Comment by Zelmor | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Zelmor | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

That is an aged political view of the world. Nowadays, a third world country is where you can die of disease, infection, etc. by drinking water due to lack of sanitation. Where infrastructure is missing almost completely, and where the majority of people live below international poverty lines (no, US families with 3 bedroom houses and loans to pay are not below the international poverty line. People sleeping in their newpaper-stand that they also work from are below such line.)

Clean and safe menstrual pads, clean water, infrastructure, education, controlled agriculture. These are pillars of progress. Space programs are impressive, but are of very little consequence when half the population is so poor, they crap on the streets in plain sight at daylight. Meanwhile women are ashamed to hang their sanitary pads in the sun to properly disinfect them due to 3rd world superstitions about cleanness and evil spirits. There are grown men in India who don't even know that women have periods. Others bury their dead in the Ganges while downstream the same water is used for cooking and drinking.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/30/idia-s...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arunachalam_Muruganantham

http://hazlitt.net/blog/india-has-toilet-problem-not-poop-pr...

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11952270 and marked it off-topic.

At the other end of the spectrum, there is antibacterial soap poisoning the water http://www.seeker.com/are-anti-bacterial-soaps-poisoning-our...

and created many more issues http://www.bbc.com/news/health-32543176

Women do not want to public display sanitary pads as here, there is nothing about "superstitions about cleanness and evil spirits". If you want to see superstitions look at all apartments in developed US/Canada where floor no. 13 is missing, and number 666 is found offensive by government https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/05/05/etobicoke-mans-v...

And deads are not buried but cremated on river beds. Burying practice also cause pollution FYI http://www.utne.com/environment/arsenic-contamination-ze0z13... http://www.disabled-world.com/health/cemetery.php

BTW, you are right about open defecation in urban area. That needs to be changed.

Your use of the colonial word "Ganges" to refer to the river Ganga betrays your coloured view of that part of the world.

Even ignoring all the factually false statements, that was an unnecessarily condescending rant.

Here we go again.

The statements are not false, burying your head in the sand is not going to make uncomfortable things untrue. Minus the menstrual-pad thing, I've seen the rest with my own eyes in India.

"the majority of people live below international poverty lines"

The international poverty line is ~$700/year. India's average income, adjusted for purchasing parity, is $6100/year. If you're going to make inflammatory, derogatory statements, at least get your facts right.

> > "the majority of people live below international poverty lines"

> The international poverty line is ~$700/year. India's average income, adjusted for purchasing parity, is $6100/year.

The mean income (which is the average for which that statement is true) tells you nothing about whether the majority is above or below a certain point, unless you know independently that the distribution is normal, so that the mean is also the median (but that's unlikely for an income distribution in a country.)

Yes, I'm aware of the mean vs median distinction. But if someone states that the majority of the country has an income below X, and I find out that the average wage in the country is actually 8X, I'm going to be extremely skeptical of the original statement. The amount of income inequality that is needed to produce a situation like that, is so extreme that no one should believe it without supporting data.

As it turns out, I was right. The other person to reply to me, dug up evidence showing that only 22% earn below the intl poverty line. Not "the majority" as was stated.

Are you really caught up on "majority"? Semantics are the line you've chosen to draw?

http://povertydata.worldbank.org/poverty/country/IND

In India, as of 2011:

- 293 million (or 22% of the population) live on less than $1.90 a day (international poverty line).

- 708 million (or 55% of the population) live on less than $3.10 a day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Below_Poverty_Line_(India)

"Internationally, an income of less than $1.90 per day per head of purchasing power parity is defined as extreme poverty. By this estimate, about 32.7% percent of Indians are extremely poor. Income-based poverty lines consider the bare minimum income to provide basic food requirements; it does not account for other essentials such as health care and education.[2] The number of people living on less than $1.9 per day in 2011 was 259.5 million (21.3% of the total population)."

32.7% are considered "extremely poor" and the poverty line counts only for basic food - not healthcare, education, etc.

India's poverty levels are extreme, severe, and talking about it is neither false, inflammatory, derogatory, or an attack.

Edit: what's with the glut of down-votes all of a sudden? Usually links and evidence - especially in recognizing social injustice - are welcomed on HN.

Someone stated that "the majority of people live below international poverty lines"

I replied stating that his comment contains factually false statements.

You replied calling me out, saying that there were no false statements.

You later provided proof that only 22% of the population lives below the international poverty line.

22% is no where even close to 50%. I don't know why you keep trying to defend this as a true statement. It isn't, as you yourself supplied proof for.

-------

Regarding your point that I'm getting lost in semantics: I should be the one saying that to you. The entire debate about the international poverty line was not even my main point. My main point as stated originally was that the post was an unnecessarily condescending rant.

And it is. If we were discussing the overall state of India, then the above comment might be a fair one. But that's not even close to what this thread is about. This thread is about India's space agency launching 20 satellites in a single mission. Someone then went off on a (unnecessary) tangent about the original definition of "3rd world", as relating to the cold war. Someone else then went off on another completely unrelated rant about every single problem he could think of, that exists in the country.

Bringing up valid criticisms during the appropriate context/discussion, is certainly very valuable. But criticizing someone/something during completely unrelated discussions isn't. It's usually just a sign of someone who enjoys condescending to others and enjoys the feeling of power that comes with it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com