[cyberhippie]

Inspired by a discussion elsewhere, which got me pretty riled, I was wondering what other people thought of the idea that Indians who try to better their life, by leaving behind the norms of their class and upbringing and aim for greater things in life, are just downright greedy.

The discussion on another forum seemed to veer in the direction that somehow Goan's are greedy because they don't follow the norms seen in other parts of India, they charge more for a taxi, food is getting more expensive, even shops are making quite extensive mark ups on the M.R.P.


This is seen by many people as an obvious sign of dishonesty and greed.
As Europe is exactly the same I don't expect to pay the same prices in say San Tropez as I would in Prague or Budapest..................
So why should India which is just as large and diverse have to follow the norms of the lowest common denominator.
I've seen a similar mindset about India's middle Class, as if they are somehow traitors to the country for garnering affluence whilst there remains much poverty in India.....SO?

I don't agree, wherever you go in the world tourist spots always try and cash in on the yearly influx of tourism.
So why shouldn't Indians/Goans do just the same, I see this a lot in India, there seems to be an unwritten rule that India should stay cheap and Indians shouldn't get ideas above their station, pretty damm selfish IMHO, especially when people add the tag to benefit future tourists

It seems totally natural to me that people should try and better their lives and one way of doing that is showing better profits.
If that means tourists get hit in the pocket...........Well I'm not complaining.

I've seen a similar mindset about India's middle Class, as if they are somehow traitors to the country for garnering affluence, whilst there remains much poverty in India.....SO?


In the case of Goa it's not all about greed, bank loans have gotten more expensive as have hire purchase agreements. The costs incurred for hiring a piece of land to put a restaurants has shot up in recent years. Bribery costs are at an all time high, petrol and Gas cost more, the market is more expensive for fish etc and the bottom line is that people just have bigger aspirations in life.
They no longer want a Hero Cycle, they want TVs, cars, new houses, better clothes, their kids in school. In short they want the things most in the west already take for granted. Should we deny them???

Where should we draw the line, a scooter, a car a house??

Where locals get hit in the pocket by the price increases inherent in all this I've a modicum of sympathy but isn't that what India has embraced, capitalism. So there will be winners as well as losers.

Whinging tourists who's only take in the whole thing is India is getting expensive for me I have little or no sympathy for. You've always got a choice and this idea that Indian should be acheap playground for us relatively rich Gora is just too much to swallow.

So what do you all think, should Indians be allowed to better themselves by stepping out of the poverty cycle and charging more for services and goods????

[noflylist]

Couple of Random thoughts,

I believe in market economics, prices will hold whatever the market can bear and eventually correct itself. Price is always "fair" when two people agree on it.

Locals, have a right to living wages as in west. Thing to define is what are living wages and what is minimal lifestyle to aspire to. Your local bhelpuriwala, needs to have income to support family and education for kids. Just because he is bhelpuriwala does not mean, his lifestyle is expendable.

[cyberhippie]

Quote

Locals, have a right to living wages as in west. Thing to define is what are living wages and what is minimal lifestyle to aspire to. Your local bhelpuriwala, needs to have income to support family and education for kids. Just because he is bhelpuriwala does not mean, his lifestyle is expendable.

Exactly..........

Because of the lag in India's economy due to lots of well known factors, the lifestyle of many has stagnated at a level we in the west regard as poor (it's not really poverty but at first glance this is how it appears)
Indian's have for years toiled under subsistence wages,  in other words disposable cash was at a premium and guarded jealously.
Many Indians have until recently not had the access to the consumer durables and credit we in the west regard as our right as working citizens (or not working as the case may be   )
Though rich in other ways compared to the working/middle classes of the west, it's only in recent times that Indians have began to become out and out consumers, intent on filling their houses with the fruits of their labors.

Many now follow a different path to contentment and happiness, replacing an older (and some would have it healthier) more traditional path for family and status.  Based on an order within society and austerity (don't flail me here I well aware that this wasn't the whole story of India and Indians before the economic boom)

So many people from the west seem to want to deny them this, citing corruption of the spiritiual whole, apparent in India(?) rampant materialism as the devil in Indian society, Poverty and moral obligation, Greed.....................

