Make in India or Made in India

Introduction
A new topic storming people's brains is 'make in India or made in India'. As Narendra Modi
launched a campaign for 'make in India', many thinkers have become vocal about its pros and
cons. 'Make in India' is mostly about emulating china in export led, growth oriented economy as
china is facing hurdles like growing cost of labor and post-market servicing. While 'made in
India' emphasizes more on industries based on home-grown technology.
Make in India
Attractive destination for investors- India is basically a service industry which is trying to move
its focus away from the tertiary sector of the economy to the manufacturing sector. Keeping this
goal in mind, 'make in India' campaign was launched to attract more foreign investment by
removing obstacles like the remaining traces of the license raj, fast sanction of projects from the
bureaucratic web, etc.
Employment- It will also help to solve the problem of employment needs of our growing
population.
Economic boost- On the economic front, it will boost trade and provide linkage with the global
supply chain and will reduce the current account deficit.
Infrastructure development - It can expand the investment in infrastructure development.
Made in India
Paying for technology - But on the other hand, it has many disadvantages too. 'Make in India'
will just import the technology so that India will pay for the technology in terms of licensing
cost, up-gradation cost, etc. Also, India does not have any control on the source of a company's
raw material supplies. The outsourcing company bounds India by contract and does not share its
secrets.
Competitive advantage - Another drawback will be, if some competition comes, say from Africa
or south America, where the conditions become suitable for manufacturing, then these companies
can shift their base from India causing a significant number loss of employment.
Emergence of geographical identity brands- Made in India can be an answer to these questions.
It can encourage entrepreneurs to start up their business and be a part of the global skill pool as
India lags behind in home-grown brands like German cars, swiss chocolates and British
scotch.

Political reasons - Made in India will provide strategical benefits in terms of defense and
nuclear energy sector which are crucial from the political perspective.
Encouragement of R&D - Finally, India can benefit from technological advances by industrial
revolution.

Conclusion:
Make in India and made in India both can be beneficial for India. India can benefit temporarily
from outsourced manufacturing plants but it can not stress it beyond a limit. It should rather
focus more on encouraging research and development and bringing industrial innovation. Make
in India should be a start to achieve the long term goal of made in India.

Journalism

should

be

out

of

the

premises

of

censorship

Journalism or reporting is a very responsible and sensitive job as it has a direct effect on a
society. It is mainly about reporting rather than supporting -but does the journalism today need to
be
brought
under
the
scissors
of
censorship?
For
- India being a democratic country has given the right of freedom of expression to everyone and
in the field of journalism; freedom of expressing the thoughts without fear is of utmost
importance.
- Censorship cripples the journalist as it confines them to work within certain boundaries
limiting
their
thoughts.
- Journalists would expose faces that have a big hand behind corrupting our country or to say the
least
are
working
on
the
lines
of
corruption.
- It would ensure that people will get to know the truth without any politics involved behind it.
- Free reporting increasing the pressure on politicians and other government bodies. This
improves
their
performance.
- It is a medium to inform the people about various issues related to the society.
Against
- There are always incidents that if revealed would harm ones image. For ex. A molested girl if
showed with her photograph would never get a respectable place in the society.
- Many unnecessary issues have been brought up by the journalists in the recent times which
shouldnt
have
been
brought
up
in
front
of
the
public.
- There are many sensitive issues that a journalist should not raise and censor boards take care of
that.
- Journalist generally write or show only those contents which they think will attract more public
,
which
would
eventually
mean
more
money
for
them.
- In an attempt to increase their TRP or be the first one to report, they at times report even the
issues which must be kept secret. For e.g. live coverage of attack on Taj hotel by terrorists lead
to
security
issues.
Journalism is a great way of bringing the truth in front of everyone but it has to follow strict
guidelines as it might raise some issues.

Removing socialist secular from the constitution of India is

an unjust act
Introduction:
Big talks of secularism and respect for every religion, freedom to follow any religious belief are
often heard when our political leaders deliver a speech. However, the same is not seen as far as
their actions are concerned. An advertisement published by the government of India on the
Republic Day with excerpts of the preamble to the constitution had the words "socialist secular"
missing. Controversy began as opposition slammed the BJP led government of its "Hindutva
promotion ideology" and to make it worse their ally, Shiv Sena stated that these words should be
deleted
from
the
constitution.
For:
1. Missing out words from the constitution of India shows the political diplomacy of the BJP led
government. On one side, there are big speeches from their leaders talking of religious equality
and on the other side, they are keen in getting rid of the word "secular" from the constitution.
Promotion of hindutva has been the unspoken motive of the Modi government with allies like
RSS and VHP. These instances should not be spared as they would only encourage their
extremist
ideology.
2. Shiv Sena leaders even went ahead to say that these words should be deleted from the
constitution. Shiv Sena spokesperson Sanjay Raut said: "Removing the words socialist and
secular is not controversy but the feeling of crores of Indians. The country is of Hindus and
belongs to them. People of all religions can live in India but Hindus will dominate." There has
been no clarification from the government or the PM in particular on this statement issued by
their
ally.
3. Obama said in his speech that India is on the way to become a very successful nation "as long
as it is not splintered on religious lines." While the development plans of Modi is very
optimistic, these alliances with the extremists more than often is a hindrance. The missing words
seems to be not an error but a deliberate move to please the ally that they hold close. The
illustration on the advertisement also shows the same story; the people shown in it are either
Hindu
or
tribal,
no
Muslim
or
Sikh
included.
4. BJP seems to be agreeing with the extremists on their motive of making India a capitalist
Hindu nation instead of a socialist secular nation. It is not just disturbing to millions of people in
the country who have to often prove their loyalty at being an Indian but also an attempt to
undermine the constitution of India with their own policies and rules dominating as they rule the
nation.
5. India is a democratic republic with people of various religion and caste divided by faith but

united in nationality. There are differences and controversies but that does not influence the
loyalty of millions of Indians towards their nation. Unity in diversity has not lost its meaning
with broad minded people respecting each other and their religion despite differences in
ideologies. Such attempts at deleting the words socialist and secular are harmful to peace and
integrity
of
the
nation.
Against:
1. This is a needles controversy as the advertisement features the original constitution that was
signed on the republic day. It was a memorial paying tribute to the original constitution that did
not actually had the words socialist and secular which were added as part of the 42nd
amendment act passed during an emergency. Since the original constitution did not have these
words, the advertisement should have been taken in an open-minded way instead of bringing in
useless
controversy.
2. Even before the word secular was added to the preamble, the constitution of India was secular
in nature. It is not to be forgotten than before the amendment that added these words, the
constitution was framed based on secularism. It was in fact an unnecessary amendment and to
celebrate the original constitution is not a crime calling for controversies on the nature and
political
diplomacy
of
the
government.
3. Adding the word socialist is a mistake that could easily be undone. It limits policy choices that
can be made by a democratically elected government. In the words of B R Ambedkar who
opposed the insertion of this word: "what should be policy of the state, how the society should
be organized in its social and economic side are matters which must be decided by people
themselves according to time and circumstances." There seems no harm in removing the word
socialist
from
the
preamble.
4. Paying tribute to the original constitution that was framed on the republic day has nothing to
do with promotion of hindutva or sharing the motives of Shev Sena. The Modi government has
development strategies that it is more involved in than these minor errors that some find
offending due to the way they misunderstood the meaning behind it. We Indians are easily
offended
and
that's
what
the
opposition
uses
to
its
benefits.
Conclusion:
The government may or may not have meant to be against the secularism and socialist nature of
the constitution but what matters is its clarification on the matter than concerns millions of
Indians with their trust in stake. The government could have issued a clarification in this regard
and should condemn the extremism with which Shiv Sena leaders interpreted the advertisement
published by the government of India. The preamble is an introduction to the constitution of
India and clearly states its nature. There is no way these words can be deleted from the
constitution.

Women are better managers

Art of management is a gift to women by nature. Women are born to take responsibilities and
perform them flawlessly. They can easily manage everything without a crease on their forehead.
For
- Women are the ones who are expected to handle various responsibilities from the childhood
which makes them a good multi-tasker.
- Be it managers in the top companies or the ones who are managing their homes, women in all
areas manage their work flawlessly.
- Their inherent qualities make them good managers as they are more patient in the difficult
situation and are able to manage situations with their positive attitude and calm mind compared
to their counter partners.
- They have the quality of managing their children and are simultaneously able to concentrate on
their career.
Against
- Women are very emotional and soft hearted which is considered as a weakness in managing
things. They are not practical about the situations.
- They might be good at managing things at home but this same strategy cannot be applied in the
external environment where they have to work for an organization.
- They might have all the qualities of managing like courage, patience, understanding etc but
these are not the only key qualities required to manage a vast workforce or other difficult
situations.
- Today we have progressed a lot but there are many women who are not given a chance to prove
themselves or are not given enough responsibilities to showcase their potential.
- A woman alone wont be able to manage things if she is not supported by her family members.
We all are born with some weakness and strengths. In the same way women also have some
strengths and weakness. They have the power to change their weakness into their strengths. If
she does that then there is no stopping for her.

Will Swachh Bharat Campaign Succeed?

PM Narendra Modi urged local masses to fulfill Mahatma Gandhi`s dream of Clean India. He
launched the Swachh Bharat Campaign at Rajpath in New Delhi. He called it as a paid homage
to Mahatma Gandhi and former PM Lal Bahadur Shastri, on their birth anniversary. He urged
people that it is the social responsibility of Indian citizens to accomplish Gandhiji`s vision of
Clean India by year 2019. He even said that the vision can only come true only when 125 crore
people of India work for it. Let us share our views on the matter. Will Swachh Bharat Campaign
Succeed?

Yes
It is not wise to start thinking of the results first as it is said that perform actions without
considering the results.
PM Narendra Modi came on the streets to start the mission, and this step cannot be ignored by
his many followers.
PM initiated the chain by inviting nine public figures for campaign including Sachin Tendulkar,
Shashi Tharoor, Mridula Sinha, Baba Ramdev, Anil Ambani, Salman Khan, Priyanka Chopra,
Kamal Hasan, and the entire team of Tarak Mehta ka Oolta Chashma.
Gujarat, which was a destroyed state, after a series was natural disaster, was rebuilt by
Narendra Modi, and he was successful in making it a clean and prosperous state.
No
Every task needs follow up and just one day working to fulfill the vision will not convert
Swachh Bharat Campaign into reality.
The celebrities will also come for one day to promote the cause and will get busy with their
schedules in future. It is the same case with every person in India.
The youngsters can only create hype on social media by sharing blogs, praising efforts of PM,
and posting his pictures. No one will take a broom and actually become a part of the movement.
In a economy where inflation is rising, growth is slowing, jobs are declining, who has got the
time to devote to such campaigns.
More than the cleaning drive, it is the people's attitude that needs a change. If we keep making
our surroundings dirty, we can never make India clean.
Conclusion
PM Narendra Modi is known for his actions. Whenever he starts a mission, gives everything to
complete it. The development of Gujarat is the finest example of his work. However, this time it
is a big challenge where he needs to change mentality of crores of people living in India. He has
started well, and message is spreading well. It needs to be continued by PM Modi by launching
some or other form of measures to encourage the people for making the vision of Swachh India a
reality by 2019.

