READ ALSO: Obama's visit has opened new chapter in ties, Narendra Modi

says
Below are 15 big pluses from the Modi-Obama arrangement:
1. Nuclear logjam broken
The significance of the completion of the India-US nuclear deal cannot be overstated.
Signed in 2005, with an NSG waiver in 2008, the deal in limbo for a few years.
2. India crosses nuclear liability hurdle
Easier for companies to invest in India's nuclear power sector.
3. Funds flow of $4 billion
Obama announced $4 billion of new initiatives to boost trade/ investment ties, jobs in India
via Exim Bank and OPIC. Opened new source of financing for social development ventures
with an Indian Diaspora Investment Initiative.
READ ALSO: Nations become successful when women do well, Obama says
4. Clean energy boost
The $4 billion deals include $2 billion of leveraged financing for renewable energy
investment and $1 billion in loans for small medium businesses.
5. Made in the USA
US Exim Bank will finance a billion dollars to support 'Made in America' exports to India
over two years.
6. Make babudom accountable
Creation of a high-level India strategic and commercial dialogue to monitor progress on
pacts and vision statements. Will hold bureaucracy accountable on both sides.
7. Big agreements
Start discussions on the Totalisation Agreement & bilateral investment treaty. Commitment
from PM his office will track big projects.
8. Defence framework agreement
Renewed for 10 years and Defense Technology and Trade Initiative operationalized with
focus on co-development and coproduction in India for India and global market, should

boost 'Make in India'.

9. Defence equipment co-developed in India
The first four Raven mini UAVs, mobile hybrid power source, chemical/bio protection gear,
roll on-roll off intelligence, surveillance modules for C-130J aircraft.
10. More on climate change
Personal priority for both leaders. Indian industry working towards clean energy, US
extends support in this mission, agreement reached on climate change issues.
11. Message to China
Convergence on issue of East Asia-facing strategic initiatives. US, India and other AsiaPacific countries to work to strengthen regional ties, sending China a strong message.
12. Tracking terror
Both to increase cooperation. Similar to the Sept statement, Pak-based anti-India terror
groups named in joint statement. To share cyber threat information.

Is All The Fuss Over A PMs Suit Justified?

When Prime Minster wore a pinstripe bandhgala suit in his meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama, he didnt
know that his suit would result in a debate across the nation. The suit was not a normal suit as it had his name
embroidered all over it. Here, among all the controversy comes a thought, why the entire nation is making a fuss
about it? Is this debate over a PM justified?
Yes
- We live in a democratic nation, and if we praise for the good stuff, then we also have a right to criticize what we
think as irrational.
- Wearing a suit with a name embroidered on it is not a small matter, and is shockingly narcissistic. Such an attitude
of an individual, who is an icon of many people, will attract criticism.
- It is said action speaks louder than words. Then why PM or anyone else needs to wear a suit with name
embroidered all over it. Indians will appreciate if the PM guides them in right direction.
- Celebrities and politicians are extra-ordinary people in the eyes of common man. These are the people who will
always stay in limelight and there every step will attract controversy.
- The PMs sartorial taste has been praised in India and abroad. And, why not, after all what you wear is a part of

personality.
No
- PM is also a normal person who has a right to wear the clothes of his choice. All the debate over such a topic is
irrational.
- Even there are many fields like sports, airlines, hotels where the professionals have their name on the dress. No
one ever calls them narcissistic.
- It is the time to focus on the various other aspects where PM is performing or underperforming. A suit will not drive
any nation.
- Let us see the phrase action speaks louder than words from other perspective. Why there is a need to talk about a
dress, instead it is the time to debate over other important stuff. Forget the written words and focus on actions.
- Even Hosni Mubarak, the former Egyptian President used to wear suits with his name imprinted on them.
Conclusion
The life of celebrities and politicians will always remain in limelight. However, making a fuss just over PMs suit is not
justified. The opposition parties never praise Modi kurta or his fashion style, whereas the world recognizes it. It is a
not a big issue, and just because his suit has his name embroidered on it, doesnt make him self-proclaimed or a
megalomaniac.

