Upcoming Elections - Vote with a conscience - Page 51

https://x.com/TimesAlgebraIND/status/1768164255013143023?s=20

Word Count: 1

Originally posted by: Palak2812

Bande ne already 100% reservation promise kiya hua hain according to caste now 50% women reservation.

100 seats per 200 reservation dega yeh.

We may mock him..laugh at him. But it is actually quite worrisome.

My son read this news. His immediate reaction was, where do we stand in all this reservation? Hamara kya hoga? Caste based reservation, gender based reservation, freebies for poor, schemes for girls. What about us general caste, middle class boys..hamare liye kuch kaam bachega kya?

When soon to be adult teenagers voice this concern, what do we answer? It just strengthens our resolve to keep such parties away from place of power..cling to whatever hope we have.

But how long can we delay it when the gullible can be lured with freebies? Hope sense prevails

Originally posted by: KJasoosChulbulP

https://x.com/desimojito/status/1767735428747047416?s=20

Daily insult hota hai Phir bhi aa jaata hai.

As if iska boss bolta hai jao, insult ho kar aao.

And you know the owners of channel is Samosa Shukla aka Rajeev Shukla and his wife Anuradha Prasad (She is the sister of Senior BJP MP Ravi Shankar Prasad.)

Brought over from the CAA thread, where it wasn't directly relevant:

Originally posted by: Palak2812

No Adani or Reliance on the list for electoral bonds. Meanwhile, who is on the list? Congress loving Bajaj. 🙏 Making this list public will actually expose Congress a lot more than its supporters are equipped to handle.

Actually, not just companies, but shell companies, as well as companies registered in tax havens like Mauritius, Virgin Islands, Bermuda, et al are allowed to buy electoral bonds. So any major companies that wants to influence regulatory policy but not be visible doing it can create such shell companies that exist only on paper, and then donate money via such channels. In other words, it is a money-laundering platform

If it weren't, SBI wouldn't have balked at complying w/ the Supreme Court order, since instant compliance would have done the government, which owns the SBI, political favors by exposing the opposition. But instead, the SBI initially wanted time until June to put that together, by which time the elections would have been over. Supreme Court unleashed the whip on that one, and so SBI had to turn in what it had

If you think about it, why would any company/corporation want to bribe an opposition party, not in power (aside from keeping it quiet if it has a history of creating workplace disruptions, like parties w/ trade unions)? But the reasons to bribe local or central governments are there: to get regulatory waivers for things they might want to do. I have argued that people/companies/corporations should be free to give any amount of money to any party they like, and the only law should be that details of all such donations be open, and available for the public to see. So that anyone can make up their own minds on the intentions of the donors and the extent to which the recipients are compromised, vs doing something that they would have done anyway

I don't get all the fuss around these electoral bonds..and don't think many care.

Do people really think voters r gonna decide their vote on the basis of this? Like even if The Con had got zero rupees I wouldn't vote for the party

Originally posted by: Kyahikahoon

I don't get all the fuss around these electoral bonds..and don't think many care.

Do people really think voters r gonna decide their vote on the basis of this? Like even if The Con had got zero rupees I wouldn't vote for the party

The issue is that the Supreme Court deemed it unconstitutional and demanded that the SBI give it all the details, to which the latter initially balked. As for the fuss, it's about the claims that the ruling party is above corruption, and doesn't get contributions the way the opposition does. Had that been true, then the BJP would have enthusiastically urged the SBI to dump all documents to the court right away, rather than ask for a time in June - right after the elections!

Originally posted by: Vr15h

The issue is that the Supreme Court deemed it unconstitutional and demanded that the SBI give it all the details, to which the latter initially balked. As for the fuss, it's about the claims that the ruling party is above corruption, and doesn't get contributions the way the opposition does. Had that been true, then the BJP would have enthusiastically urged the SBI to dump all documents to the court right away, rather than ask for a time in June - right after the elections!

Politics, courts, parties aside..how much does the common man's decision depend on this declaration?

Originally posted by: Kyahikahoon

I don't get all the fuss around these electoral bonds..and don't think many care.

Do people really think voters r gonna decide their vote on the basis of this? Like even if The Con had got zero rupees I wouldn't vote for the party

in the western world it’s called lobbying and reelection money. They put restrictions over time for which there is much debate. In Us there are political action committees PACS and SuperPacs etc that spend a ton of money. To influence decisions. Laws and could even be corruption.

So transparency etc goes only so far as we have seen here as well. As people have found means around all this (sadly).

Bottom line. Does it influence policy globally. Yea. Has anyone found a solution to this problem globally - no. Companies / industries with deep pockets play a role. It’s a fact. Does it make it right - no. But it’s what it is. As you said - will it influence your vote - no but appeasement politics can impact someone’s votes at end of day.

Originally posted by: Kyahikahoon

Politics, courts, parties aside..how much does the common man's decision depend on this declaration?

The BJP definitely thinks it'll affect public opinion, which is why it suddenly, out of the blue, announced CAA rules. Otherwise, it had 4 years to do that

Corruption - fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your POV - trumps ideology. Otherwise, in 1989, Rajiv Gandhi, who was the only prime minister in the history of independent India to announce Ram Rajya as his party's agenda, would have held on to power and not been sunk by the Bofors allegations

Originally posted by: Vr15h

The BJP definitely thinks it'll affect public opinion, which is why it suddenly, out of the blue, announced CAA rules. Otherwise, it had 4 years to do that

Corruption - fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your POV - trumps ideology. Otherwise, in 1989, Rajiv Gandhi, who was the only prime minister in the history of independent India to announce Ram Rajya as his party's agenda, would have held on to power and not been sunk by the Bofors allegations

Let's see.

Also, don't see how is it called corruption. SC declared it unconstitutional this year ya?

Are electoral bonds legal?

Aggarwala, in his letter, has however argued that the electoral bonds scheme, while declared unconstitutional by the Court, was legal and valid when the contributions were made. He contends that the donors, comprising corporate entities, followed a lawful mechanism provided by the government and Parliament of India.