Tibet is slowly fading from the headlines but for those who have been following this topic, theo ne thing that must have stood out in the incessant invective being hurled by the Chinese administration at the Dalai Lama. Now I feel no personal sense of attachment to the Dalai Lama, but by all accounts he is a man of honour and doesn't deserve the constant abuse.
And whats the carrot that the Dalai Lama is after? Talks with China.
Even for the lay observer its not hard to spot why the Chinese will never negotiate with the Dalai Lama.
The world as a whole as given up the Tibetean cause as dead for a long time now. There is no violent insurgency raging. There is no external power actively using the Tibetean case against the Chinese. Hence there is no incentive to negotiate.
China resembles the USSR of old. A disparte collection of nations held together by an iron hand.
But the Chinese have learnt for the disintegration of USSR, and have certain that that would not happen to them.
Autnomy/self rule etc are all a pipe-dream for now. The CCP is not made up of humanitarians.
So then on what basis does te Dalai Lama seek negotiations?
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Obama the champion of the round toss?
In terms of a Presidential canidate with charisma, Obama stands second to only Bill Clinton.
He certainly would represent an upgrade over the incumbent.
I can't positively say that Hillary is a better option either.
Then why am I a little hesitant at the prospect of him running off against John McCain?
Partly because its my considered opinion that America is still not ready for a Minority Community President.
And the second reason goes back to by school days in India.
We were a class of approximately 100(if I remember correctly). The girls were'nt hot enough to hold our ineterst and they were probably 20 in number. The one thing we could do in break time was to rush to the 3 ping pong tables. Now some 60 guys rushing for a 30 minute break to 3 ping-pong table made it a tough task for everyone to gain access to the said Shangri La.
So to decide who got to play, we Had a round toss.
Basically all of us going around the table keeping the ball in play. When you could'nt you were no longer in contention.
Now I wasn't particulary good at ping pong. But mastered the round toss. So I always got to play.
Coming back to Obama, my fear is he has mastered the primary round toss, but will he falter in running the nation?
I guess that kind of doubt can be directed at any canidate. But Obama of "Yes we can" has staked an awful lot on his likeability.
Well I guess only time will tell.
He certainly would represent an upgrade over the incumbent.
I can't positively say that Hillary is a better option either.
Then why am I a little hesitant at the prospect of him running off against John McCain?
Partly because its my considered opinion that America is still not ready for a Minority Community President.
And the second reason goes back to by school days in India.
We were a class of approximately 100(if I remember correctly). The girls were'nt hot enough to hold our ineterst and they were probably 20 in number. The one thing we could do in break time was to rush to the 3 ping pong tables. Now some 60 guys rushing for a 30 minute break to 3 ping-pong table made it a tough task for everyone to gain access to the said Shangri La.
So to decide who got to play, we Had a round toss.
Basically all of us going around the table keeping the ball in play. When you could'nt you were no longer in contention.
Now I wasn't particulary good at ping pong. But mastered the round toss. So I always got to play.
Coming back to Obama, my fear is he has mastered the primary round toss, but will he falter in running the nation?
I guess that kind of doubt can be directed at any canidate. But Obama of "Yes we can" has staked an awful lot on his likeability.
Well I guess only time will tell.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
The Mahatma and Tibet
If you have read Tibetean writing on their affairs prior to thier forceful "liberation" by China, thehy make a convincing case for thier independence.
But is this thier ultimate aim? I mean they will be the first to acknowledge that China is not going to not just grant them independence, especially on moral grounds, in response to a non-violent struggle.
There is no military solution possible either, China is much too powerful militarily.
The Dalai Lama has often cited his admiration for Mahatama Gandhi and the non-violent means he adopted to secure independence from India from the British.
So it might be interesting to examine wether a Mahatma could have made a difference in the Tibetean struggle. Or wether the Dalai Lama can forge a resoultion with his current tactics of non-violence.
Mahatma Gandhi had at his disposal a nation much larger than their rulers and our sheer numbers were always wieghted in India's favor. Not so when you compare the 5.5million Tibetean population to the 1billion Chinese.
Geography was another factor, the British realised that it had become increasingly less profitable to run an empire long distance. Again Tibet doesn't have that luxury especially with the railway line China has built to Tibet.
At the time India gained its independence, Britain was a power in decline badly crippled by a war that ha claimed an entre generation of its best and brightest.
China on the other hand has been on a spectacular growth streak, that shows now signs of abating.
Finally the British had a free press and a parliament, and enlightened people who were capable of asking for the moral justification in running colonies when they had just fought of the Nazi's in a brutal war to preserve freedom, democracy and equality.
No such qualms on China's side either.
I have no access to a gallup poll, but I'll wager that a majority of Chinese, are in favor of strong arm tactics to put down demonstrations in Tibet. Well even if I was wrong, it not like there is free press in China to tell me about it.
So in the ultimate analysis , Mahatma Gandhi would not have been able to do jack for Tibet.
But is this thier ultimate aim? I mean they will be the first to acknowledge that China is not going to not just grant them independence, especially on moral grounds, in response to a non-violent struggle.