Will Swachh Bharat Campaign Succeed?

PM Narendra Modi urged local masses to fulfill Mahatma Gandhi`s dream of Clean India. He launched the Swachh
Bharat Campaign at Rajpath in New Delhi. He called it as a paid homage to Mahatma Gandhi and former PM Lal
Bahadur Shastri, on their birth anniversary. He urged people that it is the social responsibility of Indian citizens to
accomplish Gandhiji`s vision of Clean India by year 2019. He even said that the vision can only come true only when
125 crore people of India work for it. Let us share our views on the matter. Will Swachh Bharat Campaign Succeed?
Yes
It is not wise to start thinking of the results first as it is said that perform actions without considering the results.
PM Narendra Modi came on the streets to start the mission, and this step cannot be ignored by his many followers.
PM initiated the chain by inviting nine public figures for campaign including Sachin Tendulkar, Shashi Tharoor,
Mridula Sinha, Baba Ramdev, Anil Ambani, Salman Khan, Priyanka Chopra, Kamal Hasan, and the entire team of
Tarak Mehta ka Oolta Chashma.
Gujarat, which was a destroyed state, after a series was natural disaster, was rebuilt by Narendra Modi, and he was
successful in making it a clean and prosperous state.
No
Every task needs follow up and just one day working to fulfill the vision will not convert Swachh Bharat Campaign
into reality.
The celebrities will also come for one day to promote the cause and will get busy with their schedules in future. It is
the same case with every person in India.

 The youngsters can only create hype on social media by sharing blogs, praising efforts of PM, and posting his
pictures. No one will take a broom and actually become a part of the movement.
In a economy where inflation is rising, growth is slowing, jobs are declining, who has got the time to devote to such
campaigns.
More than the cleaning drive, it is the people's attitude that needs a change. If we keep making our surroundings
dirty, we can never make India clean.
Conclusion
PM Narendra Modi is known for his actions. Whenever he starts a mission, gives everything to complete it. The
development of Gujarat is the finest example of his work. However, this time it is a big challenge where he needs to
change mentality of crores of people living in India. He has started well, and message is spreading well. It needs to
be continued by PM Modi by launching some or other form of measures to encourage the people for making the
vision of Swachh India a reality by 2019.

Politicians must a have retirement age

Introduction
Every profession has a retirement age, but there are a few exceptions and one of the them is
surely politics. There is a reason for having retirement age in every profession - after a certain
age ones efficiency is considered to reduce and it is time for him/her to retire from work & enjoy
the remaining life in peace. It is also essential as young need employments and one of the ways
to provide for this is by filling in the vacancies due to retirement. But when it comes to the rule
makers, no retirement age seems to apply. A recent suggestion by a senior congress party leader
Janardhan Dwivedi that politicians must retire from active politics post age 70 has started a
debate. So, what do you think? Should there be a retirement age in politics as well like any other
profession?
For
- We need young people to take up senior positions in political arena, which is only possible
when elders leave active participation in politics.
- Politicians are also human beings, and after a certain age they are also prone to age related
issues and thus for the same reason as there is a retirement age in other employment there should
be one for politicians

