India Stray Dogs Are a Menace

Yeah, it's a great life for a dog in India.

databank said:

morningsong said:

Sounds like paradise.

It's quite paradisiac, + I live 5 mn away from the beach and a colorful traditional fishermen's village so it's a complete cliché

Honestly, I was being sarcastic, because in my opinion animals just roaming around doesn't sound very pleasant, fleas being a big issue with me, I've lived around stray cats, it's work let me tell you. But your situation is a cultural thing so I'm don't know what is what. But as far as compassion goes I didn't find you're attitude compassionate. I don't see what was hard about explaining something to a child you knew they didn't.

morningsong said:

databank said:

It's quite paradisiac, + I live 5 mn away from the beach and a colorful traditional fishermen's village so it's a complete cliché

Honestly, I was being sarcastic, because in my opinion animals just roaming around doesn't sound very pleasant, fleas being a big issue with me, I've lived around stray cats, it's work let me tell you. But your situation is a cultural thing so I'm don't know what is what. But as far as compassion goes I didn't find you're attitude compassionate. I don't see what was hard about explaining something to a child you knew they didn't.

That's the problem on that forum, everything u say is held against u and u can't win. I'm sorry I didn't live up 2 ur expectations

JustErin said:

India Stray Dogs Are a Menace

Yeah, it's a great life for a dog in India.

India is this and India is that. Some people and dogs have an abominable existence, some other humans and people have a wonderful life. It's not just all black or white... U can travel in India and see well fed stray dogs and no beggars or u can travel in India seeing nothing but starved stray dogs and sick beggars, it all depends WHERE u travel. I'm lucky and where I live it's really nice and the dogs are well treated for the most part. Now yeah u can bring up articles about rape statistics and beaten wives and child labor and slavery and human rights and corruption and tell me that India is a horrible country and it is in more ways than one, and at the same time it's also MANY other things.

databank said:

JustErin said:

India Stray Dogs Are a Menace

Yeah, it's a great life for a dog in India.

India is this and India is that. Some people and dogs have an abominable existence, some other humans and people have a wonderful life. It's not just all black or white... U can travel in India and see well fed stray dogs and no beggars or u can travel in India seeing nothing but starved stray dogs and sick beggars, it all depends WHERE u travel. I'm lucky and where I live it's really nice and the dogs are well treated for the most part. Now yeah u can bring up articles about rape statistics and beaten wives and child labor and slavery and human rights and corruption and tell me that India is a horrible country and it is in more ways than one, and at the same time it's also MANY other things.

you can see all the things you've mentioned right here in the ole u.s. of a. which is actually appallin when you keep hearin about this bein the most powerful nation on earth

JustErin said:

databank said:

I like this idea that animals can be wild animals AND live AND reproduce among humans in cities as they do in India. Why we accept it for pigeons in the West but we consider that cats and dogs are unable to survive on their own, without our help, is beyond me: they can survive in the wild so they can survive in cities. Of course they don't enjoy the level of comfort and care that domestic pets and humans do enjoy but in India the difference isn't that clear: ofc ourse more and more people can afford doctors and material comfort, and some have pets, but millions of humans live in what I'd call subhuman conditions and for Indians that's just the way things are, so obviously they'll take care of wild animals' sicknesses the day they've taken care of human poverty first, and that's not for next week. But save that shitty skin disease (menge) that many dogs have, most of them are quite healthy and seem well fed. If menge was massively treated (easy to do technically speaking because it's just spraying, but obviously India has other economic priorities since the disease isn't contagious to humans), they'd be perfectly safe and happy. It's also funny to see how dogs DON'T hunt cats (cats aren't even afraid of them). I'm quite sure cats hunt rats on the other hand -we have them too, but dogs, cats, cows, goats, crows, buffallos and humans live in quite perfect harmony in my neighborhood. Still, of course, if an unknown individual -human or dog- gets close to her puppies, a female dog may grown and bite.

Actually, that is not true. They live extremely short, very unhealthy, pathetic lives. Not to mention the females are constantly having litter after litter which is horrible for them.

People simply do not understand that dogs are 100% in need of humans to survive (directly or indirectly - such as living off human discarded food). They are NOT wild animals.

One thing that's crossed my mind about the billions of Indian HUMANS living in the slums with ZERO hope of climbing the social ladder, neither for them or their kids since those don't receive any school education anyway. What u just said could be said for them just as well: "They live extremely short, very unhealthy, pathetic lives. Not to mention the women are constantly having baby after baby which is horrible for them." Don't make me say what I ain't sayin': I am NOT advocating forced sterilization of any human being because contrarly to dogs humans know whet it's done to them and have an opinion about it, but the fact is that, if these people would stop making babies (and they make a LOT of them, with a certain percentage not reaching adulthood), urban poverty in India could be totally wiped out in a generation's time. Nonetheless they keep reproducing despite the fact that, as said above, their children will, in 99% cases, live exatcly the same life as they do with absolutely no hope of improvement. Why do they do it? Well, for the most part because hinduism preaches having children and marriying them as a fundamental human duty and also because children are a way to invest for the future: if you are among the "lucky" ones who'll get old beyond the age of retirement, your children will have the duty to feed u and take care of u. India has attempted various campaigns to elicit sterilization and contraception (including, during the dark days of indira Gandhi, a certain amount of illegal forced sterilizations of men in order to fill quotas), but due to its democratic status, the weight of religion and the fact that, contrarly to the "communist" Chinese state, the Indian state doesn't provide any kind of help to these people in the first place anyway so no economic sanction is possible, India can't impose a "one child policy" to its citizens. Nonetheless, one can argue over the ethics of allowing people to have kids when these kids will be doomed from day one to a life of misery below any humane standard. Of course the solution would be to force public education on these families' kids and get more public services to help them to have a decent life, but it seems India either can't or doesn't want to afford it.

databank said:

[T]he fact is that, if these people would stop making babies (and they make a LOT of them, with a certain percentage not reaching adulthood), urban poverty in India could be totally wiped out in a generation's time. Nonetheless they keep reproducing despite the fact that, as said above, their children will, in 99% cases, live exatcly the same life as they do with absolutely no hope of improvement. Why do they do it? Well, for the most part because hinduism preaches having children and marriying them as a fundamental human duty and also because children are a way to invest for the future: if you are among the "lucky" ones who'll get old beyond the age of retirement, your children will have the duty to feed u and take care of u.

