Britons rush to India for the boom

Nick-H · Feb 12th, 2008, 23:59

Nice one, Clive

Graeme · Feb 13th, 2008, 01:00

Don't know much about Clive so can't really comment, even thought I visited his Madras (will always be Madras to me), residency last time.

Personally, I think India should be mindful to guard it's moral values and not compromise on the grounds of 'development', which unfortunately, seems to be happening.

Contrary to popular belief, the British did bring positive things to India in general, and also many Britons helped India on an individual level and had no interest in exploiting the people. I recently found out that a Brit helped formed the congress party.

A trustee at my local Hindu Temple said to me that "You came to teach us things and now we are coming to teach you things". I'm not one for generalisations, but I appreciate what he said. I believe that the way Briton is carrying on, it will become a '3rd world country', and India will be grow greatly. Indeed, many of us would consider moving to India if only to reside in a country where children respect their teachers, parents and family values are the norm etc...

As for Indians being here, well they're welcome as far as I'm concerned. By their culture, they do teach us something and I certainly wouldn't have thought about and eventually married my Wife without meeting Indians here. Ironically, whilst walking with my Wife, I have suffered my raciasm in my own country (visiting Leicester, for example), than I ever have in India. As I said, one needs to discriminate between the good and the bad and not adopt a 'them and us' racial attitude. It's far too much of a generalisation.

I hope I can contribute in some small way when I eventually move there. India still needs to develop the basics but regarding maintaining it's integrity, yes, it's a matter of failing within if anything. It's no good proudly flying the flag and proclaiming I'm part of Hindustan if one doesn't practice Santana Dharma...

There, that's my rupee's worth

Nick-H · Feb 13th, 2008, 01:22

Quote:

Contrary to popular belief, the British did bring positive things to India in general,

True. But you still have to remember that the general trend was to suck India's blood dry and spit out the bones.

Britain's colonialising of India was a purely commercial affair. It was even done by a commercial entity.

PeakXV · Feb 13th, 2008, 02:16

'Robert Clive' was really a metaphoric choice who in the end of it all, poor chap, inhaled far too much 'Indian smoke' than he could possibly draw out ..... India seems to have a way of evening the score.

Today it could easily be the Wally Walmarts, Wellington Wimpys or Monty Monsantos that represents the tip of an icebergish-like 'equivalent', 21rst century threat.

..... or possibly some rogue bankers/traders<seems to be alot of them around these days>

Dilliwala · Feb 13th, 2008, 02:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by capt_mahajan

Agree with Nick, btw. It's the selling out, not the 'invasion', which is the problem.

Oh, let's not forget that the most active collaborators the last time around too were Indians. 4000 foreigners cannot rule a sub-continent without a not-very-small but influential number selling out.

Nick-H · Feb 13th, 2008, 02:31

I'm sure that must be true, and I'm sure many made their cut out of it as well.

The East India Company came here as traders --- and it takes two to trade.

crvlvr · Feb 13th, 2008, 02:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick-H

True. But you still have to remember that the general trend was to suck India's blood dry and spit out the bones.

Britain's colonialising of India was a purely commercial affair. It was even done by a commercial entity.

So true.. But, I am always surpised to meet elderly Indians who grew up during the british raj and have been "white washed" into thinking that british rule was the best thing that ever happened to India.

Having said that. I leave you with quote from Lord Macaulay.

Quote:

Lord Macaulay's Address to the British Parliament. Feb 2, 1835

I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief, such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such high caliber, that I do not think we would even conquer this country, unless we break the back bone of this very nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and , therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if Indian think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self esteem, their native culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation.