- Whilst senior politicians would have valuable knowledge & experience, generally they have a
more conventional approach which acts as a barrier to new thoughts & ideas
- Ideally, the retirement age should not be set very high i.e 70 but should be more in line with
retirement age set for other employment (age 60), and where a politician is considered as a
valuable mentor he/she could be involved as a consultant but not put directly in power.
- We have seen enough family dynasty in Indian politics and do not need any individual to hold
power until the next kin is ready to take up the position.
- Having a set retirement age for politicians would also ensure that a person knows that his reign
of power would end at a definite point of time and he may have to answer for any
misappropriation sooner rather than later.
Against
- Politicians are representatives of the public, and assume public office. In reality they are public
servants in service as long as the public considers them as suitable.
- If the public does not think they are suitable to perform required duties due to their age, then
they would not elect them as their representative in rajya/lok sabha elections
- Over the years, politician acquire great knowledge & experience, which cant be easily
replaced
- Politicians also play an important role in maintaining diplomatic relationships which may be
impacted by their retirement, and their successor may not be as successful
- Younger people in the party who lack legislative & administrative experience would need hand
holding & direction, this would be difficult without the knowledge & experience of veteran
politicians.
- Loosing senior politicians may also impact on public acceptability of the political party, as
there is a element of individual trust and goodwill involved.
Conclusion
Senior politicians have a wealth of knowledge & experience, which is essential for the role but in
order to ensure that one does not remain in seat of power indefinitely & young people are able to
take key positions in political arena, thus contribution fresh ideas and new perspective, it is
essential that politicians also retire at a predetermined age.

Smart Phones: Latest trend or harmful device.

Introduction:
Addiction to net and smartphones have become the most common issue in the modern era where
people devote most of their precious time using the device of latest trend whose harmful effects
are being described as equivalent to its utilities. Due to rapid growth of technology, the cost of
smartphones have been diminishing continuously which has enabled users to afford them. Indeed
it's a medium through which one can gain much knowledge. It acts like a whetstone for
sharpening human minds. Though it adds perfection to personality, it also has some negative
impacts, both symbolically and physically. The question arises whether it is the latest trend or a
harmful device? Have you noticed the negative effects of smartphones on your heath?
Latest trend:
1. A hand held smart device is convenient to use. Now a days smartphones and tablets help in
making work more easier than earlier where lots of individual efforts were required. It is helpful
in connecting people easily through phone calls, video call, received, messenger etc.
2. Smartphones and tablets with internet connection is a good company for solitude and those
suffering from depressions of loneliness. One can use their phones for continuously interacting
with other individuals which keeps him potentially connected all the time. Friends, family and
colleagues are now easier to connect with wherever and whenever you want to.
3. Smartphones have much utilities which are helpful for educational gain. Students can save
their time as they can use internet as their guide to education. They can learn many innovative
substance if they are genuinely interested. Many websites and video class are available in
internet which can be beneficial for them.
4. Online activities play very important role in modern trend. Business, shopping, banking, etc.
can be done online which provides the users with wide range of choice at competitively
reasonable price. Lots to time is saved which can be utilised for other important works.
5. It makes children active. Children these days are aware of various innovative things by the use
of only a single medium. Moreover they can also use it for entertainment- playing games, surfing
net, music, videos etc. At present times when recreation is confined in week days, children need
not to go outside to look for other children to play especially when it has become crucial to
safeguard children from the evil brewing everywhere.

6. Businessmen find it more convenient for work. Smartphones and tablets are now a substitute
of laptops which is indeed not that handy to be carried everywhere compared to tablets. They
make work easy and interesting to do.
7. There are various applications and utilities available for users which they might find helpful in
most of the tasks. The most important part is that its cost does not affect the purchasing power of
even poor section of society.
Harmful device:
1. Too much addiction to internet may bring 'netbrain' disorder. It is caused due to overuse of
internet and may result to narcissism, distraction and fear of missing out on things. Smartphone
users get affected three times more likely to this disease. 11% of the British adults are suffering
from this disease.
2. According to research those who are suffering from 'homophobia' are more likely to be found
gambling online, socialising on social networks, listening to music and playing video games.
Playing online games and surfing social websites have become common among youths now a
days and they miss out on physical sporting activities.
3. Student's life which is meant for studying, is affected because of misuse of smartphones. The
time which should be utilised for studying is being distracted by the use of smartphones. The
present technology is deteriorating county's future to some extent where parents are not careful
about the amount of time children donate with smartphones.
4. Kids who are addicted to technology rarely have any time to spare on outdoor sports which
can be a great damage to their health. They are away from those games which will be helpful in
having good and strong physique. Too much emphasizing on smartphones at young age can
cause vision problem.
5. Toxic phthalates are found on iPhone cables and which require warning labels on products
exposing consumers to phthalates. This lead to violation of 'Right to be informed' under
Consumer Protection Act. Thus consumers should be warned of its dangerous containments.
6. Staying connected to smartphones is hazardous for health. Repetitive use of phones for texting
and gaming may cause soreness in wrist and thumb, can put hand and fingers in risk of injury,
neck aches and other symptoms. Micro tears or soreness can heal with time but problem
regarding posture and neck aches can increase the pressure on the discs that cushions the bone of
neck.
Conclusion:

