Why has Pak lost against India every time?

[Goodperson]

Hope Musharaf improves the economy and make the government strong. But I have normally observed always the previous or ousted government gets blamed for what ever bad things happens.
I can see the same thing happening to Nawaz and BB. Musharaf sees them as a threat he will never allow them to be protrayed as good others cannot protray them as good because they will have to face the wrath of Musharaf otherwise it will pave the path for their return.
Anti encumbancy factor exists in nearly every country and now slowly Musharaf is also started to feel the heat I think

 

[Awesome]

Largely the military has some perks. Even in the US the veterans returning from Iraq are being settled in a new town near Arlington (besides the already existing Fort Myers). Sid, you mentioned Bahria Town, which is owned by Malik Riaz.

Pakistani military does get perks on property. If they were into the looting scene don't you think they would've just wired the money into their swiss bank accounts by now?

Infact Bahria Town and all the other projects are open to the common public. These are super accomplishments by Pakistan. The living standards of these towns are exceptional.

Most army men of the 70s and 80s are comparatively richer than the Pakistani middle class because after their retirement many of them moved to foreign countries. Now I'm not saying they are any rich men, just that when you bring foreign money and invest into Pakistan (where everything is cheaper and at Pakistani affordable rates), one can buy plentiful.

Back when Safari Villas had launched in Lahore, I visited the site. The Villas were going for 50 Lakhs. Superbly done like some modern western community. 5 Million rupees is peanuts compared to what we'd have to pay elsewhere. A studio flat in Dubai goes for 3 million Dhirhams. A 2-bedroom condo in DC goes for $550,000.

If you look at the demographic of the people buying into Bahria Town like places, the overseas Pakistanis would be much higher than the military people buying into these places. What then? Blame all of us for corruption?

 

[genmirajborgza786]

Musharraf is not being discussed here. What is being discussed are the commercial stakes of the Pakistani military apparatus. The Bahria, Shaheen and DHA housing schemes, Fauji Foundation (includes factories from the production of cereals to cement), etc etc. Armed forces are NOT for commercial purposes.

totally agreed this military hold on monopoly combine with the fudal hold is the most dangarous threat to pakistan internaly and needs to be broken only then can we progress it is the the common people the middle class which forms the backbone of any strong country untill and unless they are in hold along with the labour practically nothing will change the current economic hold by the combine military/fudal/and selfish beurocratic partnerships is a colonial curse that needs be expediatate only then can we have a truley strong paksiatan both economicaly and military wise

 

[Sid]

Largely the military has some perks. Even in the US the veterans returning from Iraq are being settled in a new town near Arlington (besides the already existing Fort Myers). Sid, you mentioned Bahria Town, which is owned by Malik Riaz.

I believe there are different Bahria assets in different cities.

Pakistani military does get perks on property. If they were into the looting scene don't you think they would've just wired the money into their swiss bank accounts by now?

You misunderstood my point. I didnt say personal bank accounts of individual soldiers are kept loaded; I meant to say that these commercial projects feed the army's non-essential expenditure resulting in lavish life-styles of even retired generals and other high ranking officials while at the same time, diverting the armed forces' concentration which should be training and preparedness at all times, nothing else!

Infact Bahria Town and all the other projects are open to the common public. These are super accomplishments by Pakistan. The living standards of these towns are exceptional.

Yes they are open to public, how else will they get the money out of ordinary citizen's pocket and increase their own pensions and what not?

Most army men of the 70s and 80s are comparatively richer than the Pakistani middle class because after their retirement many of them moved to foreign countries. Now I'm not saying they are any rich men, just that when you bring foreign money and invest into Pakistan (where everything is cheaper and at Pakistani affordable rates), one can buy plentiful.

No! They're richer because they receive pensions which are ridiculously high and other perks as well even years after their retirements or in some cases, even after their death their family continues to receive the handsome compensations. Plus, add to that the fact that most high ranking officials are almost certainly appointed to high ranking civilian positions in the civil service.

There's a saying that only two classes in the Pakistani society are really living it! The armed forces and the feudal lords. The average Pakistani is at their mercy.

Back when Safari Villas had launched in Lahore, I visited the site. The Villas were going for 50 Lakhs. Superbly done like some modern western community. 5 Million rupees is peanuts compared to what we'd have to pay elsewhere. A studio flat in Dubai goes for 3 million Dhirhams. A 2-bedroom condo in DC goes for $550,000.

It is irrelevant as to how much it goes for! What is relevant is, the armed forces' involvement in commercial projects which they should NOT be doing AT ALL.

If you look at the demographic of the people buying into Bahria Town like places, the overseas Pakistanis would be much higher than the military people buying into these places. What then? Blame all of us for corruption?

Its not about WHO is living there! Its where the money of those living there paying rent and/or mortgages is going and who is benefitting at the end of the day!


