In Delhi this year, I had my ACs running practically 24x7. I could stomach the power bills but the quality of life is atrocious. I basically couldn’t work outdoors or even go for a simple walk to the neighbourhood otherwise I’d be drenched in sweat.

Modern Indian apartments in major cities are also atrociously designed with little care for ventilation and materials.

You can fight the elements, but then you’re just locked inside a concrete and glass box all day long. No fun in that.

Yes, however due to there being significantly more poor people than rich people, especially tech workers, there will be antagonizing behavior in the future. There will be country-wide instability, and even if you're rich, a comparatively rich country like in Europe or the US will be substantially more stable than one with a higher degree of income inequality.

US has higher income inequality than India[0].

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient#/media/File:M...

It is not only income inequality one needs to look at, it is the amount of the baseline population which is well fed and taken care of, as generally, those that are will not wage war against the rich, while those that aren't are much more likely to.

If 90% of the population is starving and makes 10 dollars a day (hypothetical numbers), and 10% are rich and make 100 a day, the poor will be much more likely to revolt than in a scenario where 90% make 100 a day and can afford food, shelter, education etc, and the 10% make 1 million per day. It is not the level of inequality, it's the baseline.

Put differently: https://speakola.com/political/margaret-thatcher-on-socialis...