The Sugar Coated Shaft

Re#38

``Look at the press, I`ve been around since 1987 and during my years, the press has had the most liberities in the current era. Gen. Zia, Nawaz Shareef, and Benazir Bhutto, their treatment of Najam Sethi is just one of the fine examples of censorship during their respective tenures.``

If you`ve been around since 1987, then I guess you`ll also remember the time when BB came to power.

Pakistani public`s jaws dropped when one fine day back in 1989, they saw PTV showing actual footage of Nawaz Sharif and other opposition leaders. This was a few days after BB had been sworn in as Prime Minister in 1989. People could not believe what they were seeing. For the last 11 years they had been so attuned to listening to the opening lines of PTV News which would usually start with “Sadr-e-Mumlikat Janab Zia Ul Haq neh aaj yeh kaha, Sadr-e-Mumlikat Janab Zia Ul Haq nay aj woh kaha etc. etc”.

And then it became more or less a regular feature. Opposition news and opposition TV footage (no matter for how short a time) being aired on PTV became somewhat of a norm. Heck, they even showed a few clips from the first death anniversary of Zia Ul Haq. This was the guy who hanged BB’s father.

At the same time newspaper reporting became much more open and bold.

After BB’s government was overthrown, Nawaz (a full-fledged Army/ISI man at that time), could not just completely stop what BB had started. He cut down on the footage, but he did not totally curtail it. Why? People had gotten used to the freedom, and even though most of Nawaz’s power as PM in initial days came from army’s backing & support, he still had to cater somewhat to the sentiments of the people. During Nawaz`s tenure, whenever PTV ``missed`` a major opposition news or ``forgot`` to give any coverage to opposition leaders for a few days, the newspaper articles would start screaming and people in the streets would start talking. The pressure would be on & PTV would start showing the stuff again.

So there are at least two points of time in the last two decades when there has been a shift change in the freedom of press. The first was when BB came to power & the second in Musharraf’s times. Once BB started the momentum, there was no turning back. Nawaz slowed it down but did not completely stop it. And Gen. Musharraf needs to be commended for his freedom of press policy.

Just like Najam Sethi, Shaheen Sehbai is also just one of the fine examples. Najam Sethi at least got back home after a few days. Shaheen Sehbai had to flee from his homeland to escape persecution.

``Those who disagree, need to provide some examples in Asia of countries, who have gotten out of the third-world by mere elections alone.”

Nobody’s saying that mere elections alone are the panacea for all ills. Elections are albeit one part in the larger context of democracy and a reasonable democracy takes time to set up and function.

But as Netizen has put it in #39, neither does dictatorship mean manna will start falling from heaven.

What people who want democracy in Pakistan argue is that based on our history, and the vested interests of the Military in Pakistan, the interests of Pakistan in the long run will be better served in the hands of elected civilians than in the hands of non-elected generals. This conclusion is based on our understanding of the history & politics of Pakistan & the psychology of the army.

There are all types of examples in Asia of generals as well as civilian dictators, as well as democratic civilians turning the fortunes of their countries for the better. And there are also examples of generals and civilians ruining the economies of their countries. So why would Musharraf or Pakistan Army fit into the mould of let’s say South Korea’s Chun Doo-Hwan, instead of Philippines’ Marcos or Indonesia’s Suharto.

Both Ferdinand Marcos-(Dictator-Philippines) & Suharto (Dictator-Indonesia) showed economic prosperity for a few years (just like Musharraf has), but later everything went topsy-turvy, people became disillusioned because of the massive corruption that these guys engaged in and both of them were kicked out. Now their countries have been running under elected civilians for quite some time now (without a “ghairat-mand” army taking over their TV stations).

Both Philippines & Indonesia have gone through massive & severe political crises after the removal of Marcos & Soharto. Those crises would have been more than enough reason for an army like Pakistan’s to jump right in to “bring political stability and law & order”, but the Philippines & Indonesian Army did not. And the result? These two countries have been learning to stand & stumble & will be walking & running in no time.

