Quota or no Quota - Whats ur take on it - Page 4

Originally posted by: souro

If the so called lowerd castes have become so developed and earns so much then why do they still need resevation?? 😕

Originally posted by: chal_phek_mat

I think you are missing the context here. The above has been supplied as a counter to argument was that the country is headed to a stone age because we have reservations and we have incomptetant rulers. This progress has been acheived by the NATION even when we have reservations, this proves we do not have incompetant rulers. So reservations arent really hurting the general progress of the country, in the meanwhile they are helping a section of the population that has been oppressed for centuries.

Some of the contributors to our progress have been from the underprivileged class, which is good, but we still have ways to go to make everyone from the underprivileged class as productive as the people from the privileged class

Hope this clarifies😉Nope. Now it becomes more complicated. 😉

Originally posted by: souro

So what you're saying is despite giving reservation in education and jobs, preference in promotion the lower castes have contributed only 'some' to our progress. Which essentially means that majority of the development and growth (except for the population) was achieved by people from general category. At present there is around one-fourth seats reserved for the lower castes. So, ideally for every 3 top contributors from the general category there should be atleast one from SC/ ST category. If that is not happening then in absence of any other reason we can safely conslude that they are not giving the desired contribution because of lack of competency which can only result because of selecting candidates who doesn't have enough merit.

Nope What I am saying is the country is not headed towards the stone age. For centuries we had reserved the education and the opportunities for the upper caste, now we are doing it for the lower caste people. It took about 20-25 centuries for the upper caste to grow to the level where they are now.

If you had to do statistics you should also account for the 20+centuries of sustained learning curve that the upper caste has over the 2000 years and the sharp learning curve that the lower castes have shown in the past 60 years

It's fairly known to everyone that many SC/ST candidates get ahead even though they lack merit just because they have reservation. And as I've mentioned earlier lack of merit results in under performance or in critical areas no performance at all. Which essentially means that the position and 'salary' in a job are actually given to them for free. When something is given to someone even though he has put no effort for it, we call it 'bheekh dena'. Yet, you said that no it was not 'bheekh'. Calling 'bheekh' by some other name won't change what it actually is.

Yaar again you are back to the whole meritocracy, what Merit are you talking about😆 Are you talking about the results one gets from attending exams😆 I dont know why there is so much of a fascination with education and writing exams in India, anyway the knowledge they teach in the education is ancient and has little signifance to what you see in real world

Talking about terminologies, Bheek is something you give someone for free, These kids pay just like everyone else, Whereas if you have to look at another term as "Stealing" as in the opportunity that our forefathers stole from generations of these underprivileged😉

Now, for the government part. India started emerging only after 1991 and really picked up since around 2000. So, it can easily be said that till 1991 the government of India was really incompetent.

sure😆, doesnt change the fact we are not in a stone age as the other debator said😉

Secondly, let's consider the growth rate. According to you majority of the development was due to general category and SC/ ST has only little contribution. We can logically conclude that the little contribution was actually made by those SC/ST who had the merit in the first place to acquire the position.

Now those undeserving SC/ST candidates who are not performing well are not only pulling down the growth but are actually increasing the work for the rest (because the comeptent will have to also handle the mess created by the incompetent). Which actually means if all the people in education and jobs were taken based solely on merit then the growth rate could have been much higher. Since, it's the government that is providing reservation then they're are the one that is responsible for dragging down the growth rate.

And if a government can't achieve the growth that is actually possible then invariably it is incompetent.

Not really it is the opportunity that was extended to them and only recently actually since 1990 that we have really gotten serious about the reservation thing, Remeber VP Singh, Arjun Singh, Mandal Ayog😉 So by the same logic since we have seen all the growth since 1990's and we have gotten serious about Reservations, Can we conclude

1. the growth has been because of competatant rulers

2. Reservations hasnt hurt our growth, in fact it has stimulated people to think in a different fashion and has spurted their growth. So what say we increase the reservation and we will see more growth😆

Oh and btw, don't compare the growth rate of India with that of the already developed nations. A student who used to barely pass suddenly getting 70% might pose an impressive growth but those students who were already scoring 90% are still above him and for them improving on that is much more difficult.

Again %ge of marks😆. The point is we are growing rapidly, we are almost a superpower now, economic and strategically whatever parameters you use😉

Originally posted by: chal_phek_mat

Not really it is the opportunity that was extended to them and only recently actually since 1990 that we have really gotten serious about the reservation thing, Remeber VP Singh, Arjun Singh, Mandal Ayog😉 So by the same logic since we have seen all the growth since 1990's and we have gotten serious about Reservations, Can we conclude

1. the growth has been because of competatant rulers

2. Reservations hasnt hurt our growth, in fact it has stimulated people to think in a different fashion and has spurted their growth. So what say we increase the reservation and we will see more growth😆

Originally posted by: souro

I'll reply in detail later. For now, just wanted to point out that the story of reservation started long back and not in 1990. If I remember correctly then it was something around 1920 or 1930s that it first started. Even if we ignore that, the copy pasted constitution prepared by Ambedkar had reservation clearly mentioned in it and that was in 1948-1950.

