India is the un-China, says Time

[Maynard Man]

it's a shame many americans fail to see this in geopolitical and strategic
terms which has a direct bearing on next 100 yrs.

usa has a vested interest in seeing the hindus succeed and get them in the
american orbit. this is a very simple truth, philosophically foremost,
and equally practically.
the american people, therefore, need to be more appreciative of them, and
should show patience like you would with any one trying to learn the ropes
in your neighborhood. don't put them down in moments of frustration and
haste. they are fast learners and most importantly, meticulously civilized
people who are eager join the ranks of the civilized countries of the
world, and who deserve a break after over 10 centuries of oppression. did
you know that india is about the only country that has a favorable opinon
of the usa with a rating of 70pct? (ie a number pretty consistent with the
hindu pct population in india)

when you look at the whole vast stretch of earth in the noneuropean lands,
there aren't many worthy democracies that are going anywhere in a hurry.
the hindus are; so get them on board. they want to be in your team, the
time is right, they are well on their way up, the cost is little, and they
are a positive influence in society. it isn't money only, however. usa is
already engaged with india at nearly all levels of civil society. a few
dislocations within usa as a result is a very small adjustment to make.
usa has paid far far bigger price in the past for such things. this issue
needs thinking outside the box.

I wouldn't know about the USA, I'm in the UK. But the fact remains that the
outsourcing to India from the UK is done to save money. Take IT forinstance,
the first line support (is it plugged in, switched on etc) which can be done
with no training from cue cards is outsourced, which is also far cheaper
than UK labour. But second line onwards where it gets a bit technical and
needs good communication then it is done from the UK. I deal with companies
that have outsourced to India and they all say the same thing. It is much
much cheaper labour in India than the UK.

 

[Dr. Jai Maharaj]

I wouldn't know about the USA, I'm in the UK. But the fact remains that the
outsourcing to India from the UK is done to save money. Take IT forinstance,
the first line support (is it plugged in, switched on etc) which can be done
with no training from cue cards is outsourced, which is also far cheaper
than UK labour. But second line onwards where it gets a bit technical and
needs good communication then it is done from the UK. I deal with companies
that have outsourced to India and they all say the same thing. It is much
much cheaper labour in India than the UK.

I have top-level support (for both hardware and software) provide a
service from Bharat, not the US (where I am located) or UK.

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

 

[peeks]

Well, foreign investment is not coming to India upon a due diligence on
its infrastructure and maderb day facility...it is coming because its
people are growing higher than anywhere else in the world and so is its
people's wealth - more rapidly than anywhere else. so its obvious that
there will be more takers for products here than anywhere else. Did
Unilever not find its way to the remotest Indian village to sell its
soaps and shampoo pouches,, are the MBA clad sales people of Unilever
not servising these territories because they are ill-equipped in terms
of roads, telephonnes and buses....and Unilever has been doing it for
100 years. The americans and the europeans compromise on everything
when they smell dollar...not like us, nawabs of india

 

[mbl*]

Well, foreign investment is not coming to India upon a due diligence on
its infrastructure and maderb day facility...it is coming because its
people are growing higher than anywhere else in the world and so is its
people's wealth - more rapidly than anywhere else. so its obvious that
there will be more takers for products here than anywhere else. Did
Unilever not find its way to the remotest Indian village to sell its
soaps and shampoo pouches,, are the MBA clad sales people of Unilever
not servising these territories because they are ill-equipped in terms
of roads, telephonnes and buses....and Unilever has been doing it for
100 years. The americans and the europeans compromise on everything
when they smell dollar...not like us, nawabs of india

Peeks, Please do tell us about the "Nawabs of India". Are they really
people of principle?

 

[peeks]

Nawabs are those who identify, criticise and debate on all that India
lacks and what Indians should feel horrible about and not believe in
what we have and what makes us tick as a unique nation....

 

[mbl*]

Nawabs are those who identify, criticise and debate on all that India
lacks and what Indians should feel horrible about and not believe in
what we have and what makes us tick as a unique nation....