There is no military solution possible either, China is much too powerful militarily.
The Dalai Lama has often cited his admiration for Mahatama Gandhi and the non-violent means he adopted to secure independence from India from the British.
So it might be interesting to examine wether a Mahatma could have made a difference in the Tibetean struggle. Or wether the Dalai Lama can forge a resoultion with his current tactics of non-violence.
Mahatma Gandhi had at his disposal a nation much larger than their rulers and our sheer numbers were always wieghted in India's favor. Not so when you compare the 5.5million Tibetean population to the 1billion Chinese.
Geography was another factor, the British realised that it had become increasingly less profitable to run an empire long distance. Again Tibet doesn't have that luxury especially with the railway line China has built to Tibet.
At the time India gained its independence, Britain was a power in decline badly crippled by a war that ha claimed an entre generation of its best and brightest.
China on the other hand has been on a spectacular growth streak, that shows now signs of abating.
Finally the British had a free press and a parliament, and enlightened people who were capable of asking for the moral justification in running colonies when they had just fought of the Nazi's in a brutal war to preserve freedom, democracy and equality.
No such qualms on China's side either.
I have no access to a gallup poll, but I'll wager that a majority of Chinese, are in favor of strong arm tactics to put down demonstrations in Tibet. Well even if I was wrong, it not like there is free press in China to tell me about it.
So in the ultimate analysis , Mahatma Gandhi would not have been able to do jack for Tibet.
The Tibet situation Again...
Looking at the Chinese government's predictable reaction of "crushing" the unrest in Tibet, I am reminded of a story I read while in school.
The story was of the might oak and the reed. And this gist of it was that the oak stood firm and looked strong and was strong, the reeds on the other had were weak and swayed in the slightest wind.
And then one night in a mighty storm the Oak because it stood so firm was uprooted. The reed despite the buffeting, since they swayed, managed to survive.
So standing firm is not always the virtue its made out to be. Maybe once in a while a little swaying is in order.
The story was of the might oak and the reed. And this gist of it was that the oak stood firm and looked strong and was strong, the reeds on the other had were weak and swayed in the slightest wind.
And then one night in a mighty storm the Oak because it stood so firm was uprooted. The reed despite the buffeting, since they swayed, managed to survive.
So standing firm is not always the virtue its made out to be. Maybe once in a while a little swaying is in order.
Friday, March 21, 2008
A tale of two civilizations
The two civilizations that fascinate me the most are the Indian and Chinese.
Having lived in the states for a while and having had the opportunity to interact with some Chinses people I can say we have probably more in common then say and Indian and an American.
The histories of both nations follows a similar pattern too. Both were powerhouses(cultural,economic and scientific) in ancient times, ruled by feudal warlords for the most part.
Both were bullied by colonial powers before starting out their futures as modern nations at rougly the same time.
But something went seriously awry at that point. While India chose the path of representative democracy, The chinese went the way of the authoritarian communism.
Why repeat a past everyone is aware of?
Merely to point out the extent of the gulf that exists between these 2 neighbours.
While China has Tibet , India has Kashmir.
China as has been witnessed over the last one week, will brook no dissent for its rule in Tibet.
The population has no channel to vent, so occassionally you will see these bouts of violence.
The "cultural genocide" description used by the Dalai Lama is spot on. The Chinese government has shown no inclination in preserving Tibetean culture.
Tibeteans can survive as long as they are willing to accept their fate.
To be honest I can't see things improving for the Tibeteans. In todays world, there is not one nation who isn't wary of China at some level.
Now to come back to the comparison I was drawing.
Not many will know that There is a law that debars Indians from buying land in Kashmir.
So as an Indian citizen, I can buy land in preety much any part of the world, but not in my own country(a part of my own country ie)
Whatever the merits of this law, it was enacted to pacify the average Kashmiri and reassure him that he would not be over run by millions and millions of indians.
China has shown no such restraint with Tibet.
I can't expect the Cinese government to change the way it deals with its problems,
But really would it be so bad to give the Tibeteans a voice?
Whats a few peaceful demonstartions with no media coverage going to accomplish in the larger context?
Allow peaceful demonstartions will go some way in ensuring this does'nt turn into a violent struggle(which would just lead to more dead tibeteans)
Having lived in the states for a while and having had the opportunity to interact with some Chinses people I can say we have probably more in common then say and Indian and an American.
The histories of both nations follows a similar pattern too. Both were powerhouses(cultural,economic and scientific) in ancient times, ruled by feudal warlords for the most part.
Both were bullied by colonial powers before starting out their futures as modern nations at rougly the same time.
But something went seriously awry at that point. While India chose the path of representative democracy, The chinese went the way of the authoritarian communism.
Why repeat a past everyone is aware of?
Merely to point out the extent of the gulf that exists between these 2 neighbours.
While China has Tibet , India has Kashmir.
China as has been witnessed over the last one week, will brook no dissent for its rule in Tibet.
The population has no channel to vent, so occassionally you will see these bouts of violence.
The "cultural genocide" description used by the Dalai Lama is spot on. The Chinese government has shown no inclination in preserving Tibetean culture.