Japan developed through democracy, South Korea developed through dictatorship, North Korea got screwed under dictatorship, Burma under army is screwed, Bangladesh rejected the army and has been nudging along with democracy, Indonesia & Philippines got screwed under dictatorship, Singapore (no matter what you believe in), has elected civilian leadership. So there are all types of examples.

“Most of all, the case is the fact that everyone on this site is economically well-off, hence is concerned about other issues...........If they were not well-off, they would be worrying about the economy and jobs also...........And many of them don`t want the status-quo to change, which is what rapid economic growth tends to do.....”

Let me try to explain something. Everyone has their own way of drawing conclusions from history and politics and based upon that analysis- to the best of one’s understanding & abilities- one comes up with the best way to understand how Pakistan’s interests can be served better in the long run.

My analysis of how to achieve stability & prosperity for Pakistan can and is different from yours. But basically the goal is the same i.e. to find the best way that will lead to economic prosperity for the people of Pakistan.

You believe Pakistan’s interests are best served through Musharraf. I believe this will not be sustainable in the future and some crazy general can reverse everything in a flash. Our goal is the same. We only disagree on what is the best method to achieve it. We both want the status-quo to change. Only to you Musharraf is changing the status quo, whereas to me, the more time army spends in politics the more it preserves the status quo. I agree with Temporal’s assessment of: “let the child stand, stumble, walk, run through trial and error”

So this “many of them don’t want status-quo to change” is simply not true. We all want the status quo to change, but we disagree on which route should be taken for the status quo to be changed. But believe what you want to.

Re: # 34

I would like to disagree with you for these reasons:

``In any third-world or even second-world country, the answer would be clearly in favor of quality of governance. There is no argument there. And it is backed by the following:

- Take a look at the immigration patterns from third world countries. They are based on only one factor. An increase in the economic standard of the migrating individuals. People from democratic countries, like India, quickly migrate to non-democratic kingdoms like Dubai and Oman. But never vice-versa. People from non-secular govts. like Pakistan quickly migrate to secular countries like Canada. But never vice-versa. People from secular govts. like India, migrate quickly to shariah-based countries like Saudi Arabia (where the govt. doesn`t even allow them to practice Christianity or Hinduism, etc.). But never vice-versa. ``

People migrating to Gulf nations is not because of quality of governance, but because of employment oppurtunites and petro-dollars ( increase in economic standard, as stated by you) I am quite sure when the oil evaporates and jobs dwindle and dinar is be equal to Rs. no one will bother to go there. As no one bothers to go to Egypt/Jordan.
You will see some Western/Chinese engineers working in India/Pak too, just for the moolah.

---

``Even the Pakistani expats on this site arguing about type of governance, qucikly gave up their rights to vote in Pakistan, and migrated to the USA etc., where they were not citizens and had not rights to vote, because their economic standard was going up...... ``

thats true. Personal economic prosperity will always be the first goal. But again the same can be argued about Chinese expats enjoying wanting to enjoy more civil liberties after becoming american citizens rather than be mute spectator in front of CCP.

---

``The only economies in Asia that have gotten out of the third-world are the ones that have concentrated on the quality of governance (economics over democracy). Can anyone name one, in Asia, that has gotten out of the third world that has concentrated on the type of governance (democracy over economics). One would think this would be a good enough stastic. ``

I think you are mixing up the concept of democracy with economics. There are examples of democratic countries doing good as well as bad economically. Taiwan/Japan doing good. Same with the authoritative regimes too, due you think if nepal comes under Gyanendras rule permanently its economy would start booming without fundamental changes in the policies?

Being democratic won`t guarantee economic freedom nor being authoritative will lead to a bullish market. India didn`t progress much from 47 to 90, not because it was democratic foundations but because of socialist economic policies. The progress seen in the last decade (whatever worth it is) is due to the much needed reforms rather than allowing a dictator to rule it.
Within democractic countries too you will observe vast differences in their economic policies and investment atmosphere. It would take months for someone to start a business in india whereas just a couple of days in Australia.

