India 1998 and India 2008. Is there any difference? Yes a lot of difference. India '98 was a place where there were not much of affluent people , where there were not much of Toyota Camry zipping across the roads, where there were not much of Levis and Reebok dominating the nation but it was a nation where there were not much of great divide between the rich and poor and definitely it was a nation where a lot of things were more affordable compared to what it is now.

India 2008 - People are happy about drinking a coffee for Rs.40, having a haircut for Rs.200 and having a drink for Rs. 1500.

It is really a proud moment for every Indian that we have got more millionaires now , we have got our standards raised high, different hues of Merc zipping across the Indian roads every moment. But when every one looks at the so called affluence, what happened to the set of people who were in the lower strata of society. Definitely the numbers have come down when it comes to the population below poverty line. But is this the only way to measure the economic condition of the country. 

Big glass structures get developed on the lands of poor peasants. Thanks to the concept of SEZ. Indian Multinationals getting all the tax deductions and rebates while a high school government teacher gets penalized for his attempt of evading a tax of Rs. 800. Thanks to the concept of globalization and what not.

How could India change so much? Is it because of the cash flows in the wrong hands? Definitely business men in India are Gods gift to India. They never hiked prices of the commodities by demonstrating their affluence. When IT became popular in India, the Commodities got their price hiked . because there came a new class of people who felt that they could afford anything and everything. There came a generation of people who never thought about the impact on the society but restricting their thoughts only with how much of it will be paid off from the purse and the remaining from credit cards. This generation of people went to an extent of not able to accept the fact that their purse did not have the capacity to get somethings and finally resorted to the plastic cards which slowly made people debtors. This resulted in creating that great divide between affordables and unaffordables.

Even the bus tickets gets hiked to the max. When a bus ticket gets to a level of Rs. 10/ person, A single mans wage in certain families, I wondered how will these people survive. Are they not entitled to travel by government buses? Are we discouraging them to do so? I could not believe how insane we have become to Pay Rs. 60 for a Rasam in Malgudi. Rasam is considered to be the part of a poor mans meal which does not cost more than Rs. 3. Uff. a profit thats worth nearly 20 times. There were a couple of instances that i could re-collect when i say how IT prof. were responsible for this great un-equal Indian Atmosphere.

Once I went to a road side non-A/C barber shop in hyderabad and paid him Rs. X for a cut. I would say that Rs. X to be a standard across all barber shops in the country of that quality and standard. after a period of 3 weeks my friend  went on to make a hair cut for the Rs. X, but ended up offering an unwelcomed tip of Rs. X/2 thus paying and effective price of 1.5X. The next day when i went, the barber openly charges Rs. X+5 on seeing me. Definitely that Rs. 5 is not a big thing for me but for a min i thought how foolish it has been. I tried bargaining but in vain .. paid up and came back.. Only one thing was striking my mind. This Rs. 5 is more valuable for a large section of a society. This Rs. 5 i know is how much valuable for a government clerk. I dont say that my friend is the sole responsiblity of this hike but he is definitely one amongst the many of his sort.  Next time when he goes he finds that the prices are hiked and to maintain his dignity or pride whatever we may call it, he ends up paying Rs. 2X. He has raised the cost of the service for himself by twice the time in just a period of 2 months without even thinking of what the effect that it will have on an average struggling Indian Society.

I remember when me and my another friend went in search of a house.  the house owner says the Rent as Rs.10,000 and says that he is waiting for a Yes/No from another party and promised us to give the house if it turns out to a 'No'. My friend immediately sprang up and said ' OK Uncle.. I will pay you Rs. 10,500' . Give us this house irrespective of the other party. I just stared at him. He is definitely a fool.He did not think of any one else in this average Indian Society. - A 5 % hike in the rent in just a matter of seconds. This 5% makes a lot more difference in many of the average indian families.

So doing things without even thinking about others and with that great arrogance of 'Me and my Money' has taken India to a bad shape. This might not have an immediate impact. But definitely after 30 yrs when this generation reaches its last stages it could feel how much of dirt that it has made.

Disclaimer: The quality of being argumentative does not in any way give a negative connotation. All the views expressed here are my own as an individual.

Are women more argumentative? Mr.Amartya sen in his 'The Argumentative Indian 'mentions that the Indians are by nature argumentative and he sites many examples of it in the history. In certain portions he analyses if this nature of being argumentative belongs to certain section of the society alone which is characterized by the gender or caste or region or religion and he gives instances of how the nature of being argumentative is spread across the different sections of the society.

Now let me start writing the topic of 'Are women more argumentative?' Why should I write this topic. Am i experienced enough to right this. Probably not. Have I been involved with some close friends of opposite sex to make this statement .. No.  The only women that I have talked with a lot is my mother and unfortunately she is not argumentative enough :)

We have heard and seen many arguments that the men make in the epic Mahabaratha [ shown in TVs]. Also on reading the books we could feel that there were a lot of arguments made by men. However there were some killer arguments made by women. The one that I always like is the kind of argument that Gandhari [wife of Dhirudrashtra and mother of Duriodhanan] makes  and wins it when she blindfolds herself to make herself feel the same way her husband feels. The other argument which is well worth mentioning is the one that is  by draupati with dharma on saying why he should go on a war with duriodhanan and his brothers. Both these arguments are well made, and had high impact in the entire set of events. these were the arguments that changed the course of things and events.

Having said few examples from the history and stories, let me say what makes me say women are more argumentative. when a women starts an argument she makes sure that she wins it most of the times. Are women more talented then men in influencing the course of discussions? Is this the reason that many women leaders succeed? There is always that veil of separation. In one of my earlier posts, I mentioned the men are more soft on women. So is this the one that makes/aides women win her final argument.

Woman resort to two extremes. She does not leave an argument halfway. either she is completely into the argument or she never arguments. In Indian families the story of Daughter-in-law/Mother-in-law is very famous one and is a very much prevalent one. the one who is argumentative differs in different families. I have seen women making that most conclusive decision after an argument. Is this the reason why most love marriages have women as the dominant partner? A women in a discussion is a healthy discussion. You can be sure that she is there to make that discussion come to an decisive end. Is this the diversity that brings in more benefit to the organizations?

Men lose arguments because they do not hesitate to quit the argument halfway. I do not know of an argument with an women, where she quits before it comes to an end.  Is this the nature of women among the most affluent families alone. No. The women in villages are more argumentative

Kannagis argument with the pandian king is very famous in the Tamil history. That's the main crux of 'Silapadhigaram'. Men win fights, Men win battles, Men win wars, but do men win arguments? Are Men by nature are good negotiators. the modern day men are better negotiators.

There were some great instances of women playing that best role in politics. Indira Gandhi, considered to have been one among those successful Prime ministers of India, Jayalalitha being the CM of Tamilnadu for 2 terms and in the past Jhansi Rani, Sarojini Naidu etc., assuming some great position in politics.

Ok.. I have written a lot , a little more for a blog post. So what is my conclusion on this?

Yes..Women are more argumentative. Rather they do better arguments. They leave that best impact in the arguments that they involve themselves. But modern day men has learnt that trick of how to put a womens argument in its proper use and to his advantage.  This actually is a very subjective topic for which i cannot put in a more definite conclusion. My experience and my little knowledge says.. Yes Women are more argumentative and they are capable of changing the course of Men. Though men are deemed to be physically and socially stronger by the factions of society, its definitely a truth that they are not as strong as women mentally.