Tibeteans can survive as long as they are willing to accept their fate.
To be honest I can't see things improving for the Tibeteans. In todays world, there is not one nation who isn't wary of China at some level.
Now to come back to the comparison I was drawing.
Not many will know that There is a law that debars Indians from buying land in Kashmir.
So as an Indian citizen, I can buy land in preety much any part of the world, but not in my own country(a part of my own country ie)
Whatever the merits of this law, it was enacted to pacify the average Kashmiri and reassure him that he would not be over run by millions and millions of indians.
China has shown no such restraint with Tibet.
I can't expect the Cinese government to change the way it deals with its problems,
But really would it be so bad to give the Tibeteans a voice?
Whats a few peaceful demonstartions with no media coverage going to accomplish in the larger context?
Allow peaceful demonstartions will go some way in ensuring this does'nt turn into a violent struggle(which would just lead to more dead tibeteans)
Sunday, March 09, 2008
Hillary vs Barak
I wont pretend to be anything more than a weekend analyst.
And none of the views expressed hence will can be entirely original given the relentless scrutiny that this face-off has received by the media and political pundits.
Let me start off by tackling the most sensitive question first.
Is America ready to have a black president? Or for that matter has this nation reached a point where that issue does not matter?
Its been an observation of mine, that no matter what we think about ourselves , we do tend to pre-judge people based on their origins their appearance etc. Which would mean we are all atleast a little racist.
I know , that nobody reading this will be thumping their desks in agreement (How can anyone be a little racist , its like saying some one's a little gay!!!)
Despite what we see in the Democratic primaries my feeling is that a country that's 70+% white is not quite ready to be run by a black man.
Now it would be a grave injustice to Obama to look beyond his credentials and go right for his race. After all he never appealed for votes on anything other than his credentials for the job.
Well he did'nt have to. based on some reports around 80% of the black vote in the primaries went Obama's way. Hillary on the other hand did'nt have the benefit of the "white" vote.
But then how do you explain the Obama victories in overwhelmingly white states?
My weekend analyst flippancy allows me to drag out this theory.
Obama's victories in white states has been due to superb organization and also the low overall democratic votes being cast. Not a whole of states Obama has won in the primaries are going Obama's way in a presidential election.
But what about Hillary?
She has won democratic strong holds like California and New York that would swing democrat no matter what.
So whom to pick?
Who can go toe to toe with McCain is the question.
McCain , has the independent anti establishment aura that is Barak Obama's turf.
So he will be able to attract a fair share of the independent vote.
His perceived weakness has been the conservative base of the party.
But nothing is more likely to bring out the conservative base to vote, if not for Obama running opposed to him.
My educated guess is that young educated urbane voter will plump for Obama.
But what of those with families and bleak economic prospects?
Ultimately ,it might just boil down to which democrat can win in Ohio and Florida , the 2 states that have time and again been responsible for electing a US president.
Bottom line don't read too much into Barak Obama's stunning primary success , this is a dog-fight and no matter who wins, a battered Republican party has chosen the right man maybe eight years too late.
And none of the views expressed hence will can be entirely original given the relentless scrutiny that this face-off has received by the media and political pundits.
Let me start off by tackling the most sensitive question first.
Is America ready to have a black president? Or for that matter has this nation reached a point where that issue does not matter?
Its been an observation of mine, that no matter what we think about ourselves , we do tend to pre-judge people based on their origins their appearance etc. Which would mean we are all atleast a little racist.
I know , that nobody reading this will be thumping their desks in agreement (How can anyone be a little racist , its like saying some one's a little gay!!!)
Despite what we see in the Democratic primaries my feeling is that a country that's 70+% white is not quite ready to be run by a black man.
Now it would be a grave injustice to Obama to look beyond his credentials and go right for his race. After all he never appealed for votes on anything other than his credentials for the job.
Well he did'nt have to. based on some reports around 80% of the black vote in the primaries went Obama's way. Hillary on the other hand did'nt have the benefit of the "white" vote.
But then how do you explain the Obama victories in overwhelmingly white states?
My weekend analyst flippancy allows me to drag out this theory.
Obama's victories in white states has been due to superb organization and also the low overall democratic votes being cast. Not a whole of states Obama has won in the primaries are going Obama's way in a presidential election.
But what about Hillary?
She has won democratic strong holds like California and New York that would swing democrat no matter what.
So whom to pick?
Who can go toe to toe with McCain is the question.
McCain , has the independent anti establishment aura that is Barak Obama's turf.
So he will be able to attract a fair share of the independent vote.
His perceived weakness has been the conservative base of the party.
But nothing is more likely to bring out the conservative base to vote, if not for Obama running opposed to him.
My educated guess is that young educated urbane voter will plump for Obama.
But what of those with families and bleak economic prospects?
Ultimately ,it might just boil down to which democrat can win in Ohio and Florida , the 2 states that have time and again been responsible for electing a US president.
Bottom line don't read too much into Barak Obama's stunning primary success , this is a dog-fight and no matter who wins, a battered Republican party has chosen the right man maybe eight years too late.