Originally posted by: chal_phek_mat

Not really it is the opportunity that was extended to them and only recently actually since 1990 that we have really gotten serious about the reservation thing, Remeber VP Singh, Arjun Singh, Mandal Ayog😉 So by the same logic since we have seen all the growth since 1990's and we have gotten serious about Reservations, Can we conclude

1. the growth has been because of competatant rulers

2. Reservations hasnt hurt our growth, in fact it has stimulated people to think in a different fashion and has spurted their growth. So what say we increase the reservation and we will see more growth😆

Originally posted by: chal_phek_mat

Nope What I am saying is the country is not headed towards the stone age. For centuries we had reserved the education and the opportunities for the upper caste, now we are doing it for the lower caste people. It took about 20-25 centuries for the upper caste to grow to the level where they are now.

If you had to do statistics you should also account for the 20+centuries of sustained learning curve that the upper caste has over the 2000 years and the sharp learning curve that the lower castes have shown in the past 60 years

Originally posted by: souro

^^Well what I see there is reservation started in early 1900s. In Independent India some revised reservation was implemented in 1953 and since then it has been amended, amended again and then amended some more.
So, your point is??

Originally posted by: souro

Actually in ancient ages, people in India used to be educated irrespective of their class. And in the Vedic period caste was just like what we've today, manual labourers, clerks, officers, managers, aristocrats, bureaucrats, etc. Castes were actually just a division of labour and people at that time could easily change their vocation and with that their caste. The caste system became more rigid but still opportunities to get educated or to learn some work were not taken away from anyone. That started happening only in the middle ages and became more pronounced when India became a country of small states with selfish rulers and became ultra conservative with the ascent of Islam. But do note a point here. It was not that only so called well publicised and frequently photographed dalit community that became oppressed. Anyone without money or connections were deprived of education. Only the ruling class and their cohorts were able to enjoy that 'luxury'. I'm not assuming or making it all up. Look at the the statistics: 5% population literate in 1901. Do you think whole of the general category people at that time used to make up only 5% of the population??

I think you are talking about the period of 200-300BC. You can look at the history of India and caste system the rigid nature of the caste system is observed from 200-300BC and it just got hardened. Almost everyone in the lower castes were poor. While there are poor in upper castes, they are not in the proportion and you can associate laziness and failure to seize opportunities with their lack of growth.

Okk I take it that you're not entirely pleased with the way merit is measured at present. Perfectly fine, maybe you have a better idea or at least you feel that it can be made better, which even I'll agree to.
So, let's say you devise a better way, Plan XYZ to test the merit before giving admission anywhere, education or jobs. What do you do next?? Reserve some seats for those whose performance are not upto the mark but belong to SC/ST??

I don't know about you but I'll expect only the best to get selected.

Well to identify the best you have to change the curriculum and you have to change the way you teach and you test. That is not going to happen anytime in this century. So I would prefer the current system with the reservation method and rather than delay everything till we come up with the best system, it is better to go ahead and just implement it right away. As illustrated earlier, it takes 50-60 years for such massive changes to happen

Opportunity that 1% out of those 5% stole from the whole population. Just because there are lots of reports on dalits and tons of photographs of them doesn't mean they were the only ones who were/are underprivileged. Btw, even when the lower castes used to get rich or powerful they used to act the same way.

However rich the kids from lower castes got, they never got the opportunities that the kids from upper caste got, b;cos we also had discrimination based upon caste's going on in parallel

And no those SC/ST kids don't have to pay and places where they have to, they are required to pay a lot less even though their parents might be some multi-millionaire.

But pay they and the rest of the tab is picked up by the govt, just like the education tab for the IIT's, IIM's😉

No, we're not in a stone age and I'm not concerned about what figure of speech some other debator used.
But it can't be denied that we're definitely losing the growth rate and advancement that we deserve and which will lead to a loss in competitive edge. And all that because we continue to deliberately take in incompetent people

We can run with 100% utilization with 30% capacity of people actually producing

But we are choosing to run at 50% utilization with 30% capacity of people actually producing while we are udiverting the 50% utilization to build up our capacity from 30 to 50-70% of population actually producing

By the approach we are taking currently we are aiming to acheive greater things in future with increased workforce. I say we are trying to improve the future of this company by this measures