For me it is all part of India coming of age in the global economy.
I also harbor thoughts of better ways to lead our lives but I came from a background of easy access to "things" I would find it quite romantic for India to stay just as it was in spite of recent global alliances (hmm)
I'm fond of the innocence still found in India, the simple straight forwardness of spirit and the importance placed around family and caste.
Yet if this has to fade to usher in a new India/Indian, then let the people of India decide the next chapter in their long history.
If the accumulation of wealth is part of that so be it. How could ANYONE in the west morally deny them that??
We largely come from societies based on greed.

[kavindra]

CH -

Interesting that you picked this up! I was arguing along very similar lines on the thread you refer to. I am really happy to see your take on it. I give you my take - in the backdrop on the discussion on IM.

Frankly, at some level - greed is a foundation element in most economic activity and behavior everywhere. Of course, greed is defined to be an excessive desire for wealth and possessions but often one person's excessive desire is another person's reasonable desire. So, it very much depends on the subject position of the person doing the characterizing. Mostly, it is controlled by outside (market or legal - and, in rare instances, religious and moral) factors than internal control exercised by most people.  [To digress a bit, I offer my apologies to the non-materialistic folks. Of course, materialism is actively frowned upon in the Indian value system, but I seem to notice a lot more lip-service and a lot less practice of the same amongst the fellow Indians. If what most Indians practice is non-materialism, I am ready to declare the US to be a non-materialistic society!]

So, to my mind - what you see in Goa is a simple market phenomenon - with lesser external (market) constraints on people making more money and the Goans taking advantage of it. Does not make the people in Goa specifically more or less greedy.

So, that brings one to the people throwing the labels around and at whom are these labels thrown at. After all, when you find things more expensive in San Tropez - you do not throw greedy labels at the locals, do they?  But in an Indian context, a greedy label seems to come out rather quickly, particularly regarding the relatively poor people. No one accuses a Mallya or an Ambani of greed - but your local cab driver or sabzi-wala is a perfect target to pin such label.

Who are the people doing the labeling:

• Indians aren't behind anyone in throwing the greedy label, often without introspection. Sympathy for the poor is in somewhat short supply in my India - particularly in the middle class where it is not uncommon to hear 'poor aren't really so poor after all - they have this, that and the other'. Also, to the extent the price inflation in a region is higher than the national average and the Rupee does not go too far, no one can expect them to like it.
  
• There is a segment of western tourists/long-term residents that particularly feel they are doing Goans/Indians a favor by visiting/staying/illegally buying property in Goa/India - and are quick to throw this label and worse at easy target segment of Indians (taxi-drivers/sabzi-wala, etc.)  for getting too big for their britches. To the extent that these same folks know and pay much higher prices elsewhere without complaining or at least throwing the greedy label around in their home or other western environment - I must admit a different and not so pleasant expression comes to mind.

That's my take on it. While I make generalizations and statements possibly offensive to many, my intention is not to offend but to engage in this dialog.

(kmalik on IM)

[noflylist]

First of all let us not drag other websites into this, we can have our own discussion.

 kavindra, on Aug 4 2008, 09:45 PM, said:

Indians aren't behind anyone in throwing the greedy label, often without introspection. Sympathy for the poor is in somewhat short supply in my India - particularly in the middle class where it is not uncommon to hear 'poor aren't really so poor after all - they have this, that and the other'. Also, to the extent the price inflation in a region is higher than the national average and the Rupee does not go too far, no one can expect them to like it.

That has been my argument all along, and the story about beggar with a very big haul did not help

But seriously, middle class needs to look beyond the box and realize that raising living standards for all is ultimately good for everyone, and evergrowing buying power will propel the country forward.

[iwanttogoback]

when people complain about indian prices being high when, in fact, they are lower than they would pay at home then they are only looking for a cheap holiday at the  expense of a poorer nation/person. quite frankly, i think it's exploitative.

[priya]

Everyone, no matter what colour, creed, religion or caste wants, and has the need, to better themselves.  The have-nots understandably will always want more, and why not?  If it's a willing buyer, willing seller, no-one's being greedy and everyone is happy.  That's not greed, it's business.

As for exploitation of tourists - isn't it the same everywhere?  During tourist season, prices escalate in any country so why single out India?  If the poor benefit from tourists and the tourists are willing to part with their money, which is why they're on holiday anyway, why say the Indian people are greedy and, in particular, the Goanese?

For what it's worth, the only greedy ones are the politicians, IMO; in India and anywhere else - especially the Dark Continent.

Good points CH!!!!

