Welcome to Democratic and Secular Nepal

Key declarations of the House Proclamation

• The name His Majesty's Government of Nepal changed to Nepal Government

• Nepal becomes a secular state

• National anthem to be changed

• Name of Royal Nepalese Army changed to Nepal Army

• The post of Supreme-Commander-in-Chief of the army held by the king and the constitutional provision regarding the mobilisation of the army scrapped

• Army and all other security limbs of the state brought under the direct control of the HoR

• Council of Ministers to appoint the Chief of Army Staff

• Rajparishad scrapped, its duties and responsibilities will be exercised by the HoR

• Parliament to formulate, amend, and annul the laws deciding the heir to the throne

• All executive rights of the state vested only in the Council of Ministers

• Prime Minister will summon the House session and Speaker will adjourn the session on PM's recommendation

• Parliament to decide Royal Palace expenditures and other facilities

• Private property and income of the king to be taxed as per the existing laws

• Questions can be raised in parliament and in a court of law against the king's unconstitutional and illegal actions

• The Royal Household Service scrapped, civil servants to replace Royal Household Service employees

• The Council of Ministers to decide the security arrangement of the Royal Palace

• The provisions of the Constitution of Nepal 1990 and other laws which contravene the House Proclamation will be null and void to the extent of contravention


I whole heartedly welcome this proclamation.

And I welcome all to the Democratic and Secular Nepal.

My Nepal, My Pride.

About Nepal - By Basanta, Dhankuta (Presently studying Engineering in India)

gud to hear a young and energetic person writing such book for which nobody in Nepal is interested, at least not the young generation. They think themselves to be very good but giv all these things a fuck. I just mean to point the ppl who r really worrying abt themselves rather than all. The ppl always know how to comment the things tat are not available in Nepal and make themselves suffer more with their inferiority complex.They always think that we hav nothing in our country so we are hopeless to do things.

But ther are some persons who are really worried abt the country and its develpment. I can be that much sure that given the chance there are many people who can work and serve for the country from their side. And all these ppl whom I am talking about donot care for the political calculations i.e. they donot like all the political games and donot want to get themselves involved in this.

Anyway its very easy to blame others and think self as a superior over others. Its also easy to think self to be known about everything at least more than the others. These all human nature that nobody can control is ruining ourselves.

Anyway I hate the commenting job and til now I am doing same in this message. Sorry for me. Comenting on others is easy. And lastly I would like to comment some of the Nepalis born instincts that is present all over and that is ruining the Nepali population.

1. The Jealousy over otheres ... aafu pani kehi nagarne ra aaru le kehi gareko pani dekhi na sahane.. ra kasaile kehi garna khojyo bhane uuslai tyo kura garna discourage garne .. aanek dar dekhaune or . ... kaam suru garnu bhanda aagai nai hatotsahi banaune... this is the major instinct ruining us.

2. Afraid of taking risks and doing difficult jobs.... Nepali haru sadhai garo kaam ta garirahanchan tara aaafno lagi hoina aaru kai lagi .. ra Nepali haru lai kaam garna khojda sajilo kaam nai chainchha .... for example .. SLC pass gare pacchi sabai lai sarkari or others nokari chainchha .... kunai aaru kaam garda laj hunchha re ... sathai garo pani hunchha re .... aani aarko kura Nepali haru kunai naya kaam suru garna darauchan ... kina ki tyo risk line aat chhaina ra ... kaam garnu bhanda aagadi nai khutta jhigkne prabati dherai chha ... the corrruption is emerged jobs because they want money without working and that too very easily..

3. Expecting the returns fast... Nepali haru le kunai kaam suru gare bhane tyesko pratifal chhadai nai chhain chha .. yedi bhayena bhane .... tyo kaam chodera aarko kaam thali halchan...

Ok .. this much I could write today ... I hated myself doing this .. But I did this to say u that include some topics in your book to make the readers feel(esp. Nepali) that what attitude of theirs is making Nepal lay behind(besides politics) and the attitude of the people is also important for a good and developed country not only the economic boon. Even though if the boon comes that may not last to a longer term.

About Nepal - By Fernando, Brazil

It´s a plesure to me make friends in Nepal.

I´ve been in Nepal some yars ago, I loved the country, culture, food, music and mainly the people. You are very kindly, friendly and spiritualized (at least a few).

I´m worried about polical news, but I hope Nepal can survive this as it´s doing through thousands years.

I also hope return there next year.

Best regards,

Fernando Aquino



Namascar

About Nepal - By Cedric, Germany

I am not an expert on Nepal, although I follow what is going on there in the international press.

I must say that I clearly oppose the monarchy and I support the revolution, although I do not approve of all the methods the Maoists employ.



