How and when will India become a truely developed nation?

[venkatpasupathy]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Shri Kunjappu,
Yes .You right. India has to watch out for excessive build up of forex reserves in dollar terms. Investing in gold may be wise for now. Venakt.P

 

[RVR]

india should watch out too. we have i think today about 450 billion u.s. dollar reserves. this is hard earned money. better to switch these to gold too.

India recently bought 200 tons of Gold from IMF. Please see the new item.

Full circle: India buys 200 tons gold from IMF - India Business - Biz - The Times of India

India always maintains a basket of currencies and now gradually switching over to gold. Indian foreign exchange reserves is about 285 billion US $

Thanks and all the best

 

[siva144]

india should watch out too. we have i think today about 450 billion u.s. dollar reserves. this is hard earned money. better to switch these to gold too.

India recently bought 200 tons of Gold from IMF. Please see the new item.

Full circle: India buys 200 tons gold from IMF - India Business - Biz - The Times of India

India always maintains a basket of currencies and now gradually switching over to gold. Indian foreign exchange reserves is about 285 billion US $

Thanks and all the best

Sir --usually in business/economics--gold is bought when price is low and exchanged when its price is up--[and we bought in tons when gold price is at peak]
is it a right decision ? to buy just 'cause IMF is disposing its inventory

 

[kunjuppu]

siva,

there does not seem an end to how high the price of gold will go.

already, the indian government has made a fat profit.

there is only so much more gold deposits in the world. i do not have the figures, but i heard a local radio station in toronto, that it will be only a few years hence, when all the mines will run out.

but the real jeopardy of a government hoarding gold, is that it is getting rid of its u.s. dollars. which means, that it is taking a whack at the value of the u.s. dollar, which is an imaginary value, i think.

i say imaginary, only because, for want of any other currency to negotiate, everything is quoted for international trade in u.s. dollars. we give it a certain respect based on what?

not the way the u.s. manages its economy. the u.s. has been a net importer for about 50 years now. what is offset, is that the perception in the rest of the world, that the u.s. is a safe haven for capital. so people buy property and also keep their savings in u.s. dolalrs.

this is very much the habit in latin america, africa and certain parts of asia. i believe, that it is not so much a practice in india, only because we are so huge and by and large, inward looking.

once upon a time, it was the british pound that was the international currency for quoting any commodity. but after the world war 2, the pound lost its prestige.

now they are talking of a basket of currencies. but that is not going to work, because you cannot put your finger in the SDR (that is the name of the basket).

SDR stands for special drawing rights, and each unit will have proportionately various currencies. but there is no paper SDR and you cannot go to the market and buy your grocery with SDR.

this was tried about 30 years ago, and failed to take off.

we are probably stuck with the u.s. dollar, even if its value goes down to 1 dolla = 1 indian ruppee

they say, that some day the chinese yuan may become the standard. i do not believe this will happen in my lifetime.

 

[siva144]

kunjuppu--thanks for details
world trade and currency dynamics r also changing
Euro is gaining momentum than dollar--it must fit into basket of currencies to the proportion of currency dynamics accordingly along with other strong currencies of the world-

China -Yaun in future is debatable--as long it is a communist country,,lot of deliberate strength will b shown,-- no doubt it is already creating new dynamics to world trade/currency [of USD] esp with US which is now dependent on China

coming to the Gold I am yet to understand the rationality to buy now at high price
or is that i am not able to understand macroeconomics ?

usually India goes to help--loss going corporate,countries,dismantled/obsolete tech and buy the asset and make it all unworkable--Gold too?

 

[sridharvasudevan]

I have been away from this site for some time now and there has been lot of activity out here. It was good reading through your posts

I have one question to ask all active members on this thread. Do you think there can be just one country (any one) in this world that is developed while all others are under developed or fallen? I do not think so.

That is basically why we should look at how "WE" should grow rather than see who will be bigger or biggest when we grow.

 

[kunjuppu]

Sorry siva, missed your reply. This below is to the best of my knowledge. The public are requested to correct this as appropriate.

Till 1971, the u.s. dollar was on gold standard. Ie $34 was equal to 1 ounce of gold. What this meant, was theoretically, one could go to the u.s. government, hand over paper money and get gold in return.