Monday, February 25, 2008
With great power comes some responsibility
I got a chance to flip through a few pages of "The Walmart Economy" and a couple of things that tended to stick out were , Walmart had tremendous sway over its suppliers and that its margins were shockingly low(niether observation is earth shattering I am sure).
But it got me thinking about how Walmart could influence what the consumers bought.
Take the example of CFL's over regular light bulbs. Nations such as Australia are actually moving lesgislation in this regard(based on a quick googling effort)
Since CFL's use 66% less electricity then incandescent bulbs. Now figure that into the number of times the average individual forgets to turn lights off.
I am not trying to make the case for CFL's since I think this is a well beaten path.
Consider for a moment the propostiion that Walmart simply chose to stop selling incandescent bulbs in favor of CFLS's(In concert with other huge retailers)
Would't this go a long way in ensuring millions switch to CFL's?
Its all well and good to offer people choice and let them decide , but just as we have come to the conclusion that smoking is injurious by way of second hand smoke, why can't we agree that a individual's injudicious environmental choice affects us all?
So how about it Walmart? Would you be willing to discontinue one of your thousands product lines 3-4% margin for the greater good?
And how about it Target you think you can chip in as well?
But it got me thinking about how Walmart could influence what the consumers bought.
Take the example of CFL's over regular light bulbs. Nations such as Australia are actually moving lesgislation in this regard(based on a quick googling effort)
Since CFL's use 66% less electricity then incandescent bulbs. Now figure that into the number of times the average individual forgets to turn lights off.
I am not trying to make the case for CFL's since I think this is a well beaten path.
Consider for a moment the propostiion that Walmart simply chose to stop selling incandescent bulbs in favor of CFLS's(In concert with other huge retailers)
Would't this go a long way in ensuring millions switch to CFL's?
Its all well and good to offer people choice and let them decide , but just as we have come to the conclusion that smoking is injurious by way of second hand smoke, why can't we agree that a individual's injudicious environmental choice affects us all?
So how about it Walmart? Would you be willing to discontinue one of your thousands product lines 3-4% margin for the greater good?
And how about it Target you think you can chip in as well?
Sunday, February 24, 2008
The folly that is ethanol
I walked into a small bakery/deli and decided to get a muffin(non-fat and no sugar chocolate if you wanted to know, and as you can imagine it tasted nothing like what I would want it to taste like)
As I was paying, I noticed a sign by the register. It was a notice informing customers of a price increase due in a couple of days. The sign went on to explain that this was because the steepling input costs (sample this tripling of egg prices in 7months).
This brings me to a well known problem we are facing and will probably worsen in the immediate future.
With Iraq not looking particulary good and under fire on other fronts as well. In his state of union address in January 2007, bereft on any other big plans President Bush outlined the need to use ethanol as a part substitute for oil(used as an additive). Ethanol would reduce the use of fossil fuels and thereby reduce green house gasses, so that evolutionary, his ideas were'nt on the surface moronic. (a term one has used in context of the Iraq war)
But here is the catch, in a bid to get his conservative base excited he cast it as an attempt to reduce dependance of "middle eastern oil".
So America is supposed to produce corn based ethanol. So whats the problem you ask?
It requires more energy to produce ethanol from corn than would be produced by useing the ethanol so created.
Also corn happens to be a food crop that ties into the entire food cycle, its used to feed livestock and also feed us directly.
Bush's stress on ethanol without allowing for imports from efficient cane based producers of ethanol like Brazil is one of the major reasons basic food items are a lot more expensive in the US.
Now would'nt a tax on fuel at the pump that would be used to fund research into cleaner and renewable energy sources work better?
What would people preffer? More expensive gas or more expensive everything else,. Admittedly the choise isn't as stark as I make it out to be.
But what astounds me is people responsible for running this great country do not seem to think things through an old failing I might add.
As I was paying, I noticed a sign by the register. It was a notice informing customers of a price increase due in a couple of days. The sign went on to explain that this was because the steepling input costs (sample this tripling of egg prices in 7months).
This brings me to a well known problem we are facing and will probably worsen in the immediate future.
With Iraq not looking particulary good and under fire on other fronts as well. In his state of union address in January 2007, bereft on any other big plans President Bush outlined the need to use ethanol as a part substitute for oil(used as an additive). Ethanol would reduce the use of fossil fuels and thereby reduce green house gasses, so that evolutionary, his ideas were'nt on the surface moronic. (a term one has used in context of the Iraq war)
But here is the catch, in a bid to get his conservative base excited he cast it as an attempt to reduce dependance of "middle eastern oil".
So America is supposed to produce corn based ethanol. So whats the problem you ask?
It requires more energy to produce ethanol from corn than would be produced by useing the ethanol so created.
Also corn happens to be a food crop that ties into the entire food cycle, its used to feed livestock and also feed us directly.
Bush's stress on ethanol without allowing for imports from efficient cane based producers of ethanol like Brazil is one of the major reasons basic food items are a lot more expensive in the US.
Now would'nt a tax on fuel at the pump that would be used to fund research into cleaner and renewable energy sources work better?
