Printable View
I'm sure this happens with all countries that host the Commonwealth Games.
Or is ours the worst one? Is this what we pay the taxes for? :mad:
CVC was asked not to inspect Games projects
Corruption scandal hits 2010 Games, organisers deny charges
Rs 4 lakhs for an AC, 9 lakhs for a treadmill
Sheila Dikshit says, I have nothing to say
... and the list continues...
 
Anyone has any ideas to do something about this, other than getting into a legal battle with the government?
The answer is very simple .... Vote for the right people! :afrog:
... and the right people is ______ ?
The right people is "you".Quote:
Originally Posted by Pradeep1210
The reality of the matter is that reasonably sane people tend to avoid politics like plague. The thought of ruling over the masses scares them. :sick:
Er not when we hosted it in Manchester it didn't. The Manchester CW Games went really well and it was actually in part due to how well they went that convinced the British government to bid for the London Olympics.Quote:
I'm sure this happens with all countries that host the Commonwealth Games.
Sounds like you have some dodgy people in charge.
When the Commonwealth Games actually happened in Manchester they brought a really good atmosphere to the city various new sport facilities (Swimming, cycling e.t.c) and seemed leave a legacy to the City.
Hopefully despite the organising problems of yours the games themselves will turn out well, because if they do then India will have shown they can manage and put on a large scale international sporting event which can only be good for the future.
You're right! Unfortunately, we can't vote for ourselves. We must vote for one of the political parties, and all of them would do the same/similar when voted to power. :afrog:Quote:
Originally Posted by abhijit
And it doesn't make sense in getting in into someone else's shoes, when they are not doing their job right. We are software professionals and we are doing our profession well. On the other hand the politicians are not doing their profession with dedication. If we exchange professions, they will rot the software industry too. :eek:
No one is interested in serving people. Earn Money as much you can, If you face any case, handle them with money....
Vote for the Right educated people, vote for new people..Lets some what the new one do
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedSomeAnswers
Here even the flower pots are being bought for Rs. 4000 to Rs. 5000 per pot, the actual cost of which in the open market is just Rs. 20 to Rs. 30.
And its no secret. It's declared openly. :sick:
 
Buy me a sniper rifle and hire me to shoot corrupt politicians.
$1200000 per assassination.
Satisfaction guaranteed :afrog:
The reality is that the masses have been sufficiently corrupted to vote for the same old people. The electoral process has been reduced to a mockery.:cry: :cry:Quote:
Originally Posted by danasegarane
I am surprised to see Manmohan Singh hasn't personally taken charge of the project yet. Looks like either no one cares about the success or failure of the project, or they are just waiting to use this opportunity to get rid of some political pests.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBcn782_wvI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fs4wETCMtUE
So now Hitler also isn't coming. :(
Well India need some anti-corruption laws in place and a dedicated agency that enforces / investigates it.
Along with heavy heavy jail terms for breaches with solid evidence, or outright dismissal for even a hint of corruption.
Hitler isn't coming?! I was really hoping to see him.
That would mean a lot of honest people getting shafted.Quote:
Originally Posted by capsulecorpjx
An agency would simply be headed by some one who has an ax to grind. :(
Indian democracy is evolving. India became free in 1947, so it is just been 63 years. It will take some time for it to mature. The important thing is that there have been no coups since democracy has been established. :cool:
Well one possibility is all the people who can will just move out, leaving the country in the hands of those who can't rule it.Quote:
Originally Posted by abhijit
Another possibility is the good people will organize and drive away/out the bad ones, but it's a remote possibility. A remote with no batteries, actually.
Good people do not want to join politics not because they hate ruling the masses, but because they hate being manipulated by the bad people already in business.
The fiasco of the CWG 2010 is purely because we have some pretty good incompetent people heading the whole exercise. I mean they are so incompetent, they can't even defraud the people well!
.
There are over a billion people in India, where would they all go to ???Quote:
Well one possibility is all the people who can will just move out, leaving the country in the hands of those who can't rule it.
You certainly cant all come to the UK as our current government is about to impose a non-EU immigration cap. In fact i bet most countries have an immigration cap
Send all the politicians to the UK. They are definitely less than a billion. <evil grin>
Now they are definitely cant come, they dont count as skilled workers !!!Quote:
Send all the politicians to the UK. They are definitely less than a billion. <evil grin>
Oh, they're skilled alright. Just not used to working, somewhat similar to the Royal Family you have over there.
nothing.
