Urban Middle Class Estimates in Pakistan

[Skeptic]

It seems to me that the only answer acceptable to you is that India has a huge middle class and Pakistan has none.

No Sir, I am currently of the view that Both India and Pakistan has a middle class, though size of the middle class in India sheerly by virtue of its population base is huge. Percentage wise as well Indian has a slight edge though not by much.

But to me you seem of firm belief - that India does not have a middle class at all - and Pakistan has a huge one. Which is not only contrary to the popular perception, but firmly unsubstantiated.

The only problem is I have cited lots of data to show that India has a very tiny middle class, if any.

You keep talking about NCAER, which is part of the "India Shining" hype that has been joined by the PR folks in India who ran campaigns like "India Everywhere" at WEF in Davos, Switzerland.

The fact is that India has a very small pool of less than 25% (vs 40% in Pakistan) of the population that lives on $2 a day or more from which the middle class can emerge.

Most of the factors which influence the size of middle / upper middle class are firmly overlooked by you.

Pakistan never had land reforms, that has led to all the rural income firmly held in the hands of a few Landlords (.1% anyone) and middle class is entirely an Urban phenomenon in Pakistan - unlike in India.

Higher education: While India has achieved over 14.48 % Gross Enrolment Ratio in higher education by 2010, for Pakistan it was abysmal 4.7% in 2009.

Let me quote Ram Bijapurkar again for your benefit:

While consultants and companies advise investing in India based on the current and projected size of the “middle class”, the bogey of the definition and sizing of the middle class hasn't gone away yet and adds to the unease. The World Bank defines middle class as having between $10 and $20 purchasing power parity (PPP) per capita per day, which is a lot narrower than the NCAER definition of households income between Rs. 2-10 lakh ($4,000 to $21,000 at 2001-02 prices) annually; which is what McKinsey Global Institute uses in its Bird of Gold book. Chris Butel of IIMS-Dataworks suggests sensibly that the middle class are those that have their own personal transport (car or 2-wheeler), own entertainment as in a TV set, sound system and their own communication (phone). Some of us suggest that the middle class are those who are literally in the middle i.e., have approximately between the 33rd and 66th percentile of income. Expectedly the numbers swing wildly from 50 million to 200 / 230 / 300 million. What's more, the nagging worry persists that the middle class being defined by most of these income bands is actually India's upper class.

Ramabijapurkar

The middle Class itself is yet to have a universally accepted defenition. The entire is surrounding the defenition of per capita income of $10 PPP, whereas middle class income is a household phenomenon. I gave you a simple example - If the defenition leaves a person earning 38K in Pakistan, and his family, out of the middle class, how do you expect me to believe that according to the same definition, Pakistan would have a huge middle calss, where it has been proven that only 2.8 million Pakistanis have income in excess of 2 Lakh per annum (Income tax payees).

You have certainly avoided the factual data present and went along the longer way of determining incomes. Gini coefficient has it fallacies and was estimated 68 for Pakistan in 2006.

et me quote Ram Bijapurkar again for your benefit:

While consultants and companies advise investing in India based on the current and projected size of the “middle class”, the bogey of the definition and sizing of the middle class hasn't gone away yet and adds to the unease. The World Bank defines middle class as having between $10 and $20 purchasing power parity (PPP) per capita per day, which is a lot narrower than the NCAER definition of households income between Rs. 2-10 lakh ($4,000 to $21,000 at 2001-02 prices) annually; which is what McKinsey Global Institute uses in its Bird of Gold book. Chris Butel of IIMS-Dataworks suggests sensibly that the middle class are those that have their own personal transport (car or 2-wheeler), own entertainment as in a TV set, sound system and their own communication (phone). Some of us suggest that the middle class are those who are literally in the middle i.e., have approximately between the 33rd and 66th percentile of income. Expectedly the numbers swing wildly from 50 million to 200 / 230 / 300 million. What's more, the nagging worry persists that the middle class being defined by most of these income bands is actually India's upper class.

Ramabijapurkar

I read it earlier - there is no need to get repeatative. I will provide something more for your benefit:
Premium content | Economist.com

But who, as a patrician British prime minister, Harold Macmillan, once loftily asked, are these middle classes? Their members are neither rich nor poor but somewhere in-between. In countries long divided between lord and peasant, that has large consequences. “Middle-class” describes an income category but also a set of attitudes. In the words of Shashi Tharoor, an Indian commentator, it is a category “more sociological than logical”.

