Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Indian entrepreneur, industrialist, and philanthropist, Ratan Tata, dead at 86

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 144 posts

Re: Indian entrepreneur, industrialist, and philanthropist, Ratan Tata, dead at 86

#121

Post by braza »

4ggr0 wrote: post #84

RIP, as one says. That being said, it always irks me when people worship "philantropic" billionaires. I'm sure he's done good things. But there are no ethical billionaires in capitalism. TATA is a giant corp with a lot of influence, I can't believe that they're a 'honest company which doesn't bribe, pays their taxes and are otherwise clean'. Would probably be the first case of an ethical corporation/billionaire :) Ce…

Not Indian and not personally affective. I came from a society quite similar in terms of cultural e socio-economical background with India and maybe there’s a missing point.

I got your point and you’re right in terms of worship philanthropic people with a lot of money.

However, there’s one aspect that is overlooked when a person that helped and/or serves as reference for a bunch of people that is the “emotional gratitude” or “sense of reference” that those people has in some peoples mind and no matter how much of objective and maybe correct post-mortem criticism will change people’s mind.

At the limit, any public figure can, with little scrutiny, be framed as bad.

One example from my country: Ayrton Senna (deceased F1 Driver) even being a millionaire, coming from a very privileged background in 80s in a country that used to have at least 40% of its people below the poverty line.

Even not doing (during life) objectively nothing for poor people, a lot of folks (me included) consider the guy as a reference, in some cases as a hero. When he died a lot of folks felt that they lost their “hero” and actually he had a state funeral that no other Brazilian will ever have again [1].

My point is that there’s more nuance and layers around that topic when someone with a lot of money dies, and there’s no right or wrong since we’re al humans.

[1] - https://youtu.be/j79qnfHODPk?feature=shared

Re: Indian entrepreneur, industrialist, and philanthropist, Ratan Tata, dead at 86

#123

Post by aziaziazi »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #103
aziaziazi wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Veganism = no animals "used" to make food or whatever (soap, shoes, invivo testing...) Many people here seems to make the confusion that veganism is about the food. It's not, it's about the animals. > What is the purpose of the word vegetarian if one uses it to mean consuming some animals but not others? Languages are not like mathematics, one word can convey many meaning and nothing is stone-defined (dictionaries ar…

> In the Indian context there's a BIG part of the population that have a diet that does not have a definition in the Official Oxford Dictionary. How does omnivore not cover most people’s diets in India? (in the context of a discussion about populations of people that avoid eating animals) It seems like Indians use vegetarian to describe frequency or proportion of one’s diet that is animals. Seems like there could be…

Omnivore word does cover post people diet and is indeed more accurate, but how is it useful to know that 99.9% of Indians are omnivore? « 40% avoid eating meat most of the time buy may consume it once a month » is more informative but not very practical to repeat each time someone ask your diet.

By the way its the same for veganism : most vegans have at least once washed their hand with animal glycerin in a public bathroom soap or used a non vegan cloth washing soap while traveling. Are they less vegan? For some dictionary maybe, but most people don’t care about definition absolutism and prefer focus on the motivations and the results.

Re: Indian entrepreneur, industrialist, and philanthropist, Ratan Tata, dead at 86

#124

Post by lgleason »

dotps1 wrote: post #79

I'm sure he was an amazing capitalist, but my experience with Tata consulting was the worst. I worked for a division of GE during the Immelt years that outsourced large portions of IT to Tata, and was in charge of the transition. It was a masterclass in waste and inefficiency. Definitely one of the larger nails in the coffin of a former Fortune 5 company.

Not to mention all of US jobs that we said "Ta ta" to as they went to India. I worked for GE during that time and the US divisions were pretty bad as well. The handwriting was on the wall with the future of the company. I'm sure someone in the C-Suite wrote a Kaizen to shift that inefficiency overseas and probably got a bonus for it as well.

Re: Indian entrepreneur, industrialist, and philanthropist, Ratan Tata, dead at 86

#125

Post by dyauspitr »

codegeek wrote: post #118
dyauspitr wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pure vegetarian maybe but eating chicken or fish once or twice a month is still pretty much vegetarian and that’s the vast majority of the population.

That's not what being Vegetarian means.

