Pakistan drugged out on defense & debt

[ares]

I have no doubt that you're believing this article as a source, I don't care if you are, but the point is that no a neutral this article by itself won't count as a source.

One you are not neutral..if you don't believe it is your decision but then produce a believable source..to back your claims

I just did search on him, and he seems like a vehemently anti-Pakistan author. So you can believe him if you want. Look at the very first sentence, he claims that Pakistan spends 7 times on education as on defence, yet you know and I proved a few weeks back that that's a false claim. Just because he says something, it doesn't magically become true.

Again going down the route of character assassination..by making false claims..he said nothing of that sort.

what he said was " Pakistan is spending more on debt servicing than on defense, and seven times more on arms than on primary schools.

You do know the difference between what you claim he said and what he actually said or should I explain?

Remember, he's not someone who calculates these figures himself. He has to get these figures from somewhere. If he can't state that then his books, articles are no good.


Newspapers quotes source for a claim IF that claim is not well established. This claim in particular is not well established.

As said before and I will say it again...so that it seeps in .."No newspaper quotes source for its own articles or numbers."...but if you are still curious why don't you write to him and ask!!..and in mean time it will taken as legitimate source by rest of us...and you claiming it is not well established does not make it so.

 

[ares]

So essentially you're an appeal to authority in this case. But this guy isn't an authority as far as these things are concerned. He needs some sort of a reliable source, such as UN, to back his claims up.

---------- Post added at 05:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:00 PM ----------

Also, ares, you didn't answer me.

Do you agree that India is a terrorist state? Yes or no?

How about this. India spends 0.2% of GDP on education. Do you agree with that?

You can try your level best to divert the topic...but I am not the one..who is going to fall for it.

 

[SMC]

One you are not neutral..if you don't believe it is your decision but produce then produce a believable source..to back your claims

No, I am not a neutral, but I know much more about logic and debating than you do. A neutral won't accept this based on just hearsay.

Again going down the route of character assassination..by making false claims..he said nothing of that sort.

what he said was " Pakistan is spending more on debt servicing than on defense, and seven times more on arms than on primary schools.

You do know the difference between what you claim he said and what he actually said or should I explain?

Fair enough, but again, no source provided for the claim. Too many claims without any sources to back them up.

As said before and I will say it again...so that it seeps in .."No newspaper quotes source for its own articles or numbers."...but if you are still curious why don't you write to him and ask!!..and in mean time it will taken as legitimate source by rest of us...and you claiming it is not well established does not make it so.

It will be taken as a legitmate source by YOU lol. Don't flatter yourself. The fact that there's no reliable source to back this up is what makes the claim not well established, not just me saying that. You're really incredible.

I already said when newspapers have to cite a source. I won't repeat it.

---------- Post added at 05:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:15 PM ----------

You can try your level best to divert the topic...but I am not the one..who is going to fall for it.

It's not a diversion. It's very much on topic. You need to answer it.

Here's another claim.

Pakistan spends 10% of GDP on education and 8% on health. Now go disprove it.

 

[ares]

No, I am not a neutral, but I know much more about logic and debating than you do. A neutral won't accept this based on just hearsay.

Again boasting about your ownself won't get you any where..you would not know ..what neutral person will believe.

Fair enough, but again, no source provided for the claim. Too many claims without any sources to back them up.

Then write to him and ask him.

It will be taken as a legitmate source by YOU lol. Don't flatter yourself. The fact that there's no reliable source to back this up is what makes the claim not well established, not just me saying that. You're really incredible.

This article and the newspaper itself is the source..above that source is author..who is an economist..any doubts ..you ask him.

I already said when newspapers have to cite a source. I won't repeat it

And this not one of those occasions.

It's not a diversion. It's very much on topic. You need to answer it.

Here's another claim.

Pakistan spends 10% of GDP on education and 8% on health. Now go disprove it.

You think, I will fall for it..I am not the one..who is making claims that I can't back up..if you think I am..them show me where.

 

[SMC]

Then write to him and ask him.

He has to provide sources to begin with. I am not supposed to write to him. That's not how it works.

This article and the newspaper itself is the source..above that source is author..who is an economist..any doubts ..you ask him.

No, the article and newspapers is not a source, because they are not ones who work to calculate these numbers. They have to get these numbers from somewhere, such as UN.

And this not one of those occasions.

Yes it is.

You think, I will fall for it..I am not the one..who is making claims that I can't back up..if you think I am..them show me where.

You have to answer it. You're making claims without proof. Please answer quickly.

Is India a terrorist state? If you don't think so, please provide proof why not.

Does India spend 0.2% on education? If you don't think so, please provide proof why not.

Does Pakistan spend 10% on education and 8% on health? If you don't think so, please provide proof why not.

Yes you are. Your and the author's claim about Pakistan spending 1.5% on education and 0.5% on health. That's not backed up by any reliable source.

Continue embarrassing yourself, now.

 

[SMC]

Simple question, ares. Can you provide a different source who claims the numbers to be the same as what you're claiming? Hopefully it's a reliable source.