I find it a bit confusing. Perhaps you are using a parochial definition
of a Nawab? I am not from the sub-continent! Because this is what I
have googled,

"Muslim rulers almost all used the title "Nawab" (originally the title
of an amovable governor under real Mughal rule, but soon tending to
hereditary succession whenever Delhi/Agra lost effective control over
the province) with the prominent exceptions of the Nizam of Hyderabad &
Berar, the Wali/Khan of Kalat, and the Wali of Swat. Other less usual
titles included Darbar Sahib, Dewan, Jam, Mehtar (unique to Chitral)
and Mir (from Emir).

Nawab (Urdu: نواب ) was originally the subadar (provincial
governor) or viceroy of a subah (province) or region of the Mughal
empire.

The term is Urdu, derived from the Arabic word naib, meaning deputy. In
some areas, especially Bengal, the term is pronounced Nabob. This later
variation has entered the English and other foreign languages, see
below.

Since most of the Muslim rulers of the subcontinent had -like most
otherwise titled Hindu (maha)radjas and other princely states- accepted
the authority of the Mughals at the height of this empire the term
Nawab is often used to refer to any Muslim ruler in the subcontinent.
This is technically imprecise, as it was also awarded to others and not
applied to every Muslim ruler. With the decline of that empire, the
title and the powers that went with it became hereditary in the ruling
families in the various provinces.

Many Nawabs later accepted British rule. Under later British rule,
Muslim Nawabs continued to rule various princely states of Awadh,
Bahawalpur, Baoni, Banganapalle, Bhopal, Cambay, Jaora, Junagadh,
Kalabagh, Kurnool, Kurwai, Palanpur (Pakistan), Pataudi, Rampur,
Sachin, and Tonk. Other former rulers bearing the title, such as the
Nawabs of Bengal, had been dispossessed by the British or others by the
time the Mughal dynasty finally ended in 1857.

The style for a Nawab dynasty's queen(s) (usually his consort, and
Islam is polygamous) is Begum (not specific). Most of the Nawab
dynasties were male primogenitures, although several ruling Begums of
Bhopal were a notable exception.

Before the incorporation of India into the British Empire, Nawabs ruled
the kingdoms of Awadh (or Oudh, encouraged by the British to shed the
Mughal suzereignty and assume the imperial style of Badshah), Bengal,
Arcot and Bhopal.

A few of the Muslim rulers who were tributary to the Mughal emperors
used other titles; the first Nizam of Hyderabad was given the
alternative title Nizam ul Mulk, usually translated as Governor of the
[Mughal] Kingdom."

 

[Dr. Jai Maharaj]

The people, not some material infrastructure, are the greatest
resource of a nation.

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

 

[mbl*]

The people, not some material infrastructure, are the greatest
resource of a nation.

I agree, but they can also be the biggest burden?

 

[Dr. Jai Maharaj]

The term "nawaab" is also used to describe a temperamental and conceited
man. Actually that's the definition of a "prima donna" as applied to a
female. So in Hindustani, not pure Hindi, a use is: "kyaa nawaab bun
gaye hoe" ("what a nawaab you have become").

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

Nawabs are those who identify, criticise and debate on all that India
lacks and what Indians should feel horrible about and not believe in
what we have and what makes us tick as a unique nation....

I find it a bit confusing. Perhaps you are using a parochial definition
of a Nawab? I am not from the sub-continent! Because this is what I
have googled,

"Muslim rulers almost all used the title "Nawab" (originally the title
of an amovable governor under real Mughal rule, but soon tending to
hereditary succession whenever Delhi/Agra lost effective control over
the province) with the prominent exceptions of the Nizam of Hyderabad &
Berar, the Wali/Khan of Kalat, and the Wali of Swat. Other less usual
titles included Darbar Sahib, Dewan, Jam, Mehtar (unique to Chitral)
and Mir (from Emir).

