Do you support the statehood for Telangana?

[The Outsider]

Hyderabad has developed in the recent past due to a large extent because of investment from Andhra NRIs. Also, Hyd became a IT city because of Chandrababu Naidu who is from Rayalaseema region. What did Telangana leaders do other than minting money and now blaming others for everything ? In any case, business people have already started investing in other cities like Vizag or Bangalore because they are not secure about their investments and lot of companies have moved out of Hyd already. Hyd will not develop much in the future. It will just be a dumping ground for people from villages and small towns of Telangana.

Did you read the question to which I answered Hyderabad? It was about what would be the most economically viable factor to sustain a landlocked state, and not about the underlying reasons for the creation of a new state.

[nikred]

Hyderabad has developed in the recent past due to a large extent because of investment from Andhra NRIs. Also, Hyd became a IT city because of Chandrababu Naidu who is from Rayalaseema region. What did Telangana leaders do other than minting money and now blaming others for everything ? In any case, business people have already started investing in other cities like Vizag or Bangalore because they are not secure about their investments and lot of companies have moved out of Hyd already. Hyd will not develop much in the future. It will just be a dumping ground for people from villages and small towns of Telangana.

:ohmy: Jai Telangana, Jai Jai Telangana. :beee:

[FischerTal]

this reminds me of the debate to create a separate state of Saurasthra. :hmmm:

[The Outsider]

this reminds me of the debate to create a separate state of Saurasthra. :hmmm:

India should ideally have 50+ states. It's absolute garbage that a state like UP exists as an administrative entity - 200 million people!! That's almost as much as the population of America. How can one expect it to be managed effectively with a state level apparatus!! :wall:

[randomGuy]

India should ideally have 50+ states. It's absolute garbage that a state like UP exists as an administrative entity - 200 million people!! That's almost as much as the population of America. How can one expect it to be managed effectively with a state level apparatus!! :wall:

you have a haramkhor party - c****ya Akhilesh and M******d "netaji" Mulayam at the helm, they dont care whats good for the people.

[The Outsider]

you have a haramkhor party - c****ya Akhilesh and M******d "netaji" Mulayam at the helm' date=' they dont care whats good for the people.[/quote'] Yaar, we've also had supposed reformists in Kalyan Singh, ND Tiwari, and Rajnath Singh and believe me all of them were worse than Mulayam and Mayawati.

[randomGuy]

Yaar' date=' we've also had supposed reformists in Kalyan Singh, ND Tiwari, and Rajnath Singh and believe me all of them were worse than Mulayam and Mayawati.[/quote'] I heard Akhilesh say tht they wont let UP divide when it was in the discussed in media abt dividing it into 4 parts. Maybe congress, bjp being the bigger parties have a better view or may develop a view in future which is for-division, this looks impossible to happen for SP. Afterall Uttarakhand was cut from UP only.

[The Outsider]

I heard Akhilesh say tht they wont let UP divide when it was in the discussed in media abt dividing it into 4 parts. Maybe congress, bjp being the bigger parties have a better view or may develop a view in future which is for-division, this looks impossible to happen for SP. Afterall Uttarakhand was cut from UP only.

I am not saying Mayawati or Mulayam would support a state segregation - my point is that as far as governance is concerned, believe it or not, they have been much better than Congress or BJP. Yeah, Uttarakhand was cut from UP, but that was 5 out 85 seats. In my opinion, no state should have more than a 30 seat representation in the parliament

[randomGuy]

I am not saying Mayawati or Mulayam would support a state segregation - my point is that as far as governance is concerned, believe it or not, they have been much better than Congress or BJP. Yeah, Uttarakhand was cut from UP, but that was 5 out 85 seats. In my opinion, no state should have more than a 30 seat representation in the parliament

The size of country's GDP now, to when Bjp, congress ruled UP is vastly different - the funds available to newer Governments, telecom revolution in India and other technologies available these days, maybe if one factors in the above, one will have a different reflection of relative performances or one will appreciate the limitations of earlier governments.

[The Outsider]

The size of country's GDP now' date=' to when Bjp, congress ruled UP is vastly different - the funds available to newer Governments, telecom revolution in India and other technologies available these days, maybe if one factors in the above, one will have a different reflection of relative performances or one will appreciate the limitations of earlier governments.[/quote'] BJP wasn't in power in UP so long back. With Mulayam we got gundagardi and corruption, with Mayawati we got caste based politics and corruption, with BJP we got gundagardi, caste based politics and corruption. This assessment has nothing to do with my dislike of Modi, you can ask anyone on ICF from UP.