What would people preffer? More expensive gas or more expensive everything else,. Admittedly the choise isn't as stark as I make it out to be.
But what astounds me is people responsible for running this great country do not seem to think things through an old failing I might add.
Friday, September 28, 2007
The Indo-American nuclear Deal
I am cutting into seriously needed sleep time to post this. So forgive factual errors if any.
I just read that The UPA government has finally given into the presssure exerted by the Left Front and decided to 'go-slow' whatever that mine mean on the nuclear deal.
Let us first examine the facts at hand.
India carried out a set of nuclear tests in 1998 and in response the US and preety much the rest of the potrntial nuclear suppliers imposed sanctions on high-technology trade with India. After years of negotiaitions in which India was never in a position of strenght we got a deal which the Americans admit will not be offered to anyone else.
Circumstatial evidence I admit, but exhibit A , Pakistan asks for a similar deal and China cries foul. Sounds like the deal might actually be in India's interest after all.
Now last I checked we have a nation of a billion growing at a rate of 9%. Last I checked we were importing 70% of our oil requirement. So based on just those 2 facts we are a nation with a serious need for energy. Where does this energy come from? $80 a barrel of oil (mixed with kerosene in India) is an option. The third and most promising option is for someone to invent a way to harness energy from all the Hot air that the communists so ceaselessly generate.
Since the aam aadmi can't pay for the real price of oil,
maybe just maybe we can generate some nuclear energy(To be honest I am not comepletly sold on the environmental aspects of nuclear energy, But since this hasn't figured in the protestations of the left , we will let it be for now).
Not if the Left can help it though , they have put a spanner in the works based on something to do with India mortgaging its soveriegnity. This is rich coming from an organisation that critised the nuclear tests in the first place.
What galls me most is that the left hasn't pointed out anything inherently wrong with the deal.
So all it boils down to is another 'cholbe na' protest that has no rhyme or reason. Only this time it costs the entire nation.
Make no mistake , Indian communists , every time they have had a chance , have proved that they are guided more by outmoded ideology, than any sense of what might be India's national Interest. And here am being less than harsh lest I really reveal what I think of those idiots.
I just read that The UPA government has finally given into the presssure exerted by the Left Front and decided to 'go-slow' whatever that mine mean on the nuclear deal.
Let us first examine the facts at hand.
India carried out a set of nuclear tests in 1998 and in response the US and preety much the rest of the potrntial nuclear suppliers imposed sanctions on high-technology trade with India. After years of negotiaitions in which India was never in a position of strenght we got a deal which the Americans admit will not be offered to anyone else.
Circumstatial evidence I admit, but exhibit A , Pakistan asks for a similar deal and China cries foul. Sounds like the deal might actually be in India's interest after all.
Now last I checked we have a nation of a billion growing at a rate of 9%. Last I checked we were importing 70% of our oil requirement. So based on just those 2 facts we are a nation with a serious need for energy. Where does this energy come from? $80 a barrel of oil (mixed with kerosene in India) is an option. The third and most promising option is for someone to invent a way to harness energy from all the Hot air that the communists so ceaselessly generate.
Since the aam aadmi can't pay for the real price of oil,
maybe just maybe we can generate some nuclear energy(To be honest I am not comepletly sold on the environmental aspects of nuclear energy, But since this hasn't figured in the protestations of the left , we will let it be for now).
Not if the Left can help it though , they have put a spanner in the works based on something to do with India mortgaging its soveriegnity. This is rich coming from an organisation that critised the nuclear tests in the first place.
What galls me most is that the left hasn't pointed out anything inherently wrong with the deal.
So all it boils down to is another 'cholbe na' protest that has no rhyme or reason. Only this time it costs the entire nation.
Make no mistake , Indian communists , every time they have had a chance , have proved that they are guided more by outmoded ideology, than any sense of what might be India's national Interest. And here am being less than harsh lest I really reveal what I think of those idiots.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Gee Whiz!
This very much a "I can't believe I did'nt think of this earlier" moment for me.
I knew people have been touting electric cars over gasoline ones for ages. I understood that the vehicular emissions would be reduced, but would this really help? Since we were already burning fossil fuels to generate that electricity, not tkaing into account the generation losses.
So why/how then can we use electricity sensibly to power our vehicles?
Another fact that I was aware of leads the way, in this regard.
Electric plants produce a fixed amount of electricity over a day. And that electricty is put on the distribution cables(there is more to it I am sure). Now wether all that electricty is used or none of it is, the same amount of fuel was burnt to generate it.
Efficiencies of operating generation equipment dictate when and how many generators can be fired on and off.
All that really means in times of non-peak demand , there is a significant wastage of the electricity we generate. Why not plug in our cars at that time., to utilize the electricity.
I knew people have been touting electric cars over gasoline ones for ages. I understood that the vehicular emissions would be reduced, but would this really help? Since we were already burning fossil fuels to generate that electricity, not tkaing into account the generation losses.
So why/how then can we use electricity sensibly to power our vehicles?
Another fact that I was aware of leads the way, in this regard.
