Program Manager: Fill & Download for Free

Short answer :-Blaming Nehru for all of India’s current problems has become a fashion in last few years. It seems completely illogical and absurd to me. Afterall, a person has to be evaluated, based on the appropriate context of his era, not on what is happening 70 - 80 years after his death.Blaming Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi for today's problem is like blaming Sunil Gavaskar and Kapil Dev for India’s loss to NZ in World Cup 2019 semi final. Just like Legendary players like Gavaskar and Kapil Dev should not be abused for poor performance of Kohli and Sharma, similarly Gandhi and Nehru should not be blamed for today's issues.Imagine how irrelevant and absurd would it sound that in 2100 AD nearly 80-100 years after Modi dies, someone is trying to win Lok Sabha elections by saying that Advani or Rajnath Singh should have been PM in 2014 as they were past BJP party presidents while Modi was not?Imagine how illogical would be for someone in 2100AD to say that ‘India would have been a better country had Nitin Gadkar (then the BJP's party president would have become the PM instead of Modi) ?Imagine someone creating a 3000 crore statue of ‘Iron Man’ Amit Shah, and at the same time saying that India would have been better if Amit Shah would have become PM instead of Modi who became PM by backdoor entry ?Does any of this sound even 0.0001 % relevant 100 yrs after Modi’ s death?Long answer below :-Not only on Quora but nowadays Nehru is abused also on Facebook and Twitter and whatsapp.Because of the simple reason, that people in India love to find a reason for blaming their failures on someone else's actions. They love to exaggerate stories, come up with half cooked, half baked tales, moreover they love to live in an 'unrealistic' world.In reality, Nehru was the most talented and the most successful PM in the history of India, in the most violent and challenging times of the world, immediately after an era that witnessed two world wars in quick succession. There is no one, who comes anywhere close to him, when it comes to matters of democracy and social reforms.His tenure of 50 odd years, as one of the greatest sons of India, is studied by historians in two phases. First phase, is the set of 32 years he served as a young, bold, intelligent and dynamic Indian freedom fighter who was Gandhi's right hand and the 2nd set is the set of 17 years, he served as Independent India's Founder PM. His vast contribution to India spanning 49 years, is the reason why Indian history books have mentioned him in great detail.Despite being from a super rich and affluent family, he decided to dedicate 32 years of his life, in serving the country and living a very modest life. He faced lathicharge several times and injured himself on many occasions, but kept going. He went to British jails 10 times for over 3,529 days or almost 10 years. His contribution to India's independence movement is next to Gandhi. No one highlights the fact that while serving in jail, he could not attend his ailing wife and newly born son, both of whom died due to his stay in jail for long sentences.Post independence, as India's PM he was the most popular, the most successful and most competent PM of India till date. He was the father of Industrial Revolution in India and the architect of Modern India. He built dams, schools, colleges and a great democratic framework. He also setup a framework where IIT's, AIIMS, ISRO, IISc, NIT's, NID, NSD, CSIR, IIMs were established, nurtured and developed.In India, recently BJP and RSS have come to power and strangely they don't have any leaders of their own to look up to. So instead of making an effort of raising their own level to that of Nehru, they have started lowering the level of Nehru and bringing it down to their own level.Since they can't find any flaw in his national policies, they try to call him British agent, Western thinker, Catholic Christian, Parsi, Muslim, Anti -Hindu, Anti-Sikh, Anti-India, debauch, womanizer, gay, drunkard, drug addict, chain smoker, beef eater, one who blackmailed Gandhi, killed Bose and ruined Sardar Patel's career, gave Kashmir to China and Pakistan, gave up UNSC seat to support China etc. These are completely false claims, supported by nothing, but morphed photos, fake claims, distorted data, mis-interpretation of facts and figures. There is no evidence of any of these fake stories spreading on social media, whatsapp, youtube and Facebook. None of these claims are even 0.01% true. One can read my other posts to go in detail for facts proving each of these accusations to be completely false and baseless.It is very ironic that those who sided with the British themselves, accuse Nehru of being a British agent, just because he was educated in Cambridge University and spoke good english. It is also ironic, that those Hindus who themselves eat non-veg food regularly, accuse Nehru of being a beef eater. People like Subramanium Swamy whose daughter married a Muslim, accuses Nehru of being a Muslim as his daughter Indira married a Parsi Feroze Ghandy. Illiterate people like Baba Ramdev who never understood Socialism and importance of Swadeshi concept started by Nehru, are now selling Swadeshi products and have build 8000 crores worth business empire and still they accuse Nehru to be a western thinker, despite stealing his idea of Swadeshi. Even more ironical, is that child rapists like Bapu Asharam call Nehru a womanizer, just because he shook hands with foreign women while greating them at an Indian airport. People who accuse Nehru of shaking hands with foreign women, forget that it was S.C. Bose who had married a foreign Christian girl called Emily in Europe. Their fake Hindutva doesn't get affected by this fact. People who portray Bhagat Singh and Bose as devout Hindus, forget that both of them were inclined towards atheism, though Bose was a follower of Swami Vivekanand and a moderate Hindu himself, both Bhagat Singh and Bose were far more extreme leftists than moderate Nehru.The height of absurdity is crossed when fake education degree holders like Smriti Irani, Pokhriyal etc go on to become HRD/Education Ministers in Central government of India and they accuse Cambridge alumnus Nehru to be a criminal. Moreover, terrorism accused and anti-national extremists like Sadhvi Pragya Thakur out on bail, call Nehru a conman. Patanjali Boss and Managing Director Mr. Balakrishna who is a Nepali citizen and 98% owner of the company's shares, openly tweets that Nehru died of AIDS in 1964, despite the fact that AIDS was discovered and clinically reported as a disease only in 1990.People who have never ever been to Kashmir accuse him of giving it up to Pakistan, despite the fact that it was his article 370 which helped India annex Controversial 'Muslim' dominated Kashmir into 'Hindu' dominated 'Secular' India. Moreover, he himself being a Kashmiri Pandit was the only one who made it an integral part of India, while Sardar Patel was least bothered about Kashmir.Sardar Patel is given credit for uniting 565 princely states of India in 1947. He thoroughly deserves the credit, as he was the Home Minister and Deputy Prime Minister of India at that time, reporting directly to and taking instructions from the Prime Minister Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru, on all areas of national policy.However we must understand the role of both Nehru and Patel in uniting the 565 states. Since most of the princely states wanted to be independent and tried to avoid being a part of a democracy, it was difficult for Indian National Congress to convince them to join India instead of staying independent or joining Pakistan. INC didn't have any army of its own at that time to exert pressure. Neither would it be feasible for INC to use arms against own countrymen, now would it be advisable, as most of the princely states had their own army, own military equipment and own currency. They were too powerful to be dealt with force and too difficult to negotiate with.Keeping in mind the limitations of INC and the relative strength of the princely states, who covered approximately 48% of the land and comprised of 28% of the population, it seemed an insurmountable task. Therefore the military option was ruled out. The only other option was to negotiate, but they were reluctant to be brought to the negotiating table, unless the INC exerts some sort of power, influence and offer something lucrative in return.Nehru strategically analysed, that though the princely states were tough to negotiate with INC, these princely states were controlled like puppets by the British empire, which was represented in India by then the Viceroy as Lord Mountbatten. So if the INC could some how bring Mountbatten on their side, then the 565 princely states could be brought to the negotiating table easily and later merged with India.Nehru and Menon worked in collaboration with each other to convince Mountbatten to work for a united India, as opposed to the idea of a broken and fragmented India, which was endorsed by former UK Prime Minister Winston Churchill. After being convinced by Nehru and Menon, that a divided India would cause enormous bloodshed, riots and crime against humanity, Lord Mountbatten agreed to help Nehru by going against the wishes of his UK boss, because Mountbatten had already seen enough of war and bloodshed in the World War-2, where he in the capacity of the Supreme Commander in Chief of the UK had defeated Germany’s Hitler and Italian Mussolini.Nehru and Menon also reminded Mountbatten that UK owes a lot to India, especially because more than 200,000 soldiers fighting in the British army were Indians and that Indian National Congress had agreed to support the British, only if the British grant full independence to India, post completion of WW-2.Therefore, visionary and clever Nehru played a master stroke by appointing then the Viceroy of India - Lord Mountbatten as the Governor General of Independent India. Immediately after that, the princely states decided to fall in line to join the Indian territory. The 565 states were split into 3 categories namely large states, medium states and small states, based on their relative size, population and regional influence.Nehru based on his discussion with Sardar, Menon and Mountbatten decided to offer a sort of a ‘joining bonus and annual salary ’ or privy purses to each of the kings and in return they would give up their ruling rights and join the Indian union. They would surrender their currency, their ruling rights and entire military, therefore the privy purses had to be a considerable amount.The trio of Nehru, Sardar and Menon decided that 450 small states would be given a salary of Rs 5000 per annum, while 102 medium states would be given the salary ranging from Rs 1,00,000 to Rs 2,00,000 per annum. 