CliveG · Feb 13th, 2008, 02:57

Is India selling out or is it cannily sucking in money to enable it to improve its infrastructure which it might not be able to do otherwise? If India did not want foreign investment why does it not restrict inward investment by closing its stock exchange to foreign investors? We can all grumble about the state of the roads, the interrupted electricity supply, lack of water but where does the money come from to pay for these improvements? Do Indians want to pay more taxes or would they prefer to have overseas businesses invest and pay taxes on their profits or do they want to continue to live in a state where the basic infrastructure is always crumbling due to lack of investment? Yes India should be concerned about globalisation but I cannot see how it can shut its doors and hope to grow and in doing so improve the basic living conditions of the vast majority of Indians. Many of India’s companies trade with the rest of the world but would this continue if the Indian government placed punitive restrictions on foreign companies wanting to invest in India? As Nick said it takes two to trade. If countries closed their borders to foreign investment Tata would not have been able to buy Corus and thereby ensure a steel supply for it’s transport production. There has to be a bit of give and take.
It is always going to be a balancing act but a sensible government will look at the pitfalls encountered by other countries and hopefully avoid making the same mistakes.

amyl · Feb 13th, 2008, 02:58

Quote:

Lord Macaulay

haaa..... I remember trying to remember his name for History questions (Fill in the Blanks, Match the Following kinds) back in school. I did not realize he was so shrewd!

Sama · Feb 13th, 2008, 03:51

Quote:

Having said that. I leave you woth quote from Lord Macaulay

and that is exactly what the american govt. did to the american indians..."unless we break the back bone of this very nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage..."

amazing. or maybe not.

crvlvr · Feb 13th, 2008, 04:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by CliveG

Is India selling out or is it cannily sucking in money to enable it to improve its infrastructure which it might not be able to do otherwise?

...We can all grumble about the state of the roads, the interrupted electricity supply, lack of water but where does the money come from to pay for these improvements? Do Indians want to pay more taxes or would they prefer to have overseas businesses invest and pay taxes on their profits or do they want to continue to live in a state where the basic infrastructure is always crumbling due to lack of investment?

First of all, none of the foreign investment is going towards improving Indian infrastructure. That is being funded either though world bank (click to see list) loans or local taxes (which is why infrastructure is still so bad).

Secondly, some the leading companies that attract foreign investment do not pay any tax in India -- if they solely focused on exports. Most of the IT/offshore companies fall into this category.

Third, Indian trade deficit continues to widen. what does that mean? Even with all this fantastic economic growth, India continues to import more than she exports. So, all this "free trade" actually means that Indians are consuming more foreign goods than they are exporting. Which means their foreign partners are gaining more from this open economy than India is.

The only reason India is liberalized its economic policy is to create more jobs for the unemployed and hopefully boost exports.

capt_mahajan · Feb 13th, 2008, 08:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilliwala

Oh, let's not forget that the most active collaborators the last time around too were Indians. 4000 foreigners cannot rule a sub-continent without a not-very-small but influential number selling out.

Absolutely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nick-H

I'm sure that must be true, and I'm sure many made their cut out of it as well.

The East India Company came here as traders --- and it takes two to trade.

The trading was brief. The plunder was what they came here for, and what they did for almost all of their time here. And the Indians who sold out did it during the plunder, not during the trade.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graeme

Contrary to popular belief, the British did bring positive things to India in general, and also many Britons helped India on an individual level and had no interest in exploiting the people.

There is no comparison between the scale of the massacres, loot, plunder, planned starvation of millions (4 million) and 'breaking the backbone' as mentioned earlier... with the few 'good' things they did.
Those few good things are a joke, and are often used today, even by some people in India, to somehow justify the rape of a nation, or to say that it wasn't all bad. The fact is that the East India Company, and later the British Government, were, almost without exception, oppressive occupiers on a scale rarely witnessed before. Full stop.

brownboy66 · Feb 13th, 2008, 10:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by capt_mahajan

There is no comparison between the scale of the massacres, loot, plunder, planned starvation of millions (4 million) and 'breaking the backbone' as mentioned earlier... with the few 'good' things they did.
Those few good things are a joke, and are often used today, even by some people in India, to somehow justify the rape of a nation, or to say that it wasn't all bad. The fact is that the East India Company, and later the British Government, were, almost without exception, oppressive occupiers on a scale rarely witnessed before. Full stop.

