What are your opinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

[EXPERT]

I just got the topic for a G.D , in college ...
I just wanted to know some points of you guys ..

SO WHAT DO YOU THINK COUNTRIES SHOULD HAVE TO SPEND THEIR MONEY ON INFRASTRUCTURE RATHER THAN ON DEFENCE

 

[Yusuf]

re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

I just got the topic for a G.D , in college ...
I just wanted to know some points of you guys ..

SO WHAT DO YOU THINK COUNTRIES SHOULD HAVE TO SPEND THEIR MONEY ON INFRASTRUCTURE RATHER THAN ON DEFENCE

What's budgeting for? Both important

 

[pmaitra]

Re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

Infrastructure can be built with dual purpose, so I don't see infrastructure as something exclusive of defense.

We need to build better roads and bridges in the border areas, we need to use railways to transport military equipment, and we can also use roads as runways for aircraft.

I think both are important. Importance and focus can vary depending on the geography and closeness to borders.

 

[Virendra]

Re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

I think that we can't prioritize one over the other or run the two with exclusive, separate vision in the long run.
They will have to go hand in hand, otherwise we're bound to suffer.

Without infrastructure, the Defense equipment is a functional dud.
Without Defense, the infrastructure however strong and polished it may be - is open for enemy strike.

Regards,
Virendra

 

[Virendra]

Re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

I don't see infrastructure and something exclusive of defense.

Weird, I came up with the same thought

 

[sayareakd]

Re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

OK two examples.

Kuwait was rich with oil and cash, they were small and didnt had much of defence, Iraqis just over run then in a day.

Soviet Union, they keep spending on Defence and they fell on their own weight.

So you need to spend it wisely, that is what Economics is all about, you have limited resources and unlimited wants. Both are important.

 

[A chauhan]

Re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

Look at Pakistan, it's managing to threat us with just defence, OTOH South east countries with good infrastructure can't dare to look at us, but interestingly Pak can not provide food to its citizens, while SE countries can't protect themselves. Both are necessary, but you will have to balance both of them, keeping the threat perception and financial conditions in the mind, i.e. if you are facing immediate threat then you should spend on defence, if not then infrastructure should be the priority.

 

[Payeng]

Re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

I just got the topic for a G.D , in college ...
I just wanted to know some points of you guys ..

SO WHAT DO YOU THINK COUNTRIES SHOULD HAVE TO SPEND THEIR MONEY ON INFRASTRUCTURE RATHER THAN ON DEFENCE

How about you need to defend your infrastructure....
You can't let your assets in the free, you need to protect it, a reason for security.

A fanboy quote collection: Si vis pacem, para bellum (Latin)... "If you want peace, prepare for war"

Although Defence is inevitable phenomenon for Infrastructure, for a GD I will suggest you take the side for Infrastructure because everything starts and ends with an infrastructure

 

[sayareakd]

Re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

Ok lets take a case when India was golden bird, we had lot of money, but our defences were not strong, so people came to steal our wealth.

So IMHO it should be judicious mix of both, not in 50:50 but where the need for infrastructure for economic development is balance with need to protect infrastructure and the country.

 

[Payeng]

Re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

Ok lets take a case when India was golden bird, we had lot of money, but our defences were not strong, so people came to steal our wealth.

So IMHO it should be judicious mix of both, not in 50:50 but where the need for infrastructure for economic development is balance with need to protect infrastructure and the country.

Point is you need to favour one tropic and win the debate.

 

[EXPERT]

Re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

Point is you need to favour one tropic and win the debate.

exactly , the points which all you gays are saying are conclusion points . I have to support one from INFRA or DEF and then defend my position.....
so which one I support I am confused .......

 

[Payeng]

Re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

I did ping this thread in hope so that EXPERT might get some respond.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

Guns versus butter model - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In macroeconomics, the guns versus butter model is an example of a simple production possibility frontier. It demonstrates the relationship between a nation's investment in defense and civilian goods. In this example, a nation has to choose between two options when spending its finite resources. It can buy either guns (invest in defense/military) or butter (invest in production of goods), or a combination of both. This can be seen as an analogy for choices between defense and civilian spending in more complex economies.

The "gun or butter" model is generally used as a simplification of national spending as a part of GDP. The nation will have to decide which balance of guns versus butter best fulfill its needs, with its choice being partly influenced by the military spending and military stance of potential opponents. Researchers in political economy have viewed the trade-off between military and consumer spending as a useful predictor of election success.[1]

This model does not typically correlate well with free market economies.[2]

 

[Dinesh_Kumar]

Re: What are your oppinions on DEFENCE vs. INFRASTRUCTURE

Infrastructure has quick payoff in improving economy of country, lowering costs, etc.

Defence required for protecting against external aggressors...both important....IF Nuke Triad in place, then maybe concentrate on Infrastructure and grow the economy...

 

[roma]

infrastructure has significance ONLY AFTER a certain critical level of defence is in place
no point building nice structures and your powerful neighbour
is gonna take it away from you

many have said that infra is part of defence
- in which case it becomes a question of how much usage of it is civilian
and how much is military and proportion accordingly under each budget

for example, border roads might be accounted 95% under defence budget because
those are almost exclusively used by the military

but the inland roads could be accounted more heavily under
civilian budget as they are more heavily used by civilian traffic