Lessons for Pakistanis - Brazilians want military takeover & Americans civil war

[peagle]

It

Disagreement was only on the quantum of aid received by both the countries. A minor issue.

Your view on per capita sounds ok to me. I am not an expert on economics though.

I suppose you can highlight individual years, but that would distort reality. You have to look at the full picture, and according to that picture, India is the largest recipient of economic aid, even more then Israel, Pakistan isn't even in the top 10.

Economic and military aid combined, India is still at number 7, Pakistan not even in the top 10. Perception and reality can be very different.
Less aid, combine that with 28 years of sanctions, and the reality looks very different. I'm sure 99.9% of Pakistanis are not aware either.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...t-of-us-economic-aid/articleshow/48093123.cms

 

[VkdIndian]

E

I suppose you can highlight individual years, but that would distort reality. You have to look at the full picture, and according to that picture, India is the largest recipient of economic aid, even more then Israel, Pakistan isn't even in the top 10.

Everyone quotes this article by TOI.
Please read the full report at USAID website. There are a lot of facts not given in this article. If you read the report, per capita aid to Pakistan is higher than that for India.

A little busy now. Will reproduce those excerpts here in a few days maybe.

One important factor is that India has stopped accepting aid from a lot of countries post 2015. Aid provided to private organisations and NGOs are different matter.

 

[peagle]

E

Everyone quotes this article by TOI.
Please read the full report at USAID website. There are a lot of facts not given in this article. If you read the report, per capita aid to Pakistan is higher than that for India.

A little busy now. Will reproduce those excerpts here in a few days maybe.

One important factor is that India has stopped accepting aid from a lot of countries post 2015. Aid provided to private organisations and NGOs are different matter.

I'll await your update, no rush.

You can state per capita aid was higher, that's a different metric, but it doesn't nullify the fact that India has received more aid, if you have different figures, please let me know.

 

[mudas777]

Take a breather, and look around the world.

Brazilians want a military takeover.

Americans fearing civil war, and complete breakdown of communication between opposing political groups.

The world is going insane.
Don't add to this insanity, and keep things in perspective.

Don't confuse we are Pakistani's not Brazilians. Even on dole Brazil is well ahead of us even ran by corrupt politicians while Pakistan with 70 years of military rule we are heading towards default. Get to know the meaning of the word default and its implications then you will never sing like canary again.

 

[peagle]

Don't confuse we are Pakistani's not Brazilians. Even on dole Brazil is well ahead of us even ran by corrupt politicians while Pakistan with 70 years of military rule we are heading towards default. Get to know the meaning of the word default and its implications then you will never sing like canary again.

I Honestly do not understand what you are trying to say.
And, I do not understand what you think I've said.

I would be better to understand what the other person has said before replying, otherwise it's just a one big puddle.

 

[VkdIndian]

I'll await your update, no rush.

Here is the full USAID report. From 1945 to 2019.

https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PBAAJ833.pdf

Screenshot of aid to India and Pakistan is attached below.

Out of all the numbers, the ones that make things clear are aid, loans and military assistance. Per capita terms Pakistan has received approx 14 times more than that received by India in total aid. It is more, even in absolute terms. Per capita figure is important, since it is the only way to compare two different size economies and countries. If that wasn’t the case then India would become better than Britain, because of higher GDP.
Military aid received by Pakistan is humongous compared to India. This can be considered almost zero for India. It is amusing to see how some members scoff at US military assistance to Pakistan, without knowing the real quantum of it. Not saying that US is a saint. They gave it because they needed Pakistan.

Something else is also stark. Look at the figures after 2015. India has been accepting minuscule aid compared to Pakistan. That is because India has taken a decision to stop aid and unnecessary influence wielded by the aid givers.

Now these are USAID figures. There are others that provide aid and figures aren’t likely to be very different.