Without turning this into a full scale riot about British colonisation I would have to agree with the above. By its very nature it is intrusive, forceful, often brutal and violent, and almost never by choice (the only territory that comes to mind with being happy at the process of colonisation is American Samoa). Eventually some good may come out of it - but that sounds a bit like trying to find the silver lining in what is a very bitter cloud (this is not to detract either on the genuine affection and admiration individual Brits have for India, its history, and culture).

capt_mahajan · Feb 13th, 2008, 10:35

Quote:

(this is not to detract either on the genuine affection and admiration individual Brits have for India, its history, and culture).

Or, indeed, the other way around.

Nick-H · Feb 13th, 2008, 11:39

I'm just lost for words in these discussions now.

The 'globalisation' brain washing has become so complete (including the re-writing of history which has young Indians now leaving school with the idea that the EIC might not have been so bad for India) that India greets the coming rape with open arms, and so many observers (as witnessed by many comments in the many related threads on this forum) cheer on its coming with promises of what it will do for India.

India has money to spend on its infrastructure. Last week I was reading in my newspaper of the huge difference between the amount budgeted for garbage disposal and the very small amount actually spent and invested in it.

India's domestic airline business has mushroomed over the past decade or so. An Indian company is now one of the biggest steel producers in the world. Those with real knowledge, such as the Capt, may correct me, but I do not think that India is short of capital. Look at the growth in its stock market!

Investment is looking for one thing: profit. That is what each and every one of us here wants from our investment. This is not wrong --- I am not about to put all my cash under the mattress and sell all my modest share portfolio. I'm a capitalist too.

Foreign investment is looking for foreign profit. Not necessarily a bad thing, if controlled and taxed fairly.

Feb 12th, 2008, 23:59	#16
Nick-H Loud-mouthed, Noisy Bird Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Chennai, India Posts: 24,473	Nice one, Clive __________________ . Just one member of the IndiaMike Mod Team

Feb 13th, 2008, 01:00	#17
Graeme Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Dudley, West Midlands, UK Posts: 21	Choosing btw the Good & the Bad Don't know much about Clive so can't really comment, even thought I visited his Madras (will always be Madras to me), residency last time. Personally, I think India should be mindful to guard it's moral values and not compromise on the grounds of 'development', which unfortunately, seems to be happening. Contrary to popular belief, the British did bring positive things to India in general, and also many Britons helped India on an individual level and had no interest in exploiting the people. I recently found out that a Brit helped formed the congress party. A trustee at my local Hindu Temple said to me that "You came to teach us things and now we are coming to teach you things". I'm not one for generalisations, but I appreciate what he said. I believe that the way Briton is carrying on, it will become a '3rd world country', and India will be grow greatly. Indeed, many of us would consider moving to India if only to reside in a country where children respect their teachers, parents and family values are the norm etc... As for Indians being here, well they're welcome as far as I'm concerned. By their culture, they do teach us something and I certainly wouldn't have thought about and eventually married my Wife without meeting Indians here. Ironically, whilst walking with my Wife, I have suffered my raciasm in my own country (visiting Leicester, for example), than I ever have in India. As I said, one needs to discriminate between the good and the bad and not adopt a 'them and us' racial attitude. It's far too much of a generalisation. I hope I can contribute in some small way when I eventually move there. India still needs to develop the basics but regarding maintaining it's integrity, yes, it's a matter of failing within if anything. It's no good proudly flying the flag and proclaiming I'm part of Hindustan if one doesn't practice Santana Dharma... There, that's my rupee's worth