Nawab (Urdu: =D9=86=D9=88=D8=A7=D8=A8 ) was originally the subadar (provinc=
ial
governor) or viceroy of a subah (province) or region of the Mughal
empire.

The term is Urdu, derived from the Arabic word naib, meaning deputy. In
some areas, especially Bengal, the term is pronounced Nabob. This later
variation has entered the English and other foreign languages, see
below.

Since most of the Muslim rulers of the subcontinent had -like most
otherwise titled Hindu (maha)radjas and other princely states- accepted
the authority of the Mughals at the height of this empire the term
Nawab is often used to refer to any Muslim ruler in the subcontinent.
This is technically imprecise, as it was also awarded to others and not
applied to every Muslim ruler. With the decline of that empire, the
title and the powers that went with it became hereditary in the ruling
families in the various provinces.

Many Nawabs later accepted British rule. Under later British rule,
Muslim Nawabs continued to rule various princely states of Awadh,
Bahawalpur, Baoni, Banganapalle, Bhopal, Cambay, Jaora, Junagadh,
Kalabagh, Kurnool, Kurwai, Palanpur (Pakistan), Pataudi, Rampur,
Sachin, and Tonk. Other former rulers bearing the title, such as the
Nawabs of Bengal, had been dispossessed by the British or others by the
time the Mughal dynasty finally ended in 1857.

The style for a Nawab dynasty's queen(s) (usually his consort, and
Islam is polygamous) is Begum (not specific). Most of the Nawab
dynasties were male primogenitures, although several ruling Begums of
Bhopal were a notable exception.

Before the incorporation of India into the British Empire, Nawabs ruled
the kingdoms of Awadh (or Oudh, encouraged by the British to shed the
Mughal suzereignty and assume the imperial style of Badshah), Bengal,
Arcot and Bhopal.

A few of the Muslim rulers who were tributary to the Mughal emperors
used other titles; the first Nizam of Hyderabad was given the
alternative title Nizam ul Mulk, usually translated as Governor of the
[Mughal] Kingdom."

 

[mbl*]

kyaa nawaab bun gaye hoe ("what a nawaab you have become"). I like
that!

The term "nawaab" is also used to describe a temperamental and conceited
man. Actually that's the definition of a "prima donna" as applied to a
female. So in Hindustani, not pure Hindi, a use is: "kyaa nawaab bun
gaye hoe" ("what a nawaab you have become").

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

Nawabs are those who identify, criticise and debate on all that India
lacks and what Indians should feel horrible about and not believe in
what we have and what makes us tick as a unique nation....

I find it a bit confusing. Perhaps you are using a parochial definition
of a Nawab? I am not from the sub-continent! Because this is what I
have googled,

"Muslim rulers almost all used the title "Nawab" (originally the title
of an amovable governor under real Mughal rule, but soon tending to
hereditary succession whenever Delhi/Agra lost effective control over
the province) with the prominent exceptions of the Nizam of Hyderabad &
Berar, the Wali/Khan of Kalat, and the Wali of Swat. Other less usual
titles included Darbar Sahib, Dewan, Jam, Mehtar (unique to Chitral)
and Mir (from Emir).

Nawab (Urdu: =D9=86=D9=88=D8=A7=D8=A8 ) was originally the subadar (provinc=
ial
governor) or viceroy of a subah (province) or region of the Mughal
empire.

The term is Urdu, derived from the Arabic word naib, meaning deputy. In
some areas, especially Bengal, the term is pronounced Nabob. This later
variation has entered the English and other foreign languages, see
below.

Since most of the Muslim rulers of the subcontinent had -like most
otherwise titled Hindu (maha)radjas and other princely states- accepted
the authority of the Mughals at the height of this empire the term
Nawab is often used to refer to any Muslim ruler in the subcontinent.
This is technically imprecise, as it was also awarded to others and not
applied to every Muslim ruler. With the decline of that empire, the
title and the powers that went with it became hereditary in the ruling
families in the various provinces.