Though smartphones are helpful in every field, it causes certain disorder to human health.
Parents should look after their child that they should not misuse their gadgets. Smartphones are
the mobile phones having advance features similar to personal computers. Teenagers should be
aware of its harmful effects which is caused by regular use. Parents should help their child by
talking about its drawbacks. Though it is harmful, it is also useful. The use of smartphones
should be restricted to works and time spent on it should be limited to a few hours only.

Cricket should be the National Game of India

IPL has started and along with it the people have changed their work schedules to watch the IPL matches. Cricket
fever is one peoples mind and it is not for the first time. Indians are die hard fan of cricket. Whenever there is a
series, they forget all their tasks just to watch cricket. Does this means that Cricket should be the national game of
India?
Yes
Change is the law of nature. If it is what the local citizens of India demands, then the change should be welcomed.
People feel much more connected with the cricket and find it more entertaining than hockey.
If you look for overall craze of Indian citizens for any sport then it is for cricket only. Cricketers are treated like God in
Indian.
People often blame that government dont make any efforts to encourage other supports. But if the local people
dont support it then no efforts are useful.
Cricketers are rich and famous, and pay a large sum of money in taxes. It all comes from the game of cricket.
No
If cricket is made as national game of India then it will directly discourage the inclination towards other game.
It will greatly hurt the sentiments of the hockey players. It will give a wrong message to the other sports too.
Future can never be known by anyone. Today cricket is famous but if tomorrow some other sport will be famous
then again people can demand to change the national game.
It is the media, government and people who are responsible to make other games popular. It is not that hockey and
football have no fans, they do have, but there is no proper source to encourage the other games.
Cricket is the national game of England. So in one way are we making ourselves the complete slaves of British
culture?
Conclusion
If cricket is made the national game of India then there will be no additional benefit that cricket will get. Also, it will not
have any impact on the cricket fans. But definitely making cricket as a national game will attract a lot of criticism from
many other areas. It will give a wrong message to the youngsters and will hurt the spirit of game. Therefore, it makes
no sense in making Cricket as our national game.

Will Indo-US Nuclear Deal Attract Backlash Of Opposition Parties?

India and the US came together on same platform and broke the seven-year-old blockage in operationalising the civil
nuclear agreement. The government announced that the deal is done. However, the opposition party and other
participants including media believe that BJP has offended its own position while making the nuclear agreement. Let
us discuss the topic, Will there be a political backlash on nuclear deal?
Yes: There are certain factors that raise questions on the deal- The government will require signing the CSC under which operators and not suppliers are responsible for any
nuclear accident. It indicates that in event of any nuclear accident, India and not the US will be held responsible.
- Coming to the US, it has even signed the CSC in 2008. However, it had kept a reservation clause under which it
cannot be held liable for any form of settlement disputes and procedures. The question here is whether the US will
allow India to keep a reservation clause this time?
- Ravi Shankar Prasad and Murli Manohar Joshi said in 2013 that with Indo-US nuclear deal, Congress us trying to
weaken the liability of manufacturers as far as atomic reactors are considered, and it will not be acceptable. However,
now the BJP itself is putting up the security of Indians and sovereignty of nation on stake.
- If the BJP government tries to ratify the CSC act, it will indirectly have an impact on the liability clause.
- The nuclear agreement has failed to address Section 46.
No
- The former UPA government was the one who proposed the mechanism of an insurance pool, and therefore there
should not be any issues related to the deal.
- The taxpayers money is always used by the nation for development purposes, and again this time 50% contribution
will come from government of India and rest 50% from the suppliers who have got stake in the project.
- The opposition parties will consider the growth and welfare of the nation from long-term perspective. The deal will
help India to become one of the energy exporters by 2040/2050. The contribution of taxpayers money should be
considered as an investment in Indias future.
- The administrative arrangements and liability provisions finalized under the 123 act are consistent with the IAEA
safeguards and bilateral legal contracts and arrangements.
Conclusion
A political backlash will certainly take place as the BJP government has failed to provide any clarity on the liability
clause that has been incorporated. There is no doubt that nuclear agreement can open new ways of growth for Indian
economy. However, any loopholes in the deal will put Indians at a great risk. It is therefore essential for the BJP
government to come clear on the agreed nuclear deal so that the people and opposition parties can know what the
government has decided for the nation.