Losing Virginity Before Marriage is a big deal

In the ever-changing world, the one thing that people still cant accept openly is losing the
virginity before marriage. It is a sensitive topic especially in the regions where people are more
attached with their culture and values. It is true for the countries like India where even love
marriages or live in relationships are not accepted easily. Even the teenagers especially girls

consider it to be big and cathartic event of life. The matter gets really serious and intense at
times. Are you one of those people? Do you really thing losing virginity before marriage is a big
deal?
Yes
In this world, every that thing that cannot be regained after its lost is considered as invaluable
and precious.
Virginity is not about sharing a physical relationship with other but it is more about sharing
trust and belongingness with other.
The first time early mistakes done in the teenage can prove costly for lifetime. Sometimes
damages are irreversible.
In the country like India where women are considered as God, virginity becomes a certificate of
character for them.
When it comes to girls, it doesnt get over in a short time but leads to deeper emotional
consequences afterwards.
No
People have a habit to make haste out of waste, and when something has to happen at some
time, then why to make a fuss out of it.
Getting intimate with any person is a matter of choice and cannot be confined to the defined
limits.
Character cannot be judged on the basis of virginity. If that had been the case, most of the guys
should be proved characterless.
Whenever virginity is talked about it is confined to women, if men are not bounded with the
terms, why should women be?
Virginity has nothing to do with the long term relationships or commitment. If it had been the
case, most of the arranged marriages must have been successful.
Conclusion
Since ages, people are following the concept that virginity is the gift from the two partners after
their marriage. However, in the present world, the concept is changing. It is more of a personal
preference and choice what the partners want. The only thing is that the decision should be made
with due consideration. In any case, it should not hinder the happiness and peace of your life.

Military training should be made compulsory in India.

Have you ever heard word Conscription? Well it is a form of compulsory enlistment of local
people in national service or military service. It is something that is going on from ages in some
places, and really helped people. In India also, some people are in favor of compulsory military
training. They want the central government to seriously consider the proposal of military training
in educational institutes. Can you think of Indians attending two - three months of compulsory
military training? Some countries like Switzerland have it. So, should it be made compulsory in
India?

Yes
India faces the shortage of military officers, and the step could help the government to get the
required number.
It will provide a morale boost and a stronger representation to the army brigade of Himachal
Pradesh.
The restructuring of regiments by making military training compulsory will lower down the
walls of differences between rural and urban India, the different states and the communities.
The compulsory military training will be a form of vocational training that will utilize some
years of youth life for constructive purposes.
Military training will instill much needed discipline and patriotism in the hearts of young blood
that are just blindly walking on the path of westernization.
It will provide a means to many young people who want to be a part of public enterprise but
sometimes cannot fulfill the entrance criteria.
The past has shown that conscription has helped the countries like Israel and Switzerland
during the tough times.
It will help the women to protect themselves from the illicit elements who want to take undue
advantage of females.

No
The compulsory military training will create more and more powerful regiments divided on
regional basis. India is not a place to implement such law.
The compulsory military training that is worth anything will come with a cost, and the problem
is who will bear the cost? The taxpayers money cannot be wasted like this.
Anything that is made compulsory or forced is not liked by the people, no matter it is
interesting or useful.
The prime years of youth cannot be forced to spend in vocational training as these are the years
to have fun in life.

 Forcing military training in India is like violation of individual rights as it will be like providing
the service for any government whether the person supports it or not.
The idea of compulsory military training is feasible only in countries that have a small
population base.
Many a times women are not made a part of such programs and then all the burden comes
solely on men.
It will not foster the national pride in people but will be considered as involuntary servitude and
slavery.
The efforts, time and money will be totally wasted as an unwilling and forced training will be
inefficient.
The simple decisions in India cannot be implemented due to political problems. How do you
expect the populist politicians to take such a hard decision?
Conclusion
Military training in India has to be perceived in many parameters. It has to be analyzed in terms
of social, economic, political and national factors. The idea of compulsory military training at
first idea seems good but the problem is the country is not ready to implement such training at
this level. It will give one more reason to politicians to divide the country. Instead of encouraging
the national spirit it will provide the people with an extra tool to make illegal forces. Moreover,
Indians have the right to select, and therefore in any case government cannot force the decision
on people.

Obama chewing gum during R-day parade is offensive

Introduction:
Just when we thought that American President Barack Obama's visit to India to be the chief guest
at the Republic Day is all about sealing the deal, strengthening ties and benefiting both the
countries with more trade, a whole new controversy was raised. Obama was seen chewing gum
during the parade and soon the social media was flooded with snapshots of Obama taking out
chewing gum from his mouth while Modi is seen explaining something in detail. It was called
offending, habitual, ungainly sight and the camera managed to capture it well.
Offensive:
1. The occasion was not just another public gathering, it was the Republic Day Parade and
Obama was invited to be the chief guest with utmost honour and cheered spirits of the citizens as
he took his seat amid intense security, crores spent for nothing less than the best. Expecting the
guest of honour to show respect to the event and the mob is not too much to ask for. Talking of
grown friendship and ties, Obama should not have done the offense.

2. Obama should have been careful about the sentiments of the host. It is important along with
strengthening relations, that the two countries respect reach other, their traditions and values.
Two hours is not that long that the president could not resisted the urge to grab a chewing gum
while nodding to the melodies being played.
3. This is not the first time when Obama was seen chewing gum at a public event. Apart from
less serious events to even some of the most sophisticated ones like the APEC summit held in
Beijing and World War II ceremony in France, cameras caught US president off-guards with his
chewing gums. Media of these places as well slammed his old habit, yet Obama never let that
affect his habit.
4. Reports confirm that president Obama takes nicotine gums to do away with his old smoking
addiction. The craving to go for smoking increases when the person is experiencing distress or
anxiety. None of these could have been the reason at the event at Rajpath during the formal
parade to make it necessary for Obama to chew his nicotine gums. It was sheer disrespect to the
occasion and the formal parade and very obvious for India to feel offended after the king like
treatment he was given in the country.
5. A Washington report confirms that president Obama is past the craving for tobacco stage and
now takes nicotine gums occasionally. Could he not wait for the formal occasion to be over to
resort to his occasional habit? A little more respect and dedication for the people cheering at his
arrival would have done no harm but his age old habit has.
Not offensive:
1. Obama is known to have a history of smoking and to do away with that he chews nicotine
gums occasionally. It is far better than smoking or chewing harmful tobacco products that we
Indians never find offending. It was not such a big issue that deserved being moulded into
headlines of the day. We do not have rules imposed for not eating or chewing during the formal
parade. How does it offends us if Obama chooses to chew nicotine gums or any other thing for
that reason?
2. Media always needs to pick out controversies out of everything. It's their job, we can't blame
them. It's us who needs so decide with our own reasoning abilities whether or not a particular
sight is offending. Instead of pointing out Obama chewing gum during the formal parade, we
should rather concentrate or what we could do to make India a better economy. Every individual
has a part to play in the development of a nation and criticizing guests is definitely not one of
them.
3. We Indians are habituated to being offended at worthless issues. We cannot take criticism, we
find movies offensive, we are not used to being open about our own ideas and we judge a book
by its cover. This is the basic reason why we take decades to adapt a way of living which has
been a part of healthy lifestyle.
4. Instead of focusing on what Obama was chewing during the parade, India needs to focus on
what benefits his visit has brought for us. Chewing nicotine is no big deal in America and we
should not judge him by this alone. Respect comes from within and not by showing off or faking
at events. Obama is a man of big deeds and needs no false faking of emotions to prove his
respect for India or its Republic day parade.

5. Obama seen chewing gums or removing his chewing gum while Modi must be doing
significant talks does not make him an egoist or disrespectful towards the formal parade. There
was another picture doing rounds on the social media that focused on Vice President of India not
saluting the national flag. Without knowing the complete fact, we cannot simply accuse a leader
of being offensive.
Conclusion:
This is a worthless issue brought out whenever he is spotted chewing gum in public events just
because the news-diggers have to create one when they don't find one. There was nothing
offensive in his words or stance during the entire stay in India on the whole. He has shown
utmost respect to India by accepting the invitation on the Republic Day. Instead of celebrating
his presence in the country, people got involved in such worthless issues. It's is time that we
broaden our way of looking at others and stop being judgemental all the time.

Smart Phones: Latest trend or harmful device.

Introduction:
Addiction to net and smartphones have become the most common issue in the modern era where
people devote most of their precious time using the device of latest trend whose harmful effects
are being described as equivalent to its utilities. Due to rapid growth of technology, the cost of
smartphones have been diminishing continuously which has enabled users to afford them. Indeed
it's a medium through which one can gain much knowledge. It acts like a whetstone for
sharpening human minds. Though it adds perfection to personality, it also has some negative
impacts, both symbolically and physically. The question arises whether it is the latest trend or a
harmful device? Have you noticed the negative effects of smartphones on your heath?
Latest trend:
1. A hand held smart device is convenient to use. Now a days smartphones and tablets help in
making work more easier than earlier where lots of individual efforts were required. It is helpful
in connecting people easily through phone calls, video call, received, messenger etc.
2. Smartphones and tablets with internet connection is a good company for solitude and those
suffering from depressions of loneliness. One can use their phones for continuously interacting
with other individuals which keeps him potentially connected all the time. Friends, family and
colleagues are now easier to connect with wherever and whenever you want to.
3. Smartphones have much utilities which are helpful for educational gain. Students can save
their time as they can use internet as their guide to education. They can learn many innovative
substance if they are genuinely interested. Many websites and video class are available in
internet which can be beneficial for them.
4. Online activities play very important role in modern trend. Business, shopping, banking, etc.
can be done online which provides the users with wide range of choice at competitively
reasonable price. Lots to time is saved which can be utilised for other important works.