Cheers



Cédric

About Nepal - By Stefen, Switzerland

I have been to India and - geographically speaking - quite close to Nepal, as I
was in Manali and I imagine that external and cultural conditions might
be somewhat similar. But outside of some general information, I don't
have enough personal knowledge about the exact situation in your country
for an informed opinion.

There are some general ideas that are universally true. Communism will
always lead to mayhem and poverty. An autocratic regime is likely to
stifle development in the interest of conserving power, except if the
leader happens to be one of the very few enlightened men who are willing
to give their subjects freedom, using force only to preserve peace and
the rights of the citizens.

The most brilliant advice to leaders was given by Lao Tzu, the founder
of the philosophy of Tao. You might want to include some of his quotes
in your book. A Taoist king might be better than a democracy, which
doesn't respect individual rights.

Since your royalty doesn't seem to take their inspiration from Taoism, I
have little hope that they are good rulers. I heard that there are many
government backed monopolies in Nepal, which are granted to a few chosen
individuals and families, who gain immense wealth and power. I doubt
that they would be much in favor of opening their country and their
markets...

I wouldn't mind visiting your country one day and studying its
conditions with you, but I'm afraid that won't be possible in the
immediate future. There is a slight possibility that I'll be at a
conference in Mongolia next summer, cf. www.isil.org, but the venue
hasn't been decided yet. Participating in such a conference might be of
great interest to you, as you would meet people from all over the world
and very different backgrounds there. It so happens that the prime
minister of Mongolia wanted to attend previously, hence the invitation
to his country. A previous sponsor was Otto Guevara from Costa Rica, who
is now the most hopeful presidential candidate for next year's election.

This should just underline that ideas matter and by advocating positive
ideas consistently, one can represent a force for change, so by all
means do publish your book!

If you have specific questions, don't hesitate to contact me again. I
would also suggest that you should contact Center for Civil Society
India, www.ccsindia.org, as they are much closer to you. I'm sure they
will be willing and able to help you. They already publish many books
themselves. Several members are already good friends of mine. I very
much enjoyed their company and their energy and courage to speak up.

Regards,


Stefan

About Nepal - By Praveen, Kerala, India

Hi Bhupendra, I have kept it pretty simple and brief considering my time constraints. I hope it has some value.

The first thing that comes to my mind about Nepal is the warm, friendly nature of the people. Nepalis can be found in just about every corner of India and their nature is all for you to see. Unlike people from a few other neighbouring nations(which I wouldn't like to name here), the Nepalis have integrated into society and have not de-stabilized the local society.

The second thing is the culture, very similar and closely linked with the ancient civilization of Bharat(India). No wonder just about every Indian would readily ask why Nepal is not a part of India. In midst of all the pseudo-secularism and minority appeasement policies in India, it is refreshing to see a nation openly declaring their nation as a Hindu state and keeping its secular credentials intact. India can learn from Nepal in this regard by stopping vote bank politics and recognizing the glorious past.

The third thing is the land-locked, mountaineous terrain of the nation. Majority of the tallest peaks on the planet come from this part of the world. It is also a strategic location between India and China, two of the world's future superpowers.

Nepal has a similar road like most SAARC nations as it belongs to the LDC (Less developed nations) club. Nepal can follow the India path in opening up the economy steadily to foreign players and at the same time encouraging competition among the domestic players which together would help in large-scale employment and improving the quality of products/goods and the lives of people.

Nepal can take multilateral trade paths via USA, China, EU etc. But, the most important trade partner will always be India for the foreseeable future. SAFTA and the SAARC Economic Union would help the entire SAARC region, which means Nepal too would benefit. Sure, India will gain a lot from the SAARC Union, considering its size. However, taking a long-term view, it is in the interests of SAARC nations and Nepal to be stronger economically so that the world doesn't look at this part of the world as just people with a begging bowl.

I think India should enhance its military co-operation with Nepal despite the recent fallout vis-a-vis the King seizing the power. Despite democracy being mandatory, it was a blatant error by India's foreign minister(at that time) to sideline Nepal and threatening India's own national security in the process. This has invited China to supply arms equipment to Nepal. China has already used Pakistan and Bangladesh to de-stabilize the South Asian region. It would be a nightmare to see Nepal being used as a football by China and inviting wrath from India. Also, the Maoist insurgency in Nepal is also a major concern as the naxalites in India have a close nexus with their counterparts in Nepal. Both of them linking up even more would de-stabilize both the nations.

