jalebi_bhai Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 and again' date=' [b']WTH is khujli's party doing protesting against this bill? These posers got the mandate to govern delhi, not obstruct development, I am truly disappointed :omg: Bhai, do hafton mein aapko kya hua?
gs Posted February 25, 2015 Posted February 25, 2015 :omg: Bhai, do hafton mein aapko kya hua? :giggle:
randomGuy Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 The goal of a business is to make a profit. Tomorrow, if robots are needed to make the products more competitive, business will replace people with machines. See how manufacturing moved to China and Mexico from some of the developed countries. These mega companies are doing exactly what you accuse the land owners to be doing - exploiting resources in relatively poor countries and creaming profits unethical cos. exploit people n other resources, ethical cos. do not. They help build infrastructure, provide jobs, increase exports. Infra space(the ppp projects), power generation n distribution etc in India are not that profitable if you look at their balance sheets. Business n investment needs all the encouragement and incentives and not have old known obstacles. Ind is actually in a good position right now. What it should do is go for what is coming next rather than just blindly ape west. Before embarking on development initiatives, Ind should first understand properly what is suitable for it india shouldnt keep delaying things. we want people to come out of agriculture and move to tier 2 , tier 3 cities, create more services and manufacturing jobs . its not desirable tht 60% of population continues to live in villages. Many people in India, including the poor, voted for BJP because they wanted Modi to be the PM. The last thing that the PM wants is to create unnecessary controversy by not considering an issue from 360 degrees and viewing everything from a development perspective. As I said, the definition of ideal development itself is debatable in context to countries such as Indiaoppositions role has been reduced to creating drama, oppose block everything for selfish political gains. this is the bad part of democracies
randomGuy Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 :omg: Bhai, do hafton mein aapko kya hua? was under the false impression tht they would restrict themselves to governing delhi for an year atleast:((
Khalpat Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 We want jobs for all our youth and future generation. Who is going to provide them these jobs going forward? It will be private sector only government cannot employee millions of youth on its own. I guess now the time has come that we need to come out of stereotyping all the industrialists and give them due credit. In this process we will surely have someone like Adani and Ambani getting profit afterall that is what there major target is. If they will not get profit, they will not run the business and if they will not run then business the number of unemployees will increase. Ofcourse government will have to monitor them and take neccesary action if they are violating any laws. Now coming to Land Reforms, what I can understand is hypothetically there is an area identified by government for some development task. Now if suppose there are total of 1000 farmers in the area because of that project, land will be taken over by government of suppose 100 farmers. The 900 will remain as it is. Now the scenario for 100 farmers, suppose one of the farmer having two small children has 1 acre of land and today he is not willing to give his land to government as the earning due to land is sufficient for him. But what will happen to him going forward, as the two children will grow the 1 acre land will be divided into two portion and his two kids will be earning half of what their father was earning. It will be a disastrous scenario when the two persons will be 2-3 kids each , that land will not be able to feed a single family. Second scenario: If the farmer agress , he gets handsome compensation , he can invest the money in education of his two children. Government uses the land for industry which in turn generates employment and the farmers as well as many other kids can have a good future. But there is a catch, the farmer who has given his land will have to dilligently invest his money. If like few of the Greater Noida farmers he uses it for living lavishing life and spends it, they will not be left with anything. I know Mr Modi is in hurry as he wants a second term but this whole hurried implementation might backfire. My suggestion to government is acquire the land but make sure that the farmers future is secure.
someone Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 Politicians opposing the Land bill are all landlords with vested interests The helpless BJP spokesperson should also read it. It's unfortunate that many people's mindset is still struck in the 60's. People who are against this land bill themselves are the actual anti-farmer ones. And the less said about Anna Hazare the better. Since his pathetic adventure with Mamta Banerjee for LS elections, he really has lost it.
