Returning to Nepal with a US degree, good or a bad idea?

-- "what's your point, Chana?" --
My point is: it is hard to meet the expectation of our society (or family and friends, to be precise) for a returnee. If you are not good in "khurafati kaam", you are unlikely to success, provided that the continuation of the present system. People brag about "hard-work" after they earn money but the truth is that "Earning money without corruption is impossible in Nepal". The man who does not earn sufficient is not considered a successful person.  I have not seen a single successful person who confess that s/he is successful because s/he has used the loopholes of the system (except Hari Pandey).


-- "Will you be successful, or unsuccessful," --
Honestly, I do not know.


-- "you do not trust is statistics?" --
I trust, but I have not seen statistics of returnees yet. Those people I have seen around may not represent the population, so my current understanding may be wrong.

 chana,

You amaze me. The fact that you talk about the need for statistics in one hand while making statements after statements without any basis amazes me.

So, you think along the following lines - your sentences here-:

(i) the truth is that "Earning money without corruption is impossible in Nepal"
 
 You should be remembered for this "Impossibility Theorem". A Chanatarkari Impossibility Theorem. Kudos. I am assuming you had done good empirical studies to come up with this.
 
(ii) The man who does not earn sufficient is not considered a successful person.

Another gem from Chana Tarakari. Please define "sufficient" so that we know how much you are talking about. And who "considers" here? How does it differ from how people think in other countries, say, US?

(iii)So, I mentioned earlier, every case has a different story. People of different fields, e.g. science, managment, technology, education, health etc. may have different environment but the condition is similar. 

Boy, it is even more enlightening, new insight. What does "the condition is similar" mean here?

(iv) If we collect data, I don't expect to see more success than failure side. 

On what basis do you form your expectation here? What a vague statement from our great social scientist.

(v)Most so called successful people (who earned money and name) have somehow exhausted the corrupt system and loopholes

I have no idea what 'exhausting the corrupt system' means. But using loopholes is not illegal, is it?

In fact, this is what I call "antisuccessful people' mentality of our Nepali brothers. If someone is successful, rather than trying to understand how he coped with the existing system and how he achieved success, people like you are quick to lable them corrupt. This attitude demonizes successful people and tries to create stereotype about them. It also creates complacency in lousy, lazy complainers by letting them think that they are behind not because they were lazy but because they were beaten by corrupt people which may or may not be true.

(vi)Those people who have tried to correct the system, be honest, and did not do "khurafati kaam", they are mostly "failed people" in the eyes of common citizen in Nepal.

This is another gem. Now you are blaming common citizen. Common people appreciate all kinds of people. Who says, for example, Mahabir Pun was a "failed people"?

In summary, yet another generalization about successful people that attempts to discourage other people from working hard and is worth ignoring.

NewStudent, good observations there.

Returning to Nepal is comparable to any other decision in life. It has it's pros and cons which are different for everyone and there is no right answer or right conclusion for it. There are always a lot of IFs in any scenario, but one general IF that seems to surface in 'going back to nepal' discussions is how well off your family is, or how much one can make. Although this may seem like the most important question, we have been brainwashed into thinking that money is the most important thing there is. Most people who are undecided normally say they would if they made enough money in Nepal.

One good question to ask if you are in that stage, are you making enough money right now in the US? Most likely your answer is NO because you are just a cob in the wheel of a bigger business, bigger company and a bigger economy than you can imagine. It would be nice to get a better place, a nicer car, so much more needs and future aspirations than what your current income can support.

With a better retrospection it's not difficult to realize that you are not making enough money in the US. So do you think it's possible for you to make enough money in Nepal?

How about a different perspective?

Let's say you make enough money right now. Maybe your million dollar mortgage is almost paid for, and you have [way] over 100,000 in your bank. You and your wife drive nice brand name cars. You are happy with what you are making, what you have. But you have reached a position where you are tired of the monotony of life in the US, because there is nothing much to look forward to. Ok so you can buy another new house or another new car but what now? You are just tired of the monotony and imagine living in Nepal would not be so monotonous. Few years have gone by since you were in this stage but it's difficult to make a decision because you now have a kid and you worry about your kids future in Nepal. If it was only you then it wouldn't have mattered much but you have to make sure your kid is safe. You really want to but there is no right decision.