It was also common knowledge that the u.s. government did not have the gold to back up all the dollar bills. So when charles de gaulle, president of france went on a buying spree of gold from the u.s. government, Richard Nixon, the then president decided not to honour those purchase requests for gold anymore.

So officially, the dollar and in turn, all currencies fell off the gold standard, which was how fiscal systems were built from times immemorial till 1971.

After that, the value of the u.s. dollar is one of faith. It is what the other countries are willing to pay for the dollar, and indirectly trade between each other’s currencies, the conversion rate fixed by their individual value against the dollar.

So huge is the international trade now, that there is no other currency which is widely held and familiar as the u.s. dollar. This honour throughout 18, 19 and till mid 20th century was held by the british pound. After the 2nd world war, Britain lost its pre eminent position to the u.s.a.

One of the advantages of having your currency to be the prime exchange vehicle, is that everybody wants it. There is a built in demand, which is based on the faith, that the u.s. is managing its economy well and is the leader of free market enterprise, and the currency is freely convertible.

The u.s.a. ofcourse is beset now with 2 expensive wars (yes, wars are expensive) plus this huge subsidies to kick start their ailing economy. Add to it, the new government aided health care. All this involves printing more paper currency than there is demand.

So what happens to the excess paper currency? Normally if it is the Indian rupee or any other currency, the value of the currency vis a vis the dollar will go down, as there is more supply than demand.

But when the benchmark currency itself is the problem, then everyone has got a problem. In order to alleviate this, china has bought in u.s. currency in large large quantities (trillions) in u.s. government security bills. Paying pittance of interest.

China is not doing this out of kindness. China needs a market for its goods, and only the u.s. is big and open enough to let all Chinese manufactured goods, into their country without any hassle. In return, it has all these u.s dollar bills with which the American suppliers pay the Chinese companies for these goods. China in return cannot use these dollars, as it will flood the world with unwanted u.s. dollars, and hence bring the value down.

It will be like cutting off your nose to spite your face. So china is now stuck with a lot of dollars.

The only thing stopping u.s. from what is calling, ‘priming the pump’ ie printing more money, is it will cause inflation and the lowering of the value of the u.s. dollar within usa itself. though initially it will be good for the u.s. as its products will be cheaper outside, and imports be more expensive, ultimately, inflation destroys the wealth, as cash goes down in value. Also people on fixed incomes find their incomes purchasing less and less goods.

And also, having your currency as the international exchange medium, is a source of pride.

Every once in a while, there is call to replace the u.s. dollar. But till one comes up with a currency, that is accepted by all, widely held, there is no other alternative.

Hope this somewhat made sense. Thank you.

 

[kunjuppu]

Sridhar,

I do not know much, but here is what I think.

To the best of my knowledge, in recent history, the usa, immediately after the 2nd world war in 1945 was the only country, in my opinion, who was developed, and everyone else pauperized. All due to the war or war related activities or consequences (in india though we had highly employment during the war due to people joining the army, there was famine in Bengal, because india was a net importer of food then, from burma we got the rice, and burma was occupied by the Japanese)!

But this was an unusual situation, which soon was set right, as Europe and japan started rebuilding their economies. The usa facilitated this by lending large amounts of money and unilaterally opening up its market so that these countries could sell to the u.s.

Initially it was all good stuff. However, countries like japan, pegged their currency to the u.s. dollar, and even though they produced many more goods, and did not want goods from other countries, their currency was always cheap. So what happened is that Japanese goods, while increasing in quality, always were cheap and hence forced u.s. factories to close.

This is what is called ‘beggar thy neighbour’ situation, ie one country develops at the expense of others.

Now china is doing the same thing.

What is now different, is even if u.s. imposes tariffs, and closes its markets, it has lost the manufacturing base and skillsets. Stuff like TVs, cameras, watches, now cars etc are made asia, at a better quality and price than the u.s.a.

Barring commercial aeroplanes and military hardware, the usa does not have much to sell to the outside world, except agricultural products, which are a commodity with deep rooted national feelings and sentiments, for people to open up their markets.

Not sure if I answered your query, but hopefully, this gave a backdrop to what is happening, from my very limited knowledge of world affairs. Thank you.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Kunjuppu Ji,

A very good summation on the status of US $. President Nixon got off the Gold Standard as a way to fund the Vietnam war, without diluting the value of US $, with an emptied gold reserves at Fort Knox.