 

[peagle]

Here is the full USAID report. From 1945 to 2019.

https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PBAAJ833.pdf

Screenshot of aid to India and Pakistan is attached below.
View attachment 899400View attachment 899401
Out of all the numbers, the ones that make things clear are aid, loans and military assistance. Per capita terms Pakistan has received approx 14 times more than that received by India in total aid. It is more even in absolute terms. Per capita figure is important, since it is the only way to compare two different size economies and countries. If that wasn’t the case then India would become better than Britain, because it has bigger GDP.
Military aid received by Pakistan is humongous compared to India. This can be considered almost zero for India. It is amusing to see how some members scoff at US military assistance to Pakistan, without knowing the real quantum of it. Not saying that US is a saint. They gave it because they needed Pakistan.

Something else is also stark. Look at the figures after 2015. India has been accepting minuscule aid compared to Pakistan. That is because India has taken a decision to stop aid and unnecessary influence wielded by the aid givers.

Now these are USAID figures. There are others that provide aid and figures aren’t likely to be very different.

I'll read this in detail and get back to you, I already have feedback, but it is not complete. Therefore wish to read what you have provided properly before finalising my opinions.

p.s.
I have few busy days ahead so that might effect the timeframe.

 

[VkdIndian]

I'll read this in detail and get back to you, I already have feedback, but it is not complete.

Take your time.
This aid business is a minor issue to me. I mentioned it, since it came out as a part of your analysis on the subject at hand.
Overall well being of the citizens is important. We have to do a lot on that front. Extreme poverty still exits and that’s a shame. Aid or no aid.

 

[peagle]

Take your time.
This aid business is a minor issue to me. I mentioned it, since it came out as a part of your analysis on the subject at hand.
Overall well being of the citizens is important. We have to do a lot on that front. Extreme poverty still exits and that’s a shame. Aid or no aid.

Certainly, if you put it that way, then pretty much all issues are non issues, except the well being of our people. But certain narratives exist to create a story, and it's good to discuss them so the fog clears.

 

[peagle]

Take your time.
This aid business is a minor issue to me. I mentioned it, since it came out as a part of your analysis on the subject at hand.
Overall well being of the citizens is important. We have to do a lot on that front. Extreme poverty still exits and that’s a shame. Aid or no aid.

While I compile the information, if you could clarify few points for sake of a concentrated discussion.

1. Times of India is a reputable newspaper, on political matters, including foreign affairs where national interests come into play, one can doubt their version of a story. But on a story based on facts and figures, I find it difficult they would lie.
What are your views on their figures?

2. Why are you opposed to acknowledging non government to government aid?

3. Do you recognise that USaid is just an agency with a budget, and that not all American aid is given through USaid?

 

[VkdIndian]

1. Times of India is a reputable newspaper, on political matters, including foreign affairs where national interests come into play, one can doubt their version of a story. But on a story based on facts and figures, I find it difficult they would lie.
What are your views on their figures?

The article clearly shows that the reporter who wrote it, did so with less than desired effort. Half hearted effort to go though the report properly.
I have reproduced the entire report and gone over relevant sections.

2. Why are you opposed to acknowledging non government to government aid?

Not opposed to it. Just that money received by NGOs isn’t under government control. Since discussion was about performance of the governments, aid to governments is what falls in the preview of the discussion.

3. Do you recognise that USaid is just an agency with a budget, and that not all American aid is given through USaid?

Yes. That’s true. A lot of money comes in for religious purposes. Mostly pushed in by Christian and Muslim fronts that want to spend it on thier causes. Again an issue not linked to development that can be done at government level.

 

[peagle]

The article clearly shows that the reporter who wrote it, did so with less than desired effort. Half hearted effort to go though the report properly.
I have reproduced the entire report and gone over relevant sections.

Not opposed to it. Just that money received by NGOs isn’t under government control. Since discussion was about performance of the governments, aid to governments is what falls in the preview of the discussion.

Yes. That’s true. A lot of money comes in for religious purposes. Mostly pushed in by Christian and Muslim fronts that want to spend it on thier causes. Again an issue not linked to development that can be done at government level.

You've misunderstood some of my requests, and I disagree with some of your conclusions. I won't expand for now, I just needed to get a sense of the discussion, but I'll included all in a singular reply.
Then hopefully we can take the discussion to a conclusion, or some sort of an understanding.