There is no ‘honour’ in killing

Re: # 42
HP...
The best example of land reforms is West Bengal and village sides are quite prosperous compared to other states. Bihar , UP and Rajasthan are states, where land reform was least effective and now causing feudal wars between Ranvir Sena (Land Lords) and Naxalites(farm labours). In Maharashtra Bhudan movement by Acharya Binova Bhave, succeeded well....
As per GOI, a family can hold upto 54 acres of land. That is sufficient for a 7/8 member family of three generations. But, how many people holds that much of land?

Re: # 43
Vengat...
To some extent correct. Secondarily land holding par capita decreased due to natural reasons ( population is growing but there is not enough jungle left to be converted into cultivable land). There were 2 options left in such situation
1) Increase productivity without increasing input cost much-
Due Govt. subsidy farmers in Punjab and Hariana exploited it.


2) Create good market for produces-
I know, for perishable vegetable, farmers are still very much dependent on others, and sometimes the price drops so low that, they prefers throwing rather than selling....


Majumder-
Socialism/capitalism is not any issue as per as economic success is concerned. What will you treat ancient Indian system as? It was still the best model for growth, without creating social disharmony.

In any society, every person has to get some assigned job, which he likes and skilled at. Then pay accroding to what it produces ... and "ma faleshu kadachana" (Bhagwat Geeta).

There are couple of flop sides in US capitalism. It creates corruption in upper layer, which you do not see directly ( the way police takes bribe etc...).

Well said, Masadi sahib. Social Justice indeed!!

PS: The opposition is hiding in the closet, sir. Not daring to step out!

Now, I must get going, but beware, the social justice stand will never go away and there will be no apologies for defending it.

Thank you kindly,

TNI Masadi

Kulharee sahib, you are acting as a fine gentleman today with your peacemaking in ramazan. May Allah reward you for your kind generosity in bringing people back in line...

Have a nice day,

TNI Masadi

Salam and greetings of peace my worthy friend,

This is TNI Masadi, the old masadi got out of the bag for a little while because of some people trying to push the pov of the uber tyrants of this world, which he develops a short fuse over.

Let me apologize on his behalf to HP sahib and the rest of the offended gang. Nothing personal but we wont agree to sell the nation to the "lowest" Western bidder so that he can drain our blood like he as the past 60 years under one excuse or pie in the sky and another. If foreign investment is to come in, it must come in with strict conditions of reinvestment of profit in Pakistan, proper wages to the people and local infrastructure and human capital building, with ownership control with the locals with strict government oversight. If not, it can go to India, there is no way an "industrial base" can ever develop in Pakistan with predatory foreign investment of the kind we have been seeing in the past 60 years, in the next 60 years if alive these people will be making the same arguments when half the country has starved to death and sixteen pieces of Pakistan have declared "sovereignty".

Thank you kindly for your time and attention, and let me apologize again for any personal offense I might have caused.

TNI Masadi

Please don't fight guys, it is Ramzan.

Masadi Sahib makes a good point, and GDP is a useless indicator for economies where a good chunk of the economic activity is either undocumented or is underground. International comparisons of this indicator will always have built in biases. The success of European postwar recovery lies in IMF, the World Bank, favorable tariffs and the steel industry.

HP writes "f you claim that GDP numbers are inaccurate, present the right ones, just saying it will not do it."

Regarding the GDP figures you threw out, please note that they are in "International Dollars" (if you have learned how to read tables), meaning having purchasing parity with one US $ (yeah check on that also). Pakistan GPD in PPP in 2006 was around US $ 437 Billion, higher than all of the European "industrial base" countries you show in that cheap table (http://www.onwar.com/articles/0302.htm),you linked to, and higher than France and Italy and most certainly Japan, even when we translate these 2007 prices into 1990 price by dividing by 1.6 approximately; which of course brings your non point to a crashing collapse. I am not an "emotional wreck", but you certainly are a moron, and the facts are on my side, no historian worth the name will claim that the post war recovery of the war ravaged countries of Europe was due to their preexisting "industrial base". This point you pulled out of your fat a$$, as you often do.

In #124, and not understanding the things you read.