zen Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 unethical cos. exploit people n other resources, ethical cos. do not. They help build infrastructure, provide jobs, increase exports. Infra space(the ppp projects), power generation n distribution etc in India are not that profitable if you look at their balance sheets. Business n investment needs all the encouragement and incentives and not have old known obstacles. No corp will enter in a venture if it is not profitable. It is hard to know which companies are ethical or which are not. For e.g. Nike used to have sweatshops in Asia. Only recently, Apple started to monitor its suppliers. In Ind, companies such as Enron had tried to set up shop as well - A due diligence process should be in place to ensure that Indians are not exploited india shouldnt keep delaying things. we want people to come out of agriculture and move to tier 2 , tier 3 cities, create more services and manufacturing jobs . its not desirable tht 60% of population continues to live in villages. There is no such compulsion where people from rural areas have to be moved to cities. The infrastructure in the cities itself is lacking to support existing population .... The idea behind many of these govt. schemes, including adopt a village, is to make rural India economically strong (I think that is how it should be) .... Assuming that most of agricultural land would be in rural and semi urban areas, these development initiatives could in fact help to bring people back to such areas oppositions role has been reduced to creating drama, oppose block everything for selfish political gains. this is the bad part of democracies Yes, national interests should be above politics. However, I do believe that the Land Bill could have been brought in by the govt in haste. A bill such as this one should require inputs from key stakeholders. Let's not forget that there is a lot to be done in the agricultural sector as well. India is not a leader when it comes to productivity. And ofc the supply chain infrastructure is lacking as well Response in "red" in the quote above
randomGuy Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 No corp will enter in a venture if it is not profitable. It is hard to know which companies are ethical or which are not. For e.g. Nike used to have sweatshops in Asia. Only recently, Apple started to monitor its suppliers. In Ind, companies such as Enron had tried to set up shop as well - A due diligence process should be in place to ensure that Indians are not exploited Infra,mining, power generation, distribution etc space are not very profitable yar and companies are massively debt ridden (some beyond redemption). Jaiprakash Associates Limited: Market Cap = 6000cr., Net worth =10000 Cr Debt = 60500cr FY14 loss = 824 Cr Bhushan Steel Limited: Market Cap = 2000Cr., Net worth =9000Cr Debt = 32000cr FY 15 loss= 912 Cr On top of these difficulties, people want to further discourage investment by blocking land acquisition . And since innocent janata doesnt understand these things, they get fooled by these selfish politicians.
randomGuy Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 There is no such compulsion where people from rural areas have to be moved to cities. The infrastructure in the cities itself is lacking to support existing population .... The idea behind many of these govt. schemes' date=' including adopt a village, is to make rural India economically strong (I think that is how it should be) ....[/quote'] The need is that people move to tier 2 and tier 3 cities and into satellite towns of big cities Delhi, Mumbai. (focus on affordable housing , 100 smart cities). Land is needed when a city expands too. Many Indians live n work in IT in Bangalore, Hyderabad, Gurgaon Noida pune etc. Most of the land where these IT cos. are located is actually farming land acquired from these land owners. Imagine what land not being acquired would have meant for economy.
zen Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 Infra,mining, power generation, distribution etc space are not very profitable yar and companies are massively debt ridden (some beyond redemption). Jaiprakash Associates Limited: Market Cap = 6000cr., Net worth =10000 Cr Debt = 60500cr FY14 loss = 824 Cr Bhushan Steel Limited: Market Cap = 2000Cr., Net worth =9000Cr Debt = 32000cr FY 15 loss= 912 Cr On top of these difficulties, people want to further discourage investment by blocking land acquisition . And since innocent janata doesnt understand these things, they get fooled by these selfish politicians. Every sector would have its benchmarks for profitability and ROI - I was referring to that For example, Apple and Samsung would be more profitable vs. Blackberry. What would be the point if I post Blackberry's result and try to imply that this sector is not that profitable and needs assistance :dontknow:
randomGuy Posted February 26, 2015 Posted February 26, 2015 Every sector would have its benchmarks for profitability and ROI - I was referring to that For example, Apple and Samsung would be more profitable vs. Blackberry. What would be the point if I post Blackberry's result and try to make a point that this sector is not that profitable :dontknow: Ofcourse, but in this particular area, the risks, the debt, the uncertainty, the dis-incentives are many. You wont get much investment in this area in present circumstances . yes, you should try n see that cos. dont get windfall gains and get reasonable gains for their investment
surajmal Posted February 27, 2015 Posted February 27, 2015 This buddah went senile a few decades ago.
