jind Posted June 17, 2012 Posted June 17, 2012 Jind' date=' you seems to have massive chips up your shoulders..is some sort of fake poonjabi bravado, which you've displayed many a times using your other alter-egos?[/quote'] :hysterical: teri kyun jal rahee hai
punjabi_khota Posted June 17, 2012 Posted June 17, 2012 Jind where do you live ? Why don't you tell your friends and relatives (half of them who are probably in Canada or Australia) to move to Kashmir ? I am sure there are some australians and canadians who are not happy with 'changing demographics' in their countries.
jind Posted June 17, 2012 Posted June 17, 2012 did you even look at summary again?t... try reading it again to understand what it is saying
CSK Fan Posted June 17, 2012 Posted June 17, 2012 Refer to post #51 Which is very different from what you said before, hai na? As far as I know India got independence as one country and all Indians are free to go and live wherever they please in India
Crookbond Posted June 18, 2012 Posted June 18, 2012 What I still can't understand is that why bring Punjab into picture on this thread? Am I the only one who sees there's NIL connection between what's discussed and the thread title?
Mariyam Posted June 18, 2012 Posted June 18, 2012 Don't really think the discussion re:Ludhiana is the topic here, but since you bring it up, here are my counter points. However, here's my summary 1. Punjab already has high population density.. What exactly are you trying to convey here? http://www.mapsofindia.com/census2011/population-density.html Yes, Punjab has a population density well above the national average. But its still 5-6th among all the states , and I'm leaving aside city states and UTs- Delhi/ Chandigarh etc. Bihar has a population density twice that of Punjab. And a population roughly 4.5 times. So it is a bunch of people migrating from a higher density area to a lower density area. 2. The larger cities like Ludhiana which attract the largest migrants (1 in 5) don't have the infrastructure (i.e proper housing' date=' amenities,etc) to support an increasing population especially a migrant one i.e Bhaiyaas. Thus the poor though hardworking migrants setup in jhuggis/slums...which in turn are a breeding ground for future bigger slums.[/quote'] This is the story of development and urbanization in every part of the world. Mumbai. London. New York. Nairobi. etc The local Londoners viewed the people from the country with the same disdain as some of us here view migrants at the time industrialization kicked off in the UK. Mass migration and shabby living conditions for most of the working class. It took them quite some time to get their act right.
Lurker Posted November 29, 2012 Posted November 29, 2012 Bihar No. 1 in performance According to a Planning Commission report on the state finances, among the major states, which include Maharashtra, Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan, Bihar topped in terms of Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP). The report revealed that the GSDP of Bihar was 21.9 per cent during the 11th Five-Year Plan, which ended on March 31, 2012. The report, however, claimed that only Sikkim and Goa, which are much smaller in size than Bihar, have performed better than the state. But none of the major states could achieve over 20 per cent GSDP growth rate during the period. http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/nation/north/bihar-no-1-performance-377 http://www.dailypioneer.com/nation/111959-bihars-economic-growth-best-among-states-in-11th-plan.html http://www.financialexpress.com/news/bihars-economic-growth-best-among-major-states-in-11th-plan/1037589 Jiyo Nitish Kumar :dance:
Recommended Posts