5 ms·

Your sample is too small. India is more of a fragmented subcontinent than a country. There is no "city like Bombay" (other than Mumbai).

kamakazizuru 13y ago
eh... Bombay is Mumbai - and since the author referred to her life growing up in Bombay / Mumbai - the comparison applies. That said - Bangalore, Delhi, Kolkata, Ahmedabad, Chennai - are all comparable to a reasonable extend to Bombay.
- wrongc0ntinent 13y ago
  That really depends on your definition of "reasonable". I'm not saying you don't have a good point about the economics of it, that would be the one thing included in "reasonable" metrics. But the fact is that all of the cities you listed have different versions of everything from traditions to religion to language. Ignoring that gets you nowhere when talking about India, though politicians and nationalists would have you believe otherwise.
  - kamakazizuru 13y ago
    I still dont see your point? I'm the first person to accept that you cannot generalize india - but that does not exclude the reality that if people could find better paying / more meaningful income - they'd go do that rather than be servants - thats all im discussing here - the sample size is irrelevant.
    - wrongc0ntinent 13y ago
      Here's my point: even the job you can offer someone in India as a servant, cook, driver, DJ, depends on having access to that opportunity. You don't just go in a slum and randomly pick somebody (if you do, I admire you, but you're not the average). That access itself is based on a lot of other factors that have nothing to do with economics, and the rules for that access vary greatly accross India.
      - kamakazizuru 13y ago
        sure - there's saying "depending on your connections you may or may not have access to opportunities" - which is true in pretty much ANY country in the world and theres saying the mere fact that people have servants is exploitation - which is simply not true. What you're saying is not false - but it has nothign to do with the original argument of my post.
        wrongc0ntinent 13y ago
        I'm not saying having servants is only exploitation, I'm pointing out that to chalk it all up to economics is the mistake you're making. That's all.

kamakazizuru 13y ago

eh... Bombay is Mumbai - and since the author referred to her life growing up in Bombay / Mumbai - the comparison applies. That said - Bangalore, Delhi, Kolkata, Ahmedabad, Chennai - are all comparable to a reasonable extend to Bombay.

wrongc0ntinent 13y ago
That really depends on your definition of "reasonable". I'm not saying you don't have a good point about the economics of it, that would be the one thing included in "reasonable" metrics. But the fact is that all of the cities you listed have different versions of everything from traditions to religion to language. Ignoring that gets you nowhere when talking about India, though politicians and nationalists would have you believe otherwise.
- kamakazizuru 13y ago
  I still dont see your point? I'm the first person to accept that you cannot generalize india - but that does not exclude the reality that if people could find better paying / more meaningful income - they'd go do that rather than be servants - thats all im discussing here - the sample size is irrelevant.
  - wrongc0ntinent 13y ago
    Here's my point: even the job you can offer someone in India as a servant, cook, driver, DJ, depends on having access to that opportunity. You don't just go in a slum and randomly pick somebody (if you do, I admire you, but you're not the average). That access itself is based on a lot of other factors that have nothing to do with economics, and the rules for that access vary greatly accross India.
    - kamakazizuru 13y ago
      sure - there's saying "depending on your connections you may or may not have access to opportunities" - which is true in pretty much ANY country in the world and theres saying the mere fact that people have servants is exploitation - which is simply not true. What you're saying is not false - but it has nothign to do with the original argument of my post.
      - wrongc0ntinent 13y ago
        I'm not saying having servants is only exploitation, I'm pointing out that to chalk it all up to economics is the mistake you're making. That's all.