5 large states were given salary ranging from Rs 2,00,000 per annum to Rs 10,00,000 per annum. Only 6 large states namely Hyderabad, Travancore, Baroda, Jaipur, Mysore and Patiala were given salary more than Rs 10,00,000 per annum.On the other hand, Jinnah was trying to lure these kings towards Pakistan by offering business opportunities to them in Railways Karachi port. To further appease the disgruntled Kings, some of the Kings were given ceremonial designations of Governor, while some joined politics, some were offered high positions in the military like Brigadier and Major General. Some of princely states were given construction contracts in Indian Railways, Museums, Ports and Shipping industry.Through out this episode, I do not see any activity, which makes Sardar Patel a bigger hero than Nehru. Nehru being the PM was the chief strategist, Mountbatten was the influencial stakeholder and Sardar /Menon were the people who were just following the orders of their PM by executing the tasks assigned to them. I would rather say, they worked extremely well as a team in those days, only keeping the welfare of the country in their mind.Please don’t fall for fake Nehru- Patel rift controversies created for political purpose.Nehru is often incorrectly blamed for not exploiting military advantage against Pakistan in 1947 -48 war. He has mentioned in his letters, that all efforts should be made to attain peace and avoid wars, because political leaders like him don't die in wars, however thousands of foot solidiers are killed on both sides and millions of family members of deceased soldiers suffer on both sides.He didn't want more Indian soldiers to die in that war against Pakistan, as several thousands had already died and we had already defended the fertile lands of Kashmir very well.More military conflict would have definitely drained out massive resources from India's already bankrupt treasury which we had inherited after 200 years of economic exploitation by the British. Therefore I think that Nehru was extremely wise and prudent to take the issue to the UN and declare a ceasefire as it put an immediate end to war, saving lives of thousands of Indian soldiers and millions of rupees that were now being used for constructive purposes in India like agriculture, roads, water-dams, hospitals, schools, colleges and universities.As for annexing of Kashmir in a peaceful and strategic way lets look at the best practices of top corporate leaders to attract talented people into their organization.As most people are already aware, even today lots of great companies like Amazon, Microsoft and Google give a good 'joining bonus' to attract initially 'reluctant to join' candidates from other organizations, though this leads to 'complaints' from existing employees of these organizations, who are unhappy with the existing pay structure and annual bonus.Kashmir issue of 1947 was pretty much like the same. Both India and Pakistan wanted Kashmir to join them. Muslim dominated Kashmir was naturally more inclined to join a Muslim dominated Pakistan rather than join a Hindu dominated India. As partition was done on the basis of religion there was no way 'Hindu' dominated India could have 'Muslim' dominated Kashmir easily. Nehru established extremely good and trustworthy relationship with Sheikh Abdullah who was a strong Muslim leader of muslim dominated Kashmir. So when Sheikh Abdullah refused to merge Kashmir with Pakistan and spoke openly against Jinnah, he was able to convince entire Kashmiri population to join India. Therefore the people's will was given top most priority and Kashmir willingly merged into Indian union.Lets compare this from a HR strategic talent attraction and retention perspective of a global MNC. In this scenario the CEO of a MNC made an extra effort of giving a lucrative 'joining bonus' to recruit a 'particular candidate' in order to ensure that the 'candidate' doesn't join a 'competitor' organization.Here Nehru was the CEO of India and gave this 'joining bonus' of 'article 370 special provisions to make it lucrative for candidate 'Kashmir' to join India and not join 'competitor' Pakistan.Obviously existing Indian states did get upset initially, just like existing employees of an organization, who feel that new comers are getting better pay than existing ones.After a couple of years this 'one time joining bonus of article 370 ' was tweaked (through New Delhi act of 1950) and most of its provisions 'standardised' at par with rest of the states.Here I would like to give credit to Nehru who proved to be 'Management Guru' ahead of his time, as what he implemented as a leader and practitioner, later on got added to several management books as chapters on HR strategy. Any guesses why Nehru wanted that particular candidate 'Kashmir' to join India, because he himself was a Kashmiri Pandit. In a way you can say, one college alumnus has special preference for recruiting candidates from his own alma matter!!!As for POK, India left it as it is due to potential massive costs, rising burden on treasury, and potential loss of lives of Indian soldiers. Quora wizard Balaji Viswanathan has also supported Nehru’s decision to leave POK, in his posts, after analysing all parameters.Article 370/371 came into Kashmir after mutual agreement of Raja Hari Singh, his Minister Sheikh Abdullah, Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Patel. Over a period of time, article 370 was implemented in 8-9 states of India including North Eastern states, Maharashtra and Gujarat and it still exists there for special castes, tribal and ethnic communities. There is nothing wrong with it in these 9 states, where it works perfectly fine even today, but it has been misunderstood and abused in Kashmir by Pakistan sponsored terrorists, separatists and hard core extremists. This means that Nehru's decision to get article 370 in Kashmir was not a historic blunder as portrayed by social media nowadays. Rather it was confidence building measure initiated by Hindu majority India to peacefully annex Muslim majority Kashmir into India.Despite being under enormous pressure, Nehru ensured that article 370 is a temporary provision and he stated that future PM’s of India would have the full freedom to scrap it /modify it when needed. Therefore, in these circumstances, Nehru would be extremely happy in heaven, if Modi scraps this outdated and obsolete law just like Nehru diluted it in 1950 under the New Delhi Act of 1950. Yes, Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi didn't scrap it in their tenure, probably because there was no need to do it at that time. There were no extremists, no terrorists over there and separatists were also ignored by the Kashmiris till 1989. Problem started only in 1989 when Rajiv Gandhi was in opposition and VP Singh was made PM. PM VP Singh appointed Kashmiri leader Mufti Saeed (father of Mehbooba Mufti) as Home Minister who allowed terrorists to infiltrate into Kashmir and promote radical extremism. After Rajiv Gandhi died in 1991, since then the obsolete article 370 has become a shield for extremists in Kashmir to defend themselves. Moreover the liberalization and economic reforms started by Dr. Manmohan Singh gave benefits to the whole of India but Kashmir missed out on that. Therefore I don't think that Nehru can be blamed for abuse of article 370 be Kashmiri extremists, almost 25- 30 years after his death.As for 1962 war, it was Nehru’s firm belief in the principles of Hinduism in particular and in humanity at large, that he offered help to Tibetan refugees (including Dalai Lama) who were killed in millions of numbers in China by Mao Zedong. Mao Zedong was implementing his 'Great Leap forward' strategy at that time and this resulted in deaths of millions of people. Nehru’s decision to help Tibetan refugees in 1959, angered China and it attacked us few years later in 1962. Aksai Chin was never under Indian occupation even for 200+ years earlier even Kashmir was under British rule, we never had it in real life, though we always had it on the map.RSS fondly gives high regard to many Hindu heroes like Prithviraj Chouhan, Raja Ratan Singh(husband of Padmavati), Rana Sanga, Rana Pratap, Shivaji, who lost wars to foreign invaders, but their faith in the principles of humanity in general and in the principles of Hinduism in particular remained rock solid. However the same RSS continues to be suffering from selective memory disorder, when it accuses Nehru for losing the 1962 war. Nehru was a diplomat and global Statesman, not a war trained military general. INC leadership never had any background in military warfare and didn't have any great military equipment either.Yes, he wanted peace with China at all costs, therefore he followed a policy of appeasement with them. This is nothing new to our culture and history. In Satyug, even Lord Shiva avoided direct war and confrontation with demon Bhasmasur at Kailash, only because he wanted to explore all options of peace before asking Lord Vishnu to kill him.Lord Vishnu himself has always said that all efforts should be made to attain peace and avoid wars, because rulers and Kings don't die alone in wars, thousands of solidiers are killed on both sides and millions of family members of deceased soldiers suffer on both sides also.In Tretayug, Lord Ram tried this policy of appeasement with Ravan as well by sending Hanumanji