Arvind Kejriwal is an Anarchist: Narendra Modi

Introduction:

Launching BJPs poll campaign for Delhi assembly elections, PM Modi, said that if the AAP chief Arvind kejriwal
wants to be an anarchist as he claimed to be, he should go to the naxals as Delhi cannot have anarchy. He further
taunted that anarchist cannot run the government. Kejrival had said about a year ago that he is an anarchist. Yadav
came to the defense of his party member by saying that Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was another politician who
also believed in anarchy. Is Arvind Kejriwal anarchist or is it just BJPs election strategy that got the AAP leader a
wind up of his own words?
For:
1. Kejriwal bears an arrogant attitude as he like to charge unproved statement against any politician and call
everyone corrupt. He may be called anarchist on grounds of evidence that he spared no politician when it came to
defaming them to propagate the good deeds of his own party.
2. He is always fervent when it comes to getting the fights on show on roads, dharnas are his personal attack
weapons and he believes in unorthodox opinion such as spycams, stings and people singing which are the ideologies
and entities of anarchist. Anarchy could be the right way to fight against corruption but when it gets to extremities, we
do get naxals and aggressors.
3. Kejriwal is not the only leader who mastered protests for benefits of the people and took the courage to call himself
an anarchist but there is no defying the fact that M.K. Gandhi was also an anarchist leader from Gujarat. His
measures for protest were peaceful and non-violent just as Arvind Kejriwal has been in doing since AAP saw the
dawn of emergence.
4. Kejriwal has spoken about direct democracy instead looking to the state for individual freedom and his way of
putting plans to action makes him closer to the title of an anarchist. His intentions might be good but the way he
implements them earned him the title by Modi.
Against:
1. Anarchist signifies a person who seeks to overturn by violence all constituted forms of government, with no
purpose of establishing any system of order. Till date not even a single incident cannot be recalled where Arvind
kejriwal revolted with violence or encouraged other AAP member to adopt violence as a means to get their plans into
action.
2. Kejriwal is not an anarchist. He protest against the customs which that have been constantly destroying lives of
common people in India. Others support him not because they are forced or enrolled in political parties or AAP
member but because of having good faith on him, for the man he is and for the ideologies he holds close.
3. Kejriwal is a man of unadulterated mind and anarchy can never reside in such a mind. If he demands real
accountability and persuades people not to pay unrealistic electricity bill, to take a stand against corruption, not
comprising the action against the inability of the police to protect women, its not anarchy. It could be the modernized
tool to get rid of corruption.
4. Though he adapts means such as dharnas for people's good, he also went by his fundamentals by adopting fair
measures under law and rolled out helplines, abandoned Janata Darbars and discarded the VIP-neta tag.
5. Anarchism rejects all forms of state authority and embraces self-rule. He never rejected order in any sense of
terms. Anarchy means without any ruler and nothing about Kejriwal suggests that he is in terms with such type of rule
in India; he is himself a great leader the kind that India will need in times to come.
6. Modi taunted Kejriwal as anarchist only for opposing him and to present before the public negative terms about the
competitive party by making personal remarks against him. Protesting and staging dharna is not the only work of AAP
but it has also got several other achievements at the same time which cannot be ignored.
Conclusion:
Instead of calling him an anarchist he may better be called a crusader who continues to struggle against the statue of
the system that doesn't respond to any other means which influence people to support him with the opinion that a