On the other hand, you want to spend time with your parents who are getting old. You could probably invite them to stay in the US but they wouldn't be happy here.

It seems like no matter what you do you always have to give something up! I have realized that the best thing to do is not to think about it too much! Just go with the flow and be happy with whatever you end up doing!

Newstudent,

In short: You are free to make your judgement. I have repeated that my understanding are based upon my observations. I make my judgement based on my limited information, and I understand I might be wrong. So, instead of naming them a "theorem" or awarding me any "jargons", I would appreciate if you could enlighten me showing that I am wrong based on facts and your observations.


I am adding following details to clarify the points you have marked.

(i) Everyone rich person (or family) around me are somehow corrupt. Exception: (1) those who made money by selling their land, either ancestral or the land they purchased when they were dirt cheap, (2) those who inherited ancestral wealth, and (3) those INGO staffs who earn six figure monthly salary. I, however, do not know if they pay tax or not. If they don't pay tax, these exception does not apply.

(ii) Earning "sufficient" is relative to his/her circle, with whom s/he mingles around. They are the people whose "consideration" makes you successful or not in your society. If you mingle around E4N picklist, you should be able to throw 2-4 lakh in simple gathering. If you mingle with middle-class doctor-engineers, you should be able to throw 50-60 hajaar in a small birthday-celebration gathering. If you are ordinary self-sustained professional, you should be able to throw 5-7 hajaar when you go to restaurent with your 4 friends. If you can not do, you are not considered as "successful" by your peers.

(iii) It means, no matter whatever is your field, you are successful only if you are rich. If you have PR of US/CANADA/AUS/EU, you may brag about "returning back", "desh ko maya", "desh bhitrai dherai garna sakinchha". (You don't need to prove it though). If you don't have PR, you are unlikely to brag about it.

(iv) the basis is my own observation, however, I do not claim that my observation should be true. Therefore I "expect".

(v) Yep, crook minds know smarter ways to utilize the loophole and corrupt mechanism to excel. Use of such loophole is not illegal until get caught. For example, IT consultants made money using the loophole in H1B visa quota, that was not illegal for long time, but when a few of them was caught, then they were prosecuted. Similarly, the ponzi scheme, that killed thousands of genuine investors, is another example. Now after knowing the darkside of ponzi scheme, do you think the ponzi scheme gurus were great? The investors lost not because they did no DD but because they were duped by corrupt ponzi scheme drivers, which is now proven truth.

(vi) You may say it a "blame" but it is in our society everywhere. Just read some comments on honest fathers in some other thread that was here in sajha recently talking about corrupt people in our family.

I do not buy any bragging about "successful people" if they are not transparent. For example Ichha Tamang, many people know how he was an unsuccessful lecturer 15 years ago. Perhaps nobody knows the facts behind his success, except talking about civil-homes. Do you think he ever makes his earning transparent to the public? If his progress/success/earning is not transparent then what is the point of iconizing him as a successful person? DB lama, Bharat Gurung or Charles Shovaraj also might have earned tonne-load of money.

Lets see a real successful person Mark Zuckerberg. You/me or everyone can get information on his progress/success/earning, and follow his activities, isn't it? We are sure he is not exploiting loopholes/corruption to make his fortune. We know he can't escape if he does anything wrong, e.g., he paid millions of dollars for some of his colege-day-misconducts. This is the confidence that a good system provides and you would buy the stories of successful person.

I prefer to talk about successful people, who is transparent, like Mahabir Pun, but by glorifying "corrupt, unethical, non-transparent rich people", do you really encourage nepalese people to work hard in Nepal or encourage just to be rich somehow? Read these two news pieces I visited today that highlight the general young mentality and lawlessness in the country,
http://nagariknews.com/society/nation/22853-2011-01-28-11-00-10.html
http://www.nayapatrika.com/newsportal/cover_story/21257.html
and then tell me what would be the message of these stories to a prospective US returnee.