5. It makes children active. Children these days are aware of various innovative things by the use
of only a single medium. Moreover they can also use it for entertainment- playing games, surfing
net, music, videos etc. At present times when recreation is confined in week days, children need
not to go outside to look for other children to play especially when it has become crucial to
safeguard children from the evil brewing everywhere.
6. Businessmen find it more convenient for work. Smartphones and tablets are now a substitute
of laptops which is indeed not that handy to be carried everywhere compared to tablets. They
make work easy and interesting to do.
7. There are various applications and utilities available for users which they might find helpful in
most of the tasks. The most important part is that its cost does not affect the purchasing power of
even poor section of society.
Harmful device:
1. Too much addiction to internet may bring 'netbrain' disorder. It is caused due to overuse of
internet and may result to narcissism, distraction and fear of missing out on things. Smartphone
users get affected three times more likely to this disease. 11% of the British adults are suffering
from this disease.
2. According to research those who are suffering from 'homophobia' are more likely to be found
gambling online, socialising on social networks, listening to music and playing video games.
Playing online games and surfing social websites have become common among youths now a
days and they miss out on physical sporting activities.
3. Student's life which is meant for studying, is affected because of misuse of smartphones. The
time which should be utilised for studying is being distracted by the use of smartphones. The
present technology is deteriorating county's future to some extent where parents are not careful
about the amount of time children donate with smartphones.
4. Kids who are addicted to technology rarely have any time to spare on outdoor sports which
can be a great damage to their health. They are away from those games which will be helpful in
having good and strong physique. Too much emphasizing on smartphones at young age can
cause vision problem.
5. Toxic phthalates are found on iPhone cables and which require warning labels on products
exposing consumers to phthalates. This lead to violation of 'Right to be informed' under
Consumer Protection Act. Thus consumers should be warned of its dangerous containments.
6. Staying connected to smartphones is hazardous for health. Repetitive use of phones for texting
and gaming may cause soreness in wrist and thumb, can put hand and fingers in risk of injury,
neck aches and other symptoms. Micro tears or soreness can heal with time but problem
regarding posture and neck aches can increase the pressure on the discs that cushions the bone of
neck.
Conclusion:

Though smartphones are helpful in every field, it causes certain disorder to human health.
Parents should look after their child that they should not misuse their gadgets. Smartphones are
the mobile phones having advance features similar to personal computers. Teenagers should be
aware of its harmful effects which is caused by regular use. Parents should help their child by
talking about its drawbacks. Though it is harmful, it is also useful. The use of smartphones
should be restricted to works and time spent on it should be limited to a few hours only.

English should continue to be the official language of India.

English is used as the official language in India. Recently, when PM Modi used Hindi for its
diplomatic talks, it surged agitation in non-Hindi states especially Tamil Nadu. Also, the recent
NDA governments proposal of giving importance to Hindi language on social media accounts
faced stiff opposition by the Tamil Nadu CM and other regional parties. It is considered as
violating the Official Languages Act, 1963 In the country where most of the people understand
Hindi, is it Ok to continue with English as the official language of the country?
Yes
English is one such language that is understood by people from different castes and states, and
therefore deserves to be the official language of India.
If any other language is tried to make the official language, all the regional parties will start the
battle of making the state level as official language of India.
If Hindi is given priority then it will create differences among the people who dont speak it
making them feel as second class citizens.
Region C forms an important part of India that got agitated when PM Modi used Hindi for its
diplomatic talks.
The use of English language is as per the requirement of being a part of globalization and there
is nothing wrong in it.
No
Forget about all the different castes and religions as Indians have their own national language
that is Hindi, and that should only be the official language of India.
It is the duty of the government to take the measures so that people all over in India can read,
write and speak in Hindi.
Already Indian has adopted the western culture in many ways. If it continues there will be no
personal or rather say national identity of India.
In this case, India should learn something from Pakistan who made the Urdu as their official
language after the division of country.

 The small little steps are the ways that will make sure that the people from different religion
have at least something in common as Indians.
English might be used as the official language of India but is the unofficial lingua franca in
South Asia. When it is not official for the region, why make it official for the country.
Conclusion
English should not be the official language of India. It is an internal matter of country, and the
central government should seriously consider changing the present scenario. Hindi represents
India, and when the people in India dont understand Hindi, it is a matter of shame for country.
Why the regional parties wants to make the regional language as official language when Hindi
represents India. The different regions are part of India. So, they should have proficiency in
Hindi. However, till the time, these regions dont understand Hindi; government has no option
but to have English as the official language of India.

Social media: stress generator or stress liberator

Introduction:
The ill effects of social media has been pointed out from time to time by health gurus,
psychologists, advisors and parents of youths being the most concerned ones. However, a recent
study conducted by the Pew Research Centre's Internet Project brings news of relief to those who
cannot imagine a day without social media. The study shows that stress and social media have no
direct association and the later has just been over emphasised to brag about the ill effects. Social
media has it advantages as well as disadvantages but the concern here is the stress factor
associated with it.
Stress generator:
1. Getting addicted to social networking is one of the most crucial reasons why social media is
blamed for generating stress. Overtly staying connected on social media becomes an addiction
and unknowingly the user starts avoiding important tasks of life which should get priority. A
housewife or student or a working person, for instance, postpones their important works just to
stay online for an hour which turns into half of the day. When they revert to reality, undone tasks
are sure to create stress.
2. Social media opens up ways to stay connected with friends and relatives. In the midst of
staying updated and keeping the social media profile updated, we sometimes miss upon security
precautions. Spying for fraudulence was never so easier unless the entire population decided to
go online with all the basic information of their whereabouts. These information going into
wrong hands generate unimaginable stress in people of all age group.
3. Fear of being caught or proved wrong comes from our being available most of the the time on
social media. A recent study shows that while preparing for a job interview, a person has now to
consider the details he has provided on his social networking profile. You are more likely to get

caught it you bragged about your hobbies in your Facebook profile without knowing anything
about it in reality.
4. Relationships have never been more complicated until some of our favourite social media
techies decided to treat us with surprises like "last seen" and "location trackers." Complicating of
relationships have produced greater cases of stress than any other factors and social media just
makes it worse. Ignoring partners while clicking selfies for Facebook, fear of being caught
cheating, fear of your partner finding out about your ex are the biggest stress generators ever.
5. To avoid stressful situation, most people think of social media as the ultimate rescue.
However, shutting out the real world for a couple of hours recreating on social media is not a
solution to come out of a problem. The problem stays where it began, all that happens is delay in
finding a solution to it.
Stress liberator:
1. Loneliness is one of the basic reasons why one gets stressed and is unable to cope with it.
Social media has only bridged the gap of distance and now our loved ones are just a click away
whenever we need to talk to them or even see them. In old age when parents are left alone at
home with children in different cities for work or studies, social media is blessing. A snap of me
having full-fledged meals even when I am away from home is a stress reliever for my mother. I
am sure it's the same for every mother.
2. Not everyone is an open book. Not every person can speak his heart out at times of stress. The
inability to confide in someone leads to anxiety and even in depression of the most acute order.
Social media makes it easier for taciturn people to speak about their problems to strangers or
friends which relives stress to a great extent. A good friend can advice you on how to cope with
circumstances and immediately there comes a feeling of being cared and the confidence to push
out of the shell.
3. Listening to the problems that other people in your circle are experiencing can also contribute
to stress liberation. Getting to know the problems that other people have to face, we get to assess
our own circumstances and that can give courage to tackle them. Women are more emotionally
connected, making them more prone to stress and depression. Social media is found to be a great
stress reliever, especially for women, for they just know when something is not right.
4. A shy and reserved kind of person can discover a whole new world for them at the social
networking sites. It can incur in them confidence and motivation to step ahead, leaving the old
shell behind. It is not social media that builds in stress, it is people that give stress to each other
by misusing information, blackmailing or intimidating them for their selfish motives. This is not
the mistake of social media, but people for not being careful enough.
5. Social media might have created relationship issues but most of them were for good. Finding
out that your partner cheats on you is not a bad thing after all, if you consider the fact that you
got saved from spending more of your precious time with an undeserving person. People fall in
and out of love and social media just made it easier for them to move on with their lives instead
of stressing upon the past.
Conclusion:

Just like every other technology, social media has its pros and cons too. What is important is that
we regulate our time and keep things balanced between recreation and work. Setting timer for
social media is one of the means that could keep a check on your online activities. Those that
find solace on social media must not forget that there is a real world too and that they should not
cling too much to the virtual world. Too much of anything is harmful and the same is true for
social media.

All that India benefits from Obama's visit

Introduction:
For the first time in history, an American president witnessed the Indian Republic Day Parade in
New Delhi as the guest of honour. Prime Minister Narendra Modi definitely went way ahead to
strengthen the ties between the two nations when he invited President Barack Obama over who
affirmed similar intentions by accepting the invitation. Amid the enthused crowd in Delhi, the
two leaders known to have forged chemistry and close friendship, sat in a bullet-proof chamber
for two long hours watching the event with a genuine smile enticing the pleased mob. India is
truly honoured by the presence of a charismatic personality on the auspicious occasion.
The advantages:
1. The growing chemistry between Modi and Obama, the discussion over a cup of tea, the
informal approach with which they address each other, that ease we see when the two leaders
converse is a sign that the relations between India and US has grown stronger and in days to
come it will grow even stronger. This is good news for both the nations sharing mutual
objectives.
2. There is an anticipated gesture that the two countries shall be coming together to co-produce
military tools and that there would be reforms in the Indian nuclear liability law which prevents
American companies wanting to spread their wings in India. Nothing in detail has been released
in this respect but surely there is going to be reforms for good in days to come.
3. The nuclear pact that been agreed in 2008 was kept at halt due to Indian laws on liability over
any accidents. Now it has been confirmed that a large insurance pool will be set up, without the
need for any further legislation. US ambassador Richard Verma said, "It opens the door for US
and other companies to come forward and actually help India towards developing nuclear power
and support its non carbon-based energy production."
4. Climate changes and its influences captured a part of their conversation wherein India agreed
to cap its carbon emission range. India ranks third in the list of total carbon emitter of the world,
though its per capita emissions are a fraction of those of the West. India had till now ignored
calls for a cap to emissions, with the view that with millions of its citizens living off a dollar or
two a day, its economic development must be a priority. The new formed ties are expected to
bring about changes in this font soon.
5. They together agreed to increase their bilateral trade five times, from the current $100bn
(66.7bn) a year. The US will also sell more military hardware to India. Obama has from time to

time stressed the interests in more trade and investment amongst the two countries. Towards the
end of the day, president Obama pledged of $4 billion in investments and loans, seeking to
release the "untapped potential" of a business and strategic partnership between the world's
largest democracies.
6. At a joint press conference, Mr Modi said the two countries were "starting a new journey"
based on "renewed trust and sustained attention". There are also positive hopes as the two
nations would increase cooperation on defence projects and on eliminating terrorist safe havens
and on bringing terrorists to justice.
7. Obama said that U.S. Export-Import Bank would finance $1 billion in exports of 'Made-inAmerica' products. The U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation will lend $1 billion to
small- and medium-sized enterprises in rural areas of India. Regarding renewable energy, a key
focus for Modi, $2 billion will be committed by the U.S. Trade and Development Agency for
renewable energy.
8. China's territorial claims is a major concern and to tackle this issue Modi and Obama stated
their commitment to freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. This could be a big game
changer hitting China hard with their bond. US also no longer has China in the good books and
India has its own issues with them. The two coming together is a news that China would not
celebrate upon. In a joint statement they said, "The leaders agreed to exchange information on
individuals returning from these conflict zones and to continue to cooperate in protecting and
responding to the needs of civilians caught up in these conflicts."
9. The two countries have also agreed to a 10-year framework for defence ties and struck deals
on cooperation that included joint production of drone aircraft and equipment for Lockheed
Martin Corp's C-130 military transport plane.
Conclusion:
US-India ties have seen a new seal of bond with this honoured visit of president Barack Obama
along with First Lady Michelle Obama. The close friendship between the two leaders show good
hope of bridging many other gaps between the two nations. Their trade and investments are a big
boost to India's economic development. Along with Modi wave, the much anticipated
development wave could actually see an action in progress.

TV Commercials should be banned.