Many Nawabs later accepted British rule. Under later British rule,
Muslim Nawabs continued to rule various princely states of Awadh,
Bahawalpur, Baoni, Banganapalle, Bhopal, Cambay, Jaora, Junagadh,
Kalabagh, Kurnool, Kurwai, Palanpur (Pakistan), Pataudi, Rampur,
Sachin, and Tonk. Other former rulers bearing the title, such as the
Nawabs of Bengal, had been dispossessed by the British or others by the
time the Mughal dynasty finally ended in 1857.

The style for a Nawab dynasty's queen(s) (usually his consort, and
Islam is polygamous) is Begum (not specific). Most of the Nawab
dynasties were male primogenitures, although several ruling Begums of
Bhopal were a notable exception.

Before the incorporation of India into the British Empire, Nawabs ruled
the kingdoms of Awadh (or Oudh, encouraged by the British to shed the
Mughal suzereignty and assume the imperial style of Badshah), Bengal,
Arcot and Bhopal.

A few of the Muslim rulers who were tributary to the Mughal emperors
used other titles; the first Nizam of Hyderabad was given the
alternative title Nizam ul Mulk, usually translated as Governor of the
[Mughal] Kingdom."

mbl* wrote:

peeks wrote:

Well, foreign investment is not coming to India upon a due diligence = on
its infrastructure and maderb day facility...it is coming because its
people are growing higher than anywhere else in the world and so is i= ts
people's wealth - more rapidly than anywhere else. so its obvious that
there will be more takers for products here than anywhere else. Did
Unilever not find its way to the remotest Indian village to sell its
soaps and shampoo pouches,, are the MBA clad sales people of Unilever
not servising these territories because they are ill-equipped in terms
of roads, telephonnes and buses....and Unilever has been doing it for
100 years. The americans and the europeans compromise on everything
when they smell dollar...not like us, nawabs of india


Peeks, Please do tell us about the "Nawabs of India". Are they really
people of principle?
(e-mail address removed) wrote:

Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
If "India is going down", as you claim, it would be
mainly because of corrupt politicians demanding big
bribes as they try to play the middleman in outsourcing
deals. And the "lack of real talent" claim may become
valid after the mediocre graduates as the result of
"reservation quotas" (akin to "affirmative action" in the
US) hit the job market in a few years.

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

As usual, time magazine is far behind the curve. India hit its= climax last
year and is only going down. Backsourcing of jobs to the U.S. = and the lack
of real talent in India are the biggest reasons and it's going = to put
India's economy in a depression. This also means that Dr Shith= ead Sahib
will have to get a real job scooping shit instead of posting hi= s spam shit
here all day.

"Dr.Sahib.Pandit.Shri.Shri.Rainam Ji Maharaj Ji Ustad"

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/7598_1724081,00050002.htm

A "breathtaking shift" in US policy towards India - declaring= it a
strategic partner and offering it a bilateral deal to share n= uclear
know how - can be explained, according to Time magazine, simp= ly by one
phrase: India is the un-China.

Washington's new approach to India is so explained by the Ame= rican news
magazine in its latest issue hitting the news stands on Monda= y with its
cover story "INDIA INC - Why the World's Biggest Democracy is= the Next
Great Economic Superpower- and What it Means for America."

India's infrastructure is plain awful, you can not expect to contin= ue
getting foreign investment if the quality of road, power, and
telecommunications contrasts so sharply with the next door competit= or,
sooner or later, India will hit the bottleneck if only because the = bad
transport system.

 

[harmony]

I have top-level support (for both hardware and software) provide a
service from Bharat, not the US (where I am located) or UK.

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

here is a report by the an anxious uk govt agency that should help maynard
dispel his illusion.
the g7 nations need to get the hindus at the table fast to get that critical
extra support in favor of stability for next 100 yrs.


The Indian economy is roaring ahead

UK losing race to invest in India


The UK is wasting its "unique relationship" with India and falling behind
other nations in the race to invest in the country, says a report.
The report from MPs in the Trade and Industry Committee said UK firms have a
limited understanding of the growing Indian economy.

