Why does North India have more railway networks compared to South India?

 It is unfortunate, after Independence South has given a step motherly treatment by subsequent central governments, mainly Congress Governments. Especially Madhav Rao Scindia, Lallu Prasad Yadav and Mamta Banerjee has diverted all resources to the development of MP, Bihar and West Bengal.

Over and above, present Government is ready to spend luxurios amounts for developing flying networks between Ahmedabad and Mumbai and even spend on less populous Himalayas.

In South Tamilnadu, South of Madurai, lack of railway network has become such a serious issue, people start comparing British rule was better than Our Government and even asking for a separate state from Tamil Nadu.

1.We are aware that British Government, exploited India for its resources.

2.When we got independence, it is the expectation that democracy will give development.

3.Now the elected representation exploited region specific development and ignored certain regions for their political and personal gains.

4.Now those who saw development during British, ignored after independence complain.

I can cite an example:

In Tamil Nadu, Madras Egmore to Tirunelveli Railway line is one of the oldest line laid during British. Not only, this line, entire Southern Tamil Nadu south of Maduari is being denied Railway Journey after independence.

#There is a single line.

#Conversion to Metre to Broad gauge took decades - Maduari to Kanyakumari, Madurai to Coimbatore, Maduari to Shencottah

#Now it has gone to the extent of ridiculing in competetive exams asking which are the districts in Tamil Nadu where there are no trains running? The nswer is Theni District. Unfortunate thing is that this dustrict become trainless for gauge conversion after 2000. The land is illegally occupied by political goons also. These people, who enjoyed trains during British is taken away, it causes inconvenience.

Simply Governments say that they do not have resources for completion and 80 CR is allotted for the project this year.

Mamta Banerjee did not face any resource crunch for developing rail network in WB.

Lallu Prasad Yadav did not face any resource crunch for developing rail network in Bihar.

Madhav Rao Scindia did not face any resource crunch for developing rail network in Madhya Pradesh.

Even present Government is contemplating, mega projects in Himalayas and even a Flying Rail between Mumbai and ahmedbad without any resource crunch.

Whereas people in Tamil Nadu is staring at Veera Vanchi Maniyachi (where the British General was Killed by Vanchi Nathan, a freedom fighter) a village where trains stop hours for crossings as there is single line and people in all stations in the sectir are bambarded between PF 1 and PF2 on emergency basis and the trains stop for 1 to 2min. For a journey of 3 to 4 hours, you may not know how long, 5 to 6 hours it will take.

Yes, South Tamil Nadu people say British Rule brought best things for them where the elected Governments, both State DMK and ADMK & Centre Congress and BJP, do not address and blind South of Madurai. Only exploiting resources.

Chennai is not Tamil Nadu. Unfortunately it is at the northern end. Within Tamils, there is a partiality of Sideling Southern Tamilnadu.

This is the area which followed Subhash Chandra Bose and stiff fight with the British for getting freedom.

They now say, that the British rule was good.

Why is nationalism popular in North and not so popular in south? Are North Indians more patriotic?

 Are North Indians more patriotic?

Why is nationalim popular in North and Not so popular in South?

I do not think, patriotism / nationalism pertain to any region. As question sidelined with North Indians against South Indians, I would like to clarify by making comparison from observed History:

If you look at the history, South Indians are innocent and it is the false propaganda done by constituents.I can site, atleast three incidents, from History:

1.Punjabis asked for the separate country, Pakistan was born.

2.Even a tiny Indian State is further divided into Punjab, Haryana and HP

3.Bengalis asked for the separate country, Bangladesh was born.

4. As we know, Kashmiris are now asking for a separate country……..If you observe all the above, it is the religion/ culture provoking the separation.

Fortunately, if we take example of South Indian State say TN, Tamil Nadu is a homogenous state sharing the same culture, adjusting all, including atheists - the rest of India is longing for this peace. Others could not stomach. They spread hatred and throwing mud.

Can we say,Others Envy, South India particularly Tamil Nadu’s Pride.

Why is nationalism popular in North and not so popular in south? Are North Indians more patriotic?

 Are North Indians more patriotic?

Why is nationalim popular in North and Not so popular in South?

I do not think, patriotism / nationalism pertain to any region. As question sidelined with North Indians against South Indians, I would like to clarify by making comparison from observed History:

If you look at the history, South Indians are innocent and it is the false propaganda done by constituents.I can site, atleast three incidents, from History:

1.Punjabis asked for the separate country, Pakistan was born.

2.Even a tiny Indian State is further divided into Punjab, Haryana and HP

3.Bengalis asked for the separate country, Bangladesh was born.

4. As we know, Kashmiris are now asking for a separate country……..If you observe all the above, it is the religion/ culture provoking the separation.

Fortunately, if we take example of South Indian State say TN, Tamil Nadu is a homogenous state sharing the same culture, adjusting all, including atheists - the rest of India is longing for this peace. Others could not stomach. They spread hatred and throwing mud.

Can we say,Others Envy, South India particularly Tamil Nadu’s Pride.

I want to start a cotton spinning mill in Maharashtra. What should be my first step?

 The cotton spinning industry is at one of the worst recession period now. It can only better from here. It is the best time to start a spinning mill.

Instead of starting a new mills, go for a stressed mill at a fraction of cost and turnaround it.