TV commercials is coming under attack from parents organizations, politicians and pressure
groups in many countries as it not only regulates false and misleading ads but also lures people
into impulsive spending. But they also provide us with the latest information on the latest
products, keeping us updated. Advertisements are all glitter and little truth.
For- There should be regulations against false or misleading advertisements, as most of the TV
commercials are advert towards making profit.

- TV can exist without advertising, as it only creates distractions and disturbances.

- Commercials coming nowadays depict vulgarity knowing no bounds.
- Teenagers become easy victims of the commercials, as they fail to understand that advertisers
are only trying to lure them into buying their products.
- Advertisements are directed towards the younger generation, luring them into making
premature decisions and buying things that are not essential.
- There is nothing moral in encouraging customers to be non-rational and impulsive in spending.
Against- Advertisements offer a wide range of variety for the customers, which give the customers a lot
of choices to choose from.
- It boosts economy by generating revenue; this money is generally of the people working behind
the scenes.
- It would be a violation of freedom of speech and press.
- Banning ads would create unawareness among the people about the new products that are up
for grabs, that might be useful to many.
- Banning TV ads would leave a sore taste as it would violate the right of freedom of expression.
- Many channels will get closed not being able to meet their cost of production.
- Banning the advertisements may lead to channels not being able to air impartial content in
national interest as they will have to depend on some particular revenue sources.
In the interest of the free speech, TV commercials should not be banned but they should be
restricted in terms of the contents they show that might influence the teenagers in a wrong way.
To have Freedom of Speech is a good thing but it should have its limits.
Is the boss always right?
One of the common things we all hear as employees is, there are two rules of working under a
boss Rule 1.) the boss is always right, Rule 2.) If the boss is not right, refer to rule no. 1.).
As soon as we hear the word boss, the most common first image that strikes our mind is that of
someone who is in position of power coming from his designation. Many of us have experienced
their bosses to be absolutely authoritative with a last say in everything while there are others who
have found their bosses to be giving them an opportunity to participate in important decisions.

For - The title boss comes with an experience:

-The title boss does show off some authority but only comes with an experience and practical
understanding of business. So, most of the decisions a boss would make, he would make on the
basis of practical understanding of the situation.
-Organisations usually have a reporting system which means that a boss would make the
decisions based on facts and figures. These will be well thought of actions and would be right in
most cases.
-The bosses these days come equipped either with a management degree and/or have attended a
lot of training programmes and work shops on team management and soft skills. This makes
them understand that they can not work without team and have to give it due importance and
credit. This again ensures that the boss makes a well thought of decision based on the skills and
opinion of the team. This further increases his probability of being right.
Against - The boss is a human being too:
-The employees working in the frontline know the practical aspects of business which the boss
might not know but they always make a decision for the lower level employees which many
times are taken with insufficient information.
-It is a human tendency to focus on certain aspects while ignoring others and the boss is no
exception.
-We can not expect the boss to know everything, many a times an employee may have an easy
solution to problem than a boss. Many bosses are not able to accept this fact and get into a
competition with their own sub-ordinates. Many a times, it turns out to be an ego issue for the
boss.
-If the boss comes from different domain, he may not be technically as competitive as some of
the senior employees though he may be good at managing the team and running the whole show.
In such a case the boss may not always be right and must ponder over the thoughts of his team.
-The boss may at times get into the favouritism mode which might dilute the objectivity of his
decisions.
The boss is a human being too and can have his own share of right or wrong decisions. We as
employees should not be judging him just because he is a boss. At the same time, to run the
organization effectively the boss must try to take his team into confidence and try to grow
himself into the role of a leader while getting out of the shadow of the word boss which is a bit
too strong.

Kiran Bedi as the CM candidate of Delhi Support or Oppose?

Introduction:
Kiran Bedi, the first woman IPS officer to be sworn in to one of the highest esteemed positions
in the country, an inspiration to millions, finally joins politics just in time for the Delhi legislative
assembly elections 2015. There are controversies and there are positive hopes too as Bedi steps

ahead with hints that she might be BJP's candidate for Delhi CM. No sooner was it declared that
Kiran Bedi shall be joining BJP, the screenshots of her past tweets against NaMo went viral all
over the internet. Haters can go on with their accusations but one of the most proficient lady with
numerous achievements and credentials to her name is in and that is perhaps giving sleepless
nights to Kejriwal and others.
In support of Kiran Bedi in politics:
1. Kiran Bedi has been an ardent supporter of Anna Hazare's anti corruption movement and she
broke ties when Kejriwal decided to bring politics into the movement. Both Anna and Bedi have
been against the corrupt nature of politics and not the political system entirely. It is her personal
decision whether she wants to extend support to Modi or Kejriwal. She was inspired by Modi's
leadership qualities and saw in him a hope for a better India. Every Indian should respect her
decision to join politics.
2. Kiran Bedi had been a woman of clean motives and honest principles all her life. Her
dedication to serve the nation has reflected in her journey till date and hopes are high if she goes
on to become the Chief Minister of Delhi. Indian politics indeed is in urgent need of people like
Kiran Bedi to bring in reforms and to ensure that law and order of the country is strictly
followed.
3. Kiran Bedi has worked with the United Nations in New York as the Police Advisor to the
Secretary General, in the Department of Peace Keeping Operations along with representing India
in International forums on crime prevention, drug abuse, police and prison reforms and womens
issues. In days to come she can be one of the most efficient leaders to lead India towards
development and anti corruption.
4. Indian politics need people with credibility and credentials to be elected to one of the highest
positions that decides the way the government will be run in coming years. Kiran Bedi holds a
Law, Masters, Doctorate degree. She is also a Nehru Fellow post doctoral. Being a National and
an Asian Tennis champion adds to her vulnerability in different areas. She has addressed
audiences at the American, British, European, Indian Universities, Corporate and Civil Society
groups. She possesses every quality that is needed for good leadership.
5. As a social worker, her contribution towards the society adds to her liberal nature. She had
earned the Ramon Magsaysay Award also known as the Asian Nobel Prize and several other
national and international honours. She has founded two NGOs, Navjyoti and India Vision
Foundation, that have extended support to many deprived children, and adults in the areas of
education, vocational skills, environment, counselling, and health care in both urban and rural
areas. At present her NGOs are running four Community Colleges, registered with Indira Gandhi
National Open University, to provide vocational and soft skills to Indian youth. Bedi is the most
eligible candidate for the upcoming CM elections.
6. From being the Most Admired Indian Female Icon to being voted as India's most admired and
most trusted woman, Kiran Bedi is certainly a woman of clear conscience and unbeatable spirit
of serving the nation. Her efforts with team Anna had been in headlines for long and now is the
time when her prowess could bring in the most aspired change in Indian politics - the lokpal bill.
Against Kiran Bedi in politics:

1. As pointed out by the opposition leaders, Kiran Bedi seems to be joining the group of "U
turns" as she had openly been criticizing NaMo in the past and had also been against joining
politics. Her sudden decision to join BJP is reportedly raising questions not only amongst people
but also within the party she has preferred. While there are anticipations that she might be the
CM candidate from BJP, the party leaders have been heard saying that she is just a "party
worker" extending support to Modi for his inspiring leadership. She denied the rumours saying
that BJP has a well organized system and there is absolutely no issues inside.
2. BJP chose Kiran Bedi for a face-off with Kejriwal when they feared losing to the newly
empowered AAP that seems to be gathering pace when it comes to earning the faith of Delhiites.
Just a day after AAP accused Satish Upadhyay of indulging in corruption, BJP brought in Kiran
Bedi - the icon of anti corruption and fearless image. It seems to be a little too late for the party
to take shelter within the image of a reputed former cop to earn votes in favour.
3. BJP had become used to entirely flared up rallies with mobs high spirited to hear the goodday-promise-makers talk about good governance and development in days to come. However,
the views of their recent rallies in Delhi was nothing of that sort even when Amit Shah and
Narendra Modi took charge. They were indeed not used to seeing such a sight and that's when
the fear of losing to AAP took over. Bringing in Kiran Bedi is just a move to earn votes and even
if she is elected to be the CM of Delhi, there would hardly be a change in the current economic
or political system of the country or Delhi to be specific.
4. Kiran Bedi is an influential woman who has to her name achievements, social services, and
fearless protests against the wrong doers. By entering politics she is going to be dirtying her
hands - politics deprives none of this opportunity says history. A woman of influence and
prowess should not get into politics for the mere reason of becoming the vote bank for a party.
5. Shazia Ilmi and Jaya Prada who also joined hands with BJP hail from the political field while
Kiran Bedi has been apolitical for long since she joined Hazare's India against corruption
movement. Her sudden jump into politics might backfire and her good deeds of years could be
put to sacrifice.
Conclusion:
Kiran Bedi's decision to join BJP is entirely her personal opinion of what she thinks of the
present government regardless of what she thought to them earlier. However, given the
credentials that she possesses, it should only be fair if she is chosen to be the CM candidate for
the upcoming elections instead of just bring a party worker to earn them votes. India needs her
motivations and the spirit of serving the nation, selfless and free of corruption. Delhi can see a
better tomorrow at the hands of one of the top notch cop turned leader of the country.

Does Messenger of God deserve a clearance ?

Introduction
Messenger of God is an upcoming movie, directed by Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh and Jeetu
Arora. The movie would be released in Hindi, English, Tamil and Telugu. The Central Board of
Film Certification did not allow the movie to released. It has been sent to the revising committee.
Different Sikh groups protested against the release of the movie and demanded for a ban.

Yes MSG deserves a clearance.

1. Logical In India, there are quite a few films made which do not make any sense. Yet, they
come up on the big screen. The recent movie PK depicted an alien visiting the earth. When PK
can be released, why not MSG? MSG is purely entertainment.
2. Heroism The hero of the movie is not depicted as a human god. He is portrayed as a human
being who fights against evil. The name of the movie itself suggests that he is not a human god.
It is all about heroism.
3. Miracles The movie was denied the release certificate due to the miracles shown. The movie
is highly criticized as the hero promotes miracles. Then, why movies like Dhoom 3 or Om Shanti
Om were not banned?
4. Deletion of scenes Instead of denying the release certificate, the board could have asked the
director to delete a few of the scenes. The audience are excited to watch this movie on the big
screen.
5. Right to express India is a country where different genres of films come up each month.
Every director has the right to put across a movie that would purely entertain the audience.
No MSG does not deserve a clearance.
1. Impact The movie should not be given a clearance as it portrays issues like consuming
alcohol and drugs. The audience may also include children and it would have a negative impact
on the society.
2. Emotional sentiments - A few of the Sikh groups have been demanding a ban on this movie as
they believe it targets their community. It hurts the sentiments of a group or community.
3. Human God The movie is trying to promote the concept of human god. India is a country
where a lot of people are worshiped as human gods. This will encourage more number of people
to declare themselves as god.
4. Advertisement As per the Censor board, the movie looks more of an advertisement and
encourages conflicts and fights.
Conclusion:
Bollywood is one of the largest centers of film productions in the world. It makes a lot of films
each year. In the trailer of MSG, one can see a rockstar baba trying to be like one from the new
generation. If released, it would be widely accepted by the audience as they are waiting to watch
the Baba on screen.