Many see India as a source of cheap labour rather than an emerging market.

The MPs said the higher education, manufacturing and automotive industries
offered great investment opportunities.

'Opportunities'

The Indian government still has some limits on foreign investment in areas
like the financial and retail sectors.

But it is loosening these controls gradually as it comes under pressure to
open up its markets.

It also needs foreign investment and expertise to help improve and modernise
the roads, ports and airports needed to keep its economy growing quickly.

"Levels of interest in the Indian economy are growing year upon year - but
UK investors don't yet really understand the opportunities that India
presents," said committee chairman Peter Luff.

Government support

MPs said they were worried that the UK's perception of India had been
distorted by media focus on the perceived threat to UK jobs from outsourcing
of services like call centres.

This has created a view that such call centres are a dominant feature of the
Indian economy.

However, the British Chambers of Commerce(BCC) claims British exporters are
well aware of the opportunities in India, but are not getting much help from
the government.

"They have seen export support reduced in recent years as the Treasury
switched its focus to encouraging inward investment," said the BCC director
general David Frost.

The Indian economy grew at a rate of 8.4% in the year to March 2006.

Despite this growth, foreign investment in the country has been slow to
take-off.

According to investment bank Merrill Lynch, there was $8bn worth of foreign
investment in India during 2005, well behind the $60bn pumped into China.

During 2004/2005, the UK was India's fourth largest trade partner in goods,
behind the US, China and Belgium.

 

[mbl*]

here is a report by the an anxious uk govt agency that should help maynard
dispel his illusion.
the g7 nations need to get the hindus at the table fast to get that critical
extra support in favor of stability for next 100 yrs.


The Indian economy is roaring ahead

UK losing race to invest in India


The UK is wasting its "unique relationship" with India and falling behind
other nations in the race to invest in the country, says a report.
The report from MPs in the Trade and Industry Committee said UK firms have a
limited understanding of the growing Indian economy.

Many see India as a source of cheap labour rather than an emerging market.

The MPs said the higher education, manufacturing and automotive industries
offered great investment opportunities.

'Opportunities'

The Indian government still has some limits on foreign investment in areas
like the financial and retail sectors.

But it is loosening these controls gradually as it comes under pressure to
open up its markets.

It also needs foreign investment and expertise to help improve and modernise
the roads, ports and airports needed to keep its economy growing quickly.

"Levels of interest in the Indian economy are growing year upon year - but
UK investors don't yet really understand the opportunities that India
presents," said committee chairman Peter Luff.

Government support

MPs said they were worried that the UK's perception of India had been
distorted by media focus on the perceived threat to UK jobs from outsourcing
of services like call centres.

This has created a view that such call centres are a dominant feature of the
Indian economy.

However, the British Chambers of Commerce(BCC) claims British exporters are
well aware of the opportunities in India, but are not getting much help from
the government.

"They have seen export support reduced in recent years as the Treasury
switched its focus to encouraging inward investment," said the BCC director
general David Frost.

The Indian economy grew at a rate of 8.4% in the year to March 2006.

Despite this growth, foreign investment in the country has been slow to
take-off.

According to investment bank Merrill Lynch, there was $8bn worth of foreign
investment in India during 2005, well behind the $60bn pumped into China.

During 2004/2005, the UK was India's fourth largest trade partner in goods,
behind the US, China and Belgium.

Interesting but a little oversimplified. There are many other factors
to be taken into consideration such as the Culture of the people, their
preferrences, the cognitive interpretations of the Hindu mindset, the
social and cultural pressures and flexibility of attitudes, the
attitudes of the Governments, governmental assistance to overcome
hurdles, the investment incentives, the rate of return of the
investment, the presence or absence of corruption, the work ethic, and
so on. Nevertheless, this map shows broadly the growth ares of the
world, and each will have to prove their worth to qualify for
investments. There is competition out there.

http://www.mapsofworld.com/gdp-per-capita.htm

 

[Dr. Jai Maharaj]

Dr. Jai Maharaj posted:

I agree, but they can also be the biggest burden?