The Outsider Posted March 4, 2015 Posted March 4, 2015 What is your proposal then? I'm talking about specifics here. I support the ordinance, on account of my family's experience. Financially, we benefited greatly when Mangalore Airport became an international airport (we are based in Bajpe). We lost a few cents of land, for which we were well compensated, but property prices more or less quadrupled-quintupled once the process of internationalization was complete (they started rising as soon as work began). In between acquisition and internationalization, people bought plots in and around the area with what they got from the govt. Once internationalized, some people sold their land for huge profit, others, like my dad, held on to theirs. To this day, my dad gets very lucrative offers from various people for a plot of land that is just shy of an acre. On the ground, everyone is happy and proud of the developments. The proposed ordinance can work and benefit all parties involved. My ideal solution is to have a free market where buyer and seller come to whatever conclusion. Obviously, that's not possible for projects like railway and the use of force to grab land. So, my solution is anything above 4 times the genuinely calculated land value must be given. This is in addition to social and environmental impact assessments. Makes little point to convey personal experience. We own a mango Bagh worth X Rupees. I would not sell it even if I am offered 50X because I am not in need of that money and I love to go there every summer and have mangoes lying under the trees on a charpai with my family. It's a reflection of the hard work my ancestors put in. Give me one compelling reason I should sell it.
diga Posted March 4, 2015 Posted March 4, 2015 My ideal solution is to have a free market where buyer and seller come to whatever conclusion. Obviously, that's not possible for projects like railway and the use of force to grab land. So, my solution is anything above 4 times the genuinely calculated land value must be given. This is in addition to social and environmental impact assessments. Makes little point to convey personal experience. We own a mango Bagh worth X Rupees. I would not sell it even if I am offered 50X because I am not in need of that money and I love to go there every summer and have mangoes lying under the trees on a charpai with my family. It's a reflection of the hard work my ancestors put in. Give me one compelling reason I should sell it. because you dont want to eat mangoes in jaahilistan
The Outsider Posted March 4, 2015 Posted March 4, 2015 because you dont want to eat mangoes in jaahilistan Oh Dear! The jaahil who asked for my religious affiliation has responded with his usual garbage!
Desi Cartman Posted March 4, 2015 Posted March 4, 2015 Return of Anna Hazare Forget the right or wrong price, a lot of people have not been paid any money. The new regulations make it even worse where to even sue, the poor land owner will have to file an application to get permission to sue. Why can't they add a rule stating that payments have to be made within 3 months of acquisitions, is that too hard?
surajmal Posted March 4, 2015 Posted March 4, 2015 sickulars batting for landowners?!!!! wtbf Oh wait. UPA law prevented anyone buying land legally. With the armies of goondas of these sickos running around, only they would have had the means to acquire land, since law don't mean much to these people anyway.
Khalpat Posted March 4, 2015 Posted March 4, 2015 My ideal solution is to have a free market where buyer and seller come to whatever conclusion. Obviously, that's not possible for projects like railway and the use of force to grab land. So, my solution is anything above 4 times the genuinely calculated land value must be given. This is in addition to social and environmental impact assessments. Makes little point to convey personal experience. We own a mango Bagh worth X Rupees. I would not sell it even if I am offered 50X because I am not in need of that money and I love to go there every summer and have mangoes lying under the trees on a charpai with my family. It's a reflection of the hard work my ancestors put in. Give me one compelling reason I should sell it. Fair enough from the point of view of a big Land Owner. But what should a government do if your Mango Bagh comes in the way of a proposed expressway which is going to reduce the time taken to reach from New Delhi to Lucknow and in return boost the economy of state. And what if like you there are hundred big land owners who do not want to sell their land as they are already millionaire. Practically we cannot compromise the economy of state just because you want to have mangoes lying under the trees on a charpai.
The Outsider Posted March 4, 2015 Posted March 4, 2015 Fair enough from the point of view of a big Land Owner. But what should a government do if your Mango Bagh comes in the way of a proposed expressway which is going to reduce the time taken to reach from New Delhi to Lucknow and in return boost the economy of state. And what if like you there are hundred big land owners who do not want to sell their land as they are already millionaire. Practically we cannot compromise the economy of state just because you want to have mangoes lying under the trees on a charpai. I am not sure if you've followed my other posts on the thread where I've clearly said that in cases like railroad, power lines etc. there is little choice for the government but to acquire land. However, the government should have nothing to do in helping Fortis make a hospital or Amity build a college. These should be left entirely to the private parties with the government's role limited to seeing there is no force involved.
Recommended Posts