kirtu wrote:Huseng wrote:Namdrol wrote:Americans, Canadians, and Western Europeans have more money than locals, so they should pay more. Speaking Tibetan does not bring the costs down. AFAIK.
Funny my Indian friend said the same thing, and his yearly income is probably 25x more than mine.
Exactly! It should be the higher the income the more a person can donate and national origin/citizenship has nothing to do with it. Even when I'm well-paid I don't earn more than the head of Tata Group.
In South Asia the running assumption is that if you're white (or Japanese, or clearly from a western country), then you have money. It isn't fair, but it seems hard wired into many locals. It even dictates policy decisions (for example foreigners pay more to get into museums, but Afghanis for example are exempt from the foreigner fees and pay local fees).
Funny though most of my Indian friends make more money than I ever will and they also own property. I don't own anything and by standards back home I'd be classified as low-income.
I don't think in my lifetime India or Nepal will come to institute fixed prices for one and all.