For a developed Nepal to be a reality, it has to get its basics in place. It should invest more in education, health care, infrastructure like roads, communication etc. It should encourage more trade with India and SAARC and get benefit from the rapid growth in the Indian economy. It should not sideline its traditional sectors like agriculture in this process and can work with India considering its experience in large-scale rural schemes. The main focus area should be eco-tourism considering Nepal's Himalayan terrain and its culture. For that, there should be political stability and better economic climate. The King's role should only be ceremonial like in UK or in some states of India. He should not interfere in politics no matter what the situation is.

Finally, on a personal note I would like to say that I belong to the Nair caste, common in the southern Indian state of Kerala. Nairs are not indigenous to Kerala and are claimed to be early descendants of the Newars of Nepal, who were then part of the larger Kshatriya community of Bharat. The style of pagoda-like temple architecture and house construction (Tharavaadus) of Nairs are almost identical with the Newar style of temples and houses found all along the valleys of Kulu and Nepal. In the mode of inheritance, the Newars are like the Nairs. There is the Marumakkathaayam system of inheritance, which is a matrilineal system.

This is just another indicator of the shared ancient civilization of Bharat.

Best Wishes Vijay

My dear friend and collegue, Vijay Nair got IIMC seat and he is joining the same soon. All the best Vijay, have grt days there and keep progressing.
These pictures are taken in his treat. Just enjoy.

Happy Birthday Manohar and Prabhu.

Very Happy Birthday to Manohar and Prabhu.

Happy New Year 2063

On this April 14th, Nepal has moved one year forward. Its the Nepali New Year.
Best Wishes for all the raeders of my blog.
We had a grt new year eve celebration this time in chennai, a get-together of Nepalese and a fun plays there. The interesting talks of guys, the background nepali songs, and the fore-ground guiter .. all were so hearty so nepali. I felt like being in Nepal, like being at home. Thanks to the organisers ... Rupal, Ramesh, Dinesh and Sujan. Good job guys.

Why Islamic people seperate them from rest of the World??

(This is written in the orkut community "Green Army" which is formed to transform Pakistan to moderate islamic nation. The community is started by a good friend of mine from Pakistan, Mr. Tanzeel)

I am a strong supporter of individual freedom and cultural independence. I respect the religious feeling too, and I myself is a relious person who respect one's culture and religion as one's identity. But I have a big question to you all, why do Islamic people differentiate between them and the rest?

Whenever there is message from Osama Bin Laden, he always calls for the Islamic people to fight against the american racism and supression.

Saddham Hussein called all the Islamic people to fight the invaders, when many european countries were aginst the invasion along with almost whole of Asia, wouldn't it be better had he called whole world to fight aginst this american aggression??

I am from Nepal, the only hindu kingdom of the world. The only non-secular state in the world where there is national holidays for all the four religions which are practised in Nepal. We have national holiday for Dashera and Dipawali (hindus), Losar(Buddhist), EID (Muslim), and Christmas (Christian). I have very secular feeling and I can openly say that Nepal is one of the most secular state in the world where many higher posts are taken by people of minority religions. Can this ever be seen in Pakistan??

I am following Pakistani news for some yrs and am excited to see the growth of Pakistani economy, but even the official sources show that the percentage population of minority religions are decreasing. Does this in someway show that there is religious racism in Pakistan??

Why did Yosuf Yohana changed to Islam converting his name to Mohammed Yosuf? Saying that its his personal choice is like saying press freedom by Europeans in cartoon controversy. What is the hidden reason behind this??

Lastly, the question to Tanzeel specially, why do u want to see Pakistan as "Moderate Islamic Nation" and not as "Modern Secular Nation"? Moderate means in the middle, why do u want to be in the middle? Why not complete development or complete modernisation??


Jehanjeb:
hello bhupendra...im from karachi-pakistan and i will try to reply ur questions but im not sure if im the right person to do so cuz ur scrap had lot at one time...so here it goes!

first of all with all due respect to ur religion...muslims n hindus lived together under muslims ruler for quite a few centuries and both faced almost saem invasions form time to time...in those times...things were simpler, lifestyle was simple, greed was there but yet each individual faced a trauma of knowing every other person within the so called city limits. i can not pin point the right time when the sense of individualistic identity rose and had this one poweful sector divided into so many countries...
islam does not teach ne1 to pick guns and create their own boundaries...around 1400 years back...at the time of our Prophet...his followers travelled great distances to spread the message of Islam...not to conquer countries. yes there were war fought at that time...even among muslims but those were between right and wrong. not in greed to take away something
now comes present time...today if u just accumulate allw ats hapenin...and narrow ur eyes to see things bit more clear...ull see that everything either done by non-mulsims or other non-muslim country is against Islam. just for reference and no hard feeling...was there ne destruction of mandir b4 indian hindus crushed Babri Mosque...was there ne 9/11 before US got hold of Suadi resources of Oil and still the rampage is going on...