An essential characteristic is the possession of a reasonable amount of discretionary income. Middle-class people do not live from hand to mouth, job to job, season to season, as the poor do. Diana Farrell, who is now a member of America’s National Economic Council but until recently worked for McKinsey, a consultancy that has spent a lot of time studying the middle classes, reckons they begin at roughly the point where people have a third of their income left for discretionary spending after providing for basic food and shelter. This allows them not just to buy things like fridges or cars but to improve their health care or plan for their children’s education.

Usually, an income of that size requires regular, formal employment, with a salary and some benefits, that is, a steady job—another key middle-class characteristic. The income needed to have a third of it left over after meeting basic needs also varies from place to place. In China, for example, $3,000 a year may be enough in Chongqing or Chengdu, big cities in the west, but not in Beijing or Shanghai. So defining the middle class in absolute terms is hard.

In practice, emerging markets may be said to have two middle classes. One consists of those who are middle class by any standard—ie, with an income between the average Brazilian and Italian. This group has the makings of a global class whose members have as much in common with each other as with the poor in their own countries. It is growing fast, but still makes up only a tenth of the developing world. You could call it the global middle class.


The other, more numerous, group consists of those who are middle-class by the standards of the developing world but not the rich one. Some time in the past year or two, for the first time in history, they became a majority of the developing world’s population: their share of the total rose from one-third in 1990 to 49% in 2005. Call it the developing middle class.

The problem is whether a household is middle class or a individual. As per definition - My father would certainly be in upper middle / upper class while my mom would be below poverty line. Alternatively a person with reasonably good income will be thrust out of the middle class just because he has to many kids. - this is ridiculous.

I think most appropriate for the subcontinent is the figure provided by Shashi Tharoor - "“more sociological than logical”.

As for $10 per capita - I am still awaiting data on how Pakistan has more than 5% people outside that group.

 

[deepak75]

Your NCAER data conflicts with the UNDP HDR 2009 data that says 76% of Indians live on less than $2 a day. Your NCAER data suggests that the entire population of about 400 million Indians at or above $2 a day is middle class, a definition that holds no water.

OMG, please do not mention the W word sir. We are having enough trouble with Hafiz Saeed as it is.

But jokes apart, Sir, I seek to submit to you that the NCAER data is used by World Bank + Business consultancy organizations such as McKinsey Global + Leading investment banking/consultancy organizations such as Deutsche Bank Capital + it is also referred to in Nancy Birdsall's report.

Sir, you have clearly not read the report and are depending on us to continue to provide you with the details of that report in our discussions.

Further as Skeptic pointed out, you are clearly missing the comprehension of the per capita earnings and household earnings as I was suspecting is the case earlier, and that evidently is also playing a great part in your not being able comprehend the facts.

But I appreciate that by now, you have abandoned the "30-35 Million Pakistanis earning more than 10,000 USD annual = Healthy middle class of Pakistan, you have abandoned what was "as per SBP governor + SCB Pakistan", you have abandoned Nancy Birdsall's report, and you have also abandoned the gini index that you brought up later.

Now we can discuss the Rama Bijapurkar comments. To understand this, let us go back a few posts and see your following thoughts to another friend on the forum:

World Bank has never clearly defined what constitutes middle class in developing nations.

For the first time, Birdsall has offered a definition to the World Bank as to who should count in the middle class in a developing nation....that's her main contribution......... rant......

Haq's Musings: 1999-2009: Pakistan's Decade of Urban Middle Class Growth

And then you say the following:

Middle class is defined differently by India than the UN and World Bank. Here's something from Rama Bijapurkar that might help you understand the debate...... rant......

Okay so now that you want to quote the World Bank data, please peruse of the following analysis as recent as February 2010 by Deutsche Bank Investment. I seek to quote a small excerpt:

http://www.dbresearch.de/PROD/DBR_INTERNET_DE-PROD/PROD0000000000253735.pdf

A McKinsey Global Institute study using .................... At the other end of the spectrum, a study by the World Bank estimated the group at 264 million in 2005 using the median poverty line in 70 countries as a lower bound and the United States poverty line as an upper bound. Another method employed by CNN-IBN in its middle class survey utilised a consumption-based criterion. The survey looked at whether a household owned a car or scooter, colour television, or a telephone, and estimated that the middle class equaled approximately 20% of the population or slightly over 200 million people.