Is United Nations in need of reforms to maintain its efficacy?

Introduction:
Indian President Pranab Mukherjee met United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and he
utilized the opportunity to emphasize that United Nations is in urgent need of reforms to

maintain its efficacy and proficient functioning. The meet was designated towards encouraging
India's aspirations for a permanent seat in the security council but shifted more towards
introducing reforms to fast track the proceedings of United Nations. This brings us to ponder
whether United Nations is efficient in its functioning or are there spaces for reforms to boost its
'credibility' and 'legitimacy' of its decision.
Yes, UN needs reforms:
1. The biggest of all the problems that the world at large is facing is terrorism - ruthless and
barbaric that sees no borders and no mercy. United Nations being the head council of the
member nations should do something effective to bring the countries together to fight against the
evil brewing somewhere in every nation. Fast track decisions have to be taken for providing
security to the nations from the terror attacks. Be it the Peshawar school attack or the Charlie
Hebdo press attack, United Nations is yet to prove its efficiency at restoring world peace and
security from such attacks.
2. The composition needs to be reformed too just as the functioning of the council has been
reformed from time to time. Improving the legitimacy of the security council is absolutely
necessary and since its initiation, there have been changes in its composition calling for adding
the nations that have long been aspiring to become a permanent member. India had always been
a good contributor at the UN and the second largest donors to the Democracy Fund, next only to
the United States. India completely deserve a permanent at the security council.
3. Israel and Palestine war has never been at ease even after the intervention of United Nations.
Since decades Israel has been taking unilateral actions in its geographical vicinity and no
substantial action with a proper outcome has been seen in this front. United Nations has to get
stricter in imposing rules and in taking charge of these kind of war states. United Nations has
always been partial in taking a stand against terrorism. They did condemn the terrorists involved
in attacks but at the same time no actions were taken against the government funded terror
groups.
4. When United Nations was created, United States was the only country that owned nuclear test
weapons and along with 190 other member nations, they signed the nuclear non-proliferation
treaty. Despite this treaty signed and agreed upon by all the member nation, many of them
continued with the development and testing of nuclear weapons from time to time. United Nation
seemed neither offended nor did it try to restrain the member nations from continuing with the
testing and development of deadly weapons. Was is ugly and lethal weapons make it even more
uglier.
5. United Nations inefficiency at war fronts has been seen during many crisis including the
Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam crisis, Yugoslavia bombed by NATO, unilateral actions in Iraq,
America's anarchy in Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of search for weapons and terrorists.
United nations was created to stand as a common platform that could help in restoring world
peace and security. If United Nations is not reformed to make it more legislative, it's meaning
would be lost soon.
No, UN needs no reform:

1. United Nations has been doing its part in maintaining peace and security between member
nations. It has prevented any further world wars since its creation. It has been making genuine
efforts to solve issues between India and Pakistan. Terrorism is not within the reach of member
nations or the United Nations. They have been making efforts to curb terrorism and have been
successful at various fronts.
2. UN has played a very important role in curbing colonialism and imperialism. They have also
been protective in suppressing apartheid to a great extent. Protection of human rights had also
been a successful venture supported by UN. These achievements of United Nations cannot be
ignored and it would be wrong to say that UN is inefficient in any way.
3. United Nation's agencies like WHO, UNICEF, UNESCO, any many more have been truly
efficient in making lives better especially in rural areas of member nations. Spreading awareness
and extending helping hands to the needy has been a very successful venture organised by the
United.
4. United Nation's contribution towards peacekeeping operations, settling disputes and conflicts
has been successful to great extent. Peaceful settlement of dispute has been very effective in
preventing wars and attacks.
5. United Nations had done more than its part in imparting education, food, healthy living to
poor regions of the member nations. It's health and population management strategies have
proven it's efficacy from time to time. From protecting children to protection of refugees, United
Nations has been the best support that the member nations could expect.
Conclusion:
It is true that United Nations has seen many successes since its establishment, but alongside it
can also not be denied that with changing time, the priorities need to change and to tackle bigger
challenges such as terrorism and fundamentalism, changes and reforms are necessary. To change
with time is the need of situation and United Nation has to upgrade it's current status to provide
effective help to member nations in establishing world peace and security from terrorism.

Is AirAsia responsible for its own loss?

Introduction
AirAsia is a low cost Malaysian airline. The headquarters of AirAsia are at Kuala Lampur, the
capital. 2014 was an unpleasant year for the Malaysian aviation industry as they faced quite a
few major flight mishaps. One Malaysian flight went missing early this March and another was
shot down in Ukraine in July. Now, a third incident is added to the count.
Flight QZ8501, an AirAsia Indonesia aircraft, lost its contact with the base and went missing
with around 162 people on board. A long investigation followed the missing of the plane. On the
third day officials confirmed that the missing flight has crashed into the sea as they recovered 40
bodies
and
some
debris
of
the
aircraft.

The AirAsia Indonesia plane started flying in 2008. It had flown 13600 times and had completed
23000 hours. It had undergone its last maintenance work in November, 2014.
Now, let us take a look on whether AirAsia should be held responsible for the missing flight.
Yes

AirAsia

should

be

held

responsible.

1. Safety The plane had undergone its last maintenance work in November i.e. just last month.
But AirAsia should have checked the flight once more before permitting it to take off.
2. Poor communication Due to the poor communication system the pilots could not reach the
authorities
at
the
base
in
case
of
the
emergency.
3. New Path The pilots wanted to change their path but their request was rejected due to the air
traffic. AirAsia could have contacted the air traffic control and should have granted the
permission
to
change
the
path.
4. Prevented the takeoff Due to the bad weather, many flights were canceled. AirAsia also
could
have
canceled
Flight
QZ8501.
5. Inadequate training Being a low cost airline, AirAsia might have been taking people who
are
not
very
skilled
in
operating
a
plane.
No

AirAsia

should

not

be

held

responsible.

1. Bad weather The aircraft went missing due to the bad weather and not because of the
irresponsibility
of
AirAsia.
2. Air traffic The pilots wanted to increase the altitude of the flight. But the authorities rejected
the request due to the air traffic. This was a good decision on the part of AirAsia as they were
trying
to
prevent
any
clash
of
routes.
3. Reputation AirAsia has always maintained a good reputation and people have always had a
good opinion about AirAsia. This is one of the cheapest flights. The missing of Flight QZ8501, is
the
first
such
incident
in
the
history
of
AirAsia.
4. Signal The missing flight did not give any signal of emergency. Hence, even the AirAsia
authorities
were
unaware
of
the
upcoming
tragedy.
5. Quick response - AirAsia responded quickly to the queries of the relatives and did not delay
in attending to them. It shows that they do fulfill their responsibility towards the passengers.
Conclusion
The search for the missing plane is still on. According to the people in Indonesia, AirAsia was a
good plane with cheap rates and it gave employment opportunities to many. The actual reason for

the crashing of the plane can be known only when the investigation is over. Countries like the
US, France and Australia are offering their full support and help to track down the missing flight.

Real estate investment is not always the best option for all
the money you possess.
Introduction:
Real estate investment include purchasing, managing, sale or rental of real estate (immovable
property; generally housing and building) for achieving the basic objective of profit gain. The
strategy of buying, managing, selling or renting the house or building is known as real estate
investment. The investors need to be cautious about the security and return of their investment.
First of all he should determine which type of investor he is risk bearing, or he wants security
of return back of capital or he expects regular return from his investment or may consult to real
estate agent. Would it be right decision to invest all the money he possess in real estate?
For:
1. There is no actual guarantee of appreciation of real estate as the market goes on fluctuating.
Accordingly it may depreciate if it focuses any negative image. Real estate investment can be the
best substitute of other sources of investment but not always best investment.
2. Most of the time people appoint real estate agent for investment purposes who charges very
high for these services. This would lead to unnecessary increase in cost of the property. Having
an agent may cause unnecessary pressure to buy the property before you find if it suits your
requirement
or
not.
3. The investing range is limited whether you want to actively take part in management of the
property or hire someone else to manage it. Further additional costs are also incurred in the
maintenance of the property. This will lead to certain outflow of cash from the income.
4. It is beneficiary only when the rate of fixed charge is less than return on investment, or can be
said that the payments should not overcome receipts from the investment. Thus motive of any
venture or business is to earn profits which is uncertain in this case.
5. Large sum of capital needs to be employed in such investments. If people are having relatively
lower amount they will not invest in it anyhow in real estate. They may choose other investments
such as investing in shares, debentures, etc. They find these investments more attractive than real
estate
one.
6. Many people had started their career by investing in real estate and the dull market condition
is evidence when they all went bankrupt. This only appeals to those investors who are active in
risk bearing. Thus it is not the best option for investing as it involve uncertainty regarding
investment.

Against:
1. Real estate investment includes purchase of property for resale or rental purpose to generate
income. This will provide regular assured income to the investor. In case for rental purpose,
ownership of the property still lies in the hands of investor and in case of sale purpose the value
of
the
building
goes
to
appreciate
during
the
period.
2. This investment is not time taking. With real estate investing you need not to sacrifice lots of
personal time. You may appoint an expert its active manager who will look after the tenant or
venture, whatever it may be, on your behalf. Little effort its only required in initial stage after
that
investors
need
not
to
devote
his
personal
time.
3. Real estate investment results to some tangible property which can be pledged out mortgaged
to raise funds from suitable sources of finance. Due to this credit worthiness, its ability to be
borrowed
is
high
in
the
market.
4. Returns on real estate are relatively higher than other. The expenses, taxes, or other
unconditional losses can be written off easily. Such investments greatly appeals to cautious
investors who looks for reasonable safety of their money along with fixed and higher return.
5. The investors need not pay 100 percent down but can pay 25-30 percent down payment.
Further it can be financed by bank or other financial institution. This can help investors with
lower funds, which later can expand his property with larger number.
6. If the property is financed by any financial institution or bank, the cash flow should be tax free
and the investor can wait for the capital gain on the future sale of the property. The further gains
can
be
utilised
for
writing
off
tax
or
other
expenses.
Conclusion:
Before investing, the investor should classify the various forms of investments and determine
which would be more suitable for him. People are quiet sensitive in case of security of their
capital and real estate involve heavy risk bearing element. One should not invest all their money
in real estate as they may fall shortage of funds which can't be arranged from real estate in very
short period because properties cannot be liquidated easily. One should rather invest more money
in that class of assets which can be liquidated easily if need for cash arises.

Organic and Herbal Are they safe?

Introduction:
Organic products are those which are prepared using organic materials. They may contain
ingredients that have animals as their sources. And herbal products are the ones that are prepared
from plants. Both organic and herbal products have one thing in common - they do not contain

any

chemicals

or

preservatives.

Today, a lot of organic and herbal products are available in the market. According to the World
Health Organization, Around 4 billion people across the world use herbal products. Even in
India, a lot of organic and herbal products like Tulsi Wellness Tea, Triphala, Haritaki, etc. are
available easily. There is a high demand for these products in the market.
Now,
Yes

let

us

take

Organic

look
and

at

whether
herbal

these

products

products

are
are

really

safe.

safe.