PM Manmohan Singh made the following comments on CNN, this weekend as he arrived here:
America has the capacity to bounce back, assures PM Manmohan - India - The Times of India
I think his thinking is correct. As I have said many times, the faith in $ reflects the perception of continued strength of American economy in the foreseeable future, backed by her enormous entrepreneurial efforts of her people, aided by capitalist and democratic institutions. While we talk about the contributions of giant multinationals originating and based in the US to her economy, last few decades have spawned many small entrepreneurial businesses that account for producing 70% of jobs here, which also operate abroad. This is the untold story of American economy. I think this will continue to become more dominant, as the model of start ups with venture/investment capital proving themselves to be gobbled up by bigger firms. This creats real value/wealth in the market place.

Regards,
KRS

 

[kunjuppu]

Krs,

I agree with you re the inherent dynamism of the u.s. economy.

I see two factors as moving forces in u.s. socio politics now. One the democratic party – which for historic reasons, now is moving further towards a European model of state internvention.

Not that the u.s. state has not intervened before. It did it on a grand scale in the 1930 with roosevelt’s new deal programs, which were basically job creating infrastructure projects. Whatever is being done now, is nowhere near what Roosevelt did, in its scope and impact.

I think, what is different now, is the equalization of the u.s. society, in that at no time in its history, the u.s. has been so inclusive in its political process as now. Which leads to the next stage, ie correcting historical wrongs and handicaps.

The move towards government sponsored health care is but one step towards a benefit, once reserved for the middle class, which is mostly whites. Let us remember the u.s. is a huge middle class society which tapers off at the top and bottom. Hence, I think, the bottom has always been an helpless minority, because they had no franchise in real terms. Unfortunately, these were also racial minorities.

The other force, unfortunately is the Christian right. There is no de facto social or economic right in the u.s. right now, I think, as these have been side swiped by the Christian right which has taken control of the republican party.

Much like, when our own swatantra party merged with bharatiya jana sangh to form the bjp. The secular elements of swatantra, the likes of masani, ranga, pothan joseph etc. were overshadowed by vajapayee, bhandari and madhok ( who left bjp to revive jana sangh, but to no avail).

So, many folks, who of the wall street journal now have to sit uncomfortably shoulder to shoulder with the likes of rush Limbaugh, as they both belong to the same political platform. Very frightening I think.

Back to the u.s. economy.

No matter how the u.s. manages its economy, the status of the dollar in the international market is assured.

There is no other country which has the political clout, and the willingness to float its currency. This involes a great level of self confidence and a certain military adventurism. Also, the willingness, even reluctantly, of the rest of the world to accept the fact of the leadership quality of the dominant currency.

Britain was the first western country to exhibit these traits on a global scale. We all have heard of the ‘sterling’ value – applied to anything of quality. Today the sterling is just another currency.

Now who can replace the u.s. and its dollar.

Definitely not india. We do not have either the economic or social or political clout. Long long away from it.

Not japan. Not Europe – the euro is still inwardly looking. It does not carry the political clout, even though its economy overview may be as large as the u.s.a.

China? I do not think so. People are scared of china. Nobody likes china. Thanks to china, small countries like the Caribbean or Africans, are forced to close their small factories, as china dumps goods at a price and quality, which no can afford. (the quality of Chinese goods are far better than the price we pay, I think).

Also, Chinese is still a strange language. Not many know it. China is still a poor country. In 25 years its economy might surpass that of the u.s.a but not its global clout, I think.

Deep inside, we are all prejudiced, I think, in favour of the white man. Accept this as the luck of the draw of the right coloured skin.

Was it not at the 3rd battle of panipat, on seeing the English lead the Indians against Indians (mahrattas), a wise Indian old man remarked, that atlast those who are born to rule have arrived in india.

Such attitude alone was the cause of defeat of india and the rest of the world against Europeans of the 15 through 19th centuries. Not likely to change soon.

When I was young, we were all standing in the railway station for hours to get tickets. This was the custom.

A white European tourist came. Without a murmur, the crowd, in one assent, asked the white man to skip the queue and go to the counter. Which, thanks to his sense of fairness, he did not. We have such attitudes about the white people, that in many a posts here, we see this expressed as sheer hatred, mockery and above all a comfortable ignorance.