and Angaad as messengers of peace and asking him to return Devi Sita gracefully and respectfully and the war could be avoided.In Dwaparyug, Lord Krishna himself went as messenger of peace to avoid the great Mahabharat war. Lord Krishna even gave a proposal of accepting just 5 small villages for the 5 Pandava brothers and in return Duryodhan could keep the entire Bharatvarsh. Was this not a policy of appeasement to give away a piece of land in return for avoiding large scale military conflict and attaining peace at all costs?Is it not wise to explore all options of peace to avoid war?As a devout Hindu, I don't find anything wrong in Nehru’s policies on China. Moreover he was not a trained military general to fight wars. He was a statesman and a diplomat. Even Sardar Patel in 1950 had pointed out the Chines threat to Nehru, but Patel could not provide a solution to it, probably because there was no solution in the first place, except to keep China happy at all costs and avoid warfare. Both Sardar Patel and Nehru knew from the very beginning that India could not afford a large scale war with a 3 times larger in size neighbouring country like China, so the only way to stay safe was to keep China happy by accepting its annexation of Tibet, signing the Panchsheel agreement, and avoiding discussion on all controversial border issues that could flare things up. This policy of Nehru worked fine for 15 years from 1947-62, so one cannot say that Nehru's foreign policy with Chinese was not successful, rather it was very successful for 15 out of 17 years of his tenure.At that time, Chinese leader Mao who had killed 4-5 crore (40–50 million) people in his own country during his reign had become unpopular and his regime had become extremely unstable at that time. His country was on the verge of a disaster and his own political future was very uncertain. At that time in 1959, when Nehru gave asylum to Dalai Lama on purely humanitarian grounds, this gave Mao a golden opportunity to shift the focus of his govt's inefficiencies to an external country -India shaking hands with a Chinese enemy-Dalai Lama.As Nehru’s friendship with Dalai Lama increased with time, It took Chinese 2-3 years to prepare for the war and assemble their forces in such a large number that they could attack and defeat the Indian army in 1962.Yes we lost the war under Nehru's leadership, and he took the moral responsibility for the failure of the same, however Nehru learnt from his mistakes and invested heavily in military equipment thereafter. Immediately after the 1962 war got over, Nehru doubled the budget for defence forces, quadrupled the military personnel and set nuclear science programs for self defense and military reasons (it was earlier restricted to civil purposes only).Though Nehru died soon after, his recent investment in army (1962–1964) helped India won its two major wars in next few years, against Pakistan in 1964 under Shastri and against China in 1967 under Indira Gandhi. Nehru who had initiated the nuclear science program only for peaceful purposes before the 1962 war, after the loss had now extended it to defence and war purposes as well.Though Nehru's global stature and diplomacy was not good enough to avoid the war, however it was good enough to successfully save the lives of 4000+ Indian soldiers, who were taken as prisoners of war by the Chinese army. After the chinese debacle, India has not yet made any mistake in military affairs , so I give full credit for this to Nehru for learning from his earlier mistakes.Kings and politicians don't fight wars, they only inspire the army. Even if S.C. Bose, Patel or Indira Gandhi would have been PM in 1962, the result of the war would have been the same, because the people who were fighting the war were the same, the machinery and war equipment would have been the same, the geographic location conditions which went against us, would have been the same and more importantly the opposition i.e Chinese army would have remained the same.In wars, you win some, you lose some. No one wins all wars, not even the British Empire, not even the USA and USSR won all the wars they fought. Nehru annexed 14 disputed territories (with Pakistan) into India. He further got Hyderabad, Junagadh and Jammu and Kashmir merged with India. He also won Pondicherry from France and Goa from Portugal. After so many victories, the law of averages took over and we lost a miniscule part of kashmir to China.Cambridge educated Jawaharlal Nehru was a visionary leader who put India on the global map. The seeds of meritocracy sowed by Nehru by creating/constituting institutions like IIT's, AIIMS, IIM's, ISRO, DRDO, India's nuclear and atomic energy program, CSIR(Council of Scientific and Industrial Research) , IISc, NIT's (then REC's), NID (National Institute of Design) , NSD (National School of Drama) , Lalit Kala Academy, Sangeet Natak Academy, Kendriya Vidyalayas, RBI(Reserve Bank of India) , SBI( State Bank of India) , UTI( Unit Trust of India) , LIC( Life Insurance Corporation of India) , ONGC( Oil and Natural Gas Corporation) , NPTI( National Power Training Institute), BHEL (Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited) , SAIL (Steel Authority of India) and many more public sector Enterprises, dams like Bhakra Nangal dam, Hirakud dam etc have put India at the top of the world today, just behind USA and China in almost every parameter that you can think of. Unfortunately, he didn't have time on his side, else he could have done a lot better.Moreover children and grandchildren of Sardar Patel, Lal Bahadur Shastri, S.C.Bose all have happily settled abroad in US, UK, Europe, Canada and Germany and living luxurious lives there. No one asks them for their contribution to India, post independence.Edit2:- Thanks Quorans for 415+ upvotes. Based on popular requests, I shall be adding a section on Nehru’s role in pre and post independence of India.Gandhi and Nehru’s strategic role in pre- independence era :-Gandhi and Nehru knew it very well, that Indians can't defeat a supreme military powered UK (which had established the largest empire in the world spreading across Europe, Asia, Africa, North America and Australia) by arming themselves with wooden lathis and pelting stones and some locally made pistols.UK which had probably the best Airforce, Navy and tanks/missiles in the world could tear part any opposition in any of its colonies. UK also had the support of its Allies including nuclear powered USA, USSR and France.I hope people remember that UK's best ally USA threw an atomic bomb on twin cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. As Nehru had travelled to different countries in the world, he understood global affairs much more than anyone else. This was also one of the major reasons for INC to not support S.C.Bose, when he suggested a military alliance with Japan.If Nehru indeed wanted a military solution, he could have sought help from German hero Hitler and Italian Mussolini, both of whom had invited him personally to meet them, whenever he traveled to Europe.(Source :-Letters from Hitler and Mussolini to Nehru).This also proves that Nehru was a much more accepted global leader representing India at international level than Bose, as these two leaders reached out to meet Nehru and at the same time refused to give appointment to Bose even, when Bose waited outside their office at reception.However Nehru decided to not visit these German and Italian fascists, as they were military dictators with proven past track record of violence, corruption and deceit and all they were interested in was free supply of Indian soldiers against the British, but not in the welfare / independence of the Indian citizens .Nehru knew it before, but Netaji Bose learnt after a long time, that Italy and Germany were least bothered to help Indians get their independence from British. Indian Nationalist Bose tried to convince Hitler for the same on several occasions, however on every occasion, Hitler refused to provide any help to Indians suffering from the British Raj, because there was nothing India could offer him in return. Finally Bose, gave up his efforts to team up with Germany and Italy and focussed on taking help only from Japan.Though Gandhi and Nehru trusted Bose's pure intentions for India's independence, but knew it very well that it just won't work in an extremely complicated political climate pre-World War-2 and requested him to resign from Inc and continue with his efforts separately as the end objective was the same.The victory of UK’s Allies over the Axis in 2nd world War again proved that Nehru's strategic decision making of INC to not seek help from Japan was right, else we could have been nuked as well. This also proves that Nehru was correct in his judgment, when he predicted the victors of the World War 2, much before it actually started, some thing that our beloved Netaji got terribly wrong.It would have been a catastrophic strategic failure for a extremely poor nation like India, if we had gone ahead with S.C.Bose's decision to side with Japan.If we had, indeed gone ahead with S.C.Bose's decision to side with Japan (who were losers of the 2nd world war) we would have been bombarded terribly. Imagine British and their allies using their powerful airforce for bombarding Indian cities like they bombarded Germany, Hiroshima and Nakasaki among others.I ask all Netaji supporters to ask this question to their heart and answer honestly, Could we Indians as a country of poor farmers and some laborers have fought these technologically superior military aircrafts with pelting stones, hand made local pistols n lathis made of bamboo ? Probably No.It is not that Indians didn't have a good army and military means. We did have very good military warfare and brave soldiers, but beyond the access of the common citizens. However most of Indian soldiers were either directly serving the British Army as separate regional regiments in Punjab, Bengal, Calcutt, Bombay etc or indirectly serving the puppet Kings/Maharajas who were serving the British Raj directly.Gandhi and Nehru were well read in