15 ms·

Yeah they could at least distribute that money to the super poor, instead of turning round and smugly saying how its peanuts and they don't need it. There are f

Yeah they could at least distribute that money to the super poor, instead of turning round and smugly saying how its peanuts and they don't need it. There are folk there who would kill for a peanut to line their bellies.....literally!

biggfoot 14y ago
You are confusing the two issues. India is capable of feeding its poor. The bureaucracy are too damn apathetic and corrupt to bring that into effect. But why should the ones who want to make a difference be subject to criticism that they don't deserve?
- metatronscube 14y ago
  So building a launch system capable of landing a rover on Mars is the answer then? Its hard to confuse the point im attempting to make. I will make it clear. They should concentrate on their own populating, Government and infrastructure before they even consider attempting something like this, because in the end, who is actually going to benefit from it? A Government with these problems should be considered criminal when they cant actually provide their population with the basics. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/08/business/global/a-failed-food-system-in-india-prompts-an-intense-review.html?_r=1 https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/08/business/global/a-failed-...
  - sateesh 14y ago
    I don't think there is any confusion in point you are making. The fact is the money that has been earmarked for this venture (even you account for any cost overruns) is a meager amount to what India already earmarks to spend (spends) on infrastructure, education, health etc. For example the budgetary allocation in current year for Rural Infrastructure is ~ 13 billion USD, Education is ~ 6 billion USD [1]. The sad fact is that even though India spends large sums to address the social problems, due to endemic corruption the results are far less spectacular. Spending money on ventures like space exploration doesn't really come in the way of addressing the social problems we have. 1. http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2012-13/bh/bh1.pdf http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2012-13/bh/bh1.pdf
    - ballooney 14y ago
      My opinion on this general debate is neither here not there but I must call you up on your assertion that India is spending a lot on its population: > For example the budgetary allocation in current year for Rural Infrastructure is ~ 13 billion USD, Education is ~ 6 billion USD [1]. That's really not a lot! The UK spends about 150 billion USD on education each year, which is about 2300USD per capita. Dividing 6bn by the population of india at 1.2bn, that's 5USD per capita. That is to say, the UK spends 460x as much per person on education as India. And people would say the UK can't afford a Mars mission at the moment!
      - sateesh 14y ago
        I didn't meant to say that India spends a lot on education, Infra etc. My point was compared to what is being spent on these initiatives the money being earmarked to Mars mission is not huge.
      - biggfoot 14y ago
        I can't argue with that number much, nor provide any real defense in India's favor, but do consider that the cost of living and labor in India is far far lesser than in the UK. Returning to my earlier argument, this isn't about any sacrificial costs. There is enough budget for everything including infrastructure development and a space mission as far as the Indian budget is concerned. The problems at the grassroot are not due to lack of spending power but corruption and broken implementation practices.
spitx 14y ago
Spread the dollar as in a welfare nation? I think they could use less of that. They are just emerging now from decades of central planning and control which has stagnated growth. As are the Russians. If anything, they need a larger ampule of capitalism.
- metatronscube 14y ago
  A larger amplitude in Capitalism does nothing for the many millions living in rural area where running water, roads and electricity are non existent and food is commonly scare. I'm afraid there are still huge areas in India ravaged with flooding and there is no government support. None. I saw a bit of it myself and its shocking. I think that can be solved initially with actual government intervention (handouts if you will). It wouldn't take a lot either. Capitalism doesn't build infrastructure where it doesn't exist.
  - biggfoot 14y ago
    It is not all Slumdog Millionaire you know. All countries have problems that they can't cope with. In the face of Katrina what happened for e.g. in the US was clear for the world to see. Again, these are parallel lines of progress. Spending on a space mission does NOT affect other public expenditures in this country. Neither does resolving ALL public problems make us more or less morally qualified (I still don't understand the objection) to launch a rover to Mars.
dharmach 14y ago
They should have followed English practice of sending poor or orphaned children to colonies, to help alleviate the shortage of labour. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Children http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Children

biggfoot 14y ago

You are confusing the two issues. India is capable of feeding its poor. The bureaucracy are too damn apathetic and corrupt to bring that into effect. But why should the ones who want to make a difference be subject to criticism that they don't deserve?

metatronscube 14y ago
So building a launch system capable of landing a rover on Mars is the answer then? Its hard to confuse the point im attempting to make. I will make it clear. They should concentrate on their own populating, Government and infrastructure before they even consider attempting something like this, because in the end, who is actually going to benefit from it? A Government with these problems should be considered criminal when they cant actually provide their population with the basics. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/08/business/global/a-failed-food-system-in-india-prompts-an-intense-review.html?_r=1 https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/08/business/global/a-failed-...
- sateesh 14y ago
  I don't think there is any confusion in point you are making. The fact is the money that has been earmarked for this venture (even you account for any cost overruns) is a meager amount to what India already earmarks to spend (spends) on infrastructure, education, health etc. For example the budgetary allocation in current year for Rural Infrastructure is ~ 13 billion USD, Education is ~ 6 billion USD [1]. The sad fact is that even though India spends large sums to address the social problems, due to endemic corruption the results are far less spectacular. Spending money on ventures like space exploration doesn't really come in the way of addressing the social problems we have. 1. http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2012-13/bh/bh1.pdf http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2012-13/bh/bh1.pdf
  - ballooney 14y ago
    My opinion on this general debate is neither here not there but I must call you up on your assertion that India is spending a lot on its population: > For example the budgetary allocation in current year for Rural Infrastructure is ~ 13 billion USD, Education is ~ 6 billion USD [1]. That's really not a lot! The UK spends about 150 billion USD on education each year, which is about 2300USD per capita. Dividing 6bn by the population of india at 1.2bn, that's 5USD per capita. That is to say, the UK spends 460x as much per person on education as India. And people would say the UK can't afford a Mars mission at the moment!
    - sateesh 14y ago
      I didn't meant to say that India spends a lot on education, Infra etc. My point was compared to what is being spent on these initiatives the money being earmarked to Mars mission is not huge.
    - biggfoot 14y ago
      I can't argue with that number much, nor provide any real defense in India's favor, but do consider that the cost of living and labor in India is far far lesser than in the UK. Returning to my earlier argument, this isn't about any sacrificial costs. There is enough budget for everything including infrastructure development and a space mission as far as the Indian budget is concerned. The problems at the grassroot are not due to lack of spending power but corruption and broken implementation practices.

spitx 14y ago

Spread the dollar as in a welfare nation? I think they could use less of that. They are just emerging now from decades of central planning and control which has stagnated growth. As are the Russians. If anything, they need a larger ampule of capitalism.

metatronscube 14y ago
A larger amplitude in Capitalism does nothing for the many millions living in rural area where running water, roads and electricity are non existent and food is commonly scare. I'm afraid there are still huge areas in India ravaged with flooding and there is no government support. None. I saw a bit of it myself and its shocking. I think that can be solved initially with actual government intervention (handouts if you will). It wouldn't take a lot either. Capitalism doesn't build infrastructure where it doesn't exist.
- biggfoot 14y ago
  It is not all Slumdog Millionaire you know. All countries have problems that they can't cope with. In the face of Katrina what happened for e.g. in the US was clear for the world to see. Again, these are parallel lines of progress. Spending on a space mission does NOT affect other public expenditures in this country. Neither does resolving ALL public problems make us more or less morally qualified (I still don't understand the objection) to launch a rover to Mars.

dharmach 14y ago

They should have followed English practice of sending poor or orphaned children to colonies, to help alleviate the shortage of labour. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Children http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Children