-----
PS: (pasted from previous post)
I did not join this thread to encourage or discourage someone who has a plan to return back. I just wanted to share some of my observations and show both sides of a coin so that it would be easier for people getting out of "romanticism" as Agni mentioned somewhere in his post. In the past I encouraged some people to return, and that worked great for them, but I can not generalize the case.  

"  I would appreciate if you could enlighten me showing that I am wrong based on facts and your observations"

So, basically, what you are saying is that 

(i) you can make any statement without providing evidence

BUT

(ii) it is upto us, sojhasajha sajhabasi who read your theorems, who has to provide facts/observations to repudiate/support them?

It is upto you to provide supporting evidence.

One cursory reading of your posting also shows that 

(i) You think in America , you can find all the history of an individual, every rich man is honest tax payers etc etc.

You obviously haven't seen the states. First, start from your neighborhood. How much of Indian restaurant owners, 7-11 owners pay tax honestly? How much of sajhabasi who work in gas stations can say their owners are honest tax payers?

People's tendency to avoid tax here is as much as they are elsewhere. Who invented offshore accounts to avoid tax? Who looks for loopholes in existing laws to avoid paying tax ala Shawshank Redemption? Speaking of Ponzi Schemes, it seems US is full of Ponzi schemes. The Madoff incidence should be fresh to many of us-- there was another billionaire Stanford who was caught last year and there are surely many others undetected.

People can't avoid paying tax in their salary, their tax incomes etc, and that is true in Nepal too. I agree that people generally avoid paying tax in Nepal; or rather, the state is inefficient in raising tax. But speculations that "Ichhchha Tamang must have evaded tax because he is rich" can come only from a jealous mind.

I neither encourage nor discourage people from going to Nepal. If you think you can succeed there, go there. If you feel good there, go there. Don't go there only to whine. If you think you can change something there, go there. There are many honest success stories. If you think you are better off here, stay here. But don't give that shit about every successful person there is corrupt whereas every rich person here is transparent. 
==
I enjoyed your point by point rebuttal if I may say so. It is a waste of time to make comment on every of your answers , but here is another gem from you:

(iv) the basis is my own observation, however, I do not claim that my observation should be true. 

I mean, this is a sentence, this is what you wrote, and I wonder whether you have any idea what you wrote.

So, let me understand:
(1) You claim something.
(2) When asked what the basis of your claim is you say it is your own observation. [Apparently there is nothing else to form the basis.]
(3) But you add, this is classic, that you don't claim your observation should be true.

So you said you observed something, but you don't claim what you observed is true. Oh, my god. And this is actually something you wrote.

My suggestion: please don't go to Nepal. Nepal is probably better off as it is without you.

:)

 


Source: ekantipur

Source: ekantipur

Newstudent,

I believe my observations rather than those stories published via sponsored journalism. I wont write the names of those US returnees or identify someone to provide evidence just to convince someone in sajha. I only mention names whose names are already in media.

If you think I said every rich man in USA is honest, then you did not properly undertand my opinion. The "Ichhchha Tamang must have evaded tax because he is rich" is your word, not mine. I just said, his published success story is not transparent enough to convince someone properly understand how he is converted to a successful enterpreneour from an unsuccessful lecturer. If you think this is a "jealous mind", then everyone who ask for transparacy in the world are jealous people for you. I don't agree with that idea.

My point is that, do not glorify the so called "success story" that is not transparent. For those people thinking about returning back to Nepal, they have to look both success and failure. My intuition is that chances of failure is higher than success, if you are not accustomed to "Khurafati Kaam".

I am surprised how you get wrong understanding, You wrote
"So, let me understand:
(1) You claim something.
(2) When asked what the basis of your claim is you say it is your own observation. [Apparently there is nothing else to form the basis.]
(3) But you add, this is classic, that you don't claim your observation should be true."