global affairs as well as Indian culture and history. They knew that most of the 500 +Indian Maharajas and their dynasties, who had reasonably good armies, had already sided with the British post the revolt of 1857. The British had bribed the Maharajas all over India to act in the favor of the British East Indian Company /British Raj. That is the reason, why none of these 500+ Rajas and their massive armies revolted or fought against the British for the next 90 years from 1857–1947.Realizing that the comman man was being exploited and made to suffer by their very own Indian Kings in collaboration with the British, Gandhi and Nehru decided that military option against British was ruled out.Even if Indian citizens resorted to military route and fought against the British government, just think who would fight against whom? Indians were on both sides.For. Eg. 95% of British government soldiers spread across various regional regiments were of Indian orgin only, which means that Indian citizens would have ended up killing Indian soldiers only, which would have further divided the already fragmented and battered country. Moreover Maharajas would have used their social political influence to crush the common man's desire to be independent.Thus Gandhi and Nehru decided to defeat the british in their own game by using the British law against its govt.All these years, the British had been claiming themselves to be ‘messiah of peace and democracy’ while criticizing Indians and other European countries of monarchy, military dictatorship, cruelty etc and preaching the ‘so called good and civilised’ things British were teaching un-civilised Indians. These double standards by the British gave an opportunity for British educated Indians like Gandhi, Nehru, Sardar Patel and INC leaders to argue with the British on its constitutional policies and human rights. Being born and brought up in India, they knew the tyranny of the British Raj, the immense suffering it caused to the common man and on the other hand being educated in law from top British universities, they could argue on legal grounds.Therefore Gandhi and Nehru agitated within the framework of the British law in such a way that they got great crowd support and also they did not resort to any violence. They went door to door and awakened the masses across different regions, geographies, religions, caste and social, political and cultural barriers and then merged them into the soul of one nation in principle. He gave them the concept of One Nation ‘Akhand Bharat’:-One for all and all for One.Once the erstwhile divided 33 crore people were united as one nation with one belief, Gandhi was a big force to reckon with as he could influence their behaviors and actions to such a great level that made the existing governance of Maharajas /Kings and British Raj ineffective.Then they did strategic planning to do non-cooperation, they believed in ahimsa (non-violence), and finally forced the British government to come to the negotiating table. Gandhi and Nehru understood that breaking of the salt law (Dandi March), boycott of British manufactured cotton clothes, promotion of Swadeshi products would harm the British economy a lot more than a large scale military attack against them. Dandi March was a big success and reduced Britain's revenue from India by 6 percent. Major economic blockages by India like Cotton, wood, spices, handicrafts, steel and other raw materials reduced Britain's revenue from India by another 32 %. Overall more than 40% of Britain's revenue coming from India was reduced and it brought them to the negotiating table.Therefore they broke the economic back bone on the British Empire without even making them realize it.Nehru spent 9 terms in jail, each visit was full of suffering and crying. He hardly got an opportunity to meet his ailing wife (who died at age of 36), old father and young daughter. Even today white collar criminals are put in different jails than murderers and rapists.Nehru spent 9 terms in jail spanning 3,259 days (almost 10 years) which is the maximum for any Indian freedom fighter. He has mentioned in his 200 letters to his family that he utilises his time in reading books and writing books.Rather than wasting time in cursing the British (like most Indians did) he used this time to make new strategies in countering the next move of the British.Moreover the Headquarters of Indian National Congress at Anand Bhavan which was worth lakhs of rupees even 120 years ago (now worth 100 crores) , was earlier the personal home of Nehru, which he donated generously to the Indian Congress party as it had no money of it's own to setup an office (as the entire nation and its people were mostly bankrupt). So in way he used his personal wealth to sponsor the start-up ‘Poorna Swaraj’ or independence movement of India .Not only that, all official trips of the INC leadership within India as well as abroad were sponsored by Nehru himself.Post independence, Nehru initiated 5 year plans for faster progress of the country. The first Five Year Plan emphasised on Agriculture for which major river valley projects like Bhakra Nangal, Damodar, Mahanadi and Tunga Bhadra were undertaken increasing both irrigation and hydro power electric supply. These dams were to ensure waters reaches the farmlands.During first Plan period (1951–56) there was low inflation and agricultural productivity increased manifold.Land tenure system was rationalised and Zamindari system was abolished. However, land reform measures didn't continue in most of the states and land was not restored to the tiller in most of the states except in West Bengal during Communist rule.During the second Five Year Plan (1956–61), the emphasis shifted from agriculture to industry when heavy industries were set up in the public sector and major steel plants were established in Bhillai, Bokaro, Durgapur and Rourkela.It also created new urban areas which would have taken a long time without government intervention. In private sector there were few industries in the hands of Tatas, Birlas and Dalmias. The 3rd five year plan focused on science and technology institutions.Overall, I think that regarding the freedom seeking independence movement of India, Gandhi was the soul, Nehru was the brain which took strategic decisions , Bose was the heart where passions and emotions originated and Sardar Patel was the strong and robust body. Let's not fall into the trap of petty and shrewd politicians who have made a career for themselves by baseless criticism of legendary figures. If I have to compare Nehru with a great leader of the glorious past of India, then I would compare him only with the likes of Emperor Ashoka and Emperor Akbar.I often wondered if Nehru would be born again in today's communal, caste based, corrupt political climate where would he stand? What would he do? Who would reply back to Modi’s abuses?Recently Kejriwal declared that India was fortunate to have Nehru as its first PM and architect of modern India who built laid the foundation of science, technology and industry in India. Kejriwal also said that India without Nehru would have been in a pitiable situation.I see AAP leader and Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal as an equally secular, honest, socialist, democratic, patriotic, nationalist, hardworking, visionary and well read as Nehru (maybe Kejriwal is a reincarnation of Nehru himself as Nehru died in 1964 and Kejriwal was born few years later in 1968, after all the theory of reincarnation of souls, is not new in Hinduism). During interviews in 1960’s, Nehru often said that he should be remembered as ‘Pratham Sewak’ or first servant of India and not first Prime Minister of India. Nehru further added that if he were to be reborn, he would like to serve India again and would like to be educated at IIT and join IAS rather than join US based MNC. It could well be pay back time for Kejriwal to be rewarded for his past good karma to join prestigious institutions like IIT, IAS and work as CM in the Government of Delhi - all the institutions which he created, nurtured and cared for as Nehru in his previous birth? ). Nehru had created IIT’s so that its alumni serve the country and in Kejriwal he is doing exactly the same.Both Nehru and Kejriwal see infrastructure projects like Bhakra Nangal Dam and Signature bride of Delhi as temples of Modern India. Both are extremely popular among the masses and draw huge crowds. Both want govt to spend huge amounts of money being spent on education and public health care rather than on temples and mosques. Both don't keep any VIP security and are approachable to the masses to an extent that people can even hug them or hit them. Both hate crony capitalism and consider ‘profit’ as a dirty word, if it is achieved unethically after exploitation of the common man.Modi is chasing Nehru, and Kejriwal is chasing Modi, is it payback Karma ? Could it well be the return of Nehru ?Edit4:- Based on multiple requests that I have received to write more on Nehru, I shall add more text here, If you are tired of reading and want to stop reading, you can stop here. I have brought my post to a logical conclusion. For voracious readers, pls continue to read below. Thanks to Dr. K. L. Raina for his inputs shared over mail.Post independence Era, Nehru and his vision for Science, Technology and Education:-Science occupied a central place in Pt Jawaharlal Nehru's vision of good society. As a scholar at Cambridge, he had acquired a sensitive understanding of the intellectual matrix of science and this understanding became deeper through extensive reading of socialist literature.In many ways Pt Nehru was the greatest man of our age. His name and fame will resound throughout the world in the ages to come. His love of science was only one facet of his complex, many sided, mysterious personality, yet his depth of understanding of science was perhaps unique among world leaders. He said, "The future belongs to science and to those who make friends with science".Science for Pt Nehru was more than just a conglomeration of disciplines dealing with the development