As long as this ignorance survives in the non white world, the u.s. dollar will reign supreme. J

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Kunjuppu Ji,

One thing I may add:

It is true that GOP has white majority as members. But make no mistake about it, their membership has been growing steadily, especially amongst Spanish and Asian populations.

After the new deal in the 1930s, blacks who used to be with the Republican party switched to the Democratic party in large numbers, because of the civil right lawas that passed. But today they are with that party mainly because of Government's programs assisting their community. Infact, when George Bush ran, considerable percentage of blacks, more than ever voted for him because of his promise to run a 'compassionate conservative' government, a code word for increasing the entitlements. Jews also, by tradition vote democratic by tradition. The new comers, like the Asians and the Spanish, initially are attracted by the offer of government aid by the democratic party and join. But as they become more prosperous, they run their own businesses, they switch to the Republican party.

Among whites, in the last few elections about 57% vote republican with college education and 35% without and very surprisingly 50% when they have advanced degrees.

I am an independent and I am almost a cross between a conservative and a libertarian, if I have to put a label on myself. As such I do not like the policies of both parties today, when it comes to their financial ones. I think both parties have been living large, spending more than what we can afford in terms of discretionary spending. Medicare is going to bankrupt this nation if not revised.

However, this 'broad tent' concept of the democratic party is also suspect. They are beholden to some key self interest entities like the large labour unions and the teachers union, who are mainly nowadays obstructing the self interest of USA. While democrats will field a multi ethnic face in their conventions, in the local politics, they do not allow the minorities to participate properly in their power structure. The top has been all white, till they could not deny Obama. They profess liberalism for the cadre while enjoying all the perks of being elite.

The republicans have the opposite problem. Their inherent philosophy is based on self reliance and a small size of the government. So, they automatically appeal to the majority of whites based on the economic philosophy and that concept carries over to the conservative values, regarding social issues. But, nowadays, they are trying to get rid of their progressives.

So, in the end, none of the parties represent my vales. I like the foreign policy of the republicans and I lkie some social principles of the democrats. I absolutely abhor both of their economic policies.

Hopefully an alternative will emerge soon.

Regards,
KRS

 

[tbs]

hi folks,
is india is third world country?
or a developing country....means always the same standard...
even after 300 years still developing country?may be developed
after 1000 years ........

regards
tbs

 

[KRS]

Just for comparison between USA, China and India in terms of economies. When one talks about China and India 'catching up' with the USA, one is talking about the GDP or GNP. Other statistics that reflects this is Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) per capita. In 2008, the following are roughly the PPPs of these three countries: USA: $48,000; China: $5900; India: $2900; So, one can see that China's economy is twice the size of India's and the US economy is about 8 times bigger than China. But USA is about 1/4 the size of both China and India. So, all it takes China to match the Total GDP as USA is to to get to about $12,000 PPP per Capita. Hence the calculation that if they grow at 9% per year clip, they will double their current PPP per capita figure in 8 years or so, if one assumes that USA PPP does not grow at all.

But obviously, the Purchasing Power Parity per capita will still be 1/4th of the USA. What this means is that the wealth of China and the living standards in China will have a long way to go to catch up to the USA.

Please refer: List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am giving these numbers to show, what it would take China and India to catch up to the USA.

Regards,
KRS

 

[sridharvasudevan]

Shri KRS & Shri Kunjuppu, I must appreciate the effort both of you have taken in bringing a lot of facts onto this thread. Yes, being aware of these facts you have put forth, I must agree the race for being among the most developed has a lot of political play involved.

I personally am more excited at knowing at least 20 countries in the world are among the developed category and adding India as one more is all that is needed for a start.

Becoming a Super power and/or having currency domination are not my priorities. Rather, they can be a consequence but not the goal. The mark of a leader is to compete with oneself rather than anyone else.

Do you think becoming a developed nation itself requires the role of government? Could you please quote some of the ways our government can put the nation in the right direction.

Any movement of a national scale will require to consider external factors also for a sustainable success model. However, it may not be harmful to start looking at the internal factors to get the process started.