You should also understand
(1) that is my understanding based on my observations
(2) I am sharing my opinion/judgement because that may be helpful to others. Some other might have similar observation but a different opinion, and then there may be a chance to exchange opinions. To explain the basis of my understanding, I need to tell you my observation. I may do if I know you personally, and trust enough that you would respect privacy concerns of the people involved. But in sajha, NO, I don't prefer to tell them all. So, I just say, it is my observation. If you believe it, fine, If you don't, I don't care.
(3) I am not hard-wired to believe that my judgement is always right, that is why I ask people to refute my judgement. If you don't know this, you don't know "bade bade jayete tatwobodha".

And, about going Nepal or not, I have not asked you to suggest. Unasked suggestion is not welcome. Sorry.

 Chana,

Tell me one thing:

(i) Have you tried to find out whether Ichha Tamang had paid tax or not?

If not, what did you expect these news about him to publish to satisfy you? A rashid for all taxes he has paid so far?

(ii) Have you tried to find out whether Zuckerbert had paid taxes ?

Most likely, Mr Tarkari, 

You didn't do either (i) or (ii). You came here, and wrote your prejudices. You assumed something about Ichchha, and you also assumed something about Zuckerberg.

I actually found it funny that you even talked something about statistics, data and so on. That was really funny, Mister.

Newstudent,

I thought I would pack up for today, but here is a quick and last response for the day.

It is not me or you who should run after Ichchha Tamang or Zuckerberg searching their tax rashids. It is the system we rely on. When the success stories are made public, the author is also responsibile to search the information if he is asked for it. It is not prejudice to mention that the story is not transparent because the story glorifies him as a successful enterpreneur but does not mention that he was kicked out from a running class he was teaching 15 years ago, because nobody understood what he was teaching. Did I give you enough hint what I know about him?

It is actually funny to read your expectation that someone writing opinion in sajha has to go and collect tax rashid and has to verify that before asking for transparacy.

पर्खाल पारी के छ के छ ? बिदेश गए पछी त्यो कौतुहल पनि मेटियो , पर्खाल पारी के छ भन्ने कुरा पनि राम प्रसाद जि ले !

कुरो रह्यो नाक जोगाउने? यो नै सबै भन्दा गाठी कुरो रहेछ ? हुन त हाम्रो धमैले पनि मनुस्य जातिलाई कर्म अनुसार बर्ण बिभाजन गरिदिएको ले आझै पनि यो बर्ग र बर्ण जन्जाल बाट मुक्त पाउन कठिन् नै हुन्छ तर देश खाइ , खारिएर आए पछी घैटोमा घाम लागे पछी कसैले रोक्न सकेन लागे ब्यवसाय गर्न, ब्यवसाय ले ब्यबसाई बनाउदै लगे पछी तिनै साथीभाइ हरु हिस्सबुडी खिस्स दात भए होलान ।

सक्छौ ब्यवसाय गर , सक्दैनौ ।।।।।।।।।।।।।।।।।। उखान सुनेको छ ? 

Channa,

At the risk of oversimplification, let me share these thoughts:

Facebook remains a privately held company. That means, it does NOT have to disclose its finances to the public. That further means, except for the IRS, no one really knows how much in taxes Facebook pays to the US government. Yes, savvy business journalists/analysts can piece together various strands of available information, and try to come up with a number that aims to tell us how much money Facebook makes and pays out. But in the absence of hard information, such guesses are just that: educated guesses. 

IF Facebook, as a company, goes through an IPO tomorrow, then investors around the world can buy its shares, and information about Facebook's balance sheets, cash flows, earnings statements will be regularly available to us to study/analyze/interpret via www.sec.gov  

Just because MZ is in the news a lot, and because there's a movie made about him, and so on . . . that should NOT lull us to think that therefore we know all about Facebook, and that Facebook is a 'transparent' company.

By law, publicly held companies (i.e. those listed on stock exchanges, and have public shareholders) have to disclose their (material) information on a regular basis. Others need not, therefore do not.