and certainly there was no Usama or Saddam at that time...basic rule of survival...u talk to me...ill reply...u abuse me...ill try to adjust that...u get up and slap me...ull pay for that! but this went beyond abusing or slappin...it came down to sole reason of keepin our families alive...while there are many political decisions made to save our asses, and then there were many for which we are still paying by gulping down sour outcomes. some of our great antion forefather forsaw the coming results of great US built up and they tried till the end of their lives for a one united islamic nation block! well one of the reason for this was also that u look at atlas...Pakistan is the first Islamic country of the whole Islamic belt...if there has to be a bond then we are one for that...once the era of great leaders ended came the corrupt ones who made things worst for this islamic block...their foriegn policies made us break friendships with many islamic countries...we still have one fried and that is China but only God knows till when this wud carry on...!
so u see...us muslims have been pushed by our ownselves to this limit where we cant be part of the whole world and has to create an Islamic Block to survive...which till now is succeeding! ...im keepin ma fingers cross for that! and if u wana see muslims who r not even worth callin humans...do leme know ill give u links to thier thread here on orkut which will open ur eyes of how far some of us have gone just to fuckin please thier Father america!


My REsponse to Jehanjeb:

There is clash of civilisation going on always in this world, and all want the reason to crush other. There are some works done by some people to provoke and if in those acts we get provoked then we are not gaining but giving grounds for other side to act against us. It is in our best interest to be resilent and develop.

See China, it is not disturbed by anything that is going on in the world, its simply following the so called pig policy and its rising. When Talibaan destroyed the world's largest statue of Buddha what did Japanese, Korean or Chinese do? Nothing. China decided to build a new one, and Japan declared a project for the development of Lumbini (Nepal), Birthplace of Gautam Buddha. This has certainly benefitted them. Had they thought the event as attack on Buddhism then they would have lost their resources in fighting the unnecessary war.

The demolition of Babri Masjid was a real bad act of Hinduist govt in India, and they lost the election now and are out of power. Now, the same BJP is getting secular to get muslim's vote. Lal Krishna Advani, the man behind demolition has lost the post of BJP chief in his spate over secularity of Jinnah. All these are due to those extreme hinduist feeling in the party. For their act muslims around the world showing anger and calling for destruction of India, the country with second largest muslim population is nothing more than stupidity. Again what is happenening with the anger and war? The world's wealthiest countries with lot of natural resources are getting worse off. Actually many people do something to ignite the islamic world to control their development, they fear that if nothing nothing is done to disturb the islamic world then muslim population will control world economy and politics with their heavy resources (mainly oil).

I have found an exception in the Islamic world and that is Malaysia. Malaysia is fighting war aginst US imperialism and its attack on Islam but not the way other islamic people are fighting. They are fighting by forming a group, Asean+3+3, they are fighting the war economically and I am sure their latest step of forming World's Largest Economic Zone will be a bigger blow than 9/11 to US. This was a peaceful way and proactive. Malaysia has struggled hard to get its surrounding countries with it and now getting China inside Asean and calling India, Australlia and New Zealand as observer in the Asean+3 meet but excluding US is the victory for Malaysian. But I have hardly found any apraisal for this Hero Islamic Nation by the Islamic people.

Pakistan can follow the same route and go forward with enlarging SAARC and ECO, giving a big blow to the West. Its totally a mad activity what Iran is doing now, its the worst path to follow. West is more powerful than us and we have to admit it, we need to tackle them in cautious and polite way. We have to find differences in them and get their weakness and hit, but in such a way that leaves no marks. 9/11 is the biggest blow not to US but to the Islamic people of the whole world. With it US and its allies have already killed many muslims and invaded two countries. 9/11, 7/9 etc are not proving anything but giving the west chance to say that really the Islamic people are nothing more than terrorists.

I think it will be in the best interest of Islamic world if they can form a free trade zone. It will be better if they can move the way to form Islamic Union like the European Union. But this way doesnot seem to be the priority of any islamic nation.

Subsidy not a boon for economy.

(My Reply to Kunjan)

Hi Kunjan,
Let me shall try to answer few questions raised.

Let me make all of you clear that most of the companies invest in
charitable acts to get the tax exemtions. They can show any amount to
the govt as an investment and also for the goodwill of the company. If
investing in charitable act is in company's marketing preference then i
have no question. Once i happen to read about an company producing
"Mecca Cola" a product like coca cola and anounced the ten percent of
its annual profit to be used in providing homes to the displaced
palestines. The company had record sales of about 40% of the sales of
coco-cola in France and similar good results in many arab countries.
This is a smarter marketing more than a valuatic act.
TATA and Birla are having many business houses and they need fame in the
market for their products to sale. They expend very less in
advertisements than their competitors and still stand in market. The
way they do business is not with charity but "Corporate Social
Responsibility" and this is not an help but an marketing act.