It isn’t but it kinda is. If 95% of your meals are vegetarian then I think the designation holds.

Re: Indian entrepreneur, industrialist, and philanthropist, Ratan Tata, dead at 86

#126

Post by danans »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #103
aziaziazi wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Veganism = no animals "used" to make food or whatever (soap, shoes, invivo testing...) Many people here seems to make the confusion that veganism is about the food. It's not, it's about the animals. > What is the purpose of the word vegetarian if one uses it to mean consuming some animals but not others? Languages are not like mathematics, one word can convey many meaning and nothing is stone-defined (dictionaries ar…

> In the Indian context there's a BIG part of the population that have a diet that does not have a definition in the Official Oxford Dictionary. How does omnivore not cover most people’s diets in India? (in the context of a discussion about populations of people that avoid eating animals) It seems like Indians use vegetarian to describe frequency or proportion of one’s diet that is animals. Seems like there could be…

> How does omnivore not cover most people’s diets in India?

The dimensions of dietary regimes are even more complex in India than "omnivore" can capture. Some very religiously orthodox groups won't even eat onions and garlic because they are believed to encourage behavioral and spiritual "tendencies" that they seek to avoid.

Some meat eating Hindus will avoid eating an animal that hasn't been killed with a single strike (in contrast to the Islamic Halal practice of bleeding animals when slaughtered).

> It seems like Indians use vegetarian to describe frequency or proportion of one’s diet that is animals.

Vegetarianism has a strong group-identitarian function in India. When it is used as a self-description, it generally is a claim to be 100% vegetarian (per the traditional definition).

The extent to which vegetarianism is proportional to an omnivore's diet is often based on social context, not percentage. For example, in religious contexts most Hindus adhere to vegetarianism, even if they are not vegetarian in secular and daily life contexts. There is a fair amount of dietary code-switching, and it's considered normal in the contexts where it occurs.

This is quite similar to the pattern seen in many other countries from Asia through to Christian Europe and Africa, where fasting often involves abstention from meat consumption.

India also has major differences in vegetarianism rates by region. The peak rates of vegetarianism are in the west and northwest (~70% in the states of Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Punjab), and the lowest rates are to be found in the south and east of India (~2%).

https://www.reddit.com/r/india/comments/4nr8a2/vegetarianism...

Re: Indian entrepreneur, industrialist, and philanthropist, Ratan Tata, dead at 86

#127

Post by ryzvonusef »

wuschel wrote: post #100

There is more to the story than I can tell here, unfortunately, but at least I can write this: During my work for Bentley Motors I was at one of the Geneve Motor Shows in the 2010s. During my stay at the fair, a new (1500 USD) Tata car was introduced. I visited the Tata stand with a friend, looking at their new car, which was quite the contrast in product philosophy, design and target group to the Bentley models. Tha…

Ratan Tata never married or have kids, so those weren't his sons, maybe other relatives or colleagues/employees.

Re: Indian entrepreneur, industrialist, and philanthropist, Ratan Tata, dead at 86

#128

Post by aravindputrevu »

wanderingmind wrote: post #6

People will talk about his different contribution to economy and philanthropy. However, my favorite is the story where he instructed his hotel employees to treat stray dogs well if they enter the premises. For a man of his wealth and power, to care about a stray dog truly speaks to his humble nature. RIP Sir, you were a crown jewel of the post independence India. https://m.economictimes.com/magazines/panache/ratan-ta…

His service to animals is laudable.

Re: Indian entrepreneur, industrialist, and philanthropist, Ratan Tata, dead at 86

#129

Post by wuschel »

ryzvonusef wrote: post #127
wuschel wrote: post #100

There is more to the story than I can tell here, unfortunately, but at least I can write this: During my work for Bentley Motors I was at one of the Geneve Motor Shows in the 2010s. During my stay at the fair, a new (1500 USD) Tata car was introduced. I visited the Tata stand with a friend, looking at their new car, which was quite the contrast in product philosophy, design and target group to the Bentley models. Tha…

Ratan Tata never married or have kids, so those weren't his sons, maybe other relatives or colleagues/employees.

You are definitely on point. I naturally made this assumption and thought that to be true until when I wrote my comment today.
Post reply on HN