HP writes "his is your example of Industrial production? and you think you're smart.....what food shortages have to do with Industrial base?"

That was not my example of industrial production, it was an example of the state of the British economy that you implied "took off" because of its industrial base post war. Industrial base had nothing to do with it. Food shortages have a lot to do with an economy, "industrial base" means nothing when a country cannot even feed itself. Your point is a non-point because that "base" was destroyed by the war and needed institutional support together with Marshall Aid to pull the out, and previous "base" or not they could never have managed to come out of it were it not for such institutional support. Of course the economy is going to grow during the war with war time production and everyone employed, why is it not supposed to grow, but when the war was done with there was hardly any infrastructure or factories left in Germany to explain its growth thereafter. Not a single scholar places Germany's recovery post war on its previous infrastructure. I had challenged you to show that and instead of doing that you selectively copy paste quotes to obfuscate from the issue at hand. That is the difference between claiming yourself "educated" because you can read stuff here and there and understanding the things you read.

Here is another example of your illiteracy: "You have not shown anywhere yet, that that was not the case! Pakistan’s GDP in 2007 was $143B. Even going by 1990 pricing, Japan was twice the Pakistan size. In 1990 Pakistan GDP was perhaps $20 billion (estimate)."

When you show the 1940s GDP in 1990 prices it does not refer to what the budged of country x in 1990 was. Pakistan's 2007 GDP can be translated into 1990 prices and it will still amount to more than what you table showed Japan's GDP (after years of plunder and industry) was. Once again you manufacture and pull numbers out of your fat a$$.

Then he writes "But so far you have not presented any reference to support your claim that the industrial base was completely devastated in the 2ww"

Very clever, "industrial base" means shit when your workforce does not have food, when your factories are destroyed, when you infrastructure is in total shambles, and when there is no transportation. What "base" remained in Germany except the indication that once that rubble was a factory. You are outrageously stupid. Then in the Jstor article, the gist of the review of the post war construction papers is clear: it was the Marshall aid together with institutional expediency offered by the US that led to such growth in Germany. You are so dishonest that you claim that the $1 or so billion the Germans gave as reparations showed that their industrial base was intact while the $10 or so billion of Pakistan's manufacturing sector controlled by the Army is peanuts to you all for the purpose of supporting the ulterior motive of pushing foreign investment of the predatory type that in the past 60 years has drained the country and kept it in the situation it is in together with the Army.

Get an education, an 8th grade education wont do. You have learned how to read and write but your comprehension and analysis is way poor, and needs massive work. Throwing out GDP numbers while not having a clue how they "prove" your point says nothing except reveals your dumb a$$. Regarding my level of "sophistication", these posts are not meant to reveal that my academic work, papers and articles do. An eighth grade huh, where do those big claims of being a "student-activist" come from, more lies that you have pulled out of your a$$, before you were hired by the CIA?

Have a nice day

#121 Posted by masadi
"Throwing out GDP numbers so that his nonsense points appear automatically authoritative is the kind of "scholarship" you would expect from the Pakistani rote learned scholar."

Go on with your nonsense. You are showing your own class!

I have never claimed to be a scholar. In fact, I admit that I passed 8th grade and that is my highest level of education. Except for a little work that I did for Georgetown.
I am truly the aathween(middle) pass you see in Pakistan not even the Dusween pass.
I hope that helps you. Now show me some of your academic sophistication that you might have acquired through higher eduction and college degrees.

Asadi,

“Here is the economic condition of the UK at the beginning of the war, not much better than pakistan's
At the beginning of World War II, the UK imported 55 million tons of foodstuffs per year (70%), including more than 50% of its meat, 70% of its cheese and sugar, nearly 80% of fruits and about 90% of cereals and fats…..�

This is your example of Industrial production? and you think you're smart.

Many European countries were beset with food shortage during the war…what food shortages have to do with Industrial base?

Here is what I have maintained all along:
“Marshall plan was in 1948 for countries that despite the ravages of the war, had a much larger industrial base than Pakistan has now�

You have not shown anywhere yet, that that was not the case! Pakistan’s GDP in 2007 was $143B. Even going by 1990 pricing, Japan was twice the Pakistan size. In 1990 Pakistan GDP was perhaps $20 billion (estimate).

