Talk:BIMARU states

NPOV/Unencyclopaedic

This article is hardly encyclopaedic in nature. Rather than discuss the term BIMARU in an academic fashion, it seems to be more of an emotive essay on "Why BIMARU is pejorative" or "Why BIMARU became Bimar" or "Who Made Bimaru Bimar".

A lot of the stuff here is highly speculative and unverifyiable check the following:

• in none of his writings, one finds reference to the fact that these states have always received less funds for their development since Indian independence : not necessarily true

TV 19:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC) refrences are of Indian Planning Commission data, commentaries of economists and newspaper lippings, not of a known Bihar baiter Ashish Bose

• Bihar, which has received the lowest per capita grant in each of the five year plans since independence: ignores the fact that Bihar was the richest state in terms of natural resources.

TV 19:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC) umpteen references given. Bihar's advantage due to natural resources were neutralised by a. low royalty (INR 6 per tonne of coal for instance) not revised since 1947 b. Freight Equalization

• Kerala was the state with the highest population density in spite of having an inhospitable terrain Except for a few hilly areas Kerala's terrian is anything but inhospitable.

Needs a total rewrite if this is to stay on WIkipedia. --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 07:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

TV 19:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC) We should not shy away from the discriminatory policies of the Govt of India which has broken the economic backbone of the Hindi speaking states of India. These are HARSH realities

Reply to Deepak D Souza comment

A pejorative like Bimaru cannot but give the background of the term just like terms like Apartheid are given with the circumstance in which they were created. Bimaru means sickly and that has to be explained in the article.

Calling the article speculative is highly irregular and even demeaning.

Bimaru states in general and Bihar in particular have recd the lowest per capita grant is a statistical fact. Data is published by the Planning Commission of India. Reference are quoted by way of economist Mohan Guruswamy papers. Looks like those have been ignored.

How is abundance of natural resources related to the fact of lowest per capita allocation? In any case, natural resources of Bihar went to enrich the other states of India thru discriminatory policies like freight equalisation.

Kerala was the state with the highest population density till the 70s is a census fact as given by the census of India. There is some truth in the fact that Kerala is not completely inhospitable though it gets excess of rains and has a mountainous terrain. This line may be modified to end at "population density" and delete "in spite of ............"

The citation of the highly acclaimed Pratham is given in the article in support of the recent strides by the so called Bimaru states. Why is that ignored?

Example of disproportionate grants to the richer states is given by the skewed allocation to Punjab for food subsidy. It is quoted with references.

Data regarding the comparatively better economic status of UP and Bihar is available from the economic survey done around Independence of India - one of the reasons why economist why lower allocation for these states was recommended so as to allow the poorer states to come up. The same is not available on the net, but books will be quoted for the same.

Clean up remarks removed

If a pejorative like BIMARU can be included in wikipedia (the term can only be compared with terms like Niggers or Negroes), it is important that the context of the term is also explained.

After adding the data to substantiate the context, the clean up remark has been removed.

The NPOV may be removed after sometime giving chance to others to comment on the article.

TV 19:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)