How many of you are aware but its a truth than TATAs pay less then their
competitors now. TCS pays mere 12k per month (on hand) for the fresh
engineers which is far below other players. Most of the people join TCS
just to be linked to TATAs.

Regarding subsidy and the energy efficieny I have an interesting
historical facts. Let us share.
Once in 1970's there was energy crises throughout the world due to the
rapid economic development and fuel prices were rising. Saudia Arabia
is also blamed to make that price rise by decreasing the supply of fuel
to the market. Whatever might have caused that, the effects were far
more interesting than mere price hike.

Here are the actions taken by the govts and their effect:
1. UK subsidised the fuel cost.
The effect was that more and more fund was needed for subsidisation.
This made their companies in benefit but socail sector costs were to be
cut. The companies never cared about the energy cost as they were
getting at cheaper cost so were enjoying their rise.

2. Germany subsidised partly far less than UK and invested heavily in
alternative sources of energy like wind mills and small hydro power.
The effect almost the same as UK.

3. US declared an aggressive R&D for increasing fuel efficiency and
decreasing fuel dependency and invested more on nuclear energy leaving
market play its role.

4. Japan implemented import tax on petroleum products further increasing
the fuel costs. All economists were saying that in next 10 yrs Japanese
will crumble, people were againsting the move but govt didnt move back.
The companies started doing tehir own research to decrease the fuel
dependency.

The result is the Japanese and American economic imperialism of 80s and
90s. The energy efficieny in India is only 10% of that of Japan now.
What might have caused this?? The subsidy. And this shows where we are
haeding towards with subsidy.

Cheers.

Kunjan on my article on "Charity"

After reading the mail of bhupe i did not understand few points given by him
and moreover it arises the shortest question "How?".

Firstly, as he says "I dont believe in helping others. Help gives an instant
relief but it brings two big evils with it, first the expectation of getting
more and second the dependence.". Bhupe gave the examples of charity. The
explanation of growing India due to tata,birla IIT's,IIM's,etc etc... But
there r many children who r able to complete their education due the helps
offered by the charities.I say,these children may go to the IIT's and IIM's
afterwards and frame india's future. R u saying this bcoz we r fortunate
enough that our parents were able to provide us education???


Secondly about the subsidies given by inidian govt on LPG and kerosine.. he
says "Every yr's petro and food subsidy together is enough to build a
nuclear power station and think of us getting electricity getting as low as
50p per unit, how competitive then our industry would
be? ". Again we r thinking it that way becoz we need electricity. But what
about those who r not able to fulfill their basic needs. Can u think that it
would be very hard for them to even cook food if govt does not give
subsidies on kerosine.How can india progress by ignoring the poor people
which form the large part of the country. As far as LPG is concerned,people
are switching to LPG due to its low cost and handiness. This has greatly
reduced in use of "Fossil fuels" in the country.Thats i think is a rite step
foreward..........



The next point given by bhupe is a bit rediculous.. He says "Next part the
money others are using for their marketing products is being wasted by these
companies on charity. They will loose to their competitors and finally
fall.". This is not the way business is done. Birla has opened so many
charities for long, but it did not fall. bilra is not a fool to open so many
charities and helping organisations..


Hope I find the answer of these questions....

Charity - the weakness.

(This i had written in reply to my friend's proposal for starting Charitable work)

I dont believe in helping others, cooperation is a different thing
altogether. Help gives an instant relief but it brings two big evils
with it, first the expectation of getting more and second the
dependence. Sometimes earlier I used to think of equal society and the
commodity distribution, but later I found the biggest target of the
nation should be to make people optimistic and give them hope. People
may enjoy immense wealth, some may live in poverty but what makes one
happy is the hope that tomorrow will be better. More to that is
self-dependency, and believe in self that he can do better tomorrow.

I have seen many charity organisations help. I dont say they are doing
wrong but the output they are getting is not the best possible output.
They try their best to get best of what they can, i really appreciate
that, but wouldnot that be better had they been very successful in
their life materially. Dont call me selfish here, you can call me
selfish after reading next few paras if you really feel the same.