[crvlvr]

Indians have always wanted a better life. But the difference  is that in the past money could not buy you a better life. For example, the rich would have buy the same ambassador that a working man, have to watch the same television channel (Doordarshan) as the rest of the country etc.  Instead the only few items the rich could spend their money on was homes (again with no air conditioning due to lack of power) and weddings.    As the saying went, "Even if you have money in India there is nothing to spend it on"

With the advent of consumerism there is a lot more choice and ways to demonstrate wealth.  I some ways this might have contributed to "greed". The choice for the consumer to spend their money have grown tremendously.  Now there are cars with no roads to drive them on. More TV channels than most would care to watch and the need to keep up with the Jonses.

[cyberhippie]

Good points crvlvr.
I had never thought about it like that. I also agree with all of you that it's just normal human behavior to want a better life. I have a few mates who often crib about price rises and the greed of the Goan people. I just ask them to take a pay cut and never ask for a rise again.

I also get fed up listen to people prattle on about why raise someones standard of living when there a poor people to feed.
Seems nonsensical to me, does the west consider it's poor before seizing chances of a better life. When you're offered that promotion with company car, do we stop and think well there's that bloke I pass every night sleeping in the shop door way, nah I tell the boss no thanks.

I think westerners often break down family units into the bite sized families that represent the norm in the west, wife kids and perhaps and aging mum or dad.
The rickshaw wallah may very well be supporting brothers, sister, wife's  mum dad and an auntie or uncle, the list goes on.
So what appears to be a stupendous wage on first inspection, may in fact, not be a life of gold and diamonds.

The restaurants in Goa have steadily increased their variety and quality, should that be done at 1995 prices........ of course not.

I likes Kavindra's point about getting too big for their britches, there certainly seems to be a lot of that thinking goes into the tag greedy.

[kavindra]

Frankly, I think - as we furiously agree on this thread, the greed thing is a non-topic as it is largely a common factor across the board - nationality and income strata.

The topic that got me going and still does is the attitudes of rich towards poor, haves towards have-nots. How does India compare with the rest of the world on that? For the longest time, I felt (or perhaps indoctrinated to believe) that was India was kinder towards its poor. I am no longer sure. If anything, I have found poor to be particularly poorly treated in India (as compared to other countries). The VIP crap that flies around in India makes the poor poorer by the treatment they receive at the hand of the VIPs, haves and what nots.

That said, I am open to any thoughts others might have.

[jyoti]

To bring in a new element of the discussion, I think there is some cultural stuff here that makes how Indians treat money look differently than how Americans do. (I don't know about other Westerners.) What seems to be "cheap"or "greedy" to an American is simply how things are done in India.* For instance, actually expecting 2 rupees back when paying a 48 rupee auto fare.

There are other cultural things that make no sense whatsoever to me. Where I stay paying guest, there were several plumbing problems, including my shower. The aunty had been calling a local plumber for months asking him to come, but it was hardly worth 100 rupees for him to come for one job. Finally another friend found a plumber who would come right away. Aunty paid him... 100 rupees. This is very un-American... But is it "cheap" to act that way? I think so, and I think it's foolishness to let you house fall down around your head for the sake of 50 rupees. But my aunty thinks a plumber who asks for 150 rupees is greedy, whether or not he shows up the day that he calls.  Who is to say which is right?

But there are those who act greedy in any way they can. It may be charging 10 times as much to foreigners, or waiting at the train station so they can charge you triple the normal price to get home, or sitting outside of the mall and charging insane prices. Are these guys greedy? Heck yeah. But these guys are avoided by Indians as well, and in a perfect (capitalist ) world the nice guys would eventually come out ahead.

As for overcharging foreigners, there is taking advantage of someone but there is malicious cheating. When a group of autos try to back me into a corner and force me to pay 3 times meter just because no one else is available?  That is malicious and despicable... BUT most Indians would agree with me on that! So it does NOT define India. Yet if all the autos/restaurant/shops start charging more just because it's a tourist place? Well, that's capitalism. If it gets too expensive, people will stop coming, they'll lose money, and lower their prices. Or another shop will open up down the street with cheaper prices and people will eat there. The market will correct itself. And cheap tourists can find other places to visit besides Goa that are less expensive. But, you get what you pay for.

*Note that I think throwing extravagant wedding parties and coming of age parties that put you deep into debt are unnecessary and foolish. Yet, my Indian friends would probably think that makes Westerners cheap and greedy....  So it's not always that Indians are the cheap ones and Westerners are the generous ones!