street protestor can only set the system right. It is very evident that Kejriwal honors the laws and regulation as he
never adopted violence as a means for protest. A year back, Kejriwal said that he is an anarchist and PM Modi points
it out now to defeat him. Its doesn't seemed favorable for the PM to make such statement for opposing any leader.
Thus Arvind Kejriwal it's not an anarchist but a true leader who works for growth of nation.

Whatsapp is killing minds!

A Saudi man divorced his wife after she ignored his whatsapp messages. The husband said that his wife used to
spend all her time on whatsapp messaging platform. Due to the addiction, she even ignored her children. Whatsapp
is not a new thing in the market. Even the people who are not educated are well aware of the messaging platform.
The messaging app that started as a boon can turn into a bane, if not used carefully. It is killing mind of people. Do
you agree?
Yes
The youngsters are getting addicted to the messaging platform like other addictive substances. It is more of an
addiction rather than convenience.
People are not using the messaging platform for connecting with friends or relatives instead they just want to check
out the their presence on messaging platform.
A messaging platform connects people, but whatsapp is creating bridges between people. The app, in many cases,
is creating unnecessary doubts in relationships.
The start as well as end of the day happens with whatsapp. And, if people dont find any messages they start feeling
low.
People are so occupied with the use of whatsapp that they are unable to differentiate between real and factual
relationships. We can easily notice that while you are talking all the time to your friends on Whatsapp, you hardly
have an interaction with your immediate family. This also points out the fact that while people have a lot of friends on
Whatsapp network, there's hardly any friend available whom they can talk out their heart face to face.
No
Whatsapp has become the largest messaging app, and it is just because it has allowed people to come closer to
each other.
There are some people who are not involved in any work, and such people are only addicted to whatsapp, not
everyone.
Whatsapp has allowed the school friends and distant relatives to come and talk at one place. It doesnt kill mind but
helps the people to cherish the old good memories and relationships.
In a world, where people dont have time to meet friends, whatsapp has allowed people to share their problems with
friends on messaging platform regardless of time and location.
Whatsapp is now even used by many firms and organizations for sharing of important information among
employees.
If used properly, Whatsapp can help generate new business opportunities and close the existing deals faster.
Conclusion

Every thing in this world has two sides, one positive and one negative. The use of Whatsapp is no different. It is not a
black or white app, but a grey app whose pros and cons are decided by the user himself. The people are more
isolated than before in the present world. Some make their world better by using the app, and some make
themselves more isolated after using this app. In all the cases, balance is the key.