India is getting better and better day by day. What is making it better?
Is it the help that charity organisations are giving? is it the aid that
foreign govts are providing? is it the loans that friendly countries are
giving? or is it the subsidy that Indian govt is giving to support the
poor? None of these. India is transforming just because of the success
of engineers of premiere institutes like IITs, leadership by the
managers of IIMs, the competitive business environment grown by the
positive economic policies and because of the success stories of huge
indian business houses like TATA, BIRLA, Relience, Bharti, Infosys,
Wipro etc. This has created "Brand India" in the World. By which
foreigners believe in India and the Indians, and invest in India. And
most importantly every child sees people growing around him, getting
glamorous life style, and tries to get that. In that course he reads
well, tries hard to reach there and finally ends up becoming another
legend of the country. The best one man can do in his life is to do
gain as much he can, name, fame, ecstacy etc etc. This makes the people
more optimistic. And optimism makes one happy.

Protectionism and help degrades the social structure. I have an example
from Switzerland. Swiss govt subsidises agro products. That is the only
protected part of Swiss economy and now it has become only the black
spot of that economy. Every part other than that is going very fine but
farmers are slowing loosing and crying for more subsidies.
India has subsidised Kerosene adn LPG gas heavily and is wasting lot of
money on that. Every yr's petro and food subsidy together is enough to
build a nuclear power station and think of us getting electricity
getting as low as 50p per unit, how competitive then our industry would
be? How much we could save by this? The savings would then be invested
and economy will grow in other sectors too. The huge money that goes
foreign to buy petro products could then be built for irrigation
project in the country to support farmers. But nothing of this will
happen as we believe in help, the instant help and we tend to ignore
economics behind it.
Consider a situation, TATAs and BIRLAs helping poor by running a charity
organisation. The more they focus there they will ahve less time for
business is one part. Next part the money others are using for their
marketing products is being wasted by these companies on charity. They
will loose to their competitors and finally fall. When they fall they
will not remain so finally the charity house will close altogether.

Its a global average that for any work govt wastes 3 times more
resources than what private players could have done the same work. How
come this happens? This is due to the corruption that comes with
protectionism. Any charity organisation is run by the people and any
person can get corrupt at anytiime. In such activities where he is not
in a competition of loosing to his competitors, he may get into those
activities more easily than anyone. Further he has a cover of being
social worker which is a good mask for them.

In the Human Values book published by Vivekananda Nidhi, there is a good
sentence for the person to lead.

"Everything exist, because I exist."

Feel this sentence and give a deep thought. You may feel this sentence
as a materialistic view but Value specialists see it otherwise.
Everthing for you is there only when you are there. So you are the core
of it.

Think this .....

"I exist, because everything exist."

You may feel this as an spiritual thought and leading. Giving more
importance to the society. But this is not. This is undermining self
and this shows low confidence in self and dependency on others.

Charity begins at self. When we are enriched with more knowledge, power
and wealth then it will spread to the environment. This is what the
first sentence tells us. We must grow if we really want others to grow.
This is also called leading by example, and leading by example is far
better than leading by teachings and help.

Friends, I strongly believe that noone can win a war by killing the
enemies when the enemies are continuously produced. The best way is to
attack the production base and by helping poor we are showing a human
sympathy but we are showing other people that if they come to that
condition will get our help. This will make him carefree and one day
that man will come and cry for help. People will die and its the rule
of law. We cant stop that. We can give food to a hungry now, but what
about tomorrow. If someother peoson feeds him tomorrow then what about
the next day. He will get hungry everyday.

Now, coming to our main topic of thanking god and saying "oh god" and
all. It is just to show that we are still humans and have the feel in
self that this should not happen, also showing that I cant do anything.
I am busy doing something and hope that will help the world, god please
show them the path to live their life. This is totally logical and
valuatic.

"Charity is an excuse of the people who doesnot dare to think something
big in life. Thinking small is not a weakness, its a social crime. It's
simply passing the present day hardship to the coming generation."

Some Economics with Stefen.

Well this is one of the happiest day. There were many questions in my mind about the economics and I got the answers today. There still remains something to be studied but the stefen's argument has given me a way to look.

I:

Stephen, I found your claims very interesting and it has added a lot in me. I have some doubts here:

1. social cause - in any economy there are some basic requirements, the basic infrastructure like roads, education, health, etc. Do you mean to privatise everything possible? Privatisation may bring efficiency in the organisations but what about the affordability? Do you think no sector of the economy is left out? If a sector is left out and is out of the economy and if he doesnt get any government assistance, will he not turn out to be a social criminal?

2. When the economy is rising like in the developing countries, i think govt needs to invest heavily in infrastructure as per the economic needs while the private investors will invest only in the segments where there is high profitability. By this some of the segments are leftout and this will be the cause of the economic backlash in the future. What do u think on this?