of material resources. He was concerned with, what he described as a scientific temper which enables man to look upon himself, upon society and upon the problems facing mankind with an intellectual vigor, which combines sympathy with objectivity. To him science is an effective agent to bring social and economic transformation. It doesn't solve man's present day problems but also governs the future course of civilization also.Pt. Nehru often referred to the paradox of India being a rich country inhabited by poor and starving people and asked, "Why are we unable to convert our natural endowments into wealth meaningful to our people?" And the question was answered in the book 'Discovery of India' in these words: "It is science alone that could solve the problems of hunger and poverty, of insanitation and illiteracy, of superstition and decaying customs and tradition".After our country achieved independence his gaze was on development since he wanted to concretize his vision on new India. As Prime Minister he wanted India to develop along modern lines and make rapid strides lest it should be left behind in the competitive world so he looked upon science and technology as the levers for this purpose and for raising the living standards of masses.In 1950 Planning Commission was set up to devise strategy of rapid economic growth as well as of the reduction in economic disparities. Heavy industries, Machine tool factories, fertilizer plants, shipping and aeronautical industries came up with amazing speed. Towns and cities started cropping up at places which had known no habitation at all. The entire rural India was connected through a network of village development blocks and community projects.During British period emphasis on Indian science and technology was directed towards meeting the needs and requirements of the then Government for increasing trade communication and defenses. This resulted in several important advances such as the first scientific survey of the country and a network of meteorological stations, the buildings of canals and railway system. Several academic institutions were created.The end of 19th century and the first 50 yrs. of 20th century produced some of the ablest scientist the country has known and this period is recognized as the Renaissance of science for India.Shanti Swaroop Bhatnagar(1894-1955) an outstanding chemist in his own right, worked very closely with Pt Nehru and founded the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) with a chain of National Laboratories.In the later period, another person who made the greatest impact on Indian Science was Dr Homi Bhabha, the father of India's Nuclear Program. He was instrumental in establishing the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research and the Atomic Energy Establishment which was later named after him.Dr Vikram Sarabhai was another scientist of physics background whose efforts yielded in the establishment of Space Research Organization (ISRO) and IIM's. However, it was only after the independence and through the vision of Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru that science and technology were developed as a major force for accelerating for social and economic change.Nehru's involvement in the promotion of scientific activities in India was of several folds. On the eve of independence he constituted a scientific manpower committee along the lines of a similar committee of England.From 1947 to 1950 in addition to being Prime Minister, he was the Minister-in-charge of scientific Research. In this capacity and even otherwise his fervent and convincing advocacy of the importance of science on motions to grant funds punctuated the parliamentary debates and lent luster and freshness to the quite often dull deliberations, presenting and defending the budget demands for scientific research he was not tired of reminding of his colleagues, the fundamental impact of science on the modern world and its implications for the Indian science.He laid the foundation for the establishment of a chain of national laboratories and continued as the chairman of the Governing Council of Scientific and Industrial Research until his death. From the time the Department of Atomic Energy was created, it remained directly under his charge as Prime Minister. He was elected President of Indian Science Congress Association in 1942 and again in 1947. Since that time he attended its annual sessions regularly.1n 1950, three laboratories, namely the National Physical Laboratory in New Delhi, the National Chemical Laboratory in Poona and Central Technical Research Institute in Mysore were established. Pt. Nehru diverted his attention to the villagers in 1952 in a new effort to galvanize the national economy. He gave a call that "Everything can wait but not agriculture". This statement became a landmark in the history of India for the formulation of future policies towards agricultural development.It was for the first time that Government of India showed determination to tackle major rural problems. Research institutes on crops, animals, fisheries and other related sciences were started. Agricultural Universities, colleges and research institutes were sprung up in every part of the country. It was the vision of Pt Nehru that gave us the "Green Revolution" and placed our country on strong footing to take up any challenge on the food requirements of one billion people by the turn of 20th century.Today, India can be proud of having the third largest manpower in the field of science and technology because of the structure which Pt Nehru laid down for higher education in fifties. It was the N.R.Sarkar Committee which reported in 1946 with regard to the post war landscape of technical education that led to the founding of an innovative technological institute at Kharagpur, afterwards it was raised to level of an institute of technology.Within four years, four others IIT's were established on the same pattern. This coincided in its own way with Pt. Nehru's vision of future India in which science and technology would play a considerable role in the development of the country. From the day these technical institutes were established, it was visualized that these institutes would compete with the best of the kind in the world. The model taken was from that from MIT at Boston. US helped directly for the establishment of MIT like IIT at Kanpur and Delhi. Russian and German influence was strong in Bombay and Madras IITs. All these institutes were developed in fifties.The mineral raw materials constitute the backbone of industrial production. It was Pt Nehru's time that mineral exploration and mining development was given the pride of the place and its exploration made India totally self sufficient in the filed of planning, engineering and construction of mines.Presently India is in a position to extend technical know-how in setting up, integrating and mining steel plants to other countries. The credit for all this goes to Jawaharlal Nehru, whose vision is being transmitted into reality. India's atomic energy program owns its beginning and development to the encouragement that Nehru gave during 17 years of his Prime Ministership.The creation of the Department of Atomic Energy in 1954 as an independent Ministry with Pt Nehru as its in charge was a radical departure from the normal methodologies of the working of the Government Ministries. It was Pt. Nehru who started the space Program in 1963 and its first centre at Thumba started functioning.Later on India undertook many complex projects and accomplished them. As President of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, on 23rd May 1964, Pt Nehru approved for the setting of National Laboratory devoted to the study of the Ocean. This decision led to the establishment of the National Institute of Oceanography and Research soon after his death.Pt. Nehru had strong scientific temper which dispels difference between myths and logics. From the foregoing account it is ample clear that our impressive achievements in the field of science and technology during the post independence period own a great deal to the interest, support and patronage of Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru.Unfortunately,certain extremist groups within BJP and RSS have stooped to a new low, something never seen before in Indian history. They still live in the past, and don't want to do anything in present to make a better future. They continue to spread stories that Mahabharat character Ashwathama is still alive, if that wasn't enough, now they say that S.C.Bose is still alive. It seems that spreading fake stories is the forte of some people.Some people are just too jealous of Nehru's success and seem to dislike him for that. It all depends on PM Modi now, if he continues to get driven by RSS agenda (instead of Niti Aayog agenda) and loses track of development, he may do gross injustice to the people of his country. Rather he should focus on implementation of policies initiated by Niti Aayog.Edit5:- Today in winter of 2018, Modi and BJP are hell bent on chasing and erasing Nehru’s legacy and destroying the constitutional framework setup by him. Nehru is no more so BJP can abuse him as much as they want, as they know he will not return from the ashes to answer back. In today's Era, I do not see any one in Congress even worthy of comparison with the likes of Nehru.Edit6 :- This answer was collapsed recently by Quora, as it was reported by huge number of trolls from a particular party. I hope it is reinstated as the people of this country have a right to know the truth and stay away from fake propoganda done by paid trolls of a particular party.Edit 7:-I don't want to get political. Deeply saddened by the extremely low level politics done by Modi and BJP. Not only Quora, but Facebook, youtube, whatsapp and entire social media is filled up with such disgusting things. Now BJP has made this tool of disgusting and derogatory language the new normal. The BJP always thinks that those male politicians who have potential and perform better than Modi are all rapists, womanizer and