Since the cost of living keeps on rising for the services you get, which you had before but now are just wrapped into a capitalist market, people at the bottom suffer the most even for basic necessities, access to which should have been included in their right to live.

The pathways which decide the mobility of a person from lower income to higher one are capital, education and connections

The people at the bottom have less capital so that's out of our consideration. And since they have less capital the accessibility of quality education becomes rare, as according to this market those who have money have more right on the education compared to those who are born into poor families. Third is connections, this market prioritises "productively" which is basically labour for payment, how much money you can earn becomes a category to judge people, and no one wants to sit or get connected with people who are less productive as it hampers their rep. And their mindset.

So the mobility is minimal, here comes reservation, which only favours the top one percent of the categories who get reservations. Basically people who are elites among them. Which gives rise to the debates over increasing these reservations.

While reservation is not the solution as it can't think of every person who is under the bottom line. What can be done is

1.) abolition of inherited wealth which will make every individual stand for themselves and
2.) making quality education free and accessible to everyone which will make the mobility more possible for those who are born into the lower class families.

These too things will make the society more meritorious than what we have now.

https://www.imf.org/en/publications/fandd/issues/2024/03/symposium-rethinking-economics-angus-deaton

Nobel laureate Angus Deaton's essay "Rethinking My Economics"

Peektv: Here are 5 facts that counter the comparisons between France and Italy's violent protests and India's youth protests.

Brutalist architecture isn't just unaesthetic-it's psychologically damaging and socially destructive.

A 2019 study in the Journal of Environmental Psychology showed that people exposed to harsh, grey, concrete-heavy environments like those created under Brutalist design-exhibited significantly higher cortisol levels (a stress hormone) and reported feelings of discomfort, anxiety, and detachment. Participants described these spaces as "oppressive," "cold," and "depressing."

In another study from the Crime Prevention and Community Safety Journal (2017), researchers found a correlation between impersonal, fortress-like architecture and higher instances of petty crime, vandalism, and anti-social behavior. These designs discourage community interaction, remove natural surveillance (like street-facing windows or gathering spots), and create psychological disconnection between people and their environment-this is known as "architectural alienation." Brutalism was never meant to be beautiful. It was born in the 1950s from a need for cheap, quick post-war construction-sacrificing aesthetics, cultural identity, and mental well-being for industrial efficiency. But somehow, this infected much of India too. From public housing blocks to government offices, we've adopted a concrete uniformity that has no relationship with our land, our people, or our spirit.

When your city looks like a prison, it will start to feel like one. People thrive in environments that reflect life, nature, and meaning. Clean air, natural materials, public art, cultural symbolism-these reduce stress, boost mental health, and encourage community. That's not a luxury. It's a necessity. India doesn't need grey monoliths. It needs cities that breathe. Cities that reflect the beauty, warmth, and history of its people. Architecture is not just about buildings-it's about the soul of the nation made visible.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330715541_Editorial_Journal_of_Environmental_Psychology#pf3

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/computer-science/articles/10.3389/fcomp.2023.1237531/full

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095263521000479

"It depends not on consciousness, but on being; not on thought, but on life; it depends on the individual's empirical development and manifestation of life, which in turn depends on the conditions existing in the world.

If the circumstances in which the individual lives allow him only the [one]-sided development of one quality at the expense of all the rest, [if] they give him the material and time to develop only that one quality, then this individual achieves only a one-sided, crippled development. No moral preaching avails here. And the manner in which this one, preeminently favored quality develops depends again, on the one hand, on the material available for its development and, on the other hand, on the degree and manner in which the other qualities are suppressed."

- Marx & Engels, The German Ideology