3. Americans are heavy spenders and so it is also the largest market of the world. Many economists say that most of the Asian economies are running only by US consumptions. US has given more power to the private then any other country. It has deregulated the labor market but what about the fiscal deficit? Do you think the way US economy is going is safe enough for others to follow - less govt spending and more private ownerships? How do u see the US economy when many of its pillars are dying .... enron is out, GM and Ford are loosing? How do u analyse this situation?

4. Comparing India and China, China has built its infrastructure more and the govt spending is very high w.r.t the indians and so is the economy. China is growing faster than India, and the only reason is infrastructure as the govt in india is democratic and anyone want to come to India then to China provided they provide equal oppertunity. But the flow is seen the otherwise. The govt spending is strengthening the rural markets of China. comments on this plz.

5. Nepal govt had privatised most of its economy and it is the most capitalist country in the whole of South Asia but this resulted in social unrest, while the semi-socialist govts are slowing rising. dont u think a proper planning is necessary by the govt? One thing most of the countries while developing has been controlling their economy. the better the planning by the govt and more the govt spending the faster a country develop. Japan was most controlled market before opening its economy to the world. They had made huge investments with one of the highest tax rate in the world. Is this claim false??

I have seen by your comments that you follow that " the least governing govt is the best". But is this suatainable?

When a baby is born, if it is exposed to so much competition it will never get food and so will never grow. It needs protection till a certain stage of life when he can compete. So I think a optimal protection necessary for the new entrants in the market. Whats your view?

Stefen:

There are so many issues you raise. Let me try to keep the answer as simple as possible, mostly by referring you to other posts in this forum, e.g. the one on privatization.

The issue is not if investment is private or government, but if competition is legal. I wouldn't mind government as an agency, if it was just one actor among many and of course if government didn't finance its projects with tax revenue, which dissociates the payment from the actual demand and real cost.

Any infrastructure must be financed by the users. If users can't finance it, then who should? If there are "indirect benefits", the active users will charger their own costs (e.g. of road use for transportation of goods) to their customers through prices.
Every single infrastructure, including roads, railways, schools etc, were built privately in Europe and the US before the invention of the modern State, which is a very recent invention.

Things started getting worse, not better, when governments got involved. I highly recommend the book "The Myth of the Robber Barons", Burton W. Folsom, which documents wonderfully how an entirely privately operated railroad outperformed subsidized and then state run companies, to the point where government eliminated the annoying competitor through trumped-up anti-Trust charges.

Imagine that: government was running 80% or more of all the railroad services, but the tiny proportion that was run privately was supposed to "control" the market for railroad services and cause "unfair competition".

As a rule of thumb, any service operated by government costs 2 to 3x more than it would, if the exact same service was run through competitive enterprise. So the question becomes: can any society, especially a poor society, afford to waste so many resources? The answer is obviously NO.

The next question is: would private companies provide those services? The answer is YES. Why would government have to make laws to exclude competition, if no one wanted to compete? If government does not exclude private operators either directly or through excessive legal or financial requirements, then naturally, private companies will try to offer those services, as they expect them to be profitable.

The largest infrastructure project ever, the tunnel between England and France, was built with private resources. That is a very interesting example, as it turned out that there wasn’t really that much demand for it. The ferry services were quite good, though overpriced. What happened right away was that the new competition lowered the price of ferry tickets. Investors lost a lot of money, but the project was simply taken over by new investors, who were now operating at a lower cost. The initial investors had lost most of their capital, but that was their risk.
No one ever said that every infrastructure project is really useful and will be profitable. It is the risk of entrepreneurs to find profitable investments. Non-profitable ones represent a waste of resources and should be discontinued, if their cost cannot be lowered. Governments will finance such loosing projects at excessive cost way longer than any private business would.

Given that government operating costs are so much higher, they will even loose money on potentially profitable infrastructure, which is one of the many defects of loosing information via government interventionism and tax financing.

I don’t know enough about the situation in Nepal, except that government is very strong and cronyism is widespread. Hence I imagine that “privatization” really meant tax farming privileges handed over to people who are in favor with government. Tax farming is what brought on the French revolution. It has nothing to do with competitive enterprise.

As for China, what really drives their economic growth is the fact that they finally allowed people to keep most of the benefits of their private activity. It has nothing to do with government infrastructure, which would be built one way or another. As I understand, there is even a lot of excess infrastructure and useless, glamorous projects, instead of things that people would really need.

Extremely rapid growth is possible for countries that start low. They just need to copy what is already well known from elsewhere. When they approach the state of the art, growth will naturally slow down. The amazing thing is not that some countries grow rapidly, but that many others grow very slowly or not at all, which just demonstrates how many obstacles they must impose on all economic activities. They must use FORCE to stop people from acting in their own interest to remain so poor.

