In population, less is really more
I agree with Sanchita Sharma's view in Underserved people make a crowded world (Health Wise, Wellness, June 17) that the government must take help from the private sector to tackle the population explosion. It should distribute free contraceptives especially in villages, check the migration of people from rural areas to metros and spread awareness on the advantages of small families.
Narendra Kumar, Delhi
Far too harsh on him
Khushwant Singh crosses the line with his caustic remarks on ND Tiwari in his article ND Tiwari: an able and subservient Congress neta? (With Malice Towards One and All, June 17). The writer could have avoided using harsh language to criticise Tiwari for his involvement in a sex scandal.
Raghav Gaba, Saharanpur
G20 is just a paper tiger
This refers to the article It's the politics, stupid (Chanakya, June 17). As expected, no major announcements were made at the G20 summit. As Chanakya rightly deduces, this is because the heads of the participating States are concerned more with politics and less with economic problems. They are too busy playing to their respective galleries to pay attention to the global financial slowdown. The G20 will remain a paper tiger as long as its members don't meet often and make the group's decisions binding on all major economies of the world.
Hara Lal Chakraborty, via email
India doesn't gain anything from being a G20 member. Rather than seeking assistance from other nat-ions to revive our economy, we sho-uld focus on recovering the money lost in various scams, preventing scams from occurring and ensuring that everyone pays their taxes on time. It's not difficult to bring the economy back on track, provided the government is willing to act.
Subhash Vaid, via email
How can the G20 hope to bring about meaningful changes in the world when it doesn't even meet frequently? The group won't be able to find solutions to various global problems since all members have their hands full with local problems.
Vishva Bindlish, via email
India needs Pranab the FM more
This refers to Manas Chakravarty's article Choosing a president (Loose Canon, June 17). Finance minister Pranab Mukherjee is not only a seasoned politician but also adept in crisis management. He is admired by India Inc, the UPA allies, the Opposition and the public. That's why naming him the UPA's presidential nominee is a bad move by the Congress. In India, the president is not actively involved in policymaking and governance. The UPA can't afford to lose an astute economist-cum-politician like Mukherjee at a time when the Indian economy is in a mess.
Uttam K Bhowmik, via email
Mukherjee will make a fine president. He is humble, well-informed and down-to-earth. He is one of the few Union ministers who has a clean image. Mukherjee is the best person to represent India at international forums. Occupying the top job won't stop Mukherjee from advising the government on key economic issues. So those who believe India will lose a competent finance minister if Mukherjee becomes the president are wrong. People of India can rest assured that Pranab-da will make a worthy occupant of the Rashtrapati Bhavan.
G David Milton, via email
It's all because of Mamata
With reference to Indrajit Hazra's article Of izzat and aaram (Red Herring, June 17) finance minister Pranab Mukherjee should thank West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee for challenging the authority of Congress president, which forced the party to quickly announce his name as its presidential nominee.
GK Arora, Delhi