I met a person recently who said that she did not like roses
because they have thorns. I know that roses are liked by the
majority of people even they have thorns. A resource is useful
even if some may perceive it as a burden.

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

 

[Dr. Jai Maharaj]

Heh. More accurately: kyaa navaab bun gayay hoe!
(What a prima dona you have become!)

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

kyaa nawaab bun gaye hoe ("what a nawaab you have become"). I like
that!

The term "nawaab" is also used to describe a temperamental and conceited
man. Actually that's the definition of a "prima donna" as applied to a
female. So in Hindustani, not pure Hindi, a use is: "kyaa nawaab bun
gaye hoe" ("what a nawaab you have become").

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

peeks wrote:

Nawabs are those who identify, criticise and debate on all that India
lacks and what Indians should feel horrible about and not believe in
what we have and what makes us tick as a unique nation....

I find it a bit confusing. Perhaps you are using a parochial definition
of a Nawab? I am not from the sub-continent! Because this is what I
have googled,

"Muslim rulers almost all used the title "Nawab" (originally the title
of an amovable governor under real Mughal rule, but soon tending to
hereditary succession whenever Delhi/Agra lost effective control over
the province) with the prominent exceptions of the Nizam of Hyderabad &
Berar, the Wali/Khan of Kalat, and the Wali of Swat. Other less usual
titles included Darbar Sahib, Dewan, Jam, Mehtar (unique to Chitral)
and Mir (from Emir).

Nawab (Urdu: =D9=86=D9=88=D8=A7=D8=A8 ) was originally the subadar (provinc=
ial
governor) or viceroy of a subah (province) or region of the Mughal
empire.

The term is Urdu, derived from the Arabic word naib, meaning deputy. In
some areas, especially Bengal, the term is pronounced Nabob. This later
variation has entered the English and other foreign languages, see
below.

Since most of the Muslim rulers of the subcontinent had -like most
otherwise titled Hindu (maha)radjas and other princely states- accepted
the authority of the Mughals at the height of this empire the term
Nawab is often used to refer to any Muslim ruler in the subcontinent.
This is technically imprecise, as it was also awarded to others and not
applied to every Muslim ruler. With the decline of that empire, the
title and the powers that went with it became hereditary in the ruling
families in the various provinces.

Many Nawabs later accepted British rule. Under later British rule,
Muslim Nawabs continued to rule various princely states of Awadh,
Bahawalpur, Baoni, Banganapalle, Bhopal, Cambay, Jaora, Junagadh,
Kalabagh, Kurnool, Kurwai, Palanpur (Pakistan), Pataudi, Rampur,
Sachin, and Tonk. Other former rulers bearing the title, such as the
Nawabs of Bengal, had been dispossessed by the British or others by the
time the Mughal dynasty finally ended in 1857.

The style for a Nawab dynasty's queen(s) (usually his consort, and
Islam is polygamous) is Begum (not specific). Most of the Nawab
dynasties were male primogenitures, although several ruling Begums of
Bhopal were a notable exception.

Before the incorporation of India into the British Empire, Nawabs ruled
the kingdoms of Awadh (or Oudh, encouraged by the British to shed the
Mughal suzereignty and assume the imperial style of Badshah), Bengal,
Arcot and Bhopal.