Likewise, IR Tamang, who I know casually, runs a privately held company in Nepal. So does Min Bdr Gurung of Bhatbhateni. So does Birendra Basnet of Buddha Air, and the list goes on and on . .  . of those who run privately held small or big companies in Nepal.

[From what I know about these people, all of them have -- thanks to mouth-watering economic growth rates in India and China -- increasing South Asia-wide ambitions: that means, they want to be in a position to compete with the best in South Asia. That further means that they are keenly aware that in order to realize their ambitions, they have to get their systems, internal governance, their tax stuff all very kosher and pukka and tagada so that when foreign investors/partners show up to do business, they can deal with them confidently, without having to make excuses. To that end, these people are already a part of their various global trade associations and they attend various global trade shows. Cheating on taxes and cutting corners here and there may have been yesterday's routes to success in Nepal, but in today interconnected business world, it's much, much harder to succeed that way for long: and these people know it very well. And if they are indeed cheating and cutting corners, they will be found out, and their investors will lose both money and reputation.] 

Meantime, such private owners and their small circle of partners/investors need NOT disclose their companies' financial stuff to the public. A privately held company is NOT a political democracy: To succeed for a long haul, such a company needs to keep its private investors happy. And the proven way to do that is by keeping customers, communities and tax people happy so that the company continues to generate consistently good returns on the investments.

Re: Tamang: That he was an "unsuccessful lecturer" 15 years ago is totally IRRELEVANT now. Who in Nepal or anywhere defines who is a successful lecturer or who is an unsuccessful one? Though I am all for "successful lecturers", I also think that it's wise for "unsuccessful ones" to find something else to do in life. If anything, Tamang should be applauded for NOT wasting his life on what he was NOT (according to you) good at, and then going on to do something else in which he has found success for himself and his investors. From what I know, and please correct me if I am wrong, you need NOT be a success at lecturing to also eventually succeed as an entrepreneur. If anything, these two skills are probably inversely correlated! Only in bad Nepali poetry are repeat failures celebrated with a tinge of romanticism: in the real world, a smart person learns from his or her failures, changes course, and then finds something else in which s/he is likely be a success. 

oohi
ashu

 
.  

ashu,

i do not want to push this discussion behind "tamang" vs "zuckerberg" nor want to talk much about individuals. Today's success are founded on yesterdays' system. Tomorrow's success depends on today's system. General observation is that today's system is getting worse than yesterday's system. Otherwise, Nepal would not be an island of poverty and lawlessness in between those two giant improving economy. If the system is good (e.g. IRS monitoring FB), then we tend to overlook the transparacy. If the system is questionable, we tend to seek more transparacy. That is human nature.

For a private company, if it is OK to do anything to keep investor, customer, community and tax people happy, then we should stop talking about corruption and foul play. Corruption makes everybody happy except those who want to see a good and fair system. I have seen a I.Com pass man (from Minbhavan campus) earning six figure monthly income in Nepal. He made everybody happy (his Sahuji and hakim saheb, client, family, friend, local social workers, politicians). His earning model was - 4 lakh kar tirnu parne, 1 lakh ma milaidinus, tapai 50 hajar rakhnus, ma 50 hajar rakhchhu, sahuji lai pani faida, 4 lakhko kaam 2 lakhma bhayo. This model is widespread in almost all business sector in Nepal. I would not encourage US returnee to succeed that way in Nepal.

I agree with you that learning from failures and changing the course is a smarter way to success. The "unsuccessful" lecturing carrier was brought in the discussion just to mention that the story of the "success" is incomplete because it has not touched such crucial information, which could be useful indeed. Besides, I know what Tamang has done to make his investor, customer, community and tax people happy, but I don't write those information here in sajha just to make my point or just to provide evidence how successful people have exploited corruption, lawlessness and loopholes in the system. If a reader knows his "unsuccessful lecturing carrier" is missing from the "success" story, s/he should know that the story may mislead and make his own judgement on the story. If someone does not want to understand that and continue blindly follow the story, then may god help him/her.
 