Well, there are ways, but they are difficult. Everyday when I drive to work, I see people jumping signals all the time. Since I make it a point to halt at every red light, I get many drivers behind me honking at me, asking me to move ahead. The reason: Either everybody else is doing it, the roads are empty or there are no cops. None of these people realize it's their country and they have to uphold the laws themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by arunb
Would you like to be the role model for your kids, relatives, colleagues, juniors? Here's what it would take: Follow all the laws. Which means no spitting, no smoking, no drinking, stopping at a red light, wearing seat belts, not using the mobile phone while driving. How many people in Mumbai do you think do this? You would be surprised to see how many people I see doing one or the other things out of the above mentioned ones. And these include people driving luxury cars (who are probably running their own businesses or having senior positions in companies they work for). If these people do not care about the laws, do you think the country can be improved?
.
exactly my point, since we are breaking the law at some point or the other (its impossible to be straight forward and survive in India), how can you expect our politicians to be any better.
Have you wondered why in a democracy like ours why most politicians are corrupt ??
Wait! I was thinking of changing my name to Hitler and going. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by baja_yu
It's this mentality that's hurting India as a nation the most. People almost seem to think that the laws are meant to be broken. Why can't we determine that we shall follow the laws instead of trying to see how to break them? There are so many simple ones which don't cost you a dime to follow: Never cross the railway tracks, always follow the traffic signals, do not spit or litter in public places. Do you think if you followed these laws, people would kill you?Quote:
Originally Posted by arunb
Saturday I was watching the epic Gandhi on TV. What amazes me is the determination of the person to fight back without resorting to any violent means. If he could do that in the oppressive British regime, how difficult is it to do it today?
.
congratulations !!
The opening ceremony went of well, even the Australians are hailing the event, and to think they were thinking of withdrawing from the games....
Finally we had wonderful opening ceremony
That's just an ideal speak. You can do that only if you have ample of time to spare, which unfortunately you won't have in this fast moving world.Quote:
Originally Posted by honeybee
In a city where there is a red light every 100 meters or so, if you stop at every red light, plus also bear the traffic jams every now and then, you will either have to leave from home too early or face the wrath of your bosses. If you are late a couple of days in a go you may even be fired from job. Your boss won't accept your ideals calling them "lame excuses".
Let's take an ideal situation where your office is 10 km from your home and there is a red light every 100m, or traffic jam, and you spend 2 minutes on each red light/jam. You will have to spend about 3 hours just waiting on red lights, + 1 hour traveling. So you will have to leave 4 hrs early from home to ensure you reach the office on time in worst cases. That makes it approximately 8 hours just traveling to and fro from home to office & back. :eek:
Now there are two ways to it:
1. Teach everyone that they should stop on all red lights and all the ideals related to it.
or,
2. Change yourself and do how they are doing (which don't match the ideals). Just as they say: "Do in Rome as Romans do".
Which one do you think you would be able to do?
On one hand you think the Government is oppressing you, on the other hand you want people to follow the laws. Make up your mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by honeybee
Gandhi was successful in overthrowing the then Government by not disobeying the laws set at the time. :blush:
My thoughts exactly...Quote:
That's just an ideal speak. You can do that only if you have ample of time to spare, which unfortunately..............
Has anyone else noticed that one of the tags for this thread is "fake vomit"?
Quote:
Tags
assassination, corruption, fake vomit, government, india, stupidity
I still don't understand how breaking the law becomes justifiable. It's beyond my comprehension how you can justify jumping signals just because you want to reach office early. Or you think the government officials put up traffic lights for their own amusements, to see how the lights change colour? I have yet to see a 10km stretch of road that has a traffic light every 100m which stays red for 2 minutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pradeep1210
Abhijit, Gandhi disobeyed the laws because it was a foreign government. Please don't justify the actions of hundreds of irresponsible people by citing Gandhi's actions.
.
The Government was oppressive. I am not sure if foreign was the reason he revolted.
Well, all I can say is I am shocked. I do think that he is called the Father of the Nation for a reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by abhijit
.
Through out history, India has been invaded several times by several different cultures. Some came to stay permanently, some had short term forays.
Case in point: The Mughals.
The Mughals came over from a different country. Babar was Genghis Khan's grandson. After some skirmishes against them, the rest of the country pretty much either joined forces with them or left them alone.