Leadership and education are the two factors I have grasped from the discussions till date. I guess we have quite a few educated and able thinkers out here to help provide some "direction", which is the most important role of leadership.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri SridharVasudevan Ji,

For a country of India's size, getting out of poverty and sustaining a high growth rate over the next few decades is imperative. We can acheive the first goal if we have a growth rate of about 8% over 15 years. The latter can be acheived by careful liberalization and opening up of the economy in targeted areas. I think that the rural areas should be targeted for development to take place with the first priority of investments in the infrastructure (roads, rail links, airports, water and electricity) to stimulate job growth there. If India does not do this, then we will face the same problems that China faces today - how to find employment for about 100 million of her citizens over the next decade and how to relocate them from their agrarian areas to the manufacturing hubs.

Given that Indians are saving at about 35% rate today, a 9% growth over next few decades, given the rural investments I described above is not out of question. At 9% growth rate, personal income should double every eight years (rule of 72).

But then, what can derail this growth? Unfortunately many things:

1. Corruption
2. Internal strife (e.g., between Hindus and Muslims)
3. External expensive war and/or interference
4. Wealth not distributed evenly among the population
5. Not enough skilled labour to fuel the growth
6. Lack of meritocracy

I agree with you that a great country competes with herself. But then a great country also learns to compete with others and more importantly learns how to be a power befitting her size and talents.

Regards,
KRS

 

[sridharvasudevan]

Shri KRS Ji,

True, we need to be competent. Competing is different. Even an athlete does not compete in a world championship until he has outperformed locally or smaller ones. We can be an underdog for some time, I guess

What we need to work on are the obstacles to development. We understand corruption is one. Well, but, corruption is two sided - giver and taker. We normally talk only about the taker. While the giver is more in number. we need to tackle the giver too.

Why do people participate in corruption? Greed, impatience, lack of awareness, lack of self esteem, herd mentality, fear of being a loser are among the key reasons.

Wealth distribution will never be uniform among the population, but we can provide a platform where people can gain enough wealth to live comfortably. That platform is part of what we are trying to formulate here in active discussion.

Lack of meritocracy, Internal strife, lack of skilled labor have links to corruption.

Even though individual savings in India is at about 35%, people still find it difficult to buy a decent house in a straight forward way. Personal income may double only in 8 years, but the cost of housing is doubling every 4 years.

Developing rural areas is important and is the correct thing to do. But, the way it normally happens in India - the moment there is a plan, land grabbing starts. Why and by whom? answer is obvious. So, what happens at the end, the poor remain poor, the rich get richer. Containing inflation in a developing area is equally important.

My two cents.

 

[kunjuppu]

here is an interesting article in today's new york times.

this is about foodstamps ie the u.s. government provides money to be spent on food, for otherwise these folks will go hungry.

what is astounding is not only the sheer numbers as a percentage, but in volume too. but for these government subsidies a good section of the people of the usa will go hungry.

to be sure, the food that the americans buy, even the poorest is meat, meat and other processed stuff.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/us/29foodstamps.html?em

this is another reason to educate people as to how to cook tasty vegetarian food. vegetarian foods, are usually made from scratch and more nutritive than the residuals of the force feed cows and chickens.

something to think about...

 

[pannvalan]

I agree with many points in Post # 65 of KRS.

Let me add some more.

Any extreme, capitalism or socialism (euphemism for communism) is no good.

Lopsided distribution of income and wealth must be within certain tolerable bounds.

No single life - humans or other forms of life - shoud die of hunger or poverty or ill-health. Similarly, minimum basic standards in one's life must be affordable and assured.

In spite of all its ills and weaknesses, democracy is the best form of government. But, I support proportional voting system to avoid distortions like under/over representations or no representation of certain sections of the society.

Right to Information and Right to Primary Education must be made fundamental rights, guaranteed by the Constitution.

 

[kunjuppu]

In spite of all its ills and weaknesses, democracy is the best form of government. But, I support proportional voting system to avoid distortions like under/over representations or no representation of certain sections of the society.
.

absolutely pann. democracy has its many flaws, but no better system has yet been devised.

but i am not so sure about proportional voting sysem against the current 'winner takes' all that we have.

countries like israel and germany have the proportionate representation. what this means, is that apart from directly elected representatives, the parties, based on their vote percentage, appoint certain legislators.

while in concept this sounds fair, in practice, what happens is ever hung parliament and lots of fighting as no party is ever able to get absolute majority. it involves coaltions, which gives out of proportion power to the smaller parties. atleast this is what i have heard.

maybe i am wrong. the public may have more informed views ?

