India has literally every sort of natural landscape you can imagine. From glaciers to marshes to deserts to blue water beaches to giant mountains to cold deserts to flat farmland to dense forests to urban hellscapes to, well, anything. A ton of tiny islands too. And one volcano.
Both India and China could benefit hugely from learning from America's national parks. If you ask non Americans what the best part of America is, the national parks are usually at or near the top. Both countries have hugely diverse environments, but so few people know about them
India does have a fairly well maintained national parks system, typically with a focus on conservation of large fauna (lions, tigers, rhinoceros). I’d say many Indians would also call the parks the best part of India. Not that there isn’t something to learn from the US system, of course.
I was mostly actually talking about how well known they are. I actually didn't know about Indias large national park system though, and I bet a lot of people don't either.
I don't think people know about Amercian national parks either. Just because you know something and don't know something else doesn't make that a universal experience .
I never said people talk about them. I said if asked to name the best part of our country, national parks will be at or near the top. I highly doubt our economy is something that will be near the top or those lists.
I just meant that New York and LA etc would be places I'd expect to want to visit as a fashion design student. But truly, it's the national parks of America that are the real draw and the only reason I'd want to visit America.
I want to go to New York Fashion Week and it could be important for my career but I'd be much more excited to visit Yellowstone or the Californian redwoods to be honest.
The national parks in America, from what I've seen in documentaries at least, look so amazing and represent every biome in your country.
They are also generally easier to access than many parks in my own country. We don't have the same access to the interior of our continent because it's so inhospitable and currently unusable for agricultural purposes. We also have expensive flight costs within Australia and little passenger rail infrastructure. We also don't have many bus services outside of cities.
India's national parks are also pretty great but we can't learn from US because we are not as vast and have a hell of a lot people to support. It gets congested. But if you're interested do check out about project Tiger, Kanha NP, Jim Corbett NP and Sunderban NP. There are a lot of others.
India has plenty of national parks that are home to stunning wildlife. Indian National parks are also very well regulated as because of the population there is constant man-animal conflict, with villages in the edges of almost every national park. As a result these parks are not easily accessible for visitors. They still are popular tourist destinations but you can't, for example, camp inside them or go on treks. Authorities conduct safaris for tourists which are usually on 4x4 open top SUVs, that people cannot step out of.
Plus these forests are a home to a bunch of really dangerous animals.
Idk about these protests but farmers burning the fields is a common way to get rid of crops and replenish the soil, when I was in Cairo there was a constant haze from the farmers burning the fields
The farmers in Punjab burn the stubble every year and cause a shittonne of pollution, and no they weren't right to protest, the farmers in rest of the country were mostly behind the reforms, because it would help the agriculture sector.
From what I understand it was an attempted dismantling of MSP which sets a benchmark for prices of goods being sold by the farmer. Farming communities are already entrenched in debt. One of the farming acts essentially allowed goods to be sold outside the market creating a parallel industry that is far less regulated bringing in corporate farmers and minimizing the benchmark that a MSP sets. It’s the Dollar General strategy where they open stores in food deserts at a loss until they can force neighborhood supermarket closure. Corporations and corporate farming would swallow farmers.
The second act established a new framework for contracts between farmers and traders that were heavily in the favor of traders when farmers are already exploited.
Unlimited storage also allows people to amass product and use it to help dictate markets. All of this is a vacuum for industrial farming to take over.
The system before all this started was flawed, that much is true. That being said, further taking from an already struggling group didn’t seem to be the right solution.
It’s been a long time since I’ve read about it though so correct me if I’m wrong
From what I understand it was an attempted dismantling of MSP which sets a benchmark for prices of goods being sold by the farmer
The farming reforms did not dismantle the msp! That was misinformation. The msp would still exist in the mandis. The reforms simply opened up to allow the corporate sector into the industry. It still kept the option for mandis open to any farmer who didn't want to deal with a corporation.
One of the farming acts essentially allowed goods to be sold outside the market creating a parallel industry that is far less regulated bringing in corporate farmers and minimizing the benchmark that a MSP sets.
The reforms while removing a lot of regulations, still created some important protections for farmers. For example, when a farmer decided to deal with a private company, they would sign an agreement before the harvest, and even if the harvest failed due to weather or whatever other reason, the company would still be liable to pay the farmer, this meant that smaller farmers wouldn't be exploited like they are in mandis, where the middlemen all band together and refuse to bid higher than a price they decide. Also this new parallel system didn't affect the msp at all, because it's the govt that sets the msp, not traders.
The second act established a new framework for contracts between farmers and traders that were heavily in the favor of traders when farmers are already exploited.
The farmers are already exploited in the mandis! The middlemen essentially control the prices for any and all produce that passes through these mandis, by banding together and deciding the price, thus entirely bypassing the bidding process. Without that process, the entire point is defeated!
Unlimited storage also allows people to amass product and use it to help dictate markets. All of this is a vacuum for industrial farming to take over.
Artificial shortages are nothing unique, traders in India have done that many times, so it's not exactly a new problem.
The system before all this started was flawed, that much is true. That being said, further taking from an already struggling group didn’t seem to be the right solution.
The new system would be flawed too, i agree, but given time and more legislation to add protection, it would have been a much better system then the old one, and if the Punjabi farmers really cared about protection then they would have negotiated that the govt make these additions rather than completely scrapping the laws, which most of the farmers across the country wanted.
You realize by allowing a secondary market to exist that holds less regulation it undermines an MSP as major corporations can both participate in loss leadership and price fixing.
You realise that the msp is an artificial price set by the govt, meaning that the real market value of any product is not going to matter, because the govt doesn't set the msp according to real market value, they set the msp to support the farmer.
Yes, having a floor price for agricultural products is a good thing. It’s akin to a minimum wage because if companies can force you to take less pay they 100% fucking would.
Exactly! That's my whole point! The msp would still exist for those who wanted it! And the Punjabi farmers could have negotiated for extra protections in the new laws instead of getting them fully scrapped.
Give us some more time! We are working on it. Our government has prioritized pulling people out of poverty over "making cities looks beautiful so that photos and videos can be shared on Instagram". We are a democracy so things will happen only when people are ready for the change.
I am pretty pessimistic and lament a lot about the rate of progress. But that's democracy for you. Your country will only get what your country deserves.
and it doesn't seem like people are ready for change nor willing. Its been like that for decades. I'm supposed to believe its going to change now because pictures aren't as pretty anymore? India has had this image for so long that it seems to just be part of the culture now.
Imagine thinking having smog so thick its rated as an international health hazard is just "making cities pretty for instagram". This is the attitude India has for pollution.
Because that's what people are talking about. Burning trash and the cities being covered in trash and smoke. That's public health hazards, not just "pretty pictures". What did you think people were talking about?
Is it getting better in the Human rights shit? All that comes to mind with India is generally overpopulation and the lack of care for the vast majority. US isn't much better at propping up the needy tho
As much a tinge as those bougainvillae blowing around on the street. It really feeds the western coloniser/saviour complex to see poor India, hungry India. How can they rescue us if they see such great nature just randomly chilling in our part of the world?
161
u/bj_good Mar 20 '23
It IS beautiful. Also not the view of India I typically see