The reason why Gandhi is called the Father of the Nation is he helped shape India's political destiny. (Mostly by handing over the nation to the Nehru Dynasty.) (That's a different discussion for another day).
The Brits were oppressive to the point where people found it impossible to feel free. You can't rule a country where the masses feel they are being shafted all the time. That's screaming for revolution.
No, I'm not provoking to break laws. But in situations where there is no vehicle on the sides the lights are green and you are waiting to let go your light green, I don't see any harm in jumping the red light. Though these are purely my personal views.Quote:
Originally Posted by honeybee
Only if you were in Delhi during these CommonWealth games you would have known the plight of Delhites. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by honeybee
Half the roads from both sides are just blocked for VIPs and all traffic has been cramped into the other halves of the roads. :(
In other words it's not ok to jump a red light if there are vehicles coming in from other directions, but it's ok if the street is deserted? So are you saying committing a crime when nobody is around to watch is ok? By the way thanks for clarifying these are your personal views.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pradeep1210
If we can't resist the temptation of jumping a red light for the sake of saving a minute or two, do you really think we have any right to complain about corrupt politicians?
.
Yes !Quote:
If we can't resist the temptation of jumping a red light for the sake of saving a minute or two, do you really think we have any right to complain about corrupt politicians?
I don't see how the two situations equate to each other. They are eating up our money, I'm not. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by honeybee
Both have no respect for the country's laws. The only difference is in the scale. Just as them, you too are cheating the exchequer by not paying the requisite fines for breaking the rules. And I am afraid given an opportunity, you would be as bad as the people you are cursing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pradeep1210
@NeedSomeAnswers, I hope you are speaking in jest. However, let me make one point clear. I am not going into the classical debate of who should throw the first stone. My point is that while you want to throw stones at the sinners, are we examining our own sins? Are we willing to pay for our own sins? Else it will only weed out the sinners, not the sins. Essentially you replace a set of corrupt people with another that's equally corrupt.
.
No i was not.Quote:
@NeedSomeAnswers, I hope you are speaking in jest.
I have 2 reasons for this.
1, For Instance in the UK the speed limit on the motorway is 70 mph. If you ever travel on the Motorway in the UK you can see that everyone breaks the speed limit even if only by 10 miles an hour. Pretty much 50% of the population breaks this law on a daily basis.
Does this make all the people criminals or the law a bad or badly implemented law ?
2, Speeding for instance has no bearing on someone's ability to judge whether a politician is corrupt. Also there corruption is a question of morality a minor traffic offence is not.
I am not saying that everyone should go out and break the law, but i am saying the laws are supposed to be for the good of the people not criminalise the majority.
Corrupt politicians on the other hand, there actions often effect millions of people and generally there actions are controlled by greed, not by trying to get to work on time.
I think NeedSomeAnswers has already answered the part of question directed at me and is exactly what I was about to say. :)
Breaking the traffic laws as in this instance is not just for the sake of breaking laws or to gain monetary advantage or indulge in any criminal activity. Also it is ok that some fine has been put on the same; but they should not make it a source of govt. income. They should not expect that people will break this law and they should earn from it.
So if there are a few politicians who are corrupt, it's ok for you and me to jump traffic signals and break whatever rules we can? And then whine against the high fines when we are caught? When did someone else's act of committing a crime become the justification for you and me to commit a crime ourselves?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedSomeAnswers
You are doing something which you know is a crime. A politician is taking a bribe which he knows he shouldn't be doing. How can you claim to be on a higher plane of morality than the politician? Both are essentially doing the same thing, just on a different scale. However, your decision to jump a traffic light is putting many other innocent lives in immediate danger.
Also when you jump that traffic light, do you ever pay any heed to the many other motorists who have paid road tax, vehicle tax and other monies to the government for the safe management of roadways and the signal system? Do you have any notion that you are infringing upon their right to a safe traffic system? Or is your need to reach office on time more important than any other users of the road?
.
Now if you read my post i never said any of that, what i basically said was;Quote:
So if there are a few politicians who are corrupt, it's ok for you and me to jump traffic signals and break whatever rules we can? And then whine against the high fines when we are caught? When did someone else's act of committing a crime become the justification for you and me to commit a crime ourselves?
There are degrees of crimes, which is something that is acknowledged in the justice system itself, and that jumping a red light is in no way comparable to being a corrupt politician whose dodgy dealings affect millions.