All your posts are mere shrieks. You are an emotional wreck because you can’t counter the facts and run along wherever your wondering mind takes you. Show some signs of being a scholar. At least present your thoughts with some sophistication instead of some low-brow erudition.

You are just a rube nothing else. If you claim that GDP numbers are inaccurate, present the right ones, just saying it will not do it. The more you throw temper tantrums, the crazier you appear. You claim to be an academician and a scholar but so far you have not presented any reference to support your claim that the industrial base was completely devastated in the 2ww, at least present some numbers and facts to counter what I have posted. I posted the aircraft numbers to show that the industrial base was NOT completely destroyed. There was no way the British could have possibly manufactured 26000 aircraft if the industrial base was completely destroyed. (Pakistan still can’t do that.) There is no doubt that there was lots of devastation but it was not complete as you claim! Show any reference that ALL manufacturing units/factories in Germany or England were completed bombed out or destroyed!

And please copy paste any relevant info from that www.jstor.org article not everyone has subscription to it.
Rea some more here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II

“ Much of the doubt about the effectiveness of the bomber war comes from the oft-stated fact that German industrial production increased throughout the war. While this is true, it fails to note production also increased in the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, Canada and Australia. And, in all of those countries, the rate of production increased much more rapidly than in Germany. Until late in the war, industry had not been geared for war and German factory workers only worked a single shift. Simply by going to three shifts, production could have been tripled with no change to the infrastructure. However, attacks on the infrastructure were taking place. The attacks on Germany's canals and railroads made transportation of materiel difficult.�

“The attack on oil production, oil refineries and tank farms was, however, extremely successful and made a very large contribution to the general collapse of Germany in 1945. In the event, the bombing of oil facilities became Albert Speer's main concern; however, this occurred sufficiently late in the war that Germany would soon be defeated in any case. Nevertheless, it is fair to say the oil bombing campaign materially shortened the war, thereby saving many lives.�

Warfare between 1939 and 1945 was thoroughly industrialized. The major combatants mobilized between a half and two-thirds of their industrial work-force, and devoted up to three-quarters of their national product to waging war. This was war waged on an unprecedented scale. The economic commitment was partly a result of the nature of modern weaponry, which could be reproduced in mass by utilizing existing production methods and the civilian work-force and management. The cluster of new industries which emerged before 1939--motor vehicles, aviation, radio, chemicals--could easily be converted at speed to produce tanks, fighters, or explosives. The Oxford Illustrated History of Modern War. Ed. Charles Townshend. New York: Oxford UP, 1997.

http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/web/20060406-bombing-strategic -world-war-ii-grayling-among-dead-cities-germany-japan-civilians-royal-air-force -atomic-bomb-richard-pape-terrorism-russia-axis.shtml
Grayling at one point quotes a British estimate that strategic bombing, apparently both area bombing and precision attacks, reduced German armaments output by just 1 percent in 1944.
They begin with the notion that the RAF targeted German civilians because early in the war it couldn’t directly attack German production without ruinous loss. Daylight raids on heavily defended positions were catastrophic for Bomber Command, and most bombs dropped in the first years of the air war failed to land within five miles of their targets; the only targets big enough to hit with any level of accuracy were cities. Cities contained factories and industrial workers,

Btw HP sahib went through similar pains when confronted by Agha Amin here a while back. After having shown HP the door because as usual HP has the habit of pulling nonsense (unbacked by anything) from his (fat) behind, he felt he had lost his so-called analyst position on this site. Amin sahib even though his conclusions are uncalled for at times is quite thorough in his tabulations, more so than anything I can say for the sorry pieces HP writes. Throwing out GDP numbers so that his nonsense points appear automatically authoritative is the kind of "scholarship" you would expect from the Pakistani rote learned scholar. Doesn't work with people who can think and who just don't pull history from their rear ends.....Industrial base my a$$, Europe couldn't feed itself after WW2 and had the US and its institutions done with it what they do with the Third World, they would be worse than the least developed countries of the world...

