Adux

Cactus

They get their share of the money: that share is quite generous and well-balanced in the overall scheme of things. What they make out of the money is up to them. Understand it in the context of this discussion.

Adux

Commie's, and contextual discussion. mmmm'h, you are wasting your time.

gamercube

Ok, let's understand this in the context of our discussion. Adux seems to be arguing that a cut in the defence spending is not required since we are already "one of the biggest spenders on social programs". Biggest spenders compared to whom? What yardstick do we use when measuring the effectiveness of our social programs? On what grounds can it be said that we already spend enough on social programs, so let's give more money to the military?

Let me make it clear that I am neither in favour of increasing or reducing the share of defence spending. I am unwilling to form an opinion until I know more about how exactly the budget is structured, where the rest of the money goes etc. But implying that we are already doing enough towards our social programs so the military must get more money defies logic. Our armed forces are the fourth largest in the world, while we are also one of the poorest countries in the world. If anything, there would be a reasonable basis to say that "we aare one of the biggest spenders on defence, so let's spend more on social programs", not the other way around.

Adux

We can only spend the money we have. Therefore nations talk in %'s. India spends one of the highest. A nation spends around 2.5% to 3% in defence. In the case of India with two nuclear power as neighbour as well as enemies. National Security should be the highest priority.

Cactus

Perhaps. Again, in the context of this discussion mweber24 did imply that Indian voters want to cut down on the defense spending - specifically on the Navy - and redirect the money to social programs. What you are speculating about is tangential to the point, and yet without a firm link to the point. Simply put, you are piggybacking a whole lot of meanderings on a single, concrete and coherent point someone else brought up. What exactly is your point?

gamercube

I think I made my point clear. It would be incorrect to divert money from social programs to the military-on the other hand, there is a logical basis to do the exact opposite.

I think that statement applies to you, not me. You don't have anything to say about the issue I or Adux raised. You're just questioning a valid argument without having any argument of yor own. What is YOUR point?

gamercube

[sarcasm]Ahh....is that so?!! Thank you for enlightening me! [/sarcasm]

A 10th grader could tell that.

So according to you, India spends one of the highest % of GDP on social programs, is that right? Do you know what percentage that is? Which countries are you comparing it to when you say, "one of the biggest spenders?' I could name you at least 10 different countries who spend more on social programs as a % of their GDP than India does.

Lastly, don't forget that India has the second biggest population on the planet. Now that makes a big difference when it comes to spending on social programs. The more people you have, the more you will have to spend on social programs as a % of the GDP, simply to satisfy the needs of everyone. There can be only one other country we could compare ourselves to in this regard, China. Now, regardless of India's population, our security needs are going to be the same, but as our population increases, we will have to spend more on social programs. Therefore, it is useless to compare our military spending to other countries, we are in a unique situation that no one else faces (except, possibly, China).

antimony

Regarding the correlation between the state of our economy and our military spending: if we were one of those countries who are suppounding by nations praying day and night to their respective gods for our wellbeing, things would have been just peachy and we could have ditched out military atogether.

We are not in that position. We are surrounded by belligerent and irresponsible nuclear powers with whom we have faught at least 2 wars each. Therefore we do not have the luxury of pegging our military spending to a portion of our GDP.

We need to spend whatever is necessary to keep us safe, period. What that means gets to be decided by people like Brig Ray, not by net junkies like us

gamercube

Agreed. That's why I said:

However, my only point was that it is incorrect to say that "we already spend enough, or that we're already the biggest spenders on social programs, so we should now spend more on defence instead". The fact is, we DO NOT spend enough on social programs-so if the Finance ministry decides to allocate more money to defence, it should certainly not cut spending on social programs to do so.

dave lukins

Come on make up your mind ..What do you want

or

The Social Program or Defence of the Nation. Choose one and raise taxes. Choose two and expedentially raise Taxes. Security before leisure. Times are hard. What do you want for your childrens children?

Tronic

Sir, with the growing economy, I think both can expect a raise. However, I don't know how effective raising taxes would be; especially since most of the population avoids paying taxes in the first place.

__________________
Nabha Sparasham Deeptam
-Touch The Sky With Glory

gamercube

Sir, that decision is best left to the Ministry of Finance. But you'll find it interesting that in a nation of 1.1 billion people, only around 50 million pay income tax.

Adux

Therefore every social program for the poor is done with my money. And I have no more money left to give, in all honesty. The least I could expect of the poor and the government, is to leave me alone. Read below. We cannot do in terms of %'s than what we already do. And Defence cannot be compermised upon, if we do we will not have a country to 'give' social programs to. If we do YOU will not have a country to 'show' commie feelings.

Adux

Taxes cannot be further raised in India, We have one of the most highest and inefficient tax structures, where there are various points of duplication of tax. According to various sources, An average person with in the 20% Income tax slab, pays nearly (direct and indirect) 30-40% in taxes. This is infact crippling us.

This why most of the population avoids paying taxes precisely for the above reasons. If the taxes are simplified and at atleast kept in lower tax regime.
You can see more poor people becoming rich, also the Tax collection to go up.

And in a growing economy, governments usually dont increase the taxes, as the collections will refelct the growing number of people entering the income tax bracket.