Also please see the following World Bank paper by Ravallion (2009). You will find somewhere the following amongst other information:

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/extern...58349_20090112143046/Rendered/PDF/WPS4816.pdf

By definition, half the developing countries in the Ravallion et al. sample have national poverty lines below $2 a day.9 For example, the official poverty lines in both China and India are only about half this figure, so there are many people who are not poor by official standards in both countries who are not yet “middle class” by my definition. Nonetheless, there can be no doubt that $2 a day is a frugal lower bound even amongst developing countries. There is a
marked economic gradient in national poverty lines, reflecting more generous (food and nonfood) allowances for “basic needs” as countries develop (Ravallion et al., 2008).

The highest line in the Ravallion et al. sample of developing countries is $9 a day (for Uruguay). For some purposes, I will also focus on what might be termed the developing world’s upper middle class, for which the lower bound is $9 a day. As an upper bound for defining the developing world’s middle class, I will use the aforementioned US poverty line of $13 a day at 2005 PPP.

So let us not get authorative on what defines a middle class. There have been several papers sponsored by various institutions including the World Bank and there are many definitions as may be the number of economists or other Riaz Haqs. But by any standards even USD 13 PPP (2005) = USD 3.66 per day in case of Ravalion it is pretty easy to comprehend that that there is a pretty good middle class amongst us = your neighbouring slumdog country.

So now let us turn our attention to the middle class in Pakistan. You were saying that there is a healthy middle class in Pakistan. Care to share some credible info on that besides the ones that sort of proved that your middle class is earning more than your GDP (I hope you would have read that earlier post).

 

[deepak75]

No Sir, I am currently of the view that Both India and Pakistan has a middle class, though size of the middle class in India sheerly by virtue of its population base is huge. Percentage wise as well Indian has a slight edge though not by much.

But Sir, Riaz also has to get some data up on this forum so that we can analyse the facts and try and arrive at some sort of conclusion about the middle class in Pakistan also.

So far we have just been discussing one part of the post = Nancy Birdsall's report based on which it is clear that India has a healthy middle class and it was a mistake by the TOI reporter which Riaz got hooked on.

But there was more to his post which needs to be established:

Pakistan is more urbanized with a larger middle class than India as percent of population. In 2007, Standard Chartered Bank analysts and SBP estimated there were 30 to 35 million Pakistanis earning an average of $10,000 a year. Of these, about 17 million are in the upper and upper middle class, according to a recent report.

We need to discuss that aspect too. Let us hope that Riaz can get us up to speed on this too.

 

[Skeptic]

But Sir, Riaz also has to get some data up on this forum so that we can analyse the facts and try and arrive at some sort of conclusion about the middle class in Pakistan also.

So far we have just been discussing one part of the post = Nancy Birdsall's report based on which it is clear that India has a healthy middle class and it was a mistake by the TOI reporter which Riaz got hooked on.

As I mentioned this is my perception, anyways Riaz the stage is waiting for you go give any concrete data about Pakistan other than average income ... 35 million... 10000.. which proves absolutely nothing.

Specially since the topic of the thread is Middle Class of Pakistan and not comparison of Indian and Pakistani middle class.

 

[RiazHaq]

Here's an interesting commentary by Sudha Ramachandra about India's future prospects:

The populations of Europe and Japan are already graying, and the working-age populations of the United States and China are projected to shrink too in the next two decades. By 2020 the US will be short 17 million people of working age, China 10 million, Japan 9 million and Russia 6 million. However, India will have a surplus of 47 million people, giving the country a competitive edge in labor costs, which will be sustainable up to 2050, according to a study by Goldman Sachs.

Economists say India will catch up with the Chinese economy beginning in 2030, when the latter could cool off as the result of an aging population. "The window of opportunity offered by a population bulge has clearly opened for India," points out noted economist C P Chandrasekhar of Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi. After decades of evoking despair, India's demographic profile is finally beginning to stir hope.

But not everyone views the population bulge with such optimism. Some analysts say it is not enough to have a young population. The working-age population needs to be healthy and literate.

India's score on this, while improving, is certainly not inspiring. About 50% of all Indian children are undernourished, a large percentage of them born with protein deficiency (which affects brain development and learning capacity, among other things). This is hardly the ideal foundation for a productive workforce, as the likelihood of a malnourished child growing up to be an able adult is rather dim.