P.S. As a sidenote, why would high ranking armed forces' officials live in these rather modest colonies being built by their own people when they live in some of the most posh houses in places like Defence?

 

[EagleEyes]

Pak military in terms of fighting, trained pros, etc etc is by far some of the best in the world. But military is made to protect the country and protect only. The military does not need to run our offices, schools, ec like said above by sid

Pakistan Military doesn't run schools. When in power, may be the government schools, but thats how they are meant to be. Private schools, are just private with little military interference, and that too to make sure that schools have a standard, just like in United States.

 

[sigatoka]

No! They're richer because they receive pensions which are ridiculously high and other perks as well even years after their retirements or in some cases, even after their death their family continues to receive the handsome compensations. Plus, add to that the fact that most high ranking officials are almost certainly appointed to high ranking civilian positions in the civil service.

There are no free lunches, cut the pensions of military officers and the current generation of military personall will have been jibbed out of their rightful income but in terms of new recruits, the best people will avoid the military. High pensions and lower salaries are good because it ensures that people serve for reasonable periods and dont jump out so often (reduces turnover) this is important becasue turnover dramatically increases training costs. In fact Henry Ford used this famously in paying his workers above market rates which actually increased profit of his business.

The problem with the Pakistani military is not the wages/salaries/pensions (total compensation) they receive but the fact that half a million armed personall for a nation of 150 million poor people is too high. Reducing salary now to cut costs will destroy morale and increase turnover and prevent Pak. military from attracting good recruits. However the size of the military can be reduced without sackings but by reducing number of recruits by around 7,000 a year which will minimise short term structural adjustment costs and reduce total salary bill of military. Any other proposed solution is misguided. You could halve the salaries of generals and in the short term you will have bitter generals who are paid less, in the long run you will get happy monkeys occupying the top job because the other bright people who would work towards becoming a general are now running their own companies or have migrated.

Theres another very important reason why Generals are paid a phenomenal amount. Its the same reason CEO's are paid much more than vice CEO's even though the gap in marginal output is not 2 or 3 times more (even if salary of CEO is 3 times more). The reason is when performance is difficult to measure, having a tournament with a (large) prize for the winner ensures everyone competing puts in maximum effort. Becoming a general is a prize, of the half a million personall maybe a few hundred will attain the top jobs (with massive increase in salary and perks and status). Therefore all peronall put in maximum effort to reach that position (not quite true but close enough in reality in tournaments because of payoff equilisation, the rational strategy is to be indifferent between competing and not competing. Therefore in reality of the half a million personal not all will put in maximum effort. A large number will put in minimum effort and a small number will put in maximum effort. This is because everyone putting in maximum effort cant be an equilibrium. There are after all no free lunches in life.) But the greatness of this tournament system is becaue it plays on peoples vanity, everyone overestimates their own capability and therefore more people put in maximum effort than is optimal from their sense. Therefore a tournament system for high positions actually gets more effort for given amount of resources spent than trying to pay everyone their marginal product.

 

[Contrarian]

There are no free lunches, cut the pensions of military officers and the current generation of military personall will have been jibbed out of their rightful income but in terms of new recruits, the best people will avoid the military. High pensions and lower salaries are good because it ensures that people serve for reasonable periods and dont jump out so often (reduces turnover) this is important becasue turnover dramatically increases training costs. In fact Henry Ford used this famously in paying his workers above market rates which actually increased profit of his business.

The problem with the Pakistani military is not the wages/salaries/pensions (total compensation) they receive but the fact that half a million armed personall for a nation of 150 million poor people is too high. Reducing salary now to cut costs will destroy morale and increase turnover and prevent Pak. military from attracting good recruits. However the size of the military can be reduced without sackings but by reducing number of recruits by around 7,000 a year which will minimise short term structural adjustment costs and reduce total salary bill of military. Any other proposed solution is misguided. You could halve the salaries of generals and in the short term you will have bitter generals who are paid less, in the long run you will get happy monkeys occupying the top job because the other bright people who would work towards becoming a general are now running their own companies or have migrated.

Theres another very important reason why Generals are paid a phenomenal amount. Its the same reason CEO's are paid much more than vice CEO's even though the gap in marginal output is not 2 or 3 times more (even if salary of CEO is 3 times more). The reason is when performance is difficult to measure, having a tournament with a (large) prize for the winner ensures everyone competing puts in maximum effort. Becoming a general is a prize, of the half a million personall maybe a few hundred will attain the top jobs (with massive increase in salary and perks and status). Therefore all peronall put in maximum effort to reach that position (not quite true but close enough in reality in tournaments because of payoff equilisation, the rational strategy is to be indifferent between competing and not competing. Therefore in reality of the half a million personal not all will put in maximum effort. A large number will put in minimum effort and a small number will put in maximum effort. This is because everyone putting in maximum effort cant be an equilibrium. There are after all no free lunches in life.) But the greatness of this tournament system is becaue it plays on peoples vanity, everyone overestimates their own capability and therefore more people put in maximum effort than is optimal from their sense. Therefore a tournament system for high positions actually gets more effort for given amount of resources spent than trying to pay everyone their marginal product.

wo! insightful post dude!