Regarding Singapore, I don`t understand why you are classifying it as a one party system. Its true that out of 84 seats, 82 are held by one party. But these people were elected by the populace. I read Lee Kwan Yew autobiography where he mentioned the pains he had to go through to get elected, and once elected to perform brilliantly so that the next time people will have faith in his governance. The present scenario is a reflection of the capability of PAP and the faith Singaporeans have in the party. Regarding LKYew getting his son elected as the PM, this guy is not idiot, unlike most sons of indian politicans, he is quite competent. Also if he/PAP doesn`t perform as per the expectations, people would have a choice to vote his party out.

---

``Other countries like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka etc. who have tried to concentrate on type of governance, are nowhere. ``

One common difference b/t these countries and the rest of the developed countries in Asia is the internal/external wars faced by them. India/Pak are/were always at each others throat, sri lanka for a decade or more has civil war going on. BD which went through a cataclysmic change in 71 with some period of military dictatoship cannot control its population growth. Hence there are many more factors other than being democratic or not. Look at N. Korea, it should have been far ahead of S. Korea as Jong family have been ruling it since 45. elsewhere, teh different trajectories of GDR and FRG.

``Those who disagree, need to provide some examples in Asia of countries, who have gotten out of the third-world by mere elections alone. ``

Elections are not the cure for economic malaise, in the same token being ruled by one person is also not going to herald an era of economic prosperity.
Regarding Pakistan as mulkhis stated, the problem is how far the military establishment will go without upsetting the applecart? If the threat of war diminishes it will cut down the importance of army itself.

Romair, the reason why I spoke highly of Musharraf right now is because we don`t have any other leader in Pakistan in my opinion who may effectively lead the nation. I feel that this fellow has understood that the wheels of business and industry need to be oiled and that the government should make all efforts to allow different industries to have a proper workable environment.

Romair, I think that your comment regarding how most of us are not concerned about the state of the economy and about jobs is not correct. I for one can safely say, that I am highly concerned about the state of the Pakistani economy and about issues related to jobs in the country.

Regarding the financial and telecom sectors, the government has increased spending into those sectors by geometric propotions. India is a bustling IT industry and FOREIGN companies come to India in order to produce their products cheaply and then sell them at lavish prices in the West! Whenever Pakistanis need computers, software, or other related materials, we operate via dealers primarily from the West, Dubai, SIngapore, and Hong Kong to a lesser extent. So many jobs can be created if trade policies between India and Pakistan could be relaxed.

The only fear I have is that not enough money has gone into the ginning sector of the country however I am of the opinion that within the next 4-5 years the ginning sector will be at par if not ahead of India and China`s ginning qualities. So many looms, weaving, and spinning machinery has been imported that the demand for high quality ginned cotton is surging withing the nation and only a stable domestic production would be able to meet the requirements.

Also, this budget has increased spending on health alot as well.

The fact of the matter is that there might just be a golden age at the end of the tunnel if we stay strong in the face of adversity and manage to beat all odds.

Look at the press, I`ve been around since 1987 and during my years, the press has had the most liberities in the current era. Gen. Zia, Nawaz Shareef, and Benazir Bhutto, their treatment of Najam Sethi is just one of the fine examples of censorship during their respective tenures.

This budget is actually the first budget I have seen that has not increased taxes on the middle class. In fact, it has reduced taxes, which maybe unique in Pakistan`s history:

-Personal tax rates for salaried persons proposed to be reduced to range between 3.5% to 30%

-Annual statement filed by the employer proposed to be considered as sufficient discharge of liability to file a return on the part of the employee.

-Enhancement of exemption limit from Rs. 300,000 to 400,000 proposed for senior citizen

-Tax rebate proposed to be increased from 50% to 75% in the case of teachers and researchers

In addition, the salaries of govt. servants - the one group that actually pays taxes, since it is cut directly from their paychecks - have been raised, quite a bit...........