Edited by jyoti, 06 August 2008 - 02:46 PM.

[noflylist]

One thing that will change with more credit availability is people will live beyond their means. When I was in India 25 back, people would buy what they could only if they have cash. Only minor amount of homes were mortgaged.

Whereas in US people live for minimum necessary credit payment, incurring debt. But more product sales, improved economics.

I do not know, If Indians are moving in right direction in that regard.

Is material greed good for economy?

[crvlvr]

 jyoti, on Aug 6 2008, 12:40 AM, said:

To bring in a new element of the discussion, I think there is some cultural stuff here that makes how Indians treat money look differently than how Americans do. (I don't know about other Westerners.) What seems to be "cheap"or "greedy" to an American is simply how things are done in India.* For instance, actually expecting 2 rupees back when paying a 48 rupee auto fare.

Another spin on the discussion....

I think the issue, in broader terms is, SYSTEM v. MARKET.  

Generally speaking, in any commodity/service,  the Market (where prices are free to move based on supply and demand) always exists until a System is created.

In the west many areas of commerce, that used to be free markets,  have been systemitized (sp? while in India it may still remain a market (or even if a System has been created it does not work and Market forces take over -- like taxi/auto rates). Now, it is when a western tourist  has to deal with a Market in an area where he/she is used to dealing with a System is when they are taken aback and starts complaining. Little do people realize that if a System did not exist in their country, it would be the same as in India -- a free Market.  Indians, on the other hand, do not expect any system to work

So, at the end of the day, it is the Free Market advocates who start telling and screaming  for a System when the Free Market does not work to their advantage.  What is interesting is that the so called Free Markets in west actually work within a System.  For example, the stock market, a free market, has to operate under rules and regulations of a system -- hours of trading, settlement dates  etc.  IMHO, the only free markets left in this world are in the 3rd world countries.

[kavindra]

Not clear how the analogy with the stock market works. In the financial markets - the bodies like Chicago Board of Trade, NY Stock Exchange to ensure ease and an orderly functioning of the market. They essentially assure the actors in the market of the integrity of the transactions. In cases such as options, futures or other instruments - through margin requirements and otherwise ensuring that parties on both sides of the transaction. The regulators (SEC) etc. play the role of ensuring the market is fair and the actors in it maintain confidence to continue to participate in it on an ongoing basis. So, when a company says it made so much money, it did so within the generally accepted accounting principles - or be subject to enforcement action. The quality of the policing of the market has a direct impact on the confidence of the participants in the market.

Whether you call it a system or not, all of these are valid functions in a market of any kind - anywhere. Who is in-charge of enforcement (could be police in India), or who is the market maker (could be the taxi-dispatcher in the taxi-stand), etc. is immaterial. The functions remain.

Perhaps by free market - you mean one where there is poor enforcement? Not exactly clear where it is leading to?

[kullukid]

 cyberhippie, on Aug 5 2008, 09:01 PM, said:

I also agree with all of you that it's just normal human behavior to want a better life.

I also get fed up listen to people prattle on about why raise someones standard of living when there a poor people to feed.
Seems nonsensical to me, does the west consider it's poor before seizing chances of a better life. When you're offered that promotion with company car, do we stop and think well there's that bloke I pass every night sleeping in the shop door way, nah I tell the boss no thanks.

IMHO
It's a thin line between "normal human behaviour" & greed,don't the holy books of India state that most people experiencing "normal human behaviour"  are actually living in "ignorance" through greed, envy ,jealousy,hate etc?

Just because the west doesn't consider it's poor, it doesn't make it right CH. Are you suggesting that Indians should follow the west down that slippery slope??? KK

[crvlvr]

 kavindra, on Aug 6 2008, 12:10 PM, said:

Perhaps by free market - you mean one where there is poor enforcement? Not exactly clear where it is leading to?

I point I am trying to make is that a truly free market will operate independently of a system with no rules/regulations than need to be enforced.  The more rules and regulations you have, the less of a free market it becomes.  

As an example, think of the old days, before the days of currency and law and order. Those were the really free markets. Goods and services were traded/bartered. Each deal different from the next. Today, the caiptalist praises the free market. But, is it really "free" ? I am merely suggesting that the taxi service in some parts of India is more of a free market than free markets in the west.