 

[melb4aust]

I think because PA never learns from it's mistakes.
PA has built a delusion of invincibility around itself.
It always overestimates itself & underestimates IA.
Pakistani population is brainwashed from childhood and from their Pak studies.
QUOTE]

Sorry for my ignorance, i dont have the time to go through all the posts,

but i wanna assure this guy, i could say the same to you or all indian population why do you brainwash ur children from childhood by providing fake history?

 

[Sid]

Pakistan Military doesn't run schools. When in power, may be the government schools, but thats how they are meant to be. Private schools, are just private with little military interference, and that too to make sure that schools have a standard, just like in United States.

Really? From the top of my head (without even thinking) I can point one private school and one private university owned by the armed forces in Karachi for starters.

1) Army Public School and 2) Bahria University.

 

[Sid]

What sigatoka seems to be forgetting is the main point I wanted to raise! Its not about killing their pensions totally but about limiting it to parity with what goes on economically in the non-military part of the society.

Secondly, there is NO reason given by him or even argued for the fact that most high ranking military personnel, in addition to all the pensions and perks, get appointed to important and high ranking civilian positions which should stay in civilian hands at all times!

 

[sigatoka]

1. Its not about killing their pensions totally but about limiting it to parity with what goes on economically in the non-military part of the society.

2. Secondly, there is NO reason given by him or even argued for the fact that most high ranking military personnel, in addition to all the pensions and perks, get appointed to important and high ranking civilian positions which should stay in civilian hands at all times!

1. And the point you are forgetting is that limiting it to what goes on economically in non-military part of society will lower the quality of people who wish to join Pak. military. There is no way around this, you can not have your cake and eat it too.

2. I strongly oppose the military actively running profit making businesses unrelated to military affairs, for e.g. if it starts running farms and paint factories. But I have no problem when retired military personal are appointed to civilian positions. Why shoud they be restricted??

 

[Sid]

1. And the point you are forgetting is that limiting it to what goes on economically in non-military part of society will lower the quality of people who wish to join Pak. military. There is no way around this, you can not have your cake and eat it too.

2. I strongly oppose the military actively running profit making businesses unrelated to military affairs, for e.g. if it starts running farms and paint factories. But I have no problem when retired military personal are appointed to civilian positions. Why shoud they be restricted??

1. 'Quality' of people? Its more about passing the exam for a certain position in the armed forces than one's 'qualities'. If you pass the exam, you are groomed to nurture specific qualities in you even if you lack them at first. So that arguement, IMHO, doesn't hold.

2. Its a problem because they bring a military mindset to civilian positions and the opportunity cost is those civilians who have been deserving and have been forgone for the position. It creates resentment as well.

 

[EagleEyes]

Really? From the top of my head (without even thinking) I can point one private school and one private university owned by the armed forces in Karachi for starters.

1) Army Public School and 2) Bahria University.

That is not the majority.

Both schools, are owned by military for future military field personels. So it should make sense.

 

[sigatoka]

1. 'Quality' of people? Its more about passing the exam for a certain position in the armed forces than one's 'qualities'. If you pass the exam, you are groomed to nurture specific qualities in you even if you lack them at first. So that arguement, IMHO, doesn't hold.

2. Its a problem because they bring a military mindset to civilian positions and the opportunity cost is those civilians who have been deserving and have been forgone for the position. It creates resentment as well.

1. Even if there were no exams for entry, lowering the compensation of armed forces will reduce the incentive for the best and brightest for joining. Maybe your argument is that the best and brightest Pakistani's should be running companies or researchning in labs for the next vaccine, and youd then be correct for arguing for a pay cut for armed forces then because then more of the best would move out of the military into these other fields. But you are not endorsing this position, you are saying "Cut their pay and quality will be unaffected" I am saying quite unhumbly, this is impossible. You cant cut pay without reducing quality.

2. When there is an opening for a civilan job, everyone should be entitled to have a go for it. Restricting military personal just because they were in the military is nonsensical, you are simply reducing the potential pool to recruit from. If the civilian was so deserving, they would have gotten the job anyway, but they were nto the best and so didnt get it.

Everytime there is a promotion you create resentment, becasue out of a dozen qualified people only one gets promoted. That unfortuante part of reality.

 

[melb4aust]

That is not the majority.

Both schools, are owned by military for future military field personels. So it should make sense.

Yes indeed they are, i was studying in army public school when i was living back in Pakistan(Sialkot). And i completed my matriculation from there, stayed in that school for about 5 yrz and it was totally under the control of the army. About 70% of the teachers were from army and the principal were the highest ranking officers from the army and use to wear the complete army unform.