Job creation is the name of the game, in any third-world country............And I don`t know of any way to create, ``real`` jobs, without economic growth.............

haroonellahi #35: ``So, whats the case by the anti-Musharraf group?``

What is pwned?

The case is a misguided romanticism for elections with the assumption that all elections result in a Western styled democracy. It is also a very poor understanding of how economics is and is not related to politics. It is also a complete lack of understanding of Pakistan, beyond the cushy borders of upper-middle class and upper-class Lahore, Islamabad and Karachi. It is a lack of understanding of the pre-requisites of democracy. It is also a dislike of the Army`s previous interventions in politics.

Out of the above, only the last one is legitimate. The way to success in not the Army in politics. But economic growth, with or without the Army.

What the people need to look at is why individuals, including expat Pakistanis (who themselves chose economics over elections, when they migrated) is how other countries have gotten out of poverty, in Asia.........

Most of all, the case is the fact that everyone on this site is economically well-off, hence is concerned about other issues...........If they were not well-off, they would be worrying about the economy and jobs also...........And many of them don`t want the status-quo to change, which is what rapid economic growth tends to do.....

``Ginning machinery was so expensive to import prior to this budget, we had to buy domestically made ginning machinery, which had no concept of `precision enginerring`.``

The Financial and Telecom sector has gone through a boom also. I am looking into that area and hopefully if all goes well, I should be expanding into Pakistan, soon.............I would have never dreamt of doing that, five years ago.........And if this whole peace stuff with India keeps going, I could grow my business exponentially........Another thing that I would not have thought of five years ago.........

Shaukut Aziz, Ishrat Hussain et al, need another five to ten years. After that, even BB and Nawaz Sharif will not be able to come back and screw things up again.......

Romair, have you ever heard the term `pwned`? Dude, your reply was truly lucid and extremely coherent. I think the Musharraf regime has realized that as long as the government serves as an agency who oils the wheels of economic development, prosperity for Pakistan will be possible.

Ginning machinery was so expensive to import prior to this budget, we had to buy domestically made ginning machinery, which had no concept of `precision enginerring`. Pakistan NEEDS to make sure that her textile industry flourishes, and that is happening now!

So, whats the case by the anti-Musharraf group?

haroonelahi #32: ``So the question of the day to the Pakistanis, does the quality of governance hold higher priority for you or the type of governance?``

In any third-world or even second-world country, the answer would be clearly in favor of quality of governance. There is no argument there. And it is backed by the following:

- Take a look at surveys done by international groups in Pakistan, on the most pressing issues. They are employment. Not religion, democracy, Kashmir, secularism, army, elections etc.

- Take a look at the immigration patterns from third world countries. They are based on only one factor. An increase in the economic standard of the migrating individuals. People from democratic countries, like India, quickly migrate to non-democratic kingdoms like Dubai and Oman. But never vice-versa. People from non-secular govts. like Pakistan quickly migrate to secular countries like Canada. But never vice-versa. People from secular govts. like India, migrate quickly to shariah-based countries like Saudi Arabia (where the govt. doesn`t even allow them to practice Christianity or Hinduism, etc.). But never vice-versa.

Even the Pakistani expats on this site arguing about type of governance, qucikly gave up their rights to vote in Pakistan, and migrated to the USA etc., where they were not citizens and had not rights to vote, because their economic standard was going up......

- The only economies in Asia that have gotten out of the third-world are the ones that have concentrated on the quality of governance (economics over democracy). Can anyone name one, in Asia, that has gotten out of the third world that has concentrated on the type of governance (democracy over economics). One would think this would be a good enough stastic.

Singapore basically has been a country ruled by a family, under a one-party system. Lee Kuan Yu ruled it for a generation and now his son runs it. Even now, and throughout its history, out of the 84 or so seats of its assembly, around 80 go to their party.

