and gradually became fully blind. But despite all this, the artist never gave up on his life’s passion.
Sargy adapted to his new life situation with great bravery and simply carried on with painting.
Art collectors are now glad he never gave up. His paintings regularly exhibit at one of the finest art galleries in London and his art is coveted by the rich and famous- including film director Steven Spielberg. His paintings are regularly selling for upward of US$80,000.

Sargy Mann is no ordinary man. Born in 1937, Sargy has been an artist all his life. He was an art teacher and then became a professional artist who turned his eye to landscape painting.

But early on in his career, a series of health misfortunes took away what an artist would most prize, his sight.

Sargy Mann suffered from cataracts on both of his eyes at age 30, and gradually became fully blind. But despite all this, the artist never gave up on his life’s passion.

Sargy adapted to his new life situation with great bravery and simply carried on with painting.

Art collectors are now glad he never gave up. His paintings regularly exhibit at one of the finest art galleries in London and his art is coveted by the rich and famous- including film director Steven Spielberg. His paintings are regularly selling for upward of US$80,000.

Video: BBC News

11/09/2014

WHY IS THE CHILD IN HANDS OF THE BEGGARS ALWAYS SLEEPING??????????????

"Why is sleeping child in the hands of beggars? Have you ever wondered ... "

This article I read a few months ago. Who is the author of, I don't know.
Please read…..

""Near the metro station sits a woman of uncertain age.
Women’s hair
is confused and dirty, her head bowed in grief.

The woman sits on the dirty floor and next to her lies a bag. In that bag
people throw money. On the hands of a woman, asleep, is a two year old baby. He's in a dirty hat and dirty clothes.

“Madonna with baby” - numerous passers-by will donate money. The people of our kind- we always feel sorry for less fortunate. We are ready to give unfortunate people the last shirt, the last penny out of your pocket and never think another issue.
Helping, seems like. “Good job done”...

I walked past a beggar for a month. Did not give any money, as I knew that this is a gang operated scam and money collected by the beggar will be given to whoever controls beggars in the area. Those people own numerous luxury properties and cars.
Oh and beggar also gets something, of course “ A bottle of vodka in the evening and a döner kebab”.
A month later, walking past the beggars, as shock, it suddenly
hit me….
I'm staying at a busy crossing, stared at the baby, dressed as always- dirty track suit. I realized that it
seemed "wrong", finding a child in a dirty underground station from morning to evening.
The baby slept. Never sobbed or screamed, always asleep, burying his face in the knee of a woman who was his MUM.

Do any of you, dear readers, have children? Remember how often they
slept at the age of 1-2-3 years? Hour two, maximum three (not consecutive)
afternoon nap, and again – movement. For the whole month, every day of my
walking in the underground, I've never seen a child awake! I looked
at the tiny little man, with his face buried in the knee of his mother, then at the beggar, and my
suspicion was gradually formed.
– Why he sleeps all the time? I asked, staring at the baby.

The beggar pretended not to hear me. She lowered her eyes and
hid her face in the collar of her shabby jacket. I repeated the question. The woman again
looked up. She looked somewhere behind my back, tired with utter irritation. Her look was similar to the creatures from a different planet.
-F **k off ... her lips murmured.
-Why is he asleep?! I almost cried ...

Behind me someone put his hand on my shoulder. I looked back. A some old man was looking at me disapprovingly:

– What do you want from her? Can’t you see how hard she’s got it in her life… Eh …
He gets some coins from his pocket and throws them in the beggar’s bag.

Beggar made a hand wave of a cross, portraying the face of humility and universal
grief. The guy removed his hand from my shoulder and strolled out of the underground station.
I bet, at home, he will tell how he defended poor, distraught woman from a soulless man in a tube station.

Next day I called a friend. It was a funny man with eyes like olives Romanian nationality. He only managed to complete three and a half years of education. The complete lack of education does not prevent him from moving around the
City streets on very expensive foreign cars and live in a “small” house with countless number of windows and balconies. From my friend I managed to find out that this business, despite the apparent
spontaneity, clearly organized. Its supervised by begging organized crime rings. The children used are in "rent"
from families of alcoholics, or simply stolen.
I needed to get the answer to the question – why is the baby sleeping? And I received it. My friend Gypsy said the phrase, completely ordinary with calm voice that twisted me in shock, just like he was talking about weather report:
-They are on he**in, or vodka ...
I was dumbfounded. "Who is on he**in? Whom – under vodka?! "
He answered
-The Child, so he doesn’t scream. The women will be sitting whole day with him, imagine how he might get bored?

In order to make the baby slept the whole day, it pumped up with vodka or drugs. Of course, children's bodies are not able to cope with such a shock. And children often die. The most terrible thing – sometimes children die
during the "working day". And imaginary mother must hold another dead child on her hands until the evening. These are the rules. And the by passers-by will throw some money in the bag, and believe that they are moral. Helping
"mother alone" …
… The next day I was walking near the same underground station. I stocked up journalistic identity, and was ready for a serious conversation. But the conversation didn't work out. But turned out the following ...
A woman was sitting on the floor and in her hands she was holding a child. I asked her a question about the documents on the child, and, most importantly, where was yesterday's kid, which she simply ignored.
My questions were not ignored by passers-by. I was told that I was out of my mind screaming at poor beggar with a child. All in all, I was escorted out of the tube station in disgrace. One thing remained was to call the police. When police arrived, beggar with the baby disappeared. I stood with a full sense of - “I'm trying to fight windmills”.

When you see in the subway, on the street whether women with children,
begging, think before your hand climb for money. Think about that, if it wasn't for your hundreds of thousands of handouts, the business like this would have died. The business would die and not the children-inflated with vodka or
drugs. Do not look at the sleeping child with affection. See horror… Since you're reading this article, you know now- why the child is sleeping in beggars hands.

P.S.
If you copy this article on your wall or just click "Share", your friends will read it too.
And when you decide again to open your wallet to throw a coin to a beggar, remember that this
charity could cost another child's life."

Address

Delhi

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Awared Indian posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to Awared Indian:

Shortcuts

  • Address
  • Alerts
  • Contact The Business
  • Claim ownership or report listing

  • Want your business to be the top-listed Media Company?

Share