children of Muslim terrorists be it Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Nehru or even new comer Arvind Kejriwal, and if the political candidate performing better than BJP is a lady, then she must be a sex worker /prostitute, be it Indira Gandhi or Atishi Marleen a of AAP. This is the unfortunate truth of BJP in 2019.Edit 8:-Blaming Nehru for all of India’s current problems has become a fashion in last few years. It seems completely illogical and absurd to me. Afterall, a person has to be evaluated, based on the appropriate context of his era, not on what is happening 70 - 80 years after his death. Blaming Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi for today's problem is like blaming Sunil Gavaskar and Kapil Dev for India’s poor performance and loss to NZ in World Cup 2019 semi final. Just like Legendary players like Gavaskar and Kapil Dev should not be abused for poor performance of Kohli and Sharma, similarly Nehru and Gandhi should not be blamed for current problems of India. Therefore It is only the current leadership to be blamed. We should stop living in the past and live in the present while planning for the future.Edit 9:-I visited my alma matter on 22nd December 2019 to attend the Alumni event. Till 5 years ago there was a stone kept in the IIT Delhi Main building where it was written /carved out the following text ‘IIT Delhi foundation stone inaugurated by first PM of Independent India Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru in year 1960’ and I was disappointed to see that it is now destroyed / removed. Then I quickly went to IIT Delhi administration and inquired about it. They told me that this happened recently after Modi came to power in 2014 and even the IIT Delhi website which a contained a section on ‘History of IIT ‘s’ and ‘Nehru's vision for science and technology’ and his role in setting up IIT’s has also been removed based on instructions received from MHRD. Very disappointed to see this.

The Bay Area has a lot going for it. I lived there for 30 years in 18 local cities.Here's why I left.By the end of 2017 I had recovered from personal disaster in the Financial Crisis and had managed to save $500k.I had two desires:I wanted to live in a house again.No commuting 2+ hours a day.During my reboot, I had “limited” myself to $3,000/month for rent. Seems like a lot? I had to move out of the City and farther away three times to stay in budget. My one-bedroom back in the City now goes for $4200/month.I was also facing “super-commuting,” defined as traveling over 3 hours a day to work. 104,000 City workers now do just that every day. The City population is only 880k. (Monday Note, Louis Gassee and Frederick Filloux, July 9, 2018).My SF real estate broker sent me this house for sale in the City.Nowhere near as nice as the house I lost, it's rooms are 15- 20 feet wide, on a busy street... and a bargain at only $2,850,000.Just for giggles, let's run the numbers. Say you have $700k for a downpayment (not merely my wimpy $500k) then you'd owe $2.15M. The mortgage would be $10,000 a month. Property taxes, $2,500/month. Insurance, another $2,500/month. That’s $15,000/month, before your first peanut butter and jelly sandwich. God forbid interest rates rise and you have an adjustable rate.This, of course, assumes that your're willing to Blankenship, as in the character from MadMen who can't afford to retire and must keep working until she eventually dies at her desk. Not a good look for me.OK, but how cheap can you go? Here it is:$650,000. OMG, let's hurry! It's $1M less than the median house price!Yes, the median house price in SF is now $1.65M (Case-Schiller), not that a median house was ever something you actually wanted to live in. After the Financial crisis the median was $612k. Now you can't find anything for that. The median doubled by 2014 and increased by $200k alone in the last 6 months of 2017.The magnitude of this bizarreness hit me: I managed to put away a half million dollars in 5 years — and during the same time I lost ground by over a million dollars — !I did find a condo that was bit cheaper, if a little cramped at 285 sqft.(Probably less than your conference room at work.) All yours for $453,000. It was so small I couldn’t back up far enough to take a picture, so I drew a plan:Kitchen on the left. Bathroom on the right. That's it. There was a rectangle on the wall to suggest where you might hang a fold-down bed. Looking on the bright side it does encourage you to make your bed up every day — so you can get to the front door.OK, so the City is out, how about the Peninsula? The problem is there you have Menlo Park, Palo Alto, Mountain View, Cupertino, each with their own tech behemoths.OK, I skipped over a few places like Redwood City because ... uh… Redwood City.Sorry, even this suburban dream in Redwood City is over $2M.Time to look for places where Fed inflated stock market and asset prices aren’t driving housing insanity. These would be places that have been steadily creating companies and jobs, just not the high profile ones that issue lots of stock. Places you'd fly over without a second thought. Wait, that's it!Surprise. The housing prices, cost of living, and income distribution in the midwest make it a veritable Marxist paradise compared to the Bay Area. Not that Marxism had anything to do with it.So, what you can get for the price of that San Francisco row house above? Let's pull up Zillow in my new home town of Fort Wayne, IN.Start with this 3bd house, nicely appointed, huge backyard. It's a 12 minute commute to downtown. Compare this to that Redwood City house.A nice kitchen and dining room.But that's not all. Go ahead and buy a similar house for each of your two kids.And because you're such nice parents, buy a fourth house for yourselves at the lake 'cause you need a vacation home, right?Are we done? No way, we are just getting started!Next, buy 6 more homes just like these, rent them out and never work again. As a retirement plan, never-work-again works for me. Sure beats Blankenship.OK, surely now we're done?Nope, you'd still have enough left over for two weeks in Vail for several years in a row, a trip to Paris, and twin Teslas in the garage.Or by all means, just buy that San Francisco house.Here in Fort Wayne, houses like the above go for $135k - $320k depending on size and amenities. The one I showed you above sold for $159k, but $200k is probably closer to the median. That's what houses in SF increased in the last 6 months. Think about this: the tech industry has created the greatest amount of wealth in history and actually brought down the average person’s standard of living.Or maybe you're looking to rent?I have a buddy who sometimes sublets his room in a house in the Haight for $1800/month. He's been collecting the rent for the landlord for years and the landlord knows about his subletting and doesn't care. For my friend it's how he affords a vacation.I asked him, "How would you like to rent a room the same distance from downtown, maybe in this house for a thousand less than your room in the Haight, $850/month?Of course you'd have to choose which of four bedrooms to sleep in because $850 gets you the entire house.Rent out the other 3 bedrooms to Indiana Tech students for $250-300 if you want to do the living-for-free thing. Remember, you still have your SF $1800/month AirBnB spending money, just get one of your housemates to collect the rent.OK, I admit that this was a really good find but I literally just popped open Craigslist, and grabbed the first I saw.How is this possible?There's a little trick with rent that you don't notice in the Bay Area. You see, in most places rents stop rising right about where people can afford to buy a house. I didn't notice this in the Bay Area because the cutoff for buying a house there just kinda recedes into infinity.In a non-distorted property market this puts a limit on how much you can charge for rent, even for a really nice house. Here that's about $700 per month. If you can afford that you likely have the income and credit rating to buy a house. That's why this house has to offer so much to command $840/month. But even still, $650/month gets you a nice house, and if you are willing to pay 1/3 of what you pay now for rent, a spectacular one.Or the Country?Maybe your tastes run towards something a bit more in the country, as mine do after living in Marin. At 20 minutes to work (instead of 90) we have this, also at $850/month.The modern house interior pictures above are actually from this cheaper house, not the more expensive one I mentioned above. (Sorry, I was too lazy to cut and paste more pictures.) It's also 3 bd in case you feel like contributing to the population. You could buy this house for $118k if you take your time and look, or under $200k easily. I overpay a bit for something a little larger than this, a little closer to town, renting at $1350/month because it was so much less than the $3,000 I was paying I didn’t care.As an aside, it’s nice that people here don't feel they have to put up fences around their yards. Yards run together. Here is the view out my kitchen window.My backyard is a large commons shared field containing a lake.But anyone could just come up to your back door!?Yeah, but they don't and your patio furniture and BBQ grill don't get stolen. Yeah, I didn't expect it: unselfish, communally enjoyed common space, low crime. In fact if a house sells and the new owners immediately put up a privacy fence, you can be pretty sure they’re not from the midwest.But aren’t they all racist, misogynistic, Republican, LGBTQ hating, deplorables there?OK, I made fun of the question because of the ridiculous things I hear. Still, who your neighbors are is a reasonable question to ask. My neighbors are African American on one side and a lesbian couple on the other (who drive a wicked purple HUMV!) Across the street there's an African American woman and her white husband. On the downside, kids here never saw a SmartCar before so I'm the guy who drives the clown car. Sigh.Yes, this city is 80% white and there are a lot of churches. There are liberal