1. No chemicals These products do not have any chemicals involved in their production. They
are
natural
and,
so,
they
do
not
cause
any
side-effects.
2. Effective - Organic and herbal products have a long term effect. For example, herbal products
are
effective
to
treat
arthritis.
3. No antibiotics Most of the organic products are derived from animals. These animals are not
injected
with
any
sort
of
antibiotics.
Hence,
they
are
very
safe.
4. Trademark These products come under the label of THR (Traditional Herbal Register) and
PL (Product License). They guarantee that these products are not harmful.
5. Rules and regulations The products usually follow certain guidelines prescribed by the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA is responsible for monitoring the safety of these
products.
The
regulations
assure
that
the
products
are
safe.
No

Organic

and

Herbal

products

are

not

safe.

1. Not suitable The organic and herbal products may not be appropriate in many conditions.
The organic or herbal medicines may take much more time than the modern medicines' cure. For
example,
it
cannot
cure
a
heart
problem
quickly.
2. Lack of instruction Unlike the modern medicines, most of the herbal products do not carry
dosage
instructions
on
the
cover.
Hence,
it
may
harm
a
person.
3. Poisonous Some products are made from wild herbs. Hence, consuming these products may
be
risky.
4. No regulation The organic and herbal products do not have proper regulations at many
places including the United States. Without proper regulation or law imposed, it is not safe to
prescribe these products to patients. The quality of products may also vary.
5. Lack of nutrition The organic products are mostly derive from animals. According to
researchers, animals are infected with a lot of bacteria. Hence, it can be harmful for the people
who
consume
these
products.

Conclusion:
The bottom line of this discussion is that the organic and herbal products can be safe but, at
times, they do have certain side effects. The products should be consumed only after careful
scrutiny.

Should internet freedom be curtailed?

Introduction:
With Russia and Turkey playing hard to restrain internet freedom, there is no short of countries
as more and more join the clash to retrain giants like Facebook, Twitter and Google to censor its
content. Both Russia and Turkey tried curtailing these internet companies at different times of the
year to remove controversial contents and pages from the internet. The result, however, was
same in both the cases. Facebook and Twitter respectably removed the content but copies of the
same documents were circulated in various ways and hence censoring the content was worthless.
India and Pakistan has also been in the imbroglio of internet censorship to fight terrorists from
manipulating youths for joining ISIS. Pakistan, however, had a different kind of story to censor
with
ban
of
YouTube.
Yes,

internet

freedom

should

be

curtailed:

1. Controversies never spread faster until it started going online. Anti-government protests,
terrorism blurts, defaming of persons, false rumors and allegations have all been a prominent part
of the viral contents on the internet in the gone year. Even before companies were contacted for
censoring or removing the content or video, copies were uploaded the very next moment.
2. In the European Union, a court ruling last year established a right to be forgotten, which
includes freedom to access search engines like Google to remove links of content of negative
material about them. This is important to safeguard against personal information going online
after being hacked and leaked. 2014 saw many incidences of nude pictures of renowned
celebrities going viral over the internet. Internet freedom should not include the right to leak
private
content
of
any
person
without
their
consent.
3. Talking of freedom of expression, not everything shared on the internet is intended for good
reasons. Leaked MMS defame women. Racial content create imbroglio. Misleading information
harm youngsters. Manipulative videos and articles create revolutions that are harmful for the
world at large. The sharing of this type of content cannot be included in freedom of expression.
4. Censoring content on internet is difficult but that does not mean that the government should
not even try to do so. Further spreading of such content could be stopped by asking the
companies to remove or censor the video or any sort of content. Graphics and videos on the
internet are far more influential in affecting the minds of people hence it is important to put
restraint
on
these.

5. The biggest challenge that the world is currently facing is spread of terrorism and to prevent
further more youths from being manipulated by the fundamentalists, it is important that
interaction
of
this
sort
be
censored
from
the
internet.
6. Internet access is available to children below the maturity age limit. For preventing children
from viewing inappropriate content, it has become even more important to censor hardcore
pornography and other disturbing content from the internet. India is still lagging behind in
retraining
such
content
from
the
access
of
minors.
No,

internet

freedom

should

not

be

curtailed:

1. Freedom of speech and press is being advocated in support of Charlie Hebdo but the same is
being censored on the internet. Every individual has the right to express their idea and to
propagate what they believe to be true on basis of recorded evidences in the form of audio or
video. Why cant the government apply the same rule before asking internet companies to cut out
the controversial content? Free speech can either be curtailed to certain limits or given complete
freedom
to
circulate
any
sort
of
crap
over
the
web.
2. Censoring the content creates that curiosity that compels people to do what they are prevented
from doing. Copies of such content go viral after they are removed or blocked from the main
pages. Those copied contents add to the trouble with added wrong rumors to it and hence is more
awkward
that
the
original
content
could
be.
3. Censoring with become the right exercised by the government at its call. This might prevent
information containing the truth of any situation from reaching out to the public. There will
hidden
secrets
which
public
would
have
no
access
to.
Conclusion:
It is necessary to go by the demand of present situation and the present day challenges that the
world at large has been dealing with calls for restraining freedom of internet and to limit its
extent of publishing content to only those that are non-harmful and doesnt involve larger
controversies that could affect lives of people. Facebook has always been very cooperative in this
matter. In the year ahead, we expect all the other big internet companies to follow the same
prospect.

Paris attack: Who is responsible?

Introduction:
January 7, 2015, Paris witnessed barbarity and ruthless killing in the name of vengeance.
Gunmen or more specifically, terrorists claiming to be followers of Islam, stormed into the the
office of Charlie Hebdo's satirical magazine and killed 12 people brutally. This is not the first
time when Charlie's weekly was attacked. Back in November 2011 there was firebomb attacks on

the headquarters of his office. Threats were given by mad extremists to yet another bunch of mad
cartoonists who abuse and offend people through their cartoons. Who is actually responsible for
this
barbarism
and
loss
of
12
lives?
Terrorists

are

responsible:

1. Media has the freedom of expression and though they misuse the freedom to offend religion
and beliefs of people, nothing justifies killing of people. It is terrorism and fanaticism and
everyone should condemn the act for the sake of humanity. These terrorists are no friends of any
religion. They are the biggest enemies of peace and humanity, have crossed every limits of
barbarism,
and
should
be
punished.
2. There is no vengeance in Islam and those hypocrites who shouted out after the killing that they
avenged Prophet Muhammed are actually nowhere near to the teachings of the Prophet. The
greatest of prophets of Islam does not need mere humans to take revenge for him. Islam teaches
tolerance and these extremists know nothing of the same yet call themselves follower of Prophet.
3. Protesting against the media and condemning the obscene caricatures of Hebdo could be done
in a peaceful way too. There is no denying that his cartoons are indescribably offending to our
Prophet and raised anger everywhere not only amongst the Muslims but other religions as well
(it's not only Islam that Cynic Charlie offends) but such acts of terrorism are not justified in any
way.
4. Freedom of press and democracy cannot be stabbed to silence by these means of inhuman acts.
Intimidation by religious extremists and politicians is at its height and these terrorists are born
out of it. They might take a stand that their act is justified given that they were offended by the
press' publication and they did not agree to it. But you do not need to agree to everything they
write and publish and power doesn't give you the authority to punish them for what they wrote or
drew.
5. Islamic minorities in France are living under unpleasant situation with Islamophobia getting
them discriminated. To add to their despair, their economic crisis makes them easy target to
intimidation by the so called jihadists. But instead of resorting to violence these people can
protest in other peaceful ways where there would be more space for sensible discussions and that
would
yield
effective
results
too.
Charlie

Hebdo

shares

the

partnership

in

crime:

1. The role of the media is to bring forth the truth, free from intimidation and fear. Lampooning
shariah laws and offending a religion is what media do when they have nothing else left to cover
their pages. Without thinking of the consequences or the kind of response such offensive
cartoons could draw, Hebdo continued the business of hurting sentiments of people worldwide.
This is not meant to defend the terrorists or their act of terrorism but there is no denying that
such content is like oil on fire for those already ready to kill and die intimidated by the leaders of
the
terror
groups.

2. According to Florence Noiville, a French novelist, there is a keyword in France - laicite which means public life should be separated from religion. Does this rule not apply to the French
media? Terrorists hurt physically in the name of religion. We can them hypocrites. Media
cartoonists like Hebdo hurts the sentiments of millions intentionally in the name of democracy
and freedom of press. We now call this strategy. How are people like Hebdo any different from
those
like
ISIS?
Both
are
ruthless
in
different
ways.
3. Other than the followers of these terror groups, every Muslim condemns the atrocities and
fundamentalism of these extremists. The terror act was condemned by Muslims across the globe.
Did Charlie's media think of the sentiments of these people when they drew the obscene cartoons
of one of the greatest prophets of a religion? Common people like us could get angry over it and
condemn the cartoons with words but what else had Charlie expected from these terrorists?
Opponents would call this a strategy to gain sympathy and outspread messages of Islamophobia we
expect
Charlie
to
be
expecting
this
too.
4. Meaningless and obscene cartoons of Charlie Hebdo are just meant to anger people of a
religion and they have nothing in it that calls for freedom of press of democracy. They are drawn
just to offend people. Is that so difficult to stop? If we cannot expect sensible media people to
understand that their content is hurting people's sentiments, there is no expecting these fanatics to
feel
the
pain
of
people.
Conclusion:
For Hebdo, it's just a cartoon he created one fine day when he was retarder and had no news to
play around with. His cartoons were failing to get attention so he decided to play safe with the
matter that would get him into the limelight for no good reason. Muslims across the globe were
offended (mission accomplished) but then came the unexpected blow from another bunch of
retards. Both of these groups insulted the Prophet. More than the cartoonist, these terrorists
offended his teachings. Our heart goes out to the families of the victims of this massacre.

Should Geeta be adopted as national book of India?

Politics creates controversies and this time it is about declaring Geeta as the national book of
India. External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj wants Bhagavad Geeta to be declared as the
national book of India. She presented her views in her speech given at a function kept for
celebrating 5,151, years of Geeta. She said that the religious book has answers to all the
problems and that why it should be given the national scripture status. Do you agree with her?
Should
Geeta
be
adopted
as
national
book
of
India?
Yes
India is a land of variety still the book demonstrates the teachings that can be used by all the
different
segments
of
people.
The book is not about Hinduism, or praising a particular religion, instead it is about the

practical

learning

that

can

be

implemented

in

day-to-day

life.