Feb 13th, 2008, 02:16	#19
PeakXV Naan.tering Nabob Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Abode of Glooscap Posts: 3,770	'Robert Clive' was really a metaphoric choice who in the end of it all, poor chap, inhaled far too much 'Indian smoke' than he could possibly draw out ..... India seems to have a way of evening the score. Today it could easily be the Wally Walmarts, Wellington Wimpys or Monty Monsantos that represents the tip of an icebergish-like 'equivalent', 21rst century threat. ..... or possibly some rogue bankers/traders<seems to be alot of them around these days> __________________ We shall not cease from exploration and at the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started ...and know the place for the first time. T.S. Eliot Don't go to India ~ Pre-trip Warnings & Misconceptions?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Boom Festival 2006 - Free for India Residents	mbrissos	Books, Music, and Movies	4	Jul 18th, 2006 20:45
Boom Boom India.. ?	butterball	Chai and Chat	26	Apr 6th, 2006 15:21
India extends IT outsourcing boom	passingby	India Travel News and Commentary	142	Jun 8th, 2005 07:55
Britons encourage pedaling through the heart of Goa	fredericknoronha	Goa	2	Nov 24th, 2004 23:45
Britain plans emergency evacuation of Britons from India, Pak	indiamike	India Travel News and Commentary	0	May 25th, 2002 05:11

Feb 13th, 2008, 02:31	#21
Nick-H Loud-mouthed, Noisy Bird Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Chennai, India Posts: 24,473	I'm sure that must be true, and I'm sure many made their cut out of it as well. The East India Company came here as traders --- and it takes two to trade.

Feb 13th, 2008, 02:57	#23
CliveG Maha Guru Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: PORTSMOUTH U.K. Posts: 610	Is India selling out or is it cannily sucking in money to enable it to improve its infrastructure which it might not be able to do otherwise? If India did not want foreign investment why does it not restrict inward investment by closing its stock exchange to foreign investors? We can all grumble about the state of the roads, the interrupted electricity supply, lack of water but where does the money come from to pay for these improvements? Do Indians want to pay more taxes or would they prefer to have overseas businesses invest and pay taxes on their profits or do they want to continue to live in a state where the basic infrastructure is always crumbling due to lack of investment? Yes India should be concerned about globalisation but I cannot see how it can shut its doors and hope to grow and in doing so improve the basic living conditions of the vast majority of Indians. Many of India’s companies trade with the rest of the world but would this continue if the Indian government placed punitive restrictions on foreign companies wanting to invest in India? As Nick said it takes two to trade. If countries closed their borders to foreign investment Tata would not have been able to buy Corus and thereby ensure a steel supply for it’s transport production. There has to be a bit of give and take. It is always going to be a balancing act but a sensible government will look at the pitfalls encountered by other countries and hopefully avoid making the same mistakes.

Feb 13th, 2008, 11:39	#30
Nick-H Loud-mouthed, Noisy Bird Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Chennai, India Posts: 24,473	I'm just lost for words in these discussions now. The 'globalisation' brain washing has become so complete (including the re-writing of history which has young Indians now leaving school with the idea that the EIC might not have been so bad for India) that India greets the coming rape with open arms, and so many observers (as witnessed by many comments in the many related threads on this forum) cheer on its coming with promises of what it will do for India. India has money to spend on its infrastructure. Last week I was reading in my newspaper of the huge difference between the amount budgeted for garbage disposal and the very small amount actually spent and invested in it. India's domestic airline business has mushroomed over the past decade or so. An Indian company is now one of the biggest steel producers in the world. Those with real knowledge, such as the Capt, may correct me, but I do not think that India is short of capital. Look at the growth in its stock market! Investment is looking for one thing: profit. That is what each and every one of us here wants from our investment. This is not wrong --- I am not about to put all my cash under the mattress and sell all my modest share portfolio. I'm a capitalist too. Foreign investment is looking for foreign profit. Not necessarily a bad thing, if controlled and taxed fairly.

User Name		Remember Me?
Password