churches, conservative ones, black, white, latin, Korean-Presbyterian, even Burmese ones. I'm not sure, but I think that many who go to church are more spiritual than religious and even here churchgoers are in the minority. What they do have is a particularly strong stake in having a peaceful, cooperative community.The city center tends to be much more ethnically diverse and the outlying areas less so, but, true, it's not SF. Can you deal with that? (Not meant sarcastically. There will be differences.)What about jobs?They are coming. From Rust Belt to Robot Belt? is an article describing tech moving to the midwest. That’s good because the latest survey said 1/3 of SF residents want to get out.A $140k programmer's job in SF would get a $70k - $100k salary here, but your housing costs are 90% less. That leaves you 5x better off. If you have a downpayment then a $70k salary here is way better than $140k or even 200k in the Bay Area. Remember, a down payment here is $25,000, versus $450,000+ . Your parents might spring for the former. If they'll spring the latter please adopt me.The median mortgage on any of these houses is $400 - $1100 per month as opposed to $6,000 - $12,000 in SF. When I first got here I was looking at a $300k house. (Yes, they are starting to build expensive houses for CA transplants though it's kinda humorous what they consider expensive.) $300k costs you $1500 - $2000/month, or you can put down $35k on that $179k house for $1k/month. So use 1/3 of your $70k salary and you're in a nice house instead of trying to figure out where $15,000 a month is going to come from…after income taxes.I read of a new program in SF for tax-subsidized affordable housing and you qualify with up to $117,000 a year in income. We have affordable housing here too. We call it "housing."It also makes me wonder why the city services are in such good shape here and the streets are smooth and repaired despite the fact that we have winters. With only $100 in property taxes per month per house compared with SF's $1000–$1500, plus much higher housing density, plus vastly higher business taxes, plus fewer miles of road, and no winters. Where does it all go? How do you piss that much money away? Roads in SF were so bad voters had to pass a bond for road repair. For 30 years all the general fund tax money for roads had been diverted (Diane Feinstein, personal conversation)."Second tier" cities like Fort Wayne, Columbus Ohio, Toledo may never attract the Googles and Apples of the world (edit: they are starting). What they are attracting is the data centers, manufacturing, farming, mining, healthcare, accounting, customer service and freelancers etc. There are tech parks popping up all over the place with names like "Integer" and "Linear". The rust belt decline finished over 10 yeas ago and Main Street USA turns out to be a pretty good place to live. If you are an engineer or freelancer and can earn an SF salary remotely…SchoolsI grew up in public schools at a time when private schools were for the kids of upper class capitalists (when that was a bad word) who hobnobbed with the children of dictators and politicians. The acid test is whether well-to-do parents who can afford private schools send their kids to pubic school anyway.The midwest is more conservative, so all the rich send their kids to expensive private schools and the poor go to the terrible public ones. Right? Actually, that's got it backwards.Public education is fine out here and it's free and everyone I've met sends their kids to public school. Sure, there are private schools here but it's mostly because they are Catholic or Lutheran and not because the public schools suck. I did meet a worker in a hardware store who was sending his daughter to private Lutheran school because of its arts program. What struck me though was that a hardware store clerk could send his daughter to private school.Compare this with SF. To set the metric here let me mention that I volunteered for Gavin Newsom's care-not-cash and gay marriage campaigns but by San Francisco standards I am conservative. Thus, if a pro-gay marriage supporter of Gavin Newsom is on the conservative fringe of the City, you can guess where everyone else lies.Bottom line: the school system in SF is everything an unopposed progressive left with a mind boggling tax base could make it. In fact, there's a single school in SF that costs more than all the schools in my city put together (Willie Brown Middle School). Everyone is so self assuredly progressive yet the result is so bad that my liberal friends in SF --each and every one of them-- send their kids to private school even at a mind boggling $60k per year. That’s the ultimate indictment of SF local politics.Or they take their kids and move.Final StrawAfter I figured out that I likely couldn't afford a decent house and was destined for a truly miserable commute, then — after selling my startup stock — I embarked on the final depressing task: it was time to look for a new job.I wasn’t looking to do another startup, not just yet. I wanted to be an engineer, do QA, or product management again. My last non-startup job was as a Technology VP at Macromedia after they bought my first company. It had been $220k in today’s money with bonus etc. On the other hand my last startup salary had been “only” $110k, so what price could I command in the Bay Area now?Nothing.Huh? I had 4 startups, two very successful, a billion downloads of software I designed, 7 years as an engineer and product manager at Apple, a CS degree from Berkeley with honors, 7 computer languages. Patents. That's a pretty good resume I thought.Nothing. The lack of response was embarrassing.What happened to that programmer shortage?A resume consultant suggested I create multiple versions of my resume to see which worked best, A-B testing, just like in advertising or web design. So I did, but then on a whim I also created versions of me where I switched gender, ethnicity and age. Michael became Michaela or Huhuk, my Pawnee name. I shrunk the resume so experience wouldn't signal age.Bang! That did it.My new avatars were swamped with requests.Out of a perverse sense of humor I started removing accomplishments from the most successful avatar, a young woman of color. First I deleted the software I created, then the startups.Still swamped.OK, take out the patents, and all the years at Apple.Swamped.OK, remove the CS degree and honors, apply as a UCB senior with no experience, then as a junior.I was still being recruited, but at a slower pace...as a junior...with no experience or degree.Think about that for a moment: it's all the same person and the radically different responses are solely due to age, gender, and race. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.But wait, doesn't the Bay Area condemn age, gender, and race prejudices?When someone from the Bay Area tells you they support diversity, they mean diversity from within their tribe. If you're honest, that's like a white supremacist telling you she supports diversity among Caucasians. In other words no diversity at all and brutal prejudice if you are on the outside. I was shocked. Consider yourself warned. If you are a programmer, your years to 40 may well be your countdown to exile unless you have gender or race going for you.Sure, there is a strong narrative about how people are progressive here but I think the truth is a bit different: people are tribal. Tribes favor their own and cast out the other.In 2017, 65% of all owner move-in evictions in SF—the most anti-progressive thing you can possibly do: buy a house and throw out the renters—took place within 4 blocks of the bus stops where the luxury buses from Silicon Valley pick up their tech workers.Think about that. So much for progressive ideals.So that’s why I left the Bay. I thought about it a lot and decided the risk of staying was beyond reason. The rest of this post is an explanation of:WTF happened to my Beautiful Bay Area?Well, the Fed’s response to the Financial Crisis, as Greenspan and Bernanke brazenly tell us in their books, was to engage the "wealth effect”, that is, drive up the value of assets using cheap borrowed money. Remember, money loaned at 0% is the same as giving it away, even if it’s trillions given to rich people. As you give investment banks, venture funds and well heeled investors the ability to borrow mind boggling amounts at near 0% interest they drive up asset prices.The goal of this policy is to inflate the wealth of those who own significant assets — by definition, the rich — so they spend more. Yes, in their own unabashed words, the goal is to make the rich richer.What could go wrong?The idea is that when rich people feel wealthier they spend more and this will "drive the economy". Another way of describing this might be, "let's give our rich friends and political allies lots of free money. Eventually they might also buy stuff from the people who make things."Remember, electronically printing money doesn’t create new wealth, it merely transfers it to the first recipient — in this case to those already have assets — the rich.Why not find ways to just give free money to the poor or middle class? Because—and this was seriously offered as a reason— the poor and middle class will just save it or pay off their debts. Awesome. The astounding thing is that none of this is remotely controversial.So how'd this all work out?First, let's plot peoples' jobs/income on a large piece of San Francisco salt water taffy with the lowest income jobs on the left and the highest on the right. Now have your buddy take the right side of the taffy and stretch it 10 meters father to the right. The points on the left side of the taffy hardly move while those at the right side stretch a whopping 9+ meters. (Click to enlarge.)The taffy is the Bay AreaThe guy doing the stretch is the FedThe stretch that doesn't affect the left side much is the "wealth effect".Please look at these diagrams, (I drew them myself) as they explain life in Silicon Valley. Silicon Valley is ripe for such distortions because it creates much of its wealth in the form of stock. Borrowing (ideally at low interest) to buy assets (stock, real estate) is called leverage. That's what Wall Street does and it’s what got investment banks in trouble in 2008, but they got bailed out. In the meantime, we have surpassed levels of leverage ever seen before, blowing right by the dotcom and financial crises. It doesn’t matter if Apple, of Google, or Adobe, or Facebook is sound: it will be liquidated to pay off leverage when other stocks drop, just as before.Finally, it gets even better. In an IPO, maybe 5 million shares get sold at $10/share but then voila, the other 450 million shares that didn't trade also have the same value—after all it's the market price. $5B of wealth has been created out of thin air and most of it is going into house prices. It’s important to understand this because it can go away just as easily. But for now there’s a lot of new money floating around. And as the Fed freely admits, this was their intention, but there’s a problem.Trickle down didn’t.Startup founders have the incentive to repeat their success, that's good, but they tend to create what they already know and those jobs are already on the right side of the taffy. That's not to say it’s bad, it’s great! It just doesn't trickle.How about the non-founder types? Well, what is the first thing they buy with their magically inflated stock wealth? If you answered "a new house" go to the head of the class. People want to live near where they work so the wealth doesn't travel outwards very far. Instead it travels straight up in the form of housing prices.Realization: ultimately, your salary compensation is a bit less about how valuable what you do is to society and more about whether or not you work in an industry that issues stock and is sensitive to stock price distortion. Think about that. That’s no way to run a railroad.Income inequality is bad for a lot of reasons I can't go into here but when a large swath of the population sees the main economic strategy has been to give away insane, generational wealth — but not to them — well, you get the idea.How long can this go on?I don't know, and neither do you. Still, we've seen it before. On some of the charts you can compare to the bubbles of 2000, and 2008.Look at these graphs with their lock step synchronization and try to tell yourself it has nothing to do with the Fed, that these curves represent the true value of goods and services produced by these companies. Seriously?2 QuestionsThanks for reading this far. For me it all came down to two simple questions. You probably have the same.If this continues, can I afford to live here? (House, kids, schools, commute.)If this doesn't continue, can I afford to live here? Can I sell my house if home prices fall? Can I afford that mortgage in retirement?So by all means try Silicon Valley, do the startup thing if you have the stomach for it. Then if you want to have a family, live in a nice house, and send the kids to good public schools all at the same time, leave. If your company doesn't have to be in CA, then start it elsewhere.P.S.It took 7 weeks for my furniture to arrive. The moving company told me the problem was that there are lots of trucks going east from CA but few going west: drivers can't afford to come back completely empty so you wait. The exodus has begun. Central bankers insist they are starting to reign in the free money (raising interest rates and making leverage less profitable.) How long will the party go on after they take the punchbowl away?Your call. I voted with my feet.Update: a friend recently sold his house for $2M in SF, and asked what kind of house/houses he could buy where I live, with an eye towards rentals. “Here’s some examples,” I said showing him a portfolio of 60 houses/units. “He looked at a few then said, “OK, but how many can I buy?”I chuckled, “Uh, you can buy all of them.”Update 2: Oct 2019, Remax is a national real estate brokerage. Of their top 20 cities people are moving away from, San Francisco just ranked number 1. Now over half of its residents would move if they could.

Jim ThorpeProbably the greatest sportsman to have ever lived.SynopsisJim Thorpe was born circa May 28, 1887, near current-day Prague, Oklahoma. An All-American in football at the Carlisle Indian School, he won the pentathlon and decathlon at the 1912 Olympics before his gold medals were revoked on a technicality. Thorpe played professional baseball and football, and sought an acting career after retiring from sports. He died on March 28, 1953, in Lomita, California.Early Years and SchoolsJim Thorpe was born circa May 28, 1887, near current-day Prague, Oklahoma. A child of Sac and Fox and Potawatomi Indian bloodlines, as well as French and Irish roots, he was given the name Wa-Tho-Huk, meaning "Bright Path," but christened Jacobus Franciscus Thorpe.Thorpe learned to hunt and trap prey at an early age, developing his legendary endurance via extensive excursions through Indian Territory. His aversion to the classroom was exacerbated by the early deaths of his twin brother and both parents, and his stints at the Haskell Institute in Kansas, the local Garden Grove school and the Carlisle Indian Industrial School in Pennsylvania were marked by long bouts of truancy.As a student at Carlisle in the spring of 1907, Thorpe joined a track-and-field practice session on campus. Clad in his work clothes, he launched himself over a 5'9" high bar to break the school record, catching the attention of coach Pop Warner. Thorpe soon became the star of the track program, and with his athletic skills he also enjoyed success in baseball, hockey, lacrosse and even ballroom dancing.However, it was football that propelled Thorpe to national renown. Starring as a halfback, place kicker, punter and defender, Thorpe led his team to a surprise victory over top-ranked Harvard in November 1911, and fueled a blowout of West Point a year later. Carlisle went a combined 23-2-1 over the 1911-12 seasons, with Thorpe garnering All-American honors both times.Olympic Glory and DownfallNamed to the U.S. team for the 1912 Olympic Games in Stockholm, Sweden, Thorpe burst out of the gate by winning four of five events to claim the gold medal in the pentathlon. A week later he overwhelmed the field in the decathlon, winning the high jump, the 110-meter hurdles and the 1,500 meters despite competing in a pair of mismatched shoes. Finishing the three-day event with a total of 8,412.95 points (of a possible 10,000), a mark that bested the runner-up by nearly 700 points, Thorpe was proclaimed by Sweden’s King Gustaf V to be the greatest athlete in the world.Thorpe was honored with a ticker-tape parade in New York City as part of his hero’s welcome home. However, a newspaper report the following January revealed that the Olympic champion had been paid to play minor league baseball in 1909 and 1910. Despite his handwritten plea to the Amateur Athletic Union, Thorpe was stripped of his amateur eligibility and forced to return his gold medals, his historic performance stricken from the Olympic record books.Professional Sports CareerIn 1913, Thorpe married his college sweetheart, Iva Miller, and signed to play professional baseball with the New York Giants. Troubled by the curveball, Thorpe batted just .252 over a six-year big-league career with the Giants, Cincinnati Reds and Boston Braves, although he managed an impressive .327 average in his final year.Thorpe made a much bigger impact in the early stages of pro football. He signed with the Canton Bulldogs for $250 per game in 1915, justifying the price tag by drawing massive audiences and leading the team to league championships in 1916, '17 and '19. In 1920, the Bulldogs were among the 14 clubs that made up the American Professional Football Association – soon to be renamed the National Football League – with Thorpe serving as league president for a season.From 1922 to '23, Thorpe coached and played for an all-Native American team called the Oorang Indians. Sponsored by Walter Lingo, owner of the Oorang Dog Kennels in LaRue, Ohio, the team's games featured players performing "war dances" and other rituals to entertain audiences. Thorpe went on to play for the NFL’s Cleveland Indians, Rock Island Independents, New York Giants and Chicago Cardinals through 1928.Post-Athletic Career and DeathHaving already divorced and remarried, to a former Oorang Kennels employee named Freeda Kirkpatrick, Thorpe encountered increasing difficulties after his athletic career concluded. He sought a career in Hollywood, and while he was credited with appearing in more than 60 films from 1931 to 1950, he mainly scored bit roles as a stereotypical American Indian. He undertook odd jobs to support seven children from two marriages, and a growing drinking habit led to a second divorce, in 1941.Despite his struggles, Thorpe found a purpose in fighting for his people. He formed a casting company to pressure Hollywood studios into casting authentic Native Americans for roles, and he sought to procure original Sac and Fox land holdings from the federal government. Scraping by with funds earned from public speaking, he married for the third and final time in 1945, to Patricia Gladys Askew.Thorpe achieved some public redemption in the final years of his life. The Associated Press named him the greatest athlete of the first half of the 20th century in 1950, and the following year he was portrayed by Burt Lancaster in the film Jim Thorpe – All-American. After he succumbed to a heart attack on March 28, 1953, at his trailer home in Lomita, California, his body was moved to an eastern Pennsylvania community that renamed itself Jim Thorpe in exchange for housing his remains.Legacy and Burial ControversyThorpe was elected a charter member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 1963, and in 1982 his name was restored to the Olympic record books as a co-winner of the 1912 track events. Proving he still loomed large in the American consciousness, he was voted the previous century's greatest athlete in a 2000 ABC Sports poll, and finished third in another ballot conducted by the Associated Press.Credit - Biography.com