<p>Pianoman:
“Applying internationally will only make your (and mine) chances lower”</p>
<p>I really do not think that H(Y or P) evalute internationals differently. MIT certainly does, and a number of places do when considering finaid, but think we fare the same as American citizens at these 3 places.</p>
<p>(But I do not have any hard evidence for or against this… If you do, please post.)</p>
<p>^MIT doesn’t evaluate internationals any differently than HYP. All 4 take internationals into context, as far as I know, same as with US citizens. The only difference between H and MIT is that MIT has an international quote while Harvard does not. Not sure about Y or P but I think it’s the same as H.</p>
<p>MIT places international applicants into a separate pool, but evaluates them on a need-blind admissions policy. HYP places all internationals and U.S. citizens into the same pool and evaluates them on a need-blind policy as well. </p>
<p>Only difference is MIT = 2 pools, HYP = 1 pool.</p>
<p>International admit rate for MIT class of 2014 was 3% (over 3000 applied, around 100 were accepted).</p>
<p>You do realize that $5000/yr =(approximately) 2,40,000 rupees/yr = 12,000 rupees/yr right? And based on my experiences in India, people who live in a slum area DO NOT make that much. That salary is HUGE for people who live under such circumstances.</p>
<p>And you should also provide the names instead of the dashes; no one is going to commit identity theft based on info from a forum on CC. Also, be more specific. Otherwise, people have a natural tendency to have misgivings when so little information is given.</p>
<p>I am not an INDIAN…</p>
<p>Go to post number #40.</p>
<p>Talking about India</p>
<p>Dharavi is one of the largest slums of the world. It contributes one-third of the GDP of Maharashtra State (Capital Mumbai). People here live in pathetic conditions, but that does NOT means that their income is also pathetic. Majority of dwellers earn less than $2/ day, but definitely NOT ALL.</p>
<p>Someone who lives in a slum area need not be a resident of SHACKS. An apartment resident is also residing in a slum area. He need not be a “slum-dweller.”</p>
<p>By the way I meant less than $5000 (<$5000 != $5000)</p>
<p>Correction: It’s two-third (& not one-third)</p>
<p>1] Dharavi only contributes so much because of the number of people who live there. Also, you say that “People here live in pathetic conditions, but that does NOT mean that their income is also pathetic. Majority of dwellers earn less than $2/day, but definitely NOT ALL.” Then what would you call a person who makes less than $2/day? Rich? Also, if they were making a higher income, don’t you think they would not live there in the first place? They are living in pathetic conditions BECAUSE their income is low.</p>
<p>2] “Majority of dwellers earn less than $2/ day, but definitely NOT ALL.” I agree. However, those people are so few in number that they can be considered outliers, and can be neglected relative to the other people who live there with meager incomes. Besides, I wouldn’t expect the income of any person who lives in Dharavi to have a maximum of $5000/year.</p>
<p>3] "Someone who lives in a slum area need not be a resident of SHACKS. An apartment resident is also residing in a slum area. He need not be a “slum-dweller.” I have seen Dharavi up close and from above from an airplane. I can assure you that there are only shacks there and none of your “apartments.” Also, the very definition of a slum is an area of old, rundown housing where living and social conditions are very poor. And to top it off, you’re saying that an person who lives in an apartment (which are not even present in Dharavi) which is located in a slum area is not a slum dweller. That doesn’t even make any sense. A person who lives in a general slum area IS a slum dweller, regardless of the condition of his home.</p>
<p>4] “By the way I meant less than $5000 (<$5000!= $5000)” Give us a tighter range then. Your family could be making anything from $1/year to $4999/year. Also, I wasn’t saying that “<$5000 = $5000” I was saying that $5000 is roughly equivalent to 2,40,000 rupees. That’s a HUGE upper bound for someone who claims to be residing in a slum area.</p>
<p>5] On another note, why won’t you tell us the name of your book? I thought that as an author, you would want as many people to know about your book as you can. If it’s published, then it’s subject to the copyright laws of Bangladesh, so you don’t have to worry about anyone stealing your work, especially people from College Confidential.</p>
<p>Trust me, I’m not trying to hate. It’s just that I find your credentials a bit dubious, If you have legitimately done those things, then that’s very good for you.</p>
<p>Let’s see you try to talk your way out of this one, if you can.</p>
<p>The condition is much more complex than you think.
You might have “observed” these slums closely, I LIVE here!</p>
<p>I respect the idea you have for slums, but let me put some statistics.</p>
<p>
The turnover of Dharavi is INR 30,000,000,000 p.a. (ONLY FOR INDUSTRIES. MILLIONS GO UNREPORTED)</p>
<p>Population is 1,000,000 (600,000 according to 2001 census)</p>
<p>Unemployment is around 35-40%</p>
<p>You calculate how much does an average person earns!!
