Pakistan drugged out on defense & debt

[SMC]

Suit yourself ..you provides 1yr 8 month old source..which not exactly recent..you have have had two union budgets after that...going from 2.5% to 1.5% is not that big a stretch.

But can you come up with a source that says that? A reliable source, that is, from an organization such as UN? Not a website that does not provide source for what it claims.

Tradingeconomics says that Pakistan spends 2.7% on health in 2007.

Health expenditure; total (% of GDP) in Pakistan

So wherever you go (at least as far more reliable sources are concerned), you won't find ridiculous figures such as 0.5%.

 

[ares]

Education one is from 2009 at least. Which is just one year old (2011 has just started).

The health one... well that is the latest one available from a reliable source.

I ask again, where is this article getting its numbers from?


i.e. no, you don't have a source ares.

Do contact the editor and ask him that...in mean time, produce an updated one which contradicts this one or move on.

As you say the source is from June 2009 then..you have had two union budgets for after that ..2009-10 budget and 2010-2011 budget.

 

[ares]

But can you come up with a source that says that? A reliable source, that is, from an organization such as UN? Not a website that does not provide source for what it claims.

Tradingeconomics says that Pakistan spends 2.7% on health in 2007.

Health expenditure; total (% of GDP) in Pakistan

So wherever you go (at least as far more reliable sources are concerned), you won't find ridiculous figures such as 0.5%.

Are you thick ..or can't you see year ..which is 2007 ...this is 2011.

 

[SMC]

Do contact the editor and ask him that...in mean time, produce one which contradicts this one or move on.

LOL, That's not how it works dude. They're suppose to provide sources themselves. You're being a bit ridiculous now.

It's your job to produce something from a reliable source or move on.

As you say the source is from June 2009 then..you have had two union budgets for after that ..2009-10 budget and 2010-2011 budget.

Yes, but one can't just assume that it dropped to 1.5% afterwards. Do a google search, the lowest number from 2011 that you'll find is 2%.

 

[SMC]

Are you thick ..or can't you see year ..which is 2007 ...this is 2011.

LOL read the second line of my post. You're embarrassing yourself now. What I am saying is that this is the latest year I can find source from a reliable source.

 

[ares]

LOL, That's not how it works dude. They're suppose to provide sources themselves. You're being a bit ridiculous now.

It's your job to produce something from a reliable source or move on.

My job ..did I write the article?...you are disputing its figures..I am not, atleast prove your point..by posting and updated figures and not conjunctures

Yes, but one can't just assume that it dropped to 1.5% afterwards. Do a google search, the lowest number from 2011 that you'll find is 2%.

One is not assuming..this daily is claiming ..again can you provide this yrs numbers ..which can dispute its?

 

[ares]

LOL read the second line of my post. You're embarrassing yourself now. What I am saying is that this is the latest year I can find source from a reliable source.

Ya, then search some more..you gonna need more that 5 mins for that.

 

[SMC]

My job ..did I write the article?...you are disputing its figures..I am not, atleast prove your point..by posting and updated figures and not conjunctures

I am disputing its figures because it has provided no sources to back it self up.

Stop being ridiculous. I am really starting to think that you're trolling. This is not how it works. The author of the article has to provide sources. If someone makes a claim that a country is doing this and that, they have to back themselves up. I don't have to provide sources on the contrary, despite the fact that I already HAVE provided sources from UN.

I am giving sources from 2009, which are very recent.

One is not assuming..this daily is claiming ..again can you provide this yrs numbers ..which can dispute its?

LOL ares, ares ares. What shall I say.

You do realize that the article itself has to back itself up. If it provides no source then it can't be taken seriously. Even if I don't provide numbers to dispute it, it must provide numbers to back itself up, because it is the one making the assertion. That's how it works.

But guess what? I still found some latest numbers.

Well here we go, found something.

Pakistan Education expenditures - Demographics

I hope that now you can dig a hole and hide yourself there.

 

[blain2]

Do provide this yrs source which proves your point ..mine is right here..Asia Times is not a blog ..infact your education and health does not exceed 2%.

I did not include your WOT spending and pensions in the figure calculated.

Do provide updated sources to back up your claim and figures..because I can.

PS : I am busy right now .. I ll get back to you tmrow..you have the whole day to search for your sources.

This should put things into perspective from an annual budget standpoint:
How Countries Spend Their Money -

In terms of GDP spend, Pakistan is 2% for health and for education its 2.9% compared to India's 4.9% and 3.2% respectively
WHO | Pakistan
WHO | India

Education - https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2206rank.html

Suffice it to say, neither is in the top tier of excessive over-spend, nor are they in a category which is rightly spending more money on these two development indices.

Date even from 5 years ago makes little difference as Pakistan has not changed in either direction by a whole point or more.

So the conclusion is that Pakistan is by no means a security state, any which way you look at it.

 

[SMC]

Ya, then search some more..you gonna need more that 5 mins for that.

LOL ares you're a funny guy. You do realize that you're the one who has to find a reliable source to back up what you're claiming? Yes, it's the article who is claiming the same thing that you're claiming, but the article has nothing to back itself up. So hence the onus is on you to do that now.

 

[SMC]

This should put things into perspective from an annual budget standpoint:
How Countries Spend Their Money -

In terms of GDP spend, Pakistan is 2% for health and for education its 2.9% compared to India's 4.9% and 3.2% respectively
WHO | Pakistan
WHO | India

Education - https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2206rank.html

Suffice it to say, neither is in the top tier of excessive over-spend, nor are they in a category which is rightly spending more money on these two development indices.

Pakistan is by no means a security state any which way you look at it.

Date even from 5 years ago makes little difference as Pakistan has not changed in either direction by a whole point or more.

Don't mind this guy, he has always tried to spread misinformation on Pakistan as far as this forum is concerned. I've seen it happening again and again.

I seriously wonder sometimes if he is a troll.

 

[ares]

You do realize they are quoting CIA fact book figures..did you bother reading what figure CIA has quoted?

 

[SMC]

ares, I am going to go your way now. This is what indexmundi is claiming. At least provide latest figures and not mere conjectures. If you think that it's claiming something wrong, do provide sources that contradict that.

 

[alimobin memon]

oh yes thats why we signed 32 bln$ deal with china oh yes they were some 1.5 % blah blah we don't spend anymore on defense then we did before check out
the pakistan armed forces budget charts from 1980's to 2010 you will get answer first we used to spend 6% im not sure but now its 4 and something!!!

 

[bc040400065]

yaar why you people are having the same discussion again and again.

The main problem is not defence spending, It is the deficit. this year it may touch 1trillion. so if we can cut this dificit to a more acceptable number i think defence spending would not matter any more. 2nd thing is that most of the public sectors giant are in losses. majority of this deficit is because of Wapda, Steel Mill, PIA, railways etc etc ,.So they either should privatize these or have proper economic planners heading these all.