 

[pvraman]

Sir,

I wonder sometimes, our election process itself is not suitable for our country, where the majority is not knowing their rights and requirements and yet they decide the government creating lot of problems to the welfare of society.

When we demand certain qualification for the person who stands for election, there should be some qualification for the voters also, like awareness about their problems and solutions suggested by the candidate. If somebody does not know, they should not be allowed to vote.

Secondly, "one family one vote" plan should be there. Our petty politicians count the heads and corrupt the illiterates. The son and daughter will be included in the family as long as they don't work and supported by the family head.

The citizenship card is mandatory without which one can not vote. Whereever they migrate, they should register in the new locality, and the old entry should be removed automatically.

In each place, outsider is not allowed for canvassing. Only the candidate shall put forth his plans for the constituency.

By some method, we should make the candidacy a very difficult post to hold, so that it will not be a mere money making instrument.

As rightly said, representation of all the voters should be there in the government.

Finally, I read news about our money stored in swiss banks. If India manages to get, what will be the effect?

Thanks

 

[sridharvasudevan]

In the past three to four hundred years, there have been many nations which have clung on to their developed status, some new ones have got added.

India, emerged out of the clutches of foreign occupation more than 60 years ago and has not yet organized itself even in a bare minimum handful of cities. Why?

Is it because other nations have something, that we don't have?

or

Is it because they are smarter?

or

Is it because they are more patriotic and so work towards a common goal even though they have their own personal material goals?

or

Is it because of all above?

 

[C RAVI]

In the past three to four hundred years, there have been many nations which have clung on to their developed status, some new ones have got added.

India, emerged out of the clutches of foreign occupation more than 60 years ago and has not yet organized itself even in a bare minimum handful of cities. Why?

Is it because other nations have something, that we don't have?

or

Is it because they are smarter?

or

Is it because they are more patriotic and so work towards a common goal even though they have their own personal material goals?

or

Is it because of all above?

Sri Sridharvasudevan ji,

I feel with you with some of my personal views...

Your fist analysis -

"Is it because other nations have something, that we don't have?"

-In fact, I feel we need to assert our self that India have everything that other nations don't have. And those thinks are basically

1) Multi Religion Social groups
2) Complicated and disgusting Cast based Social groups
3) Most Multi lingual social setup with State boundaries.
4) Last but not the least, corrupt politicians.

Your second analysis -

"Is it because they are more patriotic and so work towards a common goal even though they have their own personal material goals?"

- Perfectly true. No second thought on the above.


Your third analysis -

"Is it because of all above"

- Yes...It is because of all the above.

Other than above -

- The poverty of India during the initial stage after independence and there after

- Many of our talented guys settled abroad for better prospects. One of my cousins is a scientist in America. In a recent past one BE student from Pallavaram was picked up by America on full scholarship (that includes furnished accommodation, car, University admission and study expenses and many) who could come up with a solution for longer range Anti Missile attack (I could remember his work was something related to that, if I am wrong excuse me). There are many such genius of our country who has contributed and contributing a lot to the development of other nations. Off course one’s ambition and personal life is more important for which one need to migrate, when India could not do anything constructively.

- Loss of Revenue on defense set-up, defense strategy and huge expenses incurred during various wars and insurgencies.

Let us keep our fingers cross and hope for a better tomorrow.

I believe India is now progressing fast. We need to consider now that Indian is having a slow and steady advancements. India is a resourceful country and could sustain from the jolts of recession.

Who knows in future we may find lot of expatriates working in our county to better their life.

“MEARA BHARATH MAHAN”

 

[[email protected]]

To Sridhar Vasudavan, If India wanted to become superpower and well developed nation, all indians should keep the Nehru family away from politics and no Indian should vote the Nehru family. Because Nehru family ruined India and our country last the chance to become a Valarsu. s.r.k.

 

[pvraman]

IMHO,

The basic problem is that we "compromise and adjust" to anything and everything.

When these two quality are there, we will not develop as we will have only a compromised country.

(That includes wife's cooking )

Thanks

 

[C RAVI]

IMHO,

The basic problem is that we "compromise and adjust" to anything and everything.

When these two quality are there, we will not develop as we will have only a compromised country.

(That includes wife's cooking )

Thanks

Sri pvramn ji, you are making me scared with the think of wife's cooking