[randomGuy]

BJP wasn't in power in UP so long back. With Mulayam we got gundagardi and corruption' date=' with Mayawati we got caste based politics and corruption, with BJP we got gundagardi, caste based politics and corruption. This assessment has nothing to do with my dislike of Modi, you can ask anyone on ICF from UP.[/quote'] I am not at all accusing you of bias. I am just bringing out various factors. You maybe very right. They may have been a mess. But see the performances of BJP in Gujrat, MP, Chhattisgarh, Goa, punjab, Karnataka(barring yedurappa and reddy bros) and Bihar(till recently) today. Not withstanding the past, today ,they will be better than SP for UP

[The Outsider]

I am not at all accusing you of bias. I am just bringing out various factors. You maybe very right. They may have been a mess. But see the performances of BJP in Gujrat' date=' MP, Chhattisgarh, Goa, punjab, Karnataka(barring yedurappa and reddy bros) and Bihar(till recently) today. Not withstanding the past, [i']today ,they will be better than SP for UP

I give you MP and Chhatisgarh from that list. And no today they would not be better than SP, because they have the same tried and tested failures like Kalyan and Rajnath at the forefront.

[Sachin=GOD]

UPA Coordination panel to meet on July 31 on Telangana

The UPA Coordination Committee will meet on July 31 to finalise its stand on the vexed Telangana issue amid indications from Congress that carving out a separate state out of Andhra Pradesh is a foregone conclusion and that complexities involved in the process will be adequately addressed.

AICC General Secretary incharge of Andhra Pradesh Digivijay Singh and his predecessor Ghulam Nabi Azad have held separate discussions with Chief Minister N Kiran Kumar Reddy, PCC chief Botsa Satyanarayana and Deputy Chief Minister Damodar Rajanarasimha. The two leaders were understood to have conveyed to the state leadership that the party has made up its mind on the creation of Telangana and it was only a matter of time before it is announced.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/upa-coordination-panel-to-meet-on-july-31-on-telangana/1147868/0

[Sachin=GOD]

Creation of Telangana: Details emerge, Hyderabad to be a Union territory

HYDERABAD: Hyderabad is likely to be a Union territory for five years and will act as joint capital of the two states to be created out of the bifurcation of the present Andhra Pradesh. The Union territory will be administered by a lieutenant governor. The governor of the Telangana state will be the ex-officio lieutenant governor of Hyderabad in these five years. A proposal to this effect is going to be put up to the Union cabinet before August 5.

Highly placed sources privy to the proposals told TOI that the cabinet will also take a final call on whether to create Telangana or a Rayala-Telangana state. The former will consist of the ten districts of Telangana and the latter proposal envisages the addition of two Rayalaseema districts — Anantapur and Kurnool to the proposed Telangana state. Interestingly, the Andhra part of the bifurcated state will be called Andhra Pradesh. Sources told TOI that Congress party bosses are hopeful of completing this process within a week because Parliament convenes for the monsoon session on August 6.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/creation-of-telangana-details-emerge-hyderabad-to-be-a-union-territory/articleshow/21428600.cms?flstry=1

[Muloghonto]

India should ideally have 50+ states. It's absolute garbage that a state like UP exists as an administrative entity - 200 million people!! That's almost as much as the population of America. How can one expect it to be managed effectively with a state level apparatus!! :wall:

While the above is true, with India, as usual, there are big problems in implementing the above. One big reason why the central government has been muted towards splitting up states into smaller, more efficient units is because of the Gorkhaland issue: with each state created, Gorkhaland becomes a stronger and stronger issue. And creating a state right in the chicken's neck, comprising mostly of Nepalese origin people living in the area since the last 200 years, with a massive influx from Gorkhas booted from Bhutan in the last 20 years, would lead to a certain loss of influence, economy and ultimately Indian claim on the seven sister states & Sikkim. There is no way to deny Gorkhaland if we are going to create more states and there is no way the seven sisters & Sikkim remain Indian in the long run if Gorkhaland does get created ( which itself wont remain Indian for very long). So now what ?