The most amazing thing is that people from more wealthy countries are lining up to invest in such poor countries, something that was entirely unavailable for people in Europe or the USA in the 19th century, because there were no foreign countries with great wealth and technology. They had no choice but to do it all by themselves. So what gives? The fact that there is very little protection for private property in poor countries, that political whims may change rapidly, that corruption is universal and finally, absurd nationalistic opposition.

Nationalism is particularly stupid. Think of Argentina: while some British companies were operating the Argentinean railroads, they ran perfectly well. But then, some idiot decided that they should be “nationalized” (he stole private property for his own benefit, garnering public support for the theft through emotional appeal). As a result, within a few years, those railroads stopped working. WHO owns a company is entirely unimportant to the consumer. The only thing that counts is that he can purchase some useful service at a low price.

India still has many roadblocks for foreign investment and so does China. The successes of China are currently so visible that the shortcomings are not given much thought, but they are quite real. If China grows faster than India, it simply means that India still has more bureaucratic hurdles, more corruption and less protection for private property.

The same is true for western countries: their comparative wealth is so great that they are assumed to have done everything right, when in fact they are far below the possible level of wealth they could have if they had not given in to Keynes and Socialism. Their wealth only seems great as compared to countries that really, really screwed up their economies.

The US are an incredible mix of a very free society with a very large and heavy government. The spirit in America is one of free enterprise and individual achievement, which is what creates all the very real wealth, while the government is often totally out of control. Fortunately, the total share of government in the US GDP is only about 29%, which goes a long way to explain their prosperity. More than the nature of any interventionism, it is the absolute share of GDP that is really important. In France, it is 65%, which explains why they have so many problems.

US spending is not the cause of US growth and their contribution to the world economy. Far more important is their very real productivity. Why should anyone want to sell to the US if they don’t expect to get anything in return? You don’t produce just for the benefit of US consumers, right?

Americans have a special trump: they benefited largely from the fact that a lot of foreigners are happy to hold US currency. Given the instability of most national currencies, the USD is still far more convenient. So Americans are able to buy tons of real goods in exchange for some pieces of paper, because these pieces of paper are of real value to their customers. Currency DOES have a value, if it is stable. The dollar is not, but it is still far more stable than most other currencies. The US supply a service to other people in the form of a universal currency system and they get a lot of consumer goods in exchange. Fair trade.

When some stupid Marxists propose to burn US dollar notes, I always wonder just how stupid they are: that is the greatest service they can render to Americans. If currency is burned, they will never have to deliver any good in exchange for it.

Even if foreigners did demand goods in exchange for their dollars, there wouldn’t be any shortage: the total wealth in the US in the form of land, buildings, companies and available services is immense, so people who sell to Americans do act rationally. The “trade deficit” is not a problem at all. We all run trade deficits. I for one buy a lot more from supermarkets than they buy from me, but that doesn’t bother either of us, because I earn income from other sources with which I am able to pay the supermarket.

“When a baby is born, if it is exposed to so much competition it will never get food and so will never grow.”

It is not really the baby that is competing, it’s his parents. And competition is exactly what allows the parents to buy food, health care and everything else cheaply. It is the lack of competition that produces poverty. Countries where children die of hunger know almost no competition at all. They do not participate in global trade. If they did, they wouldn’t be so poor. The more “protected” a country’s economy is, the poorer it is. Switzerland has almost no protectionism, except for agriculture. The only sector of the Swiss economy that is a complete failure is agriculture.

It’s amazing to see that when the market for cheese was finally deprived of protection and subsidies, it soared and started exporting like crazy. The producers simply didn’t have any alternative and so they started marketing their product, specialized in products where they had an edge and oh, surprise, they became profitable.

“ It needs protection till a certain stage of life when he can compete.”

A very bad analogy: companies are not children. A company is run by adult people who need to make rational decisions. Size is never a problem: small companies can be far more profitable than large ones.

“So I think a optimal protection necessary for the new entrants in the market”

The current justice minister of Switzerland, Christoph Blocher, is an entrepreneur. He got into politics as an act of self-defense against the increasing pressure on private business. He started his activity by taking over a tiny chemical company that was on the verge of bankruptcy. At great personal risk, he bought it and built it into one of the largest Swiss companies, with factories all over the EU and China. He went from zero wealth to 2 billion CHF.

His opinion on “protecting” small firms? “Any company that is not able to survive on its own should fail! There never should be any form of government protection or subsidies.” It is hard to survive when you run a small company, but its independent success is the only way to know if it is viable.


....................Thanks a lot Stefen. (Stefen is a Independent software from Switzerland, educating people on Economics is his hobby).