The problem isn't so simple. If throwing money could solve the problem, it would have already been solved. The problem is that laying sewers or installing water supplies involved dealing with the local population and make them understand why it is important that the roads are dug and the sewers installed. Why should the population spend money to connect their house to the sewer?

Also, this takes planning at the city level because, once laid, the sewer needs to connected to a larger pipes so that the waste may be transferred somewhere else. Now, people living in the other area need to be convinced that their fellow humans need the sewers and their roads should be dug up.

The roads being dug up is a placeholder for infrastructure work related to installing pipes. As long as people don't see it as a serious problem, they will try to avoid the inconvenience of installing sewers.

This is just the cynic in me, but sometimes I think politicians let it be a problem so that they can use it in the next election season.

Do people living in slums who are literally shitting in the street really have the political clout to participate in NIMBYism?

SF-isms (I understand NIMBY is also used outside SF) don't map perfectly across oceans.

Suffice it to say that people living in slums in India can have a lot of political clout. For example, once a large slum pops up in an urban area, literally no one dares to lawfully remove it, for fear of losing the next local election.

Brushing aside the elite paternalism typical of HN, spare a thought for these people would go through were they not as organized.

Indeed! There was an instance in Bangalore not so long ago where the muncipality swooped in and destroyed a few houses with ~10 minutes notice[1]. In the atomized world that is the Indian middle class, no one really gave a fk.

Perhaps the Indian society can't find commonalities to organize beyond tribes (aka 'jati' 'caste'). Of course it's not really 'caste' since the grouping is voluntary, but who are you going to shout at about etymology (the epistemology of an Indian means exactly nothing just so you know).

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/in-other-news/070816/b...

[1] Conveniently those belonging to public figures (politicians, actors..) were given a pass.

Our governments are in no position to pour money into educating people/changing their habits. All the planning that you mentioned needs money that we don't have(OR politicians don't want to spend)

Simple. Authorities desire to do their job is more related to success than financial resources.

India - what I saw from going there was enclaves of prosperity surrounded with barbed wires, 4 meter walls and private army guards. And not a nice places to live everywhere else.

If the authorities and well off does not view the citizens as one of them it is hard to get anything done.