Just because you have committed a minor traffic offence it does not stop you being able to judge corrupt politicians. Anybody can make a mistake and jump a red light by accident even, but it is much harder to lie and steal from the public by accident :0)
I am not condoning jumping red lights or breaking any other laws i was just pointing out with your logic, any offence however minor has the same weight as more serious crimes and i disagree with that. The justice system also disagrees with it which is why there is a major difference in charges & sentencing for jumping a red light and fraud or theft.
There do seem to be some concepts being conflated heer that really don't belong together.
First of all, crime (whether major or minor) for personal gain cannot be equated with civil disobediance. Ghandi did not march to the sea to harvest salt because he wanted his balthi to taste nicer. He did it because he wanted to highlight a particular injustice that existed at the time (one that was part of a much largter whole). On the other hand, when you cross a red light because you're in a hurry you're not doing it because you want to highlight some inherant injustice. You're doing it because you want an extra quarter of an hour in bed. If you want to cross red lights as a protest you really need to be public about it. Take some photos of yourself and send them into the government. An unseen protest is worthless.
Secondly, you cannot justify a crime, no matter how trivial, on the basis that "everyone else is doing it" or "it's harmless". NSA, the example you gave of moderate speeding is a good example of the sort of minor crime many of us engage in but we shouldn't try to fool ourselves that we're justified in doing it. Instead we need to be honest with ourselves and say "Yeah, I know what I'm doing is a bit wrong but I'm happy to live with being a less than perfect person". (I'm not sure you'd disagree with this, I'm clarifying my position rather than contradicting yours).
In the cases of both speeding and jumping reds it's reasonably easy to justify it to ourselves as harmless... right up nutil the moment we kill a child. In truth it was never justified, just a calculated risk.
I agree with NSA that committing a minor crime should not mean you are unable to accuse another of committing a major one. But I also think you should not unable to accuse another of committing a minor one either. Each crime stands in isolation and should be judged as such. Equally, therefore, we should be willing to stand up and accept being justifiably accused and criticised for our own minor failings. That's what personal responsibility means.
Glad that the opening ceremony went off OK in the end but now you've got a bunch of poisonous cobras turning up all over the place (although I'm not sure the government can be criticised for this). I reckon Samual L Jackson need to make a new movie: "Snakes at the Games"
not at all, a completely agree. You were probably more succinct then me in presenting the same argument.Quote:
(I'm not sure you'd disagree with this, I'm clarifying my position rather than contradicting yours).
I did have another point as well here, some laws are just bad laws. the 70 mph speed limit on the UK motorway being one of them. It in effect criminalises a huge majority of the population, and its un-policableQuote:
NSA, the example you gave of moderate speeding is a good example of the sort of minor crime many of us engage in but we shouldn't try to fool ourselves that we're justified in doing it.
80 mph to 85 mph would be a more reasonable speed limit (and more in keeping with the speed that the large majority are already travelling at), so i dont believe that you would effect safety by upping it either. You could balance that out by moving some 40 mph zones to 30 mph which would probably have a bigger effect on safety.
I get where you're coming from but I think the effect would just be that we'd drive 10 to 15 mph faster. Instead of speeding doing 85 we'd be speeding to 100. Like most things in life, we drive to a certain percieved level of risk. Modern cars are easily controllable at those speeds so the percieved risk tends to be legal rather than physical.Quote:
80 mph to 85 mph would be a more reasonable speed limit
If raising it would result in us all obeying the limit I think you'd be right. The 70 limit has been in place since the 60s and cars are ALOT safer now than they were then. In fact, I'd go further and use the German Autobahn rules: no limit at all. To my knowledge their accident raes are no worse than anywhere else. I struggled to find a decent source on that but I did find this site which says their accident rates are actually lower on the unrestricted stretches than the restricted. In fact there's lots of evidence that trying to control traffic in any way just makes it more dangerous. Some British Councils have started removing traffic lights from junctions and found they get less accidents. It seems that when you tell people what to do they obey blindly but if you let them thnk for themselves they do just that - think.
The debate's not really about safety, though, it's about legality. If you're breaking a law for personal gain, even if you think that laws bad, then you can't really take some moral high ground and should accept that, to some degree, your undermining the society you choose to live in. If you're breaking it as a protest (and as an ex poll tax protester I do think there can be some call for that at times) then invite the authorities and media along to watch you do it. Otherwise you're really just breaking the rules for no real societal gain.