There is no official national book of India and giving this status to Bhagavad Geeta will
respectfully
fill
the
gap.
The true essence of Bhagwad Geeta is in its substance which is also followed by renowned
people in their life. Aldous Huxley, Henry David Thoreau, Wilhelm von Humboldt, Albert
Schweitzer
etc.
are
non
Indian
followers
of
Bhagavad
Gita.
The book also makes people remember about the epic fight that happened when a woman was
degraded by men. It states that women should be treated with utmost respect.
Hinduism doesnt depend on one single holy book, and has even got other sacred books like
Vedas, Puranas and Upanishads. And, selecting Geeta indicates it is just about teaching and not
about
religion.
No
India is a nation of many religions and giving status of national book to Bhagwad Geeta can
create
unwanted
problems
in
the
society.
The national scripture status to a book which is a holy book of Hindus will be against
secularism in India. It will be an open war against Geeta versus Kuran versus Bible versus Guru
Granth
Sahib.
It is not official but the Constitution of India, a book that has all the rules and ideas to keep
India
working
is
considered
as
a
national
book
of
India.
Equality and justice are the two important national goals in a democratic nation which are
highlighted
in
the
Preamble
of
the
Constitution.
A respectable and sacred book like Bhagwad Geeta should not be given national book status as
people should pause and analyze how much respect other national symbols are gaining? It is a
meaningless lip service as after assigning it a national status it is treated with callous disregard.
The
finest
example
is
of
National
River
Ganga.
Conclusion
Assigning a national status to Geeta will only degrade the book as the people from the other
communities and religions will start detesting the book. As of now, they dont hold any harsh
feelings for the religious book, and even try to follow the principles laid in the book. The step
will create unwarranted drama and nuisance in the society. India is guided by the Constitution
and therefore, if any book deserves the national status is only the Constitution. It is created by
Indians, for Indians, of Indians and will always unite people.

Whatsapp is killing minds!

A Saudi man divorced his wife after she ignored his whatsapp messages. The husband said that
his wife used to spend all her time on whatsapp messaging platform. Due to the addiction, she
even ignored her children. Whatsapp is not a new thing in the market. Even the people who are
not educated are well aware of the messaging platform. The messaging app that started as a boon
can turn into a bane, if not used carefully. It is killing mind of people. Do you agree?
Yes
The youngsters are getting addicted to the messaging platform like other addictive substances.
It
is
more
of
an
addiction
rather
than
convenience.
People are not using the messaging platform for connecting with friends or relatives instead
they just want to check out the their presence on messaging platform.
A messaging platform connects people, but whatsapp is creating bridges between people. The
app, in many cases, is creating unnecessary doubts in relationships.
The start as well as end of the day happens with whatsapp. And, if people dont find any
messages
they
start
feeling
low.
People are so occupied with the use of whatsapp that they are unable to differentiate between
real and factual relationships. We can easily notice that while you are talking all the time to your
friends on Whatsapp, you hardly have an interaction with your immediate family. This also
points out the fact that while people have a lot of friends on Whatsapp network, there's hardly
any friend available whom they can talk out their heart face to face.
No
Whatsapp has become the largest messaging app, and it is just because it has allowed people to
come
closer
to
each
other.
There are some people who are not involved in any work, and such people are only addicted to
whatsapp,
not
everyone.
Whatsapp has allowed the school friends and distant relatives to come and talk at one place. It
doesnt kill mind but helps the people to cherish the old good memories and relationships.
In a world, where people dont have time to meet friends, whatsapp has allowed people to share
their problems with friends on messaging platform regardless of time and location.
Whatsapp is now even used by many firms and organizations for sharing of important
information
among
employees.
If used properly, Whatsapp can help generate new business opportunities and close the existing
deals
faster.

Conclusion
Every thing in this world has two sides, one positive and one negative. The use of Whatsapp is
no different. It is not a black or white app, but a grey app whose pros and cons are decided by the
user himself. The people are more isolated than before in the present world. Some make their
world better by using the app, and some make themselves more isolated after using this app. In
all the cases, balance is the key.

Bullet trains in India: pros and cons

While the country seemed excited when Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced a diamond
quadrilateral of bullet trains to connect the four major cities of Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata and
Chennai in his venture called Smart cities project, critics have a lot to say. There are reasons to
be happy about this project and there are reasons that drive us to ponder if this is the first priority
of a nation with majority of its population below poverty line. Let us look at it from all point of
views
and
generate
our
own
opinion
on
this.
Pros

of

Bullet

trains:

1. Speed: High speed is one of the biggest reasons for the proposal of this idea when it was first
initiated in India. Major cities connecting with towns of economic growth face the problem of
fast transportation. This would save time and boost businesses amongst the connected cities.
Reduction in commuting time is greatly required in Mumbai and other metro cities where a lot of
time
is
consumed
in
the
process.
2. Comfort: These trains would utilize high grade technology to provide comfortable journey of
long hours within just a few hours. Improvising on the comfort level of train journeys have been
a missing factor in Indian railways and the introduction of bullet trains would be a great
development
in
this
factor.
3. Safety: Earlier there were questions raised on the safety issues of these high speed trains but
the Shinkansen network of Japan shows excellent records of safety. Ever since the bullet trains
started
in
1964,
the
Shinkansen
has
reported
zero
fatalities.
4. Avoid overcrowding: Making commuting easier from small town to major cities would lessen
the crowd of settlement and migration in major cities which would reduce pressure on growing
urban areas. Chief Minister has rightly mentioned decongestion of Bangalore as one of the
reasons
for
the
bullet
train.
5. Stronger and eco-friendly: Not only these High speed trains are stronger enough to carry
heavier weight but are also eco-friendly as they do not require deforestations to set tracks. It is a
modern and technologically advanced means of transportation which can be a step towards
growth
and
development
in
India.

Cons

of

bullet

trains:

1. Cost of construction: The cost of laying a bullet-train corridor is estimated to cost up to Rs

100 crore a kilometre. After summing up the costs of signals, rolling stock, etc, the cost can rise
up to Rs 115 crore a km. Operation and maintenance costs would also be high.
2.High fares: Fares of these trains would be high too in order to compensate the expenses and
maintenance. One way fare on Mumbai-Ahmadabad route is projected to be around Rs 5,000.
Quite few Indians would be able to afford travelling with these expenses. And even those who
would be willing to pay such a high price might prefer travelling planes instead. If this factor is
not considered, then the project might prove to be a loss for the government.
3.Time consuming project: The project is at its initial level of planning and it is predicted that
the implementation of the plan would take years. In between if there is a change in government,
and
then
the
project
could
face
the
consequences.
4. Land acquisition: For laying tracks, there would be issues of land acquisition which might
trigger anger amongst commoners whose everyday living might come under menace. For
instance laying these tracks in Mumbai would require acquisition of land which has the largest
slums
in
the
city.
5. Other issues: This project might have other issues under Indias present condition including
plaguing of power sector, choice of speed and gauge, minimum length of the route for the
viability of the project, etc. It is important to understand whether or not India is ready for this
change.
Conclusion:
Bullet train has sets of pros and cons under Indias present situations and they need to be
properly handled so that it brings prosperity and development in the country and not debacles.
Every factor must be considered wisely and safeguarding of peoples living should not be
compromised. There are risks in this project but without risks nothing big can be acquired.

Why you should not buy gold?

Prime Minister Narendra Modi and RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan urged banks to convince
people to channelize their savings to other financial instruments apart from gold. This will not
only help India to grow economically but will also bring a great social transformation. Even
Finance Minister Arun jaitley wants Indian banks to make cashless transactions as it will help in
gaining currency value. The challenge will be faced by the commercial banks when it will come
to convincing people that a bank is as safe and reliable as they think gold is. This will also
improve
the
productivity.
Why

do

people

buy

gold?

In modern economic era where paper currency is the money in demand, gold's only usage is in
making jewelry. On the contrary, gold is an asset and has inherent qualities that make it unique
and precious for investors to have it in their treasury. It also serves as the investors' insurance
against geopolitical events, uncertainty and inflation as it is a much better option in terms of
liquidity
For this reason, investors typically look at gold as a safe haven during the times of political and
economic uncertainty. Reviewing historical wars and political we have seen the downfall in
currencies. At that time investors who had gold were able to protect their wealth. Accordingly,
whenever there are updates on any type of uncertainty, investors often buy gold as a safe option.
The reason for the importance of gold in the modern economy centers is the fact that it has
successfully preserved wealth for thousands of generations. The same, however, cannot be said
about
paper
currencies.
Why

should

you

not

buy

gold?

Gold is the only commodity that tends to go down when everything is up and vice-versa. The
market is expected to move in the downward direction as heavy investors are expected to sell
gold
rather
than
buying
it.
Earlier, gold did much better than equities but not anymore. Both equities and gold involve risks
and
you
cannot
rely
on
gold.
Even in the US, with the increased interest rates, investors keep their money in dollars rather
than gold. At the same time the price of gold is dependent on the international macroeconomic
factors. You cannot invest in gold confidently for a short and medium term.
You can only buy it for two reasons- need for gold and need for a security instrument in your
portfolio. Gold is just a precious metal that involves additional costs and risk involved is
comparatively more than cash investment. It is moreover considered as a pledged asset as it is
equivalent
to
savings
or
wealth
stores
but
not
an
investment.
Now that other investments look more appealing than gold, a time will come when gold will be
considered less valuable. In India, e-gold is offered by the National Spot Exchange Limited
(NSEL) which gives investors the option to invest in commodities such as gold, silver and
platinum online. The real risk in buying gold is that we lose the opportunity of investing in other
commodities
which
can
actually
give
higher
returns.
Investing in Gold Exchange Transfer Funds (ETFs) and mutual funds is safer and more
convenient than buying pure gold and jewelery. Gold funds are a much better option than
physical gold as they have significant advantages over the latter if you are looking at it as an
asset
class.
If you keep gold in its physical form, there is only outflow of current income for the
maintenance of lockers. Jewelry is not an investment as it is only an expenditure for pleasure,

symbolizing

wealth.

Gold is considered to be a good option in terms of liquidity but families in India even have
sentiments attached to it and it is the last item to leave the house in case of financial difficulties.
So
it
has
no
use
even
being
a
liquid
asset.
Moreover, it does not have any tax benefits. The price of gold even goes down if a natural
calamity strikes the country.

Military sees a bright future with roboflies

Introduction:
US army has for long been researching the development of robotic flies that would be
mechanically controlled via ultrasonic motors of the size of about three millimetres. It is said to
have only three to five centimetres long wings made of lead zirconium titanate, a material that
can create electric charge under an applied voltage or electric field. The wings would bend and
flap when voltage is applied to the material. However, there is only a probability as of now that
this thing could actually fly but the real confirmation would come only when the other
drawbacks
could
be
handled.
For:
1. These tiny mechanical flying robots would be ideal for spying into an enemy operation centre.
The army would be able to anticipate the strengths and weaknesses of the enemy and accordingly
plan their strategies. These spying roboflies would make it an easy win game for American army
2. These roboflies would be of great help to the American army in fighting the war against
terrorism where they would be able to determine more closely the concentration of terror groups
in an area with or without the innocent civilians. There is no denying that the rising enthusiasm
amongst youths joining ISIS and other terror groups is vengeance for innocents killed in the war
against terrorism. We can all but hope that this would change the war scenario into a fair fight.
3. There could be easy access to the locations of the terror groups that America has long been in
a troubled status with. These tiny flying spies could easily trespass into enemy areas and trace the
hidden locations of suspect to seek hostages and captives that these terror groups abduct more
than often. This device if developed as per anticipation would be the greatest of army weapons to
be invented ever - a far more advanced version of a spy cam.
4. A spy cam of such small length would neither be traceable nor easily visible to naked human
eyes. It will utilize artificial intelligence to determine balance and invisibility from bright caught.
This will make it the best of surveillance device ever crafted in such a small length. It would be
able to fly on it's own hence avoiding risks taken by army officials during the surveillance of
enemy
operation
centre.