Bullet trains in India: pros and cons

While the country seemed excited when Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced a diamond quadrilateral of bullet
trains to connect the four major cities of Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata and Chennai in his venture called Smart cities
project, critics have a lot to say. There are reasons to be happy about this project and there are reasons that drive us
to ponder if this is the first priority of a nation with majority of its population below poverty line. Let us look at it from all
point of views and generate our own opinion on this.
Pros of Bullet trains:
1. Speed: High speed is one of the biggest reasons for the proposal of this idea when it was first initiated in India.
Major cities connecting with towns of economic growth face the problem of fast transportation. This would save time
and boost businesses amongst the connected cities. Reduction in commuting time is greatly required in Mumbai and
other metro cities where a lot of time is consumed in the process.
2. Comfort: These trains would utilize high grade technology to provide comfortable journey of long hours within just
a few hours. Improvising on the comfort level of train journeys have been a missing factor in Indian railways and the
introduction of bullet trains would be a great development in this factor.
3. Safety: Earlier there were questions raised on the safety issues of these high speed trains but the Shinkansen
network of Japan shows excellent records of safety. Ever since the bullet trains started in 1964, the Shinkansen has
reported zero fatalities.
4. Avoid overcrowding: Making commuting easier from small town to major cities would lessen the crowd of
settlement and migration in major cities which would reduce pressure on growing urban areas. Chief Minister has
rightly mentioned decongestion of Bangalore as one of the reasons for the bullet train.
5. Stronger and eco-friendly: Not only these High speed trains are stronger enough to carry heavier weight but are
also eco-friendly as they do not require deforestations to set tracks. It is a modern and technologically advanced
means of transportation which can be a step towards growth and development in India.
Cons of bullet trains:
1. Cost of construction: The cost of laying a bullet-train corridor is estimated to cost up to Rs 100 crore a kilometre.
After summing up the costs of signals, rolling stock, etc, the cost can rise up to Rs 115 crore a km. Operation and
maintenance costs would also be high.
2.High fares: Fares of these trains would be high too in order to compensate the expenses and maintenance. One
way fare on Mumbai-Ahmadabad route is projected to be around Rs 5,000. Quite few Indians would be able to afford
travelling with these expenses. And even those who would be willing to pay such a high price might prefer travelling
planes instead. If this factor is not considered, then the project might prove to be a loss for the government.
3.Time consuming project: The project is at its initial level of planning and it is predicted that the implementation of
the plan would take years. In between if there is a change in government, and then the project could face the
consequences.

4. Land acquisition: For laying tracks, there would be issues of land acquisition which might trigger anger amongst
commoners whose everyday living might come under menace. For instance laying these tracks in Mumbai would
require acquisition of land which has the largest slums in the city.
5. Other issues: This project might have other issues under Indias present condition including plaguing of power
sector, choice of speed and gauge, minimum length of the route for the viability of the project, etc. It is important to
understand whether or not India is ready for this change.
Conclusion:
Bullet train has sets of pros and cons under Indias present situations and they need to be properly handled so that it
brings prosperity and development in the country and not debacles. Every factor must be considered wisely and
safeguarding of peoples living should not be compromised. There are risks in this project but without risks nothing
big can be acquired.

Should Delhi be granted Statehood?

Structure of Delhi government
- Delhi, a Union Territory, is the Capital of India, officially known as the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
- At the time of Independence Delhi was administered by a chief commissioner and after a few changes the
Metropolitan Council was set up in 1966. This Council had deliberative rights through which they provide
recommendations to legislate.
- Political administration of the NCT of Delhi closely resembles that of a state of India, with its own legislature, high
court and an executive council of ministers headed by a Chief Minister by Government of the National Capital
Territory of Delhi (GNCT) Act passed in 1991.
- Assembly has all rights like all other states powers to govern and make laws except on three subjects like public
order, police and land.
- The National Capital Territory of Delhi is divided in to three sub territories MCD, NDMC and NCT all of which are
governed by separate bodies, some of who are elected, others are appointed by the central govt.
- MCD: Municipal Corporation of Delhi is an elected body with a mayor as its head.
-NDMC : New Delhi Municipal Corporation is governed by a council with a chairman appointed by the central
government and includes the chief minister of Delhi.
- NCT : National Capital Territory is headed by the lieutenant governor who also happens to be the chairman of the
Delhi Development Authority (DDA).
- Civic bodies and Delhi Police come under the Union home ministry.
- Delhi Development Authority reports to the Union urban development ministry.
Argument against granting statehood to Delhi
1. Being a national Capital, it is home to central ministry and a large number of administrative buildings.
2. Delhi Hosts foreign dignitaries, guides foreign investments which are under the jurisdiction of Centre.
3. Statehood will encourage regionalism in Delhi where people from all over India come and stay.

4. Delhi police are responsible for VIP security which is huge task. Many of these VIPs being related to central
government, their security cant be left to the state.
Argument favoring statehood to Delhi
1. Law and Order is a serious problem for which the elected minister cant be held responsible
2. Delhi is a territory being ruled by central government as well as local government bodies that do not report to the
Elected Chief Minister.
3. Number of conflicts arise because of three elected bodies - Central, state and municipal bodies.
4. Government of Delhi to function autonomously, and provide a better service to the people.
5. Six different agencies handle drains, sewerage and water pipes. Five civic bodies and the PWD look after
maintenance of the roads thereby leading to chaos of single work handled by too many bodies.