A few of the Muslim rulers who were tributary to the Mughal emperors
used other titles; the first Nizam of Hyderabad was given the
alternative title Nizam ul Mulk, usually translated as Governor of the
[Mughal] Kingdom."


mbl* wrote:

peeks wrote:

Well, foreign investment is not coming to India upon a due diligence =
on
its infrastructure and maderb day facility...it is coming because its
people are growing higher than anywhere else in the world and so is i=
ts
people's wealth - more rapidly than anywhere else. so its obvious that
there will be more takers for products here than anywhere else. Did
Unilever not find its way to the remotest Indian village to sell its
soaps and shampoo pouches,, are the MBA clad sales people of Unilever
not servising these territories because they are ill-equipped in terms
of roads, telephonnes and buses....and Unilever has been doing it for
100 years. The americans and the europeans compromise on everything
when they smell dollar...not like us, nawabs of india


Peeks, Please do tell us about the "Nawabs of India". Are they really
people of principle?
(e-mail address removed) wrote:

Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
If "India is going down", as you claim, it would be
mainly because of corrupt politicians demanding big
bribes as they try to play the middleman in outsourcing
deals. And the "lack of real talent" claim may become
valid after the mediocre graduates as the result of
"reservation quotas" (akin to "affirmative action" in the
US) hit the job market in a few years.

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

As usual, time magazine is far behind the curve. India hit its=
climax last
year and is only going down. Backsourcing of jobs to the U.S. =
and the lack
of real talent in India are the biggest reasons and it's going =
to put
India's economy in a depression. This also means that Dr Shith=
ead Sahib
will have to get a real job scooping shit instead of posting hi=
s spam shit
here all day.

"Dr.Sahib.Pandit.Shri.Shri.Rainam Ji Maharaj Ji Ustad"

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/7598_1724081,00050002.htm

A "breathtaking shift" in US policy towards India - declaring=
it a
strategic partner and offering it a bilateral deal to share n=
uclear
know how - can be explained, according to Time magazine, simp=
ly by one
phrase: India is the un-China.

Washington's new approach to India is so explained by the Ame=
rican news
magazine in its latest issue hitting the news stands on Monda=
y with its
cover story "INDIA INC - Why the World's Biggest Democracy is=
the Next
Great Economic Superpower- and What it Means for America."

India's infrastructure is plain awful, you can not expect to contin=
ue
getting foreign investment if the quality of road, power, and
telecommunications contrasts so sharply with the next door competit=
or,
sooner or later, India will hit the bottleneck if only because the =
bad
transport system.

 

[Dr. Jai Maharaj]

Ah, so you're a trash collector (garbage man) and you call the experts for support?

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

 

[Dr. Homilete]

Ah, so you're a trash collector (garbage man) and you call the experts for support?

Arrey wah, wah! Tum ne eclair khake declare kar liya!
How exactly did you come to be an expert in collecting trash, Johnny?

 

[Dr. Jai Maharaj]

Every immature, ignorant kid beats his chest as you do.

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

 

[Dr. Jai Maharaj]

That is the feeble response I have ever heard

Is that why you actually understood it?
Dumbing down works, folks!

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

 

[hari.kumar]

"My consultancy creates people who have a lot
of money to spend. They don't have much when
they begin to consult me. But you seem to be one
of those who tries to take their money. What"

Jay stevens,aka dr. jai etc., "consults" as a self styled astrologer. He
is an american who adopted his "dr." and indian sounding name to enhance
his marketing to real indians. He knows little about computers and
software, excpt to know which menu items to use on his astrology software
package to provide his "consult". He posts in computer newsgroups to
market to indians who are involved in that field and ends all his posts
with a multiple sig line with links to his web services and other material
thought to appeal to real indians.

 

[Dr. Jai Maharaj]

I am national service manager for large
company and I deal with people who spend a lot of money . . .

My consultancy creates people who have a lot
of money to spend. They don't have much when
they begin to consult me. But you seem to be one
of those who tries to take their money. What
bill of goods do you try to sell to them?

Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

"Millionaires don't use astrology. Billionaires do."
- J. P. Morgan

(John Pierpont Morgan (1837-1914) was one of the most
influential and important financiers in history. Morgan
literally saved the United States from severe depression
in 1907. He formed U.S. Steel, the world's first billion-
dollar corporation. He was a major financial supporter of
Thomas Edison. His purchases of business and finances,
combined with his personal power, made him one of the
major controllers of the trusts that sought monopolies in
a wide variety of U.S. businesses. They were eventually
dismantled by the U.S. government.)