5. Owing to their small size these roboflies would be able to invade through narrow spaces and
even hide into the least of space available to keep away from enemy eyes. The smaller the spy
device the better it gets for those handling it. A fully developed robofly would indeed be the best
of
spying
device
ever
invented.
Against:
1. This spying device would be far more advanced as any other device ever accessed and if it
goes into wrong hands like the probability of being caught by the enemies, the outcome could be
adverse. The enemies would be able to replicate the device and use it against the country that
designed
it
or
against
the
other
countries
of
it's
target.
2. There have been reports before that these spy like insects were used during election protests
and the government was using it to track the people involved in the protest. This could put the
lives of common citizens in danger as they would be suspected and tracked without any fault of
their
own.
3. The smaller the gadget the more are the chances of encountering errors and challenges during
its development. PiezoMEMS team also stated that it might take another ten to fifteen years of
research and development to make these roboflies completely functional. There are intricate
aerodynamic problems that the makers of this device is presently facing.
4. The object of surveillance could be common people that would become suspects within
minutes and their privacy could be mishandled. There might also be controversies from friendly
nations with reports of being spied by these roboflies. It would be challenging to maintain peace
and harmony with the other countries that would be under the fear of being spied by these robots.
5. The small size of the roboflies could also be a problem when its accuracy would be judged.
The cam size would be small too and the clarity of images captured by the flies might not be
good enough and could lead to misinterpretation of data collected by them. Wrong information is
more
dangerous
than
no
information
at
all.
Conclusion:
With acute security precautions and after compete consideration of the pros and cons, this device
could promise a brighter future to US army. In years to come it would open new spheres in
making wars less bloody and fairer if not misused or misguided with evil notions of conquering
everything accessible.

Reduction in Interest Rates - Imperative for Industrial

Growth
Interest rates are an important monetary tool in the hands of Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to
control the money supply in the market and thereby affect inflation, investments, and the

economy
RBI,
1)

in
or

If

any

Central

inflation

is

Bank,
high,

general.

generally
increase

follows
the

these
interest

protocols:
rates

Higher interest rates discourage banks to borrow money from the RBI, and these banks in turn
increase their interest rates leading to lesser borrowings. This further leads to lower economic
growth, decreases the liquidity in the market, and the prices of goods slowly come down thus
reducing
inflation.
2)

If

inflation

is

lower,

decrease

the

interest

rates

When the inflation is low, the central bank generally lowers its interest rates. This means that
commercial banks borrow more money from the central bank, and they also simultaneously
reduce their own lending rates. This further causes an increase in borrowing by the general
population
who
use
this
money
for
spending
and
investing.
When the interest rate is lower, there is less incentive to save and more incentive to spend. This
is because saving money doesn't yield big returns like it would have done if interest rates are
higher.
Current

Scenario

Currently the wholesale inflation is very low (4.38 % in November, 2014) and the RBI is yet to
reduce its rates. However, given the current scenario of inflation, it is expected that interest rates
will
be
lowered.
Whenever RBI lowers its interest rates, this provides a positive signal to the businesses and
industries, because they are allowed to raise funds and invest money that could lead to more
growth.
The task of the central bank lies in balancing the growth in inflation along with making sure that
the high interest rates don't dampen industrial growth. For example, as soon as Raghuram Rajan
was appointed as the Governor of RBI, he increased the repo rate by 25 basis points (to 7.5 per
cent) to control the then inflation in 2013 though it came with some criticism from the industrial
sector
as
well.
Pros

&

Cons

of

Lower

Interest

Rates

Pros:
The Central Bank reduces interest rates when it sees that the inflation is low, and when the
market is conducive. The lowering of interest rates sends a positive signal to the industrial sector.
Lowering interest rates also increases the aggregate demand in the market because there's more

incentive

for

spending

than

there

is

for

saving.

Given the current low rate of inflation if the RBI drops its interest rates, it can provide the
necessary
momentum
for
industrial
growth.
Lower

interest

rates

are

good

news

for

mortgage

holders,

borrowers,

etc.

Cons:
Lowering of interest rate can be termed to be a 'necessary' condition to provide momentum to
industrial growth, but by itself it does not form a 'sufficient' condition, because other factors need
to
be
present
as
well
Lowering interest rates can increase Aggregate Demand, and a prolonged increase in Aggregate
Demand
can
cause
a
demand-pull
inflation
Sometimes it happens that the Central Bank reduces its interest rates but that does not get
translated into lower interest rates offered by the commercial banks for consumers. This
happened in the recession of 2008 when the Central Banks reduced the rates but the commercial
banks
did
not
do
so
for
the
consumers.
Lower interest rates isn't a good news for everyone. It is good for industrial growth but for the
section that depends on savings, like retired people, they prove to be less profitable. Their
savings do not yield higher returns and thus the retired people are left with lower disposable
income than before.
FDI in Retail - Will really affect the farmers of India? - Group Discussion
Group Discussion 06-26-2012 02:00 AM
For
- Farmers might have to shut down their farms due to corporatization of the farming sector.
- It has divided Indias social, political and trading classes. It works on the divide and rule
concept.
- It would mean depreciation of Indian money which will have a negative impact on the
economy.
- The retailers will have an enormous control over their suppliers and indirectly affecting the
farmers.
- This kind of structure would result in reduced farm prices and thus, closure of farms.
- It will have disastrous consequences on the Indian farmers as buyers will have total control
over
the
sellers
according
to
this
policy.

- FDI will let some major players emerge in the retail segment. Big retail outlets will enjoy
monopoly in selling and in buying as well. This means that the poor farmers will not have much
optiona to sell their crop in the market causing them to lower their selling price and shrink the
margins.
Against
- It will be profitable to the farmers as middlemen will give them a better price for their goods.
- Farmers will get an opportunity to supply their produce to the big chains directly rather than
going
through
intermediate
brokers.
- The induction of the foreign investors will definitely help the small traders i.e. the farmers.
-

It

will

deepen

the

economic

cooperation

between

India

and

US.

- Agricultural products will form a very small percentage of the products these retail outlets
would sell. The majority of products will be the finished goods. Snce these retail chains will
source these products from China and other countries, more than farmers this will affect our
local industries.

Cyber security threats are evolving

Cyber security is defined as the protection of system, networks and data in cyberspace. It has
become
a
critical
issue
for
all,
especially
the
businessmen.
According to Ernst and Young, cyber security threats are rapidly increasing. Brazil has the largest
number of internet users in Latin America. Cyber security threats have reached a peak in Brazil
due to the use of malware a kind of software that is used to infect the computers.
According to Naveen Bhatia, Vice President and General Manager of Asia Pacific, Security is
not
only
nice
to
have
but
it
is
a
must
to
have.
In Latin America, the concept of Hacktivism is widely increasing. In hacktivism people hack
computers in order to show their support for a cause. Mexico witnessed the largest number of
hacktivism
attacks
during
the
2012
presidential
elections.
According to the Norton report, around 22 million Brazilians and 6 million Colombians are
victims
of
cyber
crime
and
threats.
The most famous cyber security threat of 2014 was the Sony hack. The confidential data of Sony
Pictures Entertainment (SPE) was hacked on November 24, 2014. The data included personal
information of the Sony employees, emails exchanged between the employees, etc. The hackers
called
themselves
the
Guardians
of
Peace.

Hacking was done as a sign of disapproval of the release of The Interview. It is a comedy. The
movie is about the assassination of Kim Jong Un a North Korean leader. The US blamed North
Korea for hacking the data. The movie received criticism from some Hollywood figures and
President Barack Obama as the released documents carried unwanted comments about them. The
movie was canceled in many theaters due to safety issues. Later on, Sony released the movie
online and gained mixed views. The Interview was the most successful online movie by Sony.
But after the latest scientific analysis by the New York times it was found that the hacker's
language in the threat was written by a native Russian speaker and not a native North Korean.
India faced many cyber security issues in the year of 2014 which were not so easy to solve.
Despite all these threats, the government did not take any necessary step to meet the challenges.
India is trying to utilize the Digital India policy to its best as it aims to reduce cyber threats in
the country. India needs to strengthen its cyber security in the areas of cyber terrorism,
International
cyber
security
cooperation
and
cyber
warfare.
Internet has been useful to millions of people to gather information, strengthen their
communication, etc. But at the same time, there are people on the other side who misuse the
disadvantages of the digital world. Privacy of an individual or institution has become a great
concern in the cyber world. People across the globe are awaiting for the day when there will be
an implementation of new laws to provide security and safety in the digital space.

What should decide when to retire? - Age or Talent

Introduction
Retirement is a point when a person stops his employment completely. There is a term semi
retirement wherein the employee reduces the hours of his/her work. The concept of retirement
started during the 19th and 20th century. It was first used in Germany.
This year the Punjab and Haryana HC gave its verdict on the controversy of reducing the
retirement age from 60 to 58 years. The retirement age for IAS officers, officers of the judiciary
and teachers of government schools is still 60 years. As per the decision from the Central
government, the retirement age would remain 60 years and no changes have been made to it.
Now, let us come to the point of discussion. Should the retirement of an employee be based on
his/her
age
or
the
talent
that
they
showcase?
Age

should

be

the

criteria

for

retirement.

1. Benefits If you retire at the proper age you will be entitled to the benefits for the rest of your
life. You will get a small monthly benefit amount but for a long period.

2. Health The death rate is increasing rapidly. It is advisable to retire at an early age before the
health
of
the
employee
starts
deteriorating.
3. Family time The employee will be completely free after retirement if he retires at the age
given by the government (60 years). He/she would get the opportunity to devote the time to
his/her
family
without
any
tension.
4. New career Retiring at a proper age would give a person a lot of time to work on his interest
and passion. For example, there are people who write books after they retire.
5. Earn respect Many people fail to retire early. Making your life big even after retiring from
work increases the respect that you get from the society or from your family.
Talent

should

be

the

criteria

for

retirement.

1. Passion for work Most of the employees refuse to retire early as they love to keep their
talent alive. They continue to be dedicated and give good output to their work.
2. Growth of company Allowing retirement to talented employees is a disadvantage for the
company's growth. Hence, if the employees are willing to work, their retirement age should be
extended.
3. Avoid health issue There are many active employees who extend their retirement and
continue to work. Sitting idle at home bores and may also cause some health problems. Hence,
they
choose
to
display
their
talent
rather
than
considering
retirement.
4. Promote the talent Instead of getting retired early, there are employees who stay in service
and train the newcomers well. They try to impart their talent to these freshers which is helpful for
the
company's
growth.
5. Less working hours When an employee extends his retirement age, he can also reduce the
working
hours.
It
will
be
helpful
to
reduce
stress
and
strain.
Conclusion
No proposal has been passed till now for the the High Court judges to increase their age of
retirement. If employees are willing to serve even after their retirement age or if they wish to
extend their retirement, it should be allowed. For employees, who take an early retirement,
planning their life in advance will be much beneficial.