Electric plants produce a fixed amount of electricity over a day. And that electricty is put on the distribution cables(there is more to it I am sure). Now wether all that electricty is used or none of it is, the same amount of fuel was burnt to generate it.
Efficiencies of operating generation equipment dictate when and how many generators can be fired on and off.
All that really means in times of non-peak demand , there is a significant wastage of the electricity we generate. Why not plug in our cars at that time., to utilize the electricity.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Who wants to be president of India?
The perks of the job include being the titular head of a country of a billion people and the commander in chief of an armed force 1.7 million strong(I might be off a little).
U get palatial accommodation(that includes of all things a zoo and a veterinary hospital) and a presidential body guard.
A jet and a fleet of cars.
Your responsibilities include rubber stamping every decision that the government of the day makes , showing up to great foreign dignitaries and making trips abroad .
Sound good? How do u apply? It would help if u have never trod on any toes. It would help still further if ur Dalt/woman/Muslim or disadvantaged in any other way. Cos then we can say we are progressing We have a Muslim/woman/Dalt/Sikh president.
It doesn't matter what state the actual community is in , if one member of that community has done well for themselves , we can hold it up as a shining example that draws attention away from even more glaring failure.
Another prime qualification would have to be the complete lack of any spine/charisma or personality , which politician wants to be outshone by the ultimate sinecure , the President of India. And who wants to deal with a President with some spine who will actually voice his opinion against patently illegal ordinances that are so much in vogue with the government of the day?
So now that the presidency of one of the most admire men in India , Abdul Kalam
is at an end, its time to elect another 'minority' to the post. A political lightwiegth at best and a sycophant of the Nehru Gandhi dynasty at worst. Turns out that Pratibha Patil fits the bill.
Trust politician after politician to praise the 'wise' choice made by Sonia Gandhi, who is doing so much for the uplift of women by delivering all the comforts that tax payers money can buy to a career politician, who can scarcely claim to be known in the country let alone be admired.
U get palatial accommodation(that includes of all things a zoo and a veterinary hospital) and a presidential body guard.
A jet and a fleet of cars.
Your responsibilities include rubber stamping every decision that the government of the day makes , showing up to great foreign dignitaries and making trips abroad .
Sound good? How do u apply? It would help if u have never trod on any toes. It would help still further if ur Dalt/woman/Muslim or disadvantaged in any other way. Cos then we can say we are progressing We have a Muslim/woman/Dalt/Sikh president.
It doesn't matter what state the actual community is in , if one member of that community has done well for themselves , we can hold it up as a shining example that draws attention away from even more glaring failure.
Another prime qualification would have to be the complete lack of any spine/charisma or personality , which politician wants to be outshone by the ultimate sinecure , the President of India. And who wants to deal with a President with some spine who will actually voice his opinion against patently illegal ordinances that are so much in vogue with the government of the day?
So now that the presidency of one of the most admire men in India , Abdul Kalam
is at an end, its time to elect another 'minority' to the post. A political lightwiegth at best and a sycophant of the Nehru Gandhi dynasty at worst. Turns out that Pratibha Patil fits the bill.
Trust politician after politician to praise the 'wise' choice made by Sonia Gandhi, who is doing so much for the uplift of women by delivering all the comforts that tax payers money can buy to a career politician, who can scarcely claim to be known in the country let alone be admired.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Exercise Physiology page.
I have'nt had the time to go thru this toroughly, but seems preety comprehensive.
Saturday, May 05, 2007
A funny analogy
Indian cricket's present predicament of being one of the weaker sides in world cricket but easily the financial life-force of cricket reminds me of a childhood analogy.
As a kid playing cricket in the neighborhood, there was always one rich kid (or one who had indulgent parents) who owned the bat/ball and stumps.
Almost invariably that kid was not as good as some of us who turned up with nothing other than a grin. No prizes for guessing which kid I preferred to be.
I wonder if Indian cricket has been reduced to the kid with the stumps while the others nations flash a grin at out predicament.
As a kid playing cricket in the neighborhood, there was always one rich kid (or one who had indulgent parents) who owned the bat/ball and stumps.
Almost invariably that kid was not as good as some of us who turned up with nothing other than a grin. No prizes for guessing which kid I preferred to be.
I wonder if Indian cricket has been reduced to the kid with the stumps while the others nations flash a grin at out predicament.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Coldplay "Fix You" lyrics.
Could'nt have said this any better.
COLDPLAY LYRICS"Fix You"
When you try your best, but you don't succeed
When you get what you want, but not what you need
When you feel so tired, but you can't sleep
Stuck in reverse
When the tears come streaming down your face
When you lose something you can't replace
When you love someone, but it goes to waste
Could it be worse?Lights will guide you home
And ignite your bones And I will try to fix you
High up above or down below
When you're too in love to let it go
If you never try you'll never know
Just what you're worthLights will guide you home
And ignite your bones And I will try to fix you
Tears stream down your face
When you lose something you cannot replace
Tears stream down your faceAnd I...
Tears stream down on your face
I promise you I will learn from my mistakes
Tears stream down your faceAnd I...
Lights will guide you home
And ignite your bones
And I will try to fix you.
