anon291

6 ms·

91.
by anon291 2mo ago
Not really. I was laid off and my daughter literally cut her finger off requiring expensive surgery and orthopedic stuff and my state covered all of it (over 100k in nominal cost) and our overall tax burden is less than most European countr
92.
by anon291 2mo ago
Simply wrong in most states.
93.
by anon291 2mo ago
For some tech workers maybe but the issue is that for much of vc backed tech work, Marxist analysis a la Jacobin et Al do not work. Marxists delineate the working class from the owning class but in my experience in these vc backed startups
94.
by anon291 3mo ago
Right. Here you go. France has decided to shut down radical mosques. Imagine if India did anything like that. You'd have the entire world telling them about religious freedom lol. People are retarded, and a lot of western assumptions o
95.
by anon291 3mo ago
Employees get told to like and repost. In any large company chances are there are multiple people with large audiences.
96.
by anon291 3mo ago
When this hits the supreme Court they need to debar the prosecutors who bring these cases to begin with.
97.
by anon291 3mo ago
Since some people misunderstood what I am saying: when I saw 'the jews' I am referring to Indian Jews who were mostly indifferent to the whole Zionism movement. Of course many did exercise the right to return, but mostly for econo
98.
by anon291 3mo ago
And like clockwork, a single terror attack in Berlin and you'll find redditors from western countries calling for solutions much worse than anything india has ever proposed. https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comme
99.
by anon291 3mo ago
I merely pointed out that India's banning of satellite communications is a mirror to the American response to 9/11 except that India faces more 9/11 like situations on a regular basis. This is hardly some boogeyman. Most coun
100.
by anon291 3mo ago
The UN declaration is retarded because Indian law is not and has never been neutral to religion. If you believe it should be, then you are on the side of the BJP. This is why such things cannot be reduced so simply to American biased left r
101.
by anon291 3mo ago
Honestly not really. Hindu was the widely used demonym to refer to any Indian before Hindu nationalists decided to turn it into a religious designation. To be a follower of the Hindu religion meant that you followed some set of practices th
102.
by anon291 3mo ago
The idea of a Westphalian nation state is foreign to South Asia until 1947. Before that there was your local patil and whatever clan you belonged to. Even Indian princely states had no clean separation before the British insisted on clean b
103.
by anon291 3mo ago
And that is relatively benign compared to the constant barrage of foiled or successful terror attacks that India faces. Also, no one really cared when America went forward with a giant war of aggression against those people America labeled
104.
by anon291 3mo ago
This has nothing to do with India. This is an argument the British and some European states made. India iirc recognizes both Palestine and Israel and most Indians are skeptical of Zionism, including the Christians. Once again American polit
105.
by anon291 3mo ago
Hmm... I said nothing of modernization; I was talking about Indias police state tendencies. These are orthogonal issues. Indians lack of economic development is due to severely lacking general government funded education and over regulation
106.
by anon291 3mo ago
Let me be more clear. There is a racial component to it that the American settlers did not have. Gandhi and the original nationalists were English barristers who spoke English, believed in English institutions, were educated in England, and
107.
by anon291 3mo ago
Yes. Since these two nations came into being they have been in what is basically a state of war. That is what perpetual means.
108.
by anon291 3mo ago
Indian christian. European history and South Asian history are really quite different and don't map at all
109.
by anon291 3mo ago
> Largely uncited and generalised exposition of Bangladeshi's misses other factors which could be involved in their decision towards distrust of India. It's reasonable to distrust a neighboring country with distinct interest, e
110.
by anon291 3mo ago
Britain did not deny it and was actively working towards allowing self-rule in India the entire time. You seem to be saying that Britain denied India independence while at the same time saying Britain allowed an independent India. The two v
111.
by anon291 3mo ago
The difference is that American colonials could return to England and have representation, while Indians could not, so no there is a distinct difference in what was being asked for.
112.
by anon291 3mo ago
It is simply not true to the same degree. The American colonies believed the King of England had violated their rights as Englishmen, Indian independence activists simply wanted Indians to have the same rights as other citizens of the UK an
113.
by anon291 3mo ago
I disagree with the Modi and Hindutva project almost entirely, not only politically, but on a personal level coming from a minority community (Christian) in India. However, India is in what basically amounts to a perpetual state of war with
114.
by anon291 3mo ago
People greatly misunderstand the Indian independence movement. The early Indian activists merely wanted India to have a devolved legislature like present-day Scotland and Wales, or like Canada and Australia used to have. It was relatively l
115.
by anon291 3mo ago
India desperately needs more r&d and advanced manufacturing. Good for them; congrats to the team
116.
by anon291 3mo ago
People say things like this, and yet housing has -- for most of history -- been a viable asset class, including in the times that people idolize as the great boom times of America. The main issue is mismanaged regulation, as always. Real es
117.
by anon291 3mo ago
This is family law though. That's different. The op said he was defrauded which is criminal. If both perp and victim are indian then the tribal courts can handle a criminal case But if one is not then it's an automatic federal jur
118.
by anon291 3mo ago
If you're not an Indian (us legal term) then I believe you can file a federal case, can you? Tribal law can't supercede basic American law from what I understand especially not when there's a non Indian involved.
119.
by anon291 3mo ago
Unless you're divorced or super rich there's basically no reason to worry about kidnapping.
120.
by anon291 3mo ago
What mortal danger would necessitate a smart phone versus a dumb phone? I don't understand

More ›