While Nepal has many opportunities to capitalize, it is completely untrue that you won't have to compromise with your principles/values.  Almost no one succeedes in Nepal if you are not the one associated with the league of corrupts.

@Ashu: There are many statements that you make sense, but the fact is you worked for Himal Media as well--an infamous media house. Many people know your investors list who Himal Media serves/served.  You may not be the bad guy, but your decision to join such a corrupt power house, especially with infamous communists like Dixits, have not left you in a position to comment on the fair game of business in Nepal.

Obviously, there are many people in Nepal who are making 15, 20K dollars per month for doing nothing from the NGOs.

Now back to my question, have you not compromised with your values to become "someone" in Nepal?  When I go to bed, I don't feel any guilt of compromising with my principles.  You can make any arguments which many Nepalese will buy as well...but does it really surprise anyone?...a country where killers are hailed as heroes?

The problem with the likes of Chana Tarkari is this:
Look at how he starts his sentences in his last two posts:

" I thought I would pack up for today, ..."
"i do not want to push this discussion behind "tamang" vs "zuckerberg" nor want to talk much about individual.."

So basically, chanatarkari is an individual who thinks about himself a lot and who has the habit of throwing in arguments that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Who cares whether he would pack up ? He can always hide his tail behind his two legs and run away. Similarly, he starts this Tamang Vs Zuckerburg, makes all assumption about Tamang (basically calls him a corrupt man, inefficient teacher and what not) and when pushed, he wants to say he doesn't want to push the discussion. This is the extreme of shamelessness. I totally agree that there is no point in talking to individuals like him because they have no position in this debate that they can defend.

==

And what is this with nagarikreport? 

When did Dixits become communists? Not that this is an honor, but it shows the extent to his knowledge.

Basically, the lesson I get here is that there are bunch of losers who are quick to brand any successful person as a corrupt. These people don't try to do anything. They just hate successful people in Nepal. They don't recognize the changing nature of Nepal. yastale kina feri bekar ko discussion ma bhag lina pareko.

==
Ashu , good inputs there. Not that it made any difference in the mind of the person who refuses to learn or admit his mistake anyway.

Hi Ashu,
How are you doing? It's been a long while since you last visited this site.
As for the original theme of this thread (since it has now gone in a different direction), you yourself being a returne can may be give your thoughts. Of course you returned to Nepal few years back when the financial system in the US was still vibrant and the political and economical situations in Nepal were worse (with an assumption that they are slightly better now).
One of the main reasons why we question our motive to hang on in the US these days is the US economy. It is harder to get a job and immigration laws are getting stricter. So with not much prospect and lack of opportunity, we tend to wonder if it is even worth staying far away from our parents and struggle. For you this probably wasn’t the case since I mentioned earlier that you left the US quiet a few years back and you could have done very well here.

So why did you leave? What were your expectations when you decided to go back to Nepal? Did people criticize you as a failure in Nepal because you went back? Did they question you as “why the hell did you go to the US, if you were to come back so quickly?” And what was the reality? How were the job market, working culture and attitude in Nepal? And how do you think one should prepare if he is wondering about returning to Nepal?

 Life is like Facebook. People will like your problems & comment on it but no one gonna solve them. Coz everyone's busy updating their own.

My first and last comment to this thread.

 Its not about likes or dislikes. It's more about insight.

newStudent, you stink. put your insight rather than likes or dislikes of others.

newStudent is God.  He knows that the people are losers if they are commenting against his views.  By the way, how do you exaclty define losers?

For me, success is a relative term. I don't consider Ashu even an inch successful.  For others, may be he is.  It all depends on the relative perception.  What has he achieved in his life?  Do you know how many media houses are there in Nepal?  What's so unique about Himal Media?  I don't find anything.

FYI, there are many successful Nepalese you will come across if you are an Entrepreneur. They are visionary, hold multiple patents, started and operating good businesses (I don't mean cheap gas stations).  They just don't advertise what they have done in life.  They are known where they are supposed to be known.