1.Approach NCLT.

2.Shortlist your takeover candidates. You may select Nagpur or Kolhapur.

3.Go for one time settlement with the lenders, and the fresh equity infusion.

4.Keep your capital structure reasonably.

5.Remember cotton price vary 28 to 40% in a year. Keeping cash to take advantage purchase timing will always help.

Enjoy the business. You have created wealth for your future generations.

Do South Indians worship demon King Ravana because he was South Indian and Rama was North Indian?

 South Indians do not give much importance to avatars. They worship Vishnu.

Ravana is not a South Indian. Ramayana mentions that he is a Brahmin. The varna systems does not apply south of vindhyas.

He may be either North Indian or ruler of Sri Lanka.

Rama was completely disgraced by his father, mother, brothers and kith and kin. Born in a royal family he could not safeguard his wife.

South Indians only helped him to rescue his wife, and in a war, lot of lives have been lost.

After everything is over, and he crowned for the chair he deserves, the cheap north indians realized him as an avatar.

North Indians did not help him, did not stand behind them at the time of distress, but praise him after he was crowned.

So selfish, they follow “Jo jita oyi sikander”

Visit Rameswaram, once in your life time, to understand the South Indians.

Which one is older between Prakrit and Sanskrit?

 People are confusing.

1.The term “Prakrit” is coined in which language?

In Sanskrit.

The Sanskrit categories any language other than Sanskrit as Prakrit.

#It is like putting boundaries. Manusmriti is applicable South of Himalayas and North of Vindhyas. Suppose if there is any confusion in Varna of a King in South, say Shivaji, it simply put him as Sudra instead of Kshatriya. Technically, he is out of geographic boundary.

#It is like in all Tamil literature mention of any language as “Vada Mozhi” meaning language of North. It is putting all languages other than Tamil as “Vada Mozhi” But many interprete as Sanskrit , it may not be so.

2. The mention of Prakrit in Sanskrit become prominent when it faced competition from other languages given prominance by new found religions in 4th to 7th Century. It categories each and every languages under the umbrella term Prakrit.

Conclusion: Prakrit is a general term used to represent any language other than Sanskrit during 4the to 7 the century.

Which is the easiest language in India?

 “Ma”

Undoubtedly, one’s Mother Tongue is the easiest language, anywhere in the world. The reason is it is deep inside in unconscious, till death and beyond.

We speak languages. One is English, one is Hindi, one is Tamil, or something else. We speak languages, systems of thought, and they have become so important that we can die them. Man can die for words, for mere words. Someone calls his language useless -- then man can fight, for a mere word he can kill the other. The word has become so important. This is nonsense, but this is history and this is how we are still behaving.

A single word can create such a disturbance in you that you are ready to kill or to die for it. We speak languages, systems of thought. What are languages? Thoughts arranged logically, systematically, in a pattern. And what are thoughts? Words arranged in a system, meaningfully. And what are words? Sounds, upon which it is agreed that they mean either this or that. So sounds are basic; they are the basic structure of the mind. languages are the peak, but the bricks by which the whole structure is raised are sounds.

What is wrong? A sound is just a sound, and the meaning is given by us, agreed upon by us; otherwise it has no meaning. The meaning is invested by us, projected by us; otherwise "a aa" is just a sound -- it is meaningless. We give it a meaning, and then we create a system of thought around it. Then this word becomes very significant, then we make a language around it. Then you can do something, anything, for it. You can die or you can live for it. If someone insults this sound "a aa," you can become infuriated. And what is this? Just an agreement, a legal agreement that "This word means this." No word means anything in itself, it is simply a sound.

Bold sentences above says to go in the reverse order -- go backwards. Come to the sounds, then, more basic than sounds, a feeling is somewhere hidden. This has to be understood. Man uses words. Words mean sounds with meanings that are agreed upon. But animals, birds use sounds without any linguistic meaning. They do not have any language, but they use sounds with feeling. A bird is singing: it has a "feeling" meaning in it, it is indicating something. It may be a call for the partner, for the beloved, or it may be a call for the mother, or the child may be feeling hungry and just showing his distress. It is indicating a feeling.

Above sounds there are words, thoughts, languages; below sounds are feelings. And unless you can get below feelings, you cannot get below mind. The whole world is filled with sounds, only the human world is filled with words. And even a child who cannot use language uses sounds. Really, the whole language developed because of particular sounds that every child is using all over the world.

For example, in any language the word `mother' is somehow related with `ma'. It may be `amma', it may be `Mummy', it may be `mata', it may be `ma', -- anything -- but somewhere it is related with the sound "ma" in all the languages, more or less. The child can utter "ma" most easily. The first sound which the child can utter is "ma." Then the whole structure is based on this "ma." A child utters "ma" because it is the first sound which is easy for the child to utter. This is the case anywhere, in any part of the world, in any time. Just because of the structure of the throat and the body, "ma" is the easiest sound to utter.

And the mother is the nearest and the first person who is meaningful. So the first sound becomes associated with the first person who is meaningful, and from this mother, mater, mata, ma, all the other words are derived. But when the child for the first time utters "ma," he has no linguistic meaning for it, but a feeling is there. And because of that feeling the word becomes associated with the mother. That feeling is more basic than the sound.

“Ma”