COLDPLAY LYRICS"Fix You"
When you try your best, but you don't succeed
When you get what you want, but not what you need
When you feel so tired, but you can't sleep
Stuck in reverse
When the tears come streaming down your face
When you lose something you can't replace
When you love someone, but it goes to waste
Could it be worse?Lights will guide you home
And ignite your bones And I will try to fix you
High up above or down below
When you're too in love to let it go
If you never try you'll never know
Just what you're worthLights will guide you home
And ignite your bones And I will try to fix you
Tears stream down your face
When you lose something you cannot replace
Tears stream down your faceAnd I...
Tears stream down on your face
I promise you I will learn from my mistakes
Tears stream down your faceAnd I...
Lights will guide you home
And ignite your bones
And I will try to fix you.
Monday, April 16, 2007
32 young lives extinguished
32 young lives extinguished,
with each died hopes and dreams of a future so bright,
32 families in pain, so much anger so much pain.
with each died hopes and dreams of a future so bright,
32 families in pain, so much anger so much pain.
There will be prayers there will be candles,
There will be Talk of healing and moving on.
None of which can dull the anger or the pain.
Anger unlike pain is a funny beast,
Pain is far more private still.
Tragedy it is in many ways,
Whom do we question and who do we blame?
The madman who fired the shots ,
or the law that allowed the madman to have a gun?
turned to killing fields.
Whom do we question and who do we blame?
For all the Anger and Pain.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
The anguish of the wooden spooner.
In India, (and amongst Indian's abroad) most can be classified as either in love with the game of cricket and those who don't care much for it. I'll stick my neck out to say, that "those who don't care much are in a minority.
So though I am slowly drifting towards the minority, I would like to articulate the anguish If I can the anguish of a billion people at their one great hope of getting some "Feel good" going for them.
The Indian Cricket Team with more combined experience than a few other nations combined , was unceremoniously dumped out in the qualifying stages of the Cricket World Cup yesterday.
I have a million things to do, but I find myself constantly scanning for news stories on the aftermath of this most ignominious exit.
The post mortem to follow will have the saner voices reminding us that its "just a Game" and that "Nobody died". They will caution us against "Overreacting" and "Chopping and Changing".
Dire warnings will be given with respect to the talent pool .
They will blame the media for raising expectations too high and the adulation of a billion fans as being unbearable pressure.
So 2-3 months from now we will see the same bunch of incompetents save one or two, doing duty for India. Murdering teams at home and doing just enough abroad to create "History"(how does a test win in Ireland sound?).
We react strongly when told of by the likes of Malcom Speed, about our lack of infrastructure for paying spectators , lack of an assemly line of good young players and a lack of results in major tournaments.
We react even morre strongly when Ricky Ponting rightly taunts us about our results.
But make no mistake excuses run their course after a while. No One wants to hear team India's sob story. They are not held to the same stanadard as the rest of us dimwits when it comes to taking home a pay check and delievering results.
Unlike professional footballs teams in the US or the european soccer teams. We have no draft or acquiring players with better pedigrees, to turn this ship around.
So after public anger has died down the same people who criminally spent millions to bring home a wooden spoon will be rehabilitated.
Our 34 year old triumverate who have failed so often in unision , you would believe they are joined at the hip will happily retire on the millions they have earned. Move one to braodcast journalism perhaps, and nothing will change.
This is not just a game and it never was. Those who put on Indian colors know it. On the positive side those in India will have a whole lot less sleepless nights than they had anticipated.
So though I am slowly drifting towards the minority, I would like to articulate the anguish If I can the anguish of a billion people at their one great hope of getting some "Feel good" going for them.
The Indian Cricket Team with more combined experience than a few other nations combined , was unceremoniously dumped out in the qualifying stages of the Cricket World Cup yesterday.
I have a million things to do, but I find myself constantly scanning for news stories on the aftermath of this most ignominious exit.
The post mortem to follow will have the saner voices reminding us that its "just a Game" and that "Nobody died". They will caution us against "Overreacting" and "Chopping and Changing".
Dire warnings will be given with respect to the talent pool .
They will blame the media for raising expectations too high and the adulation of a billion fans as being unbearable pressure.
So 2-3 months from now we will see the same bunch of incompetents save one or two, doing duty for India. Murdering teams at home and doing just enough abroad to create "History"(how does a test win in Ireland sound?).
We react strongly when told of by the likes of Malcom Speed, about our lack of infrastructure for paying spectators , lack of an assemly line of good young players and a lack of results in major tournaments.
We react even morre strongly when Ricky Ponting rightly taunts us about our results.
But make no mistake excuses run their course after a while. No One wants to hear team India's sob story. They are not held to the same stanadard as the rest of us dimwits when it comes to taking home a pay check and delievering results.
Unlike professional footballs teams in the US or the european soccer teams. We have no draft or acquiring players with better pedigrees, to turn this ship around.
So after public anger has died down the same people who criminally spent millions to bring home a wooden spoon will be rehabilitated.
Our 34 year old triumverate who have failed so often in unision , you would believe they are joined at the hip will happily retire on the millions they have earned. Move one to braodcast journalism perhaps, and nothing will change.