China is being ruled by literally one party. Either you join the Communist Party or you are political dissident. Those are your only two poltical options. Malaysia had the longest serving, ``Prime Minsiter`` in the world. The guy ran the country, single-handedly for a generation. Korea, Taiwan etc. You name it.........

Other countries like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka etc. who have tried to concentrate on type of governance, are nowhere. The results are right in front of you. South Asia is the most backwards area in the world, in HDI, other than Sub-Saharan Africa.........

This, in no way, suggests that one should not have democracy. Of course one should. Ideally one should have both. But, for third world countries, if the choices are a democracy which lead to poverty and a non-democracy which is leading to economic growth, then
the later should win out.

People practice the above in their personal decisions, but for some strange reason, some argue against it in the public decisions. If Pakistan has ten years of elections, I don`t know where it will be, since its electoral system is so messed up. It had 10 years in the 90s, and we all saw what happened. If it has 10 years of 6-8% growth rates, it will be a changed country. And it doesn`t matter who is running the country, as long as the growth is occuring........

Those who disagree, need to provide some examples in Asia of countries, who have gotten out of the third-world by mere elections alone. The only ones I can see are the ones who have gotten out through sound economic policy..........

Re: # 30
Thanks mr. Muzumdar. I have not follwed properly. It takes time some time will think about it.
If i am correct Mr. Manto aka YLH is technical person graduated from College in America in computers. He is in computers as once he gave advt. on chowk to have some computer type engineers in usa. He has returned back leaving lucrative job and business and has enter law college in Lahore city. He has interest in Politics and Jinnah and Jinnahism. ( I always thought concentrated economics is politics). I doubt he has time and interest in such economy things.
I will like to hear how central banks controls rupees production to control foreign exchange rates.
Mr.Romair is right. For average person price stability and job matter IT DOES NOT MATTER WHO IS OVERLORD.
I always feel our country need ``Recolonized`` but under United nations guidence. We have not got still stabilized. We can have our laws but at top we need some American or British Supreme Court chief Judge. He can interpreat our laws. Brown man has been worst to brown man ( blacks are more dark to their own people). Even we can have `` President`` general it does not matter if main administration is under british. White boss will be respected and law of rule will return. Now look at good doing countrie like Saudi Arabia. It is has kind of system like I suggested. They keep in touch with American govt and follow general guidelines without day to day us interference. Pakistan need is good noncorroupt british type system.
If supreme court is all white British or American Judges then they will read law books and follow. Then this army take overs will be history. Our problem started with spinless coup take over approving justices. Bringing back ``british White`` rule under Unined nations and british justices is only practical solution , and Chinese Czar for family control so population decrease onl can save otherwise people will start killing for water and punjab sindh animosity will be very bad due to shortage of water. All other things even with Kkalifa ruling population will damage even Khilafat.
Good Night to all

So the question of the day to the Pakistanis, does the quality of governance hold higher priority for you or the type of governance?

I wonder what reply the average Pakistani would give to that. As in, the answer, which the eltisits and the middle class people would give, would not truly do justice to what the overall sentiment would be. Since they do not face the same hardships, which the commonman faces.

Godot , the United States of America after 1796 to the 1890s...

Big business always influenced everything!

Re#27

Ahmed,

I am afraid I am not an economist so cannot explain very precisely maybe Manto can. However economic growth does not necessarily require more currency notes, its just as well that the notes circulate faster. To give you a simple eg. I have RS. 100 and catch Rs. 100 fish, you have Rs. 100 worth of goats and Rs. 100 of currency. I sell my fish to you, you sell ur goat to me. So Rs. 200 worth of currency and Rs. 200 worth of goods change hands.

Now in the seocnd year I cut Rs. 100 worth of wood and catch Rs. 100 of fish, you produce Rs. 100 od goat and Rs. 100 of wool. I sell my fish to you for Rs. 100 and you sell your goat for Rs. 100 of my notes. Then I use my notes to buy wool from you and you give me your notes for my wood. So GDP has doubled without any any new notes being printed.