The underlined bit is the key causal mechanism. For very many people in the developing world, having children has a practical point behind it: children can work and provide much-needed income for the family when they're old enough, and they can take care of their parents in old age or if they get sick. That's the reality if you live in a society where you don't have the same economic opportunities nor a functioning social security system that can act as a safety net for the poor, the sick, the old, etc. Having more children is a defence against impoverishment in that situation, and "these people" are smart enough to have figured that out.

As societies develop, you find the birth rates tend to go down - hence the reason they're much lower in the West. Maybe you see culture exert some limited degree of influence on the situation, but people tend to find ways to adapt their cultures to the socio-economic reality in which they live. In fact, I'd be surprised if more wealthy Hindus even in India were having as many babies, though ostensibly influenced by the same religious edicts.

deebee said:

databank said:

[T]he fact is that, if these people would stop making babies (and they make a LOT of them, with a certain percentage not reaching adulthood), urban poverty in India could be totally wiped out in a generation's time. Nonetheless they keep reproducing despite the fact that, as said above, their children will, in 99% cases, live exatcly the same life as they do with absolutely no hope of improvement. Why do they do it? Well, for the most part because hinduism preaches having children and marriying them as a fundamental human duty and also because children are a way to invest for the future: if you are among the "lucky" ones who'll get old beyond the age of retirement, your children will have the duty to feed u and take care of u.

The underlined bit is the key causal mechanism. For very many people in the developing world, having children has a practical point behind it: children can work and provide much-needed income for the family when they're old enough, and they can take care of their parents in old age or if they get sick. That's the reality if you live in a society where you don't have the same economic opportunities nor a functioning social security system that can act as a safety net for the poor, the sick, the old, etc. Having more children is a defence against impoverishment in that situation, and "these people" are smart enough to have figured that out.

As societies develop, you find the birth rates tend to go down - hence the reason they're much lower in the West. Maybe you see culture exert some limited degree of influence on the situation, but people tend to find ways to adapt their cultures to the socio-economic reality in which they live. In fact, I'd be surprised if more wealthy Hindus even in India were having as many babies, though ostensibly influenced by the same religious edicts.

Everything u say is absolutely true. The problem with India is that about 30% Indians live below the poverty line, that's about 1 dude outta 3, and if u add to these high figues corruption in India, development is going to be extremely slower than it should. Low middle classes and even some high lower classes manage to provide education to their kids and this generates a growing middle class, and as soon as they reach that middle/upper-middle level people start making MUCH less kids, but there are SO MANY people who remain stuck in poverty and so little political will to change it that, at this rate, it's gonna take another century to allow the majority of these people to emerge from extreme poverty (middle and higher class Indians themselves are actually the most pessimistic when addressing that issue).

As for the old age safety net u've summed it up perfectly. I'll add to that my experience living in Cambodia, where it's the same, and where (but I guess it's the same everywhere) parents/children relationships consitute an odious system of blackmailing. Basically children r being taught since their earliest age that they owe everything to their folks for providing them with life and educating them (even if this didn't include sending them to school and condemning them to a life of poverty) and that therefore they have to be grateful and obeying. This generates terrible inner dilemmas where u meet people who basically CAN'T live their life because they have to work like slaves in jobs they hate to send money to their folks and marry men or women they don't like to satisfy their folks, when by themselves and free of these obligations, some of them at least could consider either going to some evening classes and improve their education and work prospects, or working less (i.e. 8 hours a day instead of 12) or at least enjoy the little money they earn a little more. I find this absolutely monstruous. Besides, the system itself is absurd.

I knew this guy (it's only one example out of many) who was working like that about 12/14 hours a day and was able to enjoy only about a half of the (little) money he was making because he had to pay for his younger sisters' education instead of his folks who had just paid for his and felt it was enough (!). Let's note like it's not like his folks has sent him to Harvard and he could have a great job, he could just be a teacher which was better than a factory worker but didn't provide much money in the end. Then he told me, the minute his sisters will finish school his parents will marry him to a wife they'll find him, with whom he'll have to have a child immediately after marriage (and then 1 or 2 more kids), so he'll have to keep working just as much to provide food to his wife (who may work too but who will mostly take care of the kids) and kids and education to the later. Then his parents will retire so he'll have to keep working to send them money just as well because they won't have a pension. And finally maybe one day, if he manages to survive until his folks are dead and his kids are grown, after having worked 12 hours a day, 6 days a week, all his life from 20 to 50 or 60 y.o., he will be able to enjoy life and relax for a few years, with his own kids paying for him, until he dies (in a country where life expectation is still very low and likely to stay so for quite some time). If u ask me he should tell EVERYBODY to go fuck themselves and not marry and not have kids and enjoy life NOW while it's there and save the money he has to give everyone for his old days. But of course the mere notion is absolutely unthinkable for him and I knew it would have been silly if not rude to try and talk him into doing this, so I didn't. But God I feel so SORRY for this poor dude and all the others like him that I met.

Of course as soon as most families reach upper-middle class for 2 generations, parents manage to save money for their old days and leave the kids alone.

[Edited 4/13/14 7:42am]