 

[ares]

He has to provide sources to begin with. I am not supposed to write to him. That's not how it works.

The newspaper who he writes for ..does not require him too..then who are you?

Infact that is exactly how it work..you have a doubt about his article you ask him.

No, the article and newspapers is not a source, because they are not ones who work to calculate these numbers. They have to get these numbers from somewhere, such as UN.

Neither does UN calculate these numbers ..I hope atleast you know that!!..yet you believe UN?

Yes it is.



You have to answer it. You're making claims without proof.

Yes you are. Your and the author's claim about Pakistan spending 1.5% on education and 0.5% on health. That's not backed up by any reliable source.

The author is claming some thing and I believe him because unlike you he is an expert in this field..so I am not the one who is making this claim..your fellow Pakistani economist and international newspaper is.

Continue embarrassing yourself, now.

You are juvenile, if you believe that.

 

[ares]

Simple question, ares. Can you provide a different source who claims the numbers to be the same as what you're claiming? Hopefully it's a reliable source.

I don't need to ..because I have this one..and uptill now you have not been able to neutralize even a single one of its claims..so I have no reason to doubt it.

 

[SMC]

The newspaper who he writes for ..does not require him too..then who are you?

Infact that is exactly how it work..you have a doubt about his article you ask him.

That's exactly why the article is not reliable. Because he is not having to provide sources for his claim.

And no, that's not how it works.

Neither does UN calculate these numbers ..I hope atleast you know that!!..yet you believe UN?

UN is a reliable source as far as these numbers are concerned. They have reliable ways of obtaining such figures.

The author is claming some thing and I believe him because unlike you he is an expert in this field..so I am not the one who is making this claim..your fellow Pakistani economist and international newspaper is.

You can't be an expert when calculating these numbers are concerned. You're making an appeal to authority, unfortunately in this case it's not going to work. There must be somewhere he got these numbers from. That "somewhere" is exactly what I need to know.

You are juvenile, if you believe that.

LOL keep embarrassing yourself further.


Again,


Is India a terrorist state? If you don't think so, please provide proof why not.

Does India spend 0.2% on education? If you don't think so, please provide proof why not.

Does Pakistan spend 10% on education and 8% on health? If you don't think so, please provide proof why not.

PLEASE ANSWER THIS.

 

[SMC]

I don't need to ..because I have this one..and uptill now you have not been able to neutralize even a single one of its claims..so I have no reason to doubt it.

These numbers are typically printed by multiple websites. As of now you can't find any other. One doesn't cut it.

I've already neutralized it a long time back. There's no source to back these numbers up. That's those numbers neutralized.

 

[ares]

That's exactly why the article is not reliable. Because he is not having to provide sources for his claim.

And no, that's not how it works.

That is how it works.
and newspapers do not provide another source for their number ..it is not a common practice..if it is then show it where?

UN is a reliable source as far as these numbers are concerned. They have reliable ways of obtaining such figures.

How would you know, what methods they have..uptill now you din't even know UN does not obtain its own figures

You can't be an expert when calculating these numbers are concerned. You're making an appeal to authority, unfortunately in this case it's not going to work. There must be somewhere he got these numbers from. That "somewhere" is exactly what I need to know.

If you really need to know that somewhere..then ask him.

LOL keep embarrassing yourself further.


Again,


Is India a terrorist state? If you don't think so, please provide proof why not.

Does India spend 0.2% on education? If you don't think so, please provide proof why not.

Does Pakistan spend 10% on education and 8% on health? If you don't think so, please provide proof why not.

PLEASE ANSWER THIS.

You are making a claim..burden of proof lies on you.

 

[ares]

These numbers are typically printed by multiple websites. As of now you can't find any other. One doesn't cut it.

I've already neutralized it a long time back. There's no source to back these numbers up. That's those numbers neutralized.

No you haven't neutralized any of them ..what you did produce were 5 yr , 2yr old outdated figures ...which frankly were an embarrassment.

 

[SMC]

LOL I am going to sign off now. This buffoonery from ares has really reached epic levels. What an epic buffoon. The claims being made haven't been backed up, yet just because a person says so, we should believe it. This is about as thick as one can get. What a waste of time.

No point in continuing to argue with a fool who will drag you to their level if you keep going.

 

[ares]

^^I know you tried your level best..but all your arguments were tangential and conjectures....you think you are good at debating ..but you can not convince me until, you back your arguments with facts.

 

[SMC]

Of course I cannot convince you, but your post is like someone believing in UFOs saying that when a person doesn't want to argue with them, it means that the person is making conjectures and lost the debate. LOL. Very much expected. Don't flatter yourself, like I said, the reason I am not argue with you is because you're a fool, not because I can't argue with you or because I don't have anything to back myself up.

It's you who was making conjectures btw, FYI. I've already backed myself with facts. It's you and the author of this article who needs to back themselves up. Remember, the article's author has to back themself up as they're the ones making the assertion. Not me.