Regards

Excellent post Mukhlis... am in total agreemant with you

“Take any survey of Pakistan and the top concern will be jobs and security. In fact, take the survey of any poor country and these will be at the top. Look at Maslow`s hierarchy.”

Did anyone take a survey before the 1965 war, or before Kargil? Anyone knows what the priority of Pakistani people was on 5 September 1965 or right before the Kargil clash? Did they want jobs or did they want war?

Where did Maslow’s hierarchy go when the general with cigar in his mouth & pistol in his hand ordered Kargil operation? A few months after nuclear explosions, Pakistani economy being in dire straits after sanctions having been slammed, and the generals send the sons of this country to go scale the heights of Kargil mountains? Some Maslow’s hierarchy of needs they were fulfilling I’d say. The only hierarchy of needs they were fulfilling was their own.

In those days the same people who are now arguing about economy being tops were crying at the top of their lungs that this post-nuclear-explosion scenario is the best time to start a Kargil like operation, as India will not go for an all out war fearing Pak’s nuclear capability. The economy really took the back seat at that time and Maslow’s hierarchy went flying out the window. Amazing how now the mantra has changed to “economy”.

It made much more sense to not go to a mini war in 1999, as Pakistan was left with virtually no friends after the nuclear explosion (compared to today when Pak has a MNNA status, for whatever it’s worth) and majority of loans & aid had been stopped (as opposed to now). But the generals had to do it. Who was thinking of Maslow at that time?

Whatever is happening in Pakistan now is not because all of a sudden the generals have seen the light of Maslow’s words. It is because now they are facing a power which they had never faced before. America’s daisy cutters now targeting cushy DHA Mansions and America’s LGBs now targeting the GHQ in Rawalpindi.

These same generals kept on fuelling the fires of hatred and violence in the country. They were OK with sectarian violence because some of the sectarian parties were providing fodder for Kashmir. They were OK with the rest of the country on fire, at the expense of Maslow`s hierarchy. Why? Because it was not they who were getting killed. It was not their kids who were being blown to pieces. It was not their riches or their lifestyle that were getting hit. It was just the common Pakistani, his kids & the Pakistani economy (an economy from which the generals are shielded courtesy their grip on power and the Bandar-bant of plots & resources that they do amongst themselves, free of any scrutiny & accountability).

Did the country’s image take a severe hit because of all this? It sure did. Did our economy get affected due to the political instability, the extremism, the sectarian and ethnic violence? It sure did. Were the potential investors scared all this time whenever they heard of heavy firing across LOC? They sure were. Did the generals ever care about the image, the economy, the lives of common Pakistanis in those days? Nope, they didn’t give two hoots. They have only started to care after 9-11. Why? Because American Daisy-cutters & LGBs can make a difference to these generals` lives in a way like nothing ever has in the past. The day the American gun withdraws from the generals’ face, is the day we’ll be back to square one, and all of a sudden Maslow and his golden words will just not make any sense anymore to our educated, economy-friendly generals.

Nothing in Pakistan is irreversible, especially as long as generals have the last say in matters. That is why 10 years of 6-8% growth does not amount to a sack of peas. Why? Because all of that growth can be washed away in a jiffy. How? All it will take is the American pressure being released, and our generals will forget all they would have learnt about Maslow’s hierarchy in those 10 years. Then, in a flash, they will remember that the best interest of Pakistan lies in some theory of strategic depth, or in perennial confrontation with India, or in scaling some mountains in Kargil and not in some stupid theory propounded by a guy with a weird sounding name like Maslow.

Anyone remember 1965? Anyone have a good reason why the 1965 war should have taken place in the first place? What was the economic condition of Pakistan pre and post 1965?


“Doesn`t matter who is running the country. Doesn`t matter what it is doing anywhere else. Not even the individual running the country, be it Musharraf, Benazir, etc. matters.”