Women are better managers

Rajani Sharma 01-2-2012 05:44 AM
Art of management is a gift to women by nature. Women are born to take responsibilities and perform them
flawlessly. They can easily manage everything without a crease on their forehead.
For
- Women are the ones who are expected to handle various responsibilities from the childhood which makes them a
good multi-tasker.
- Be it managers in the top companies or the ones who are managing their homes, women in all areas manage their
work flawlessly.
- Their inherent qualities make them good managers as they are more patient in the difficult situation and are able to
manage situations with their positive attitude and calm mind compared to their counter partners.
- They have the quality of managing their children and are simultaneously able to concentrate on their career.
Against
- Women are very emotional and soft hearted which is considered as a weakness in managing things. They are not
practical about the situations.
- They might be good at managing things at home but this same strategy cannot be applied in the external
environment where they have to work for an organization.
- They might have all the qualities of managing like courage, patience, understanding etc but these are not the only
key qualities required to manage a vast workforce or other difficult situations.
- Today we have progressed a lot but there are many women who are not given a chance to prove themselves or are
not given enough responsibilities to showcase their potential.
- A woman alone wont be able to manage things if she is not supported by her family members.
We all are born with some weakness and strengths. In the same way women also have some strengths and
weakness. They have the power to change their weakness into their strengths. If she does that then there is no
stopping for her.

Globalization, as a power of prosperity is in trouble

No one can forget the financial crisis of 2008, as it was one of the most distressful conditions that made people
believe that world would go back into the isolationism. However, today these fears seem subsided, but restrict the
policymakers in many nations to thoroughly evaluate the benefits of globalization. Regulators in America and Europe
have decided to save their financial institutions against contagion from abroad. So, does it indicates that
Globalization, as a power of prosperity is in trouble?

Yes
- Multilateral trade didnt materialize in 2008, and after that many nations have classified their liberalization measures
into regional agreements with like-minded neighbors, like the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
- Big emerging markets like China, India, Russia and Brazil represented a more interventionist approach that
depends on government-directed lending and industrial policy. It was meant to boost domestic sellers.
- The world GDP is not encouraging, and negative trends can be seen on financial capital and direct investment
inflows.
- The existing dualism between economic globalization and the political sphere restricted within the national borders
can prove to be fatal.
- In the present world, international commerce takes place in goods as well as services, and can consist of movement
of staff, investments and ideas across borders. However, with the increased number of categories, the governments
also have more number of means to disadvantage foreign firms.
No
- The volume of global trade relative to world GDP after financial crisis declined sharply, but bounced. It indicates
globalization has not reversed.
- WTO issued "World Trade Report 2013" which states there was rise in global trade in new emerging markets,
encouraged by trade reforms in China and India. It boosted the ratio of global trade to world GDP from almost 20% to
30% approximately.
- During this period, the world witnessed a sharp decline in world poverty. A large percentage of people in India and
China got rid from a life of impoverishment as they jumped into the lower middle class.
- After the crisis in the 1930s, the world had taken a u-turn towards protectionist direction. It was not the same case
after 2008. The crisis resulted in protectionist measures like producer subsidies, anti-dumping duties, most of which
were piecemeal and ad hoc.
- The starting gains from market openness in India and China seem to end leading return of manufacturing to the
U.S. It doesnt indicate that globalization is in trouble but rebalancing of economic activity across the world.
Conclusion
The financial crisis forced the nations to opt for protectionist measures. It is more or less good for the world economy.
The world prepares itself for a much better form of globalization. The growth may be slow, but will come with stability
and sustainability. The protectionist measures have not resulted in a large closing of markets. The world trade
rebounded four years ago and has been rising steadily ever since.