This is not just a game and it never was. Those who put on Indian colors know it. On the positive side those in India will have a whole lot less sleepless nights than they had anticipated.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Poor little Rich kids.
So Fortune magazine has gone through its ritual of identifying the worlds billionaires.
Thanks to the ferentic pace of growth witnessed in India, 36 Indian billionaires find themselves on the list. 10 years back I would put this number at 3.
A lot of these freshly minted billionaires have come under media scrutiny as to how they spend to share their billions with the rest of the country for the greater good.
Naturally they have drawn comparisons to billionaires such as Warren Buffet and Bill Gates. Who have pledged their billions to Humanitarian efforts the world around.
No that this affects anyone in particular , but I find this comparison both illogical and unfair.
Warren Buffet and Bill Gates have Billionaires for the last 20-30 years. Their approach to philantrophy has evolved over the years. To expect the same of an Indian paper billionaire is foolhardy. Maybe charity has forever been a game of one upmanship. But for what its worth , its just that, charity - A voluntary generous act or donation to aid those in need.
Thanks to the ferentic pace of growth witnessed in India, 36 Indian billionaires find themselves on the list. 10 years back I would put this number at 3.
A lot of these freshly minted billionaires have come under media scrutiny as to how they spend to share their billions with the rest of the country for the greater good.
Naturally they have drawn comparisons to billionaires such as Warren Buffet and Bill Gates. Who have pledged their billions to Humanitarian efforts the world around.
No that this affects anyone in particular , but I find this comparison both illogical and unfair.
Warren Buffet and Bill Gates have Billionaires for the last 20-30 years. Their approach to philantrophy has evolved over the years. To expect the same of an Indian paper billionaire is foolhardy. Maybe charity has forever been a game of one upmanship. But for what its worth , its just that, charity - A voluntary generous act or donation to aid those in need.
Friday, February 23, 2007
His excellency The ambassador of a brand
Almost all of us , who have'nt been livign under a rock, have seen a celebrity endorsement of a product. Naturally if a celeb can use a product, its certainly good enough for me.
Maybe a decade back, I heard the term brand ambassador being bandied about. Usually it was to assosciate one celeb in particular with the brand, and the brands were usually premium brands(at least by Indian standards). The term ambassador, had to stand for something regal right? Wrong. I just read that Priety Zinta has been decalred a "Brand ambassador" for something as mundane as Rexona Deo.
For the life of me I can't figure out how a deo will make its way into a classy converstaion.
"Damn , have u heard of deo" doesn't count. Nor can I quite imagine anyone associating apreety lass like Priety with deo either. "God Priety makes a perfect ambassador for Rexona Deo, she sweats like a hound dog on a hot summer day , but u can't tell, cos she has a life time supplyy of rexona deo".
So marketing folks who make a lot more than I do, take a moment and maybe a breath or two, before u decide to get a brand ambassador for the next ,mousetrap.
Maybe a decade back, I heard the term brand ambassador being bandied about. Usually it was to assosciate one celeb in particular with the brand, and the brands were usually premium brands(at least by Indian standards). The term ambassador, had to stand for something regal right? Wrong. I just read that Priety Zinta has been decalred a "Brand ambassador" for something as mundane as Rexona Deo.
For the life of me I can't figure out how a deo will make its way into a classy converstaion.
"Damn , have u heard of deo" doesn't count. Nor can I quite imagine anyone associating apreety lass like Priety with deo either. "God Priety makes a perfect ambassador for Rexona Deo, she sweats like a hound dog on a hot summer day , but u can't tell, cos she has a life time supplyy of rexona deo".
So marketing folks who make a lot more than I do, take a moment and maybe a breath or two, before u decide to get a brand ambassador for the next ,mousetrap.
Monday, January 08, 2007
Oh yes ! We made it.
I took 3 local flights within europe on "low cost" airlines.. And the one thing I noted in each case was that when we landed , people broke into frenzied clapping. As if they didn't expect to land.
Ah well we were flying budget can't be too harsh on them for clapping.
Ah well we were flying budget can't be too harsh on them for clapping.
Welcome aboard Mr. Ottawa Dhulipala
I was on the last leg of my european trip flying from madrid to paris. Checking in at the Ryanair counter I handed over my passport over as identification. All this is routine so I did'nt pay any attention till I got back my boarding pass. As I stepped Away from the counter , I saw Ottawa very clearly written as my first name. The security environment at the airports being as it is I headed back to the counter to get this error fixed.
The clerk at the counter pointed to my US visa which had listed Ottawa as the issuing location right above my last name Dhuliapala.
I can't figure out whats funnier, the fact that he made thew mistake or thought that Ottawa was a fine first name to go with Dhulipala. I am sure Ivana Humpalot would have gone past his vast intellect just as easily.
The clerk at the counter pointed to my US visa which had listed Ottawa as the issuing location right above my last name Dhuliapala.
I can't figure out whats funnier, the fact that he made thew mistake or thought that Ottawa was a fine first name to go with Dhulipala. I am sure Ivana Humpalot would have gone past his vast intellect just as easily.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)