In Pakistan it really does matter who is running the country, even if that someone has shown 6-8% growth for a couple of years. Why? Because generals running the country means that a major screw up will happen even if there’s a period of relative economic stability for a few years. Because Ayub, after a few years of economic growth led Pakistan to war. Because Musharraf led Pakistan to a mini war right after nuclear explosions. Because Zia powered the Pakistani economy with CIA money & heroin dollars and the house collapsed after the soviets left Afghanistan.

It matters because if Army keeps all the power, it will screw up again and again, the way it has screwed up all along these 57+ years.

To think that a few years of economic growth (or 10 years for that matter) means that it will keep on being on the right track is a fallacy as proven by our history. It will take one crazy general (or the existing general - if American policy changes), for the wheel to turn back. The economy needs to be in the hands of people whose interest is in keeping peace & quiet and in furthering and ``sustaining`` the business interests of the country (politicians like Shahbaz or Imran Khan), not in the hands of generals who one day smoke cigars and show off pistiols during Kargil & the next day become the successors of J.K Galbraith.

The generals will have no interest in keeping the economy on the correct path, in the long run. Why? Because their life style does not change no matter how the Pakistani economy is doing. They are not affected a single bit. They can go back to their jihads & wars, without changing their living standard & without having to stop their kids from going to Stanford or Yale. They have been doing that for the last 57 years without any accountability, and they can go back to their same old ways before you can say “economy”.

“put them in positions of power, and create an environment where they can operate without hinderances........

That`s it. That, in a nutshell is how a country progresses”

This simple nutshell has been there all along but our generals only realized it after 9-11. This nut shell will again be crushed if and when the American pressure is ever let off.


“.......If Musharraf (or anyone else) can even deliver five years of such growth, while the elitist will hate him, his picture will be on the back of every other rickshaw in Pakistan.........”

Musharraf better not talk to any rickshaw driver in Pakistan nowadays. If he does, he needs to make sure the rickshaw driver is not near a pana or any other sharp metallic object.

And here`s a little something from Mir Jamil Ur Rahman`s column in today`s (June 11) The News Online edition. Who`s Maslow`s hierarchy of needs is being satisfied in this budget? Do your own math.

``The pathetic condition of human resource development can be assessed from the fact that education has been allocated a paltry sum of Rs16 billion and health Rs9.4 billion. The total allocation of these two important sectors comes to Rs25.4 billion, which is Rs4.6 billion less than the increase that the defence budget would receive this year. The defence allocation has been increased to Rs223 billion from last year`s Rs193 billion, a hefty jump of Rs30 billion.``

Re: # 22,24

Thanks Mr.Muzumdar, Your explaination is lucid, understood clearly.

In example taken nominal growth is about 20%.
Do central bankers print that much more currancy to keep the dollar rate constant ? (If not the rupee will start upward revision with respect to dollar and export will suffer)
I will appreciate if some body can explain. Thanks in advance.

Ref # 24 : There is misunderstanding about Agricultural tax in Minds of Indians. In India agricultural income is tax exempt reason may be majority senetors of Indian Loksabha are farmers. So many EXpaks take for granted it is same system of no agricultural tax in our country also. It is quite wide spread wrong assumption.

HP #9: ``It is easy to comment on Agriculture tax from a room in Toronto but think about the guy who spends most of his day in the scorching Multan or Sukker’s sun that turns a man’s skin into leather.``

It`s funny you should speak of Multan. I have actually spend around two years, about 100 miles from it, scorching my skin under hot sun. It didn`t turn into leather. But it is, no doubt, extremely uncomfortable........Have you had the opportunity to do so.........

When anyone talks about any type of taxation, on anything, in any country, it obviously starts from a threshold. Every single guy farming his land, or running a tiny business, or working as a clerk, or as a sepy in the military, or washing the street, or barely making ends meet is not taxed..........

Agricultural tax or any kind of tax, should obviously have a starting threshold and should exponentially increase at levels, where it should become impossible to maintain land holdings, beyond a certain size........