34 ms·

>Again, what peculiar crimes exclusive to India are you alluding to that are suddenly extinct now? The ban was lifted because a successful court petition ruled

by Zenst 7y ago

>Again, what peculiar crimes exclusive to India are you alluding to that are suddenly extinct now? The ban was lifted because a successful court petition ruled the government is paranoid at best and out-of-touch with reality at worst wrt crypto. I wasn't alluding to any particular crime and the article does mention some forms, though perhaps better explained by: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-37974423 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-37974423 As another reply outlined, this did not impact the organised level of crime and only the middle class and below, as sadly most initiatives seem to effect, however well intended.

ignoramous 7y ago
The article you cite was written just after demonetization was announced. It simply speaks in the tone of hope and optimism from a journalist far removed from the ground realities. The aftermath since then has left no doubts that demonetization didn't do anything to curb any sort of tax crimes, whatsoever [0]. Heck, a well-respect economist at the helm of the most important financial institution in India, the RBI, resigned, possibly in protest [1]. > As another reply outlined, this did not impact the organised level of crime and only the middle class and below, as sadly most initiatives seem to effect, however well intended. Yeah, exactly: That's text-book sham. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Indian_banknote_demonetisation#Reactions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Indian_banknote_demonetis... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raghuram_Rajan#Controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raghuram_Rajan#Controversies
- estebarb 7y ago
  Well, journalist main task is to inform objectively, not to comment subjectively. They aren't researchers or economic analyst. And on other hand, most politics decisions are based on feelings, not facts.
- calvinbhai 7y ago
  Could you cite more primary sources? It looks like India related entries on Wikipedia were totally hijacked by paid wiki moderators[0]. Now I cannot trust any India related entry on Wikipedia [0]http://www.opindia.com/2020/03/delhi-anti-hindu-riots-wikipedia-bias-edits-dbigxray-investigation/ http://www.opindia.com/2020/03/delhi-anti-hindu-riots-wikipe...
  - ignoramous 7y ago
    OpIndia is a Brietbart-esque website. I trust the Wikipedia moderators more than OpIndia "journalists", who, not long ago, called for "war to defend the Hindus". The systemic way in which the neo-facist government is taking control the narrative by tarnishing trust in institutions that have stood up well to scrutiny is unnerving. > Could you cite more primary sources? I'm pretty sure any primary source that doesn't fit a narrative would be dismissed as non-trustworthy because OpIndia wrote an "investigative" piece that refutes those sources, or because a prominent right-wing person tweets questioning the legitimacy and dismissing it as "fake news"? The incumbent is playing abhorrable politics. > Now I cannot trust any India related entry on Wikipedia. Sure, trust OpIndia instead? The standard bearer for journalistic ethics.

by Zenst 7y ago

ignoramous 7y ago

The article you cite was written just after demonetization was announced. It simply speaks in the tone of hope and optimism from a journalist far removed from the ground realities. The aftermath since then has left no doubts that demonetization didn't do anything to curb any sort of tax crimes, whatsoever [0]. Heck, a well-respect economist at the helm of the most important financial institution in India, the RBI, resigned, possibly in protest [1]. > As another reply outlined, this did not impact the organised level of crime and only the middle class and below, as sadly most initiatives seem to effect, however well intended. Yeah, exactly: That's text-book sham. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Indian_banknote_demonetisation#Reactions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Indian_banknote_demonetis... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raghuram_Rajan#Controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raghuram_Rajan#Controversies

estebarb 7y ago
Well, journalist main task is to inform objectively, not to comment subjectively. They aren't researchers or economic analyst. And on other hand, most politics decisions are based on feelings, not facts.
calvinbhai 7y ago
Could you cite more primary sources? It looks like India related entries on Wikipedia were totally hijacked by paid wiki moderators[0]. Now I cannot trust any India related entry on Wikipedia [0]http://www.opindia.com/2020/03/delhi-anti-hindu-riots-wikipedia-bias-edits-dbigxray-investigation/ http://www.opindia.com/2020/03/delhi-anti-hindu-riots-wikipe...
- ignoramous 7y ago
  OpIndia is a Brietbart-esque website. I trust the Wikipedia moderators more than OpIndia "journalists", who, not long ago, called for "war to defend the Hindus". The systemic way in which the neo-facist government is taking control the narrative by tarnishing trust in institutions that have stood up well to scrutiny is unnerving. > Could you cite more primary sources? I'm pretty sure any primary source that doesn't fit a narrative would be dismissed as non-trustworthy because OpIndia wrote an "investigative" piece that refutes those sources, or because a prominent right-wing person tweets questioning the legitimacy and dismissing it as "fake news"? The incumbent is playing abhorrable politics. > Now I cannot trust any India related entry on Wikipedia. Sure, trust OpIndia instead? The standard bearer for journalistic ethics.