Here is some reading from the Journal of Economic Literature totally in line with what I have been writing, not some pitting GDP figures (provided by an economic illiterate who can only read GDP figures without knowing what they signify) of European recovery after WW2, and it has nothing to do with the devastated industrial base.

http://www.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-0515(199706)35%3A2%3C814%3AEPR%3E2. 0.CO%3B2-L

HP writes "I am done with your ridiculous empty revolutionary zeal."

Losers are always "done", and after being done partake in self stupification. Your posts and your points were pathetic. I challenge you here to provide for me one academic source that says that Europe was able to recover after WW2 due to its preexisting industrial base. I challenge you to do that. You cannot do it because as usual you pull out claims and manufacture them from your fat behind....

they set up shop to exploit cheap labor

HP writes "Please present some numbers and sources to make your point. Abuses and cusses don't impress me at all.

Here are some facts from Germany and Britain after the war and see the numbers yourself. If you have some shame you will acknowledge that even the Japanese GDP at the end of the war was hinger than Pakistan's current GDP"'

HP sahib, caught with your pants down claiming that the industrial infrastructure of Europe was not devastated by the war when it was thoroughly and totally destroyed, you come up with GDP numbers that prove nothing at all, the drastic fall of over 25% in Germany's GDP tells a lot. What you have to do to "prove" your point (and btw Japan's GDP at the end of the war was not "higher" than pakistan's, those are 1990 numbers that some author has manufactured, get your numbers correct). German factories were a pile of rubble after WW2, and relatively little input lifted them up, much of the infrastructure was destroyed as well. GDP doesn't measure such "destruction". Another cheap effort by HP to save face by denying the fact that Europe devastated by WW2 with relatively little input was allowed to rise to domination.

Nevermind that argument, let us consider your bs regarding private investment lifting up Pakistan when the facts show that these foreign investors don't build up the country to make it equal competing partners, they set up show to exploit cheap labor and then then drain the profit through reparations from the country. How does Japan's GDP post during World War 2 prove your point?

HP writes "n 1944 alone, British manufactured 26,452 different kind of aircraft"

They still don't manufacture 26,452 "different kinds" of aircraft. Get a grip on the BS you are writing. Their aircraft production might have been 26,452, that certainly does not prove their current standing in the world today, they had a long history of industrialization which was completely and thoroughly devastated during the war, less than Germany's but devastated nonetheless.

HP writes "Asadi, your posts are tiring, lack substance and coherence, and downright petty. "

What is petty is your immoral attempt at lies and manufacturing history and presenting estimates of GDP figures as if they were the "real thing" and as if they show the state of European industry after the war had devastated it. Wrong on both counts. What else is petty is that you have not even approached proving your point that pakistan will be saved by foreign investment when history shows otherwise, unlike European history where industry is built by draining the Third World.

Here is the economic condition of the UK at the beginning of the war, not much better than pakistan's

At the beginning of World War II, the UK imported 55 million tons of foodstuffs per year (70%), including more than 50% of its meat, 70% of its cheese and sugar, nearly 80% of fruits and about 90% of cereals and fats. It was one of the principal strategies of the Axis to attack shipping bound for the UK, restricting British industry and potentially starving the nation into submission (see Battle of the Atlantic).

In order to deal with the extreme shortages the Ministry of Food instituted a system of rationing. Each person would register with their local shops, and was provided with a ration book containing coupons

Throwing out BS numbers of GDP that do not measure the condition of an economy, just its size says nothing to prove your nonsense that European industry wasn't destroyed during the war. If your education only affords you to read GDP numbers, then you are a sorry case indeed.


Majumdar writes "So the Marshall Plan was working on fertile ground. And in any case USD 10 bn or so was worth a lot more in 1940s than what Pakistan received in the 1990s and 2000s"

It doesn't matter what Pakistan received what it gave out is a lot more than multiple Marshall plans put together. The "fertile" ground was the will to make it develop and not any infrastructure or factories that could be salvaged. That is just HP pipe dream to cover his BS after being caught with his pants down. Can you imagine this nonsense? he is claiming that European industry escaped unhurt from World War 2 and that was the base that the Marshall plan worked on!