I will give you another
parallel example of Netherlands. ...
Netherlands experienced a great flood (1950s) and at once the govt took measures through a flold managenetics scheme.....This meant taking people's land and moving people from large homes to small land/ homes....It also meant the govt couldn't always compensate 100% so the people had to manage....and they did...
The flood history:
https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2018/02/the-netherlands-remembers-the-devastating-floods-of-1953/
The sacrifice :
https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2014/feb/16/flooding-netherlands
Well at least these countries provided basic facilities for their citizens
Same cannot be said about Pakistan where you have to provide even water yourself
At a time of sacrifice even the basics are not provided....depends on how much the govt can afford ...
For financial a developed country like Netherlands...The flood management is important and it's people understand....out of all who were moved in the mid 2000s only two families went to court and lost:
There are no financial packages for people who have to move. "They get the market value of their house and that is all. We will help them find another place, but not financially. The only thing we do is to make sure that they do not lose money." He insists people will accept the situation "if you are honest and proactive and go to people and talk to them and take their fears seriously".
Only two cases have been taken to court by people who didn't want to leave, both of which have been won by Room for the River.
"Of course there is opposition and of course people are hurt," said Brouwers. "They aren't singing and dancing about it. If you are the third generation in that house and you have to move it is terrible. But we have to find a way to live with water rather than fight it.
Our task is clear. Our cashflow is constant. The programme is on track. Holland is divided and ringed by dykes and that will not change. We have built our cities for years close around rivers, we have given them no space so we have to change that."
Also like how the ancestors of some of us left everything in India to come to Pakistan...It is called sacrifice
After the sacrifice there is a struggle period and then you see the result....when you don't sacrifice and just keep complaining at everything even when you know and have been shown the financial situation Bare....then you get a crisis and violence...and foreigners take advantage
So all these children bachi for the sake of NS or from disappointment. ...All one can say is even Pakistan is disappointed in you lot.
Instead of understanding our situation and making cuts you people complain and don't even cut one import good from your homes....you aren't proactive just a whiny!!
@Dubious my question is why does the common man always have to make sacrifices while the rich and the influential get away with everything including murder....unless you establish justice which is equal for the rich and the poor no amount of sacrifice would suffice
That is true but who can fix our courts? What is the process?
Well at least these countries provided basic facilities for their citizens
Same cannot be said about Pakistan where you have to provide even water yourself
And whose fault is it that we lack basic facilities? Who decided metro was more important than clean water? Basic facilities is not something you get overnight. ...you build on it..tell me which previous govt worked on it? Current govt is fighting economic mess and trying to elevate poor....yet you guys still whine?
Basic facilities in Malaysia started in 1950s...Malaysia doesn't have hostel neighbours so they started early but the whole dept was reorganised
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5345496/
http://www.ideas.org.my/malaysia-welfare-state/
And even then the basics were subjected to criticism ...
https://www.schoolmalaysia.com/resources/govn_social_welfare.php
After 70 yrs IK stars basic facilities for poor and people claim he is drunk? He starts basics for the lower class and people say he is wasting our money then when they don't fall under the poverty line they claim there is no basic facilities? Dude where was your cry for the past 70yrs or even previous talent when metro was more important than your basics?
Ab kiyun yaad ari hain?
As for Japan it is still ans on going struggle that they are still working on:
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2...ty-threatening-education-future/#.XM5Xlh5RU0M
http://www.ipsnews.net/2010/01/development-japanrsquos-rude-awakening-poverty-hurts/amp/
Do you think these facilities came by magic?
No people also sacrificed...first by deciding to marry late then to have fewer children...then to move into smaller apartments high rise :
Social change
Two major changes were visible in the social life of the Japanese from 1952 to 1973. The first was the significant decline in the
birth ratethat stabilized the Japanese population. The second was the population shift from the countryside to urban centres. In addition to
birth control, such factors as a more highly educated populace, postponement of
marriage in favour of education and employment, and a desire for greater independence in early adulthood contributed to changing fertility patterns—as did the increasing
conviction among many couples that it was in their economic self-interest to have fewer children. But even with a stable population Japan remained one of the world’s most densely populated countries.
As population growth slowed and the economy expanded, Japan faced a labour shortage that drew workers from agriculture, as well as from small and medium enterprises, to the new large-scale industries of the cities. The resulting shift in Japan’s population was dramatic. In the
Meijiperiod the rural population of Japan stood at 85 percent of the national total; by 1945 it was approximately 50 percent, and by 1970 it had fallen to less than 20 percent. In the process, both village and urban life underwent significant changes. Factories were built in the countryside as industrialists tried to tap into the still-underemployed rural
labour force. Agriculture itself became increasingly mechanized and commercialized. As sons, and even husbands, went off to the factories, women, children, and the elderly were often left to run the family farm. At the same time, the face of rural Japan changed, with hard-surfaced roads, concrete schools, factories, and sales outlets for automobiles and farm equipment replacing the once timeless thatched-roof houses. By 1970 the average farm household income had risen higher than its urban counterpart, providing considerable rural purchasing power. Television tied rural households to urban Japan and to the world beyond. Young men brought up on visions of urban life as projected by American television programs were eager to move to the cities after graduation from
high school. Young women showed increasing reluctance to become farm wives, and in some instances villagers sought spouses for their sons in
Southeast Asia. Rural solidarity suffered from such out-migration, and in many cases prewar village life ceased to be, as villages amalgamated into cities and struggled to develop new identities.
Cities also underwent rapid change. By 1972 one in every nine Japanese lived in
Tokyo and one in four lived in the Tokyo-Ōsaka industrial corridor. As the national centre for government, finance, business, industry, education, and the arts, Tokyo became a magnet for many Japanese and the quintessential expression of Japanese urban life.
But while Tokyo and other large cities remained highly attractive, urban dwellers also faced serious problems, notably housing. Living space for most urban dwellers was infinitesimal when compared with Western societies. Although Japanese bristled when Westerners described them as living in “rabbit hutches,” apartments with 125 square feet (12 square metres) of living space—often with shared facilities—were common. Such apartments were often found in drab residential developments that pushed out at greater distances from the inner wards of major cities and required increased commuting times. The dream of owning one’s home, which most urban dwellers sought to keep alive, was already becoming increasingly
elusive by the 1970s. In 1972 the price of land in or near Japan’s largest cities was some 25 times higher than it had been in 1955, far surpassing the rise in the average urban worker’s
disposable income for the same period. While government and private industry were able to provide some low-cost housing, higher-priced housing in the form of high-rise condominiums, or “mansions,” proliferated, and for most Japanese urbanites housing remained the chief flaw in Japan’s postwar economic “miracle.”
https://www.britannica.com/place/Japan/Economic-transformation
Now when IK announced high rise...which laughter gas did some of the populace took? How many are willing to "sacrifice" in any means?
You see the "facilities" but you people don't see how they came about....had japan not stopped breeding. ...would their govt be able to help? Even now standard of living in Japan is very high....
Social welfare was used for election campaigns in Japan in 70's and 80s...in Pakistan they chose metro like projects and voted based on how big the road looks not who can offer them clean water