(don’t forget the dis-balance here)</p>
<p>
NOT ALL. It’s very complex.
People live here because they are integrated with their job and occupation. They can’t leave it. Definitely, NOT ALL.</p>
<p>"80% of Dharavi’s residents work there. In this way, Dharavi is also a full-fledged industrial area. A study by the SPARC (Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centres) estimates that Dharavi has 4,902 production facilities, with 1,036 in textiles, 932 in pottery, 567 in the leather, 722 in recycling and scrap metal, 498 in embroidery and 152 in food. Furthermore, there are 111 restaurants and several thousand boutiques in Dharavi.</p>
<p>I reiterate the statement - People live here because they are integrated with their job.
For example - A recycling industry worker earns INR 10,000 pa, owns a small shop (sort of shack) and lives nearby this shack, but he too lives in a shack. He can definitely get himself a good flat at an apartment through loans-installments, but its of no use. He is integrated.</p>
<p>The number of people earning $5000/yr is not few.</p>
<p>
You might have “observed” these slums closely, I LIVE here!</p>
<p>Is Dharavi the only slum in the World?</p>
<p>I am talking more of my place than of Dharavi. I live in a slum area full of shacks and apartments.</p>
<p>You are talking about the definition of a SLUM. I am talking about SLUM AREA. There’s a day-night difference.</p>
<p>
I don’t want to reveal my identity. It’s just a personal choice.</p>
<p>
Which part?</p>
<p>Any more questions?</p>
<p>Actually, I do have a couple of questions:
1] So is a population of nearly 1,000,000 for just one part of Mumbai not enough for you?</p>
<p>2]
What do you mean, “no one can leave it”? Everyone has the equality of opportunity since India is a democracy. Also, how could you move up so much and get so many awards and stuff if you were “integrated” with your social condition? How could you even get Internet access in the first place? (unless you’re doing this from a cyber cafe.) Your statement is paradoxical.</p>
<p>3]
10,000 rupees/yr = $200/yr
So your example is pointless and does not disprove my statement.</p>
<p>4]
Slum: An AREA of old, rundown housing where living and social conditions are very poor.
So there is no difference. An individually dilapidated home is not called a slum by itself. A collection of such homes is.</p>
<p>5]
Then why don’t we talk about your place rather than Dharavi? You’re the one who began to talk about Dharavi in the first place.</p>
<p>6]
All right then, whatever suits you.</p>
<p>7]
The fact that you don’t provide the names of your awards.</p>
<p>Have fun making a counter-argument.</p>
<p>
I couldn’t get this point.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I apologize for the typo. It is not /yr (or p.a.), it’s /month.
Its not a big deal to earn $200/m. Consider this example:
[Dharavi</a> dwellers face ruin in development blitz | Reuters](<a href=“http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-33958520080608]Dharavi”>http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-33958520080608)
He earns $6/day ~ $180/ m and guess what? He is a courier.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s not that they are bounded by any legal procedures. They are just entangled in their job in a way they can’t come out.
Consider a group of potters. The group works 18hrs/dy. It earns enough to feed itself and even more. It can afford an apartment in Navi Mumbai/ or nearer, but the problem is that the daily transportation costs and other living costs exceeds the budget as living in a slum is cheaper than any other part of Mumbai. Moreover, they can use the house only for 6hrs/dy or less. What’s the point of a flat then?
They have to work even at 3 o clock. And getting a bus at three o clock is not possible.</p>
<p>
I never said “I” was integrated.
Internet connection costs $7/m!
An old computer costs $100.
I am from a private school and have been there mostly on scholarships.</p>
<p>A Slum, as defined by the United Nations agency UN-HABITAT, is a run-down area of a city characterized by substandard housing and squalor and lacking in tenure security.</p>
<p>A Slum Area is a district marked by poverty and inferior living condition.</p>
<p>A Slum Area is much wider in area than a Slum. The two terms are often misinterpreted and interchanged in their usage in the similar fashion SPEED and VELOCITY is. Jargon, you know. But technically, they differ.</p>
<p>BTW nice talking to you. It’s late now (1:47 am).</p>
<p>So should I conclude that the VERDICT is competitive enough for Harvard?</p>
<p>You have an interesting profile and so NO-ONE here will be able to give you an accurate chance. Your objective points are low, but your subjective ones could be great. WE DON’T KNOW AND WE CAN’T KNOW.</p>
<p>So</p>
<p>Good luck.</p>
<p>Yeah, we can’t tell because we haven’t seen your subjectives. If your essay was like the one you linked to in another thread, though, your chances will be low.</p>