There is also the question of whether the population has the skills and knowledge to take on India's future work. Literacy has improved dramatically over the years - just 14% of the population was literate in 1947 versus about 64.8% today - but many who are classified as literate can barely read or write. And 40% of those who enroll in primary schools drop out by age 10. The curriculum in the schools, especially the government-run ones, does not prepare the child for the domestic job market, let alone the global one. The huge "workforce" might not be qualified to do the work.

Moreover, India's rich and educated classes are preferring to have small families, so the additions to the population are coming largely from the poor, illiterate sections in society. Nicholas Eberstadt, who researches demographics at the Washington-based American Enterprise Institute, points out that while India's overall population profile will remain relatively youthful, "this is an arithmetic expression averaging diverse components of a vast nation. Closer examination reveals two demographically distinct Indias: the north that stays remarkably young over the next 20 years, and a south already graying rapidly due to low fertility."

Yet India's north is far more backward than the south. On almost every socio-economic indicator the north scores poorly. The young population that the country is setting its hopes on might not be qualified to take up the challenge.

There is a danger of India squandering its demographic edge if it does not act rapidly to invest in human capital. India's population policy - it was the first in the world to come out with one - has hitherto focused on population control. This was essential given the large population base and the high growth rate. Steps were taken to limit family size, and incentives were given to couples to adopt permanent birth-control measures.

Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan

 

[RiazHaq]

FACT: Countries with large middle class populations are more urbanized, with fewer people living below the poverty line.


Now, I have a simple quiz for all the "smart" analysts on this forum who claim India has a larger middle class relative to Pakistan:

Country A has 40% of its people living at or above $2 a day with 40% of its population urbanized.

Country B has only 24% of its population living at or above $2 a day and only 30% of its people live in cities.

Country A has less rich-poor disparity than country B.

Question: Which country has a bigger middle class? A or B?

 

[deepak75]

Here's an interesting commentary by Sudha Ramachandra about India's future prospects:

The populations of Europe and Japan are already graying, and the working-age populations of the United States and China are projected to shrink too in the next two decades. By 2020 the US will be short 17 million people of working age, China 10 million, Japan 9 million and Russia 6 million. However, India will have a surplus of 47 million people, giving the country a competitive edge in labor costs, which will be sustainable up to 2050, according to a study by Goldman Sachs.

Economists say India will catch up with the Chinese economy beginning in 2030, when the latter could cool off as the result of an aging population. "The window of opportunity offered by a population bulge has clearly opened for India," points out noted economist C P Chandrasekhar of Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi. After decades of evoking despair, India's demographic profile is finally beginning to stir hope.

But not everyone views the population bulge with such optimism. Some analysts say it is not enough to have a young population. The working-age population needs to be healthy and literate.

India's score on this, while improving, is certainly not inspiring. About 50% of all Indian children are undernourished, a large percentage of them born with protein deficiency (which affects brain development and learning capacity, among other things). This is hardly the ideal foundation for a productive workforce, as the likelihood of a malnourished child growing up to be an able adult is rather dim.

There is also the question of whether the population has the skills and knowledge to take on India's future work. Literacy has improved dramatically over the years - just 14% of the population was literate in 1947 versus about 64.8% today - but many who are classified as literate can barely read or write. And 40% of those who enroll in primary schools drop out by age 10. The curriculum in the schools, especially the government-run ones, does not prepare the child for the domestic job market, let alone the global one. The huge "workforce" might not be qualified to do the work.

Moreover, India's rich and educated classes are preferring to have small families, so the additions to the population are coming largely from the poor, illiterate sections in society. Nicholas Eberstadt, who researches demographics at the Washington-based American Enterprise Institute, points out that while India's overall population profile will remain relatively youthful, "this is an arithmetic expression averaging diverse components of a vast nation. Closer examination reveals two demographically distinct Indias: the north that stays remarkably young over the next 20 years, and a south already graying rapidly due to low fertility."

Yet India's north is far more backward than the south. On almost every socio-economic indicator the north scores poorly. The young population that the country is setting its hopes on might not be qualified to take up the challenge.

There is a danger of India squandering its demographic edge if it does not act rapidly to invest in human capital. India's population policy - it was the first in the world to come out with one - has hitherto focused on population control. This was essential given the large population base and the high growth rate. Steps were taken to limit family size, and incentives were given to couples to adopt permanent birth-control measures.

Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan

Article is from May 2006 posted here with no relevance but to digress from your spurious claims that Pakistan has a middle glass of about 30 - 35 million which earn more than USD 10,000 annual. Please provide credible sources for your claims otherwise please accept that you are a plagiarist.

Please do not try to troll the thread away from the main focus that you raised.

 

[deepak75]

FACT: Countries with large middle class populations are more urbanized, with fewer people living below the poverty line.


Now, I have a simple quiz for all the "smart" analysts on this forum who claim India has a larger middle class relative to Pakistan:

Country A has 40% of its people living at or above $2 a day with 40% of its population urbanized.

Country B has only 24% of its population living at or above $2 a day and only 30% of its people live in cities.

Country A has less rich-poor disparity than country B.

Question: Which country has a bigger middle class? A or B?

Please provide the sources for your claims = Pakistan has a middle class of 30 - 35 million which are earning more than USD 10,000 annual.

If you are not able to provide sources for your claims the please accept that you indulged in sheer plagiarism and deliberately tried to misinform the members on this forum and apologise.


And then I will be happy to answer you above question too gladly.

 

[RiazHaq]

Please provide the sources for your claims = Pakistan has a middle class of 30 - 35 million which are earning more than USD 10,000 annual.

If you are not able to provide sources for your claims the please accept that you indulged in sheer plagiarism and deliberately tried to misinform the members on this forum and apologise.


And then I will be happy to answer you above question too gladly.

Go back and check this thread and you'll find lots of citations. Learn to do your own homework.

---------- Post added at 09:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:48 AM ----------

Article is from May 2006 posted here with no relevance but to digress from your spurious claims that Pakistan has a middle glass of about 30 - 35 million which earn more than USD 10,000 annual. Please provide credible sources for your claims otherwise please accept that you are a plagiarist.

Please do not try to troll the thread away from the main focus that you raised.

It's absolutely relevant because it brings out the issue of millions of people in India slipping into, not rising from poverty and deprivation.

The situation is now worse than it was a few years ago. India has slipped several places on HDI rankings and there are 100 million more poor in India.

Haq's Musings: South Asia Slipping in Human Development

100 million more Indians now living in poverty | Top News | Reuters

 

[deepak75]

Go back and check this thread and you'll find lots of citations. Learn to do your own homework.

No need to get impolite Riaz. You should know better than that.

On the topic: Your only source so far has been the following:

Economy of Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Upon analyzing which we found out the following:

You are misinformed about Pakistan's GDP and the basis of using incomes to classify people as poor, middle class or upper class.

In developing countries, it's the PPP values that are used for this purpose. Pakistan's GDP in PPP terms exceeds $450 billion, not $144 billion as you erroneously assert.

As to your stretching of Nepal's "goat economy" description to include Pakistan's economy, you are simply confirming your own ignorance, if not your bigotry against Pakistan.

Regarding India's situation, there is plenty of data, documentation and literature that confirms India's deep poverty and vast rich-poor gap that leaves little room for middle class. Birdsall also makes a reference to this fact.

Haq's Musings: 1999-2009: Pakistan's Decade of Urban Middle Class Growth

Sir good that you dropped Mr. Pritchett's comments (spice in the original post?) from the discussion. But I am sure that you have no idea about what he has said about the efficacy of Aid and the "Goat Economy" otherwise you have found it relevant also to Pakistan. We can discuss that if you want. I will be happy to help you.

Now about takign the rest of the discussion forward, let us take this step by step:

First, it is good that you now have brought in PPP to this discussion. That is the first sane thing I have seen from you on this thread. Okay, so let us establish some facts before we continue with our discussion.

Your assertion: 30 – 35 Million people in Pakistani were earning USD 10,000 in 2007. (We have now established that this number needs to be per PPP so we will have to factor that in to your USD 10,000 statistic). Let us do those below:

So the number that you had quoted = 30 – 35 Million is the middle class in Pakistan earning above USD 10,000 initially. You now say that it is per PPP so let us discount that number also by the 2.97 factor to get the USD comparison so that is now = USD 3367 (throwing 10,000 up in the original post may have looked quite glamourous, No?) (Store this number please)

(The 2.97 factor retrieved from your source = Economy of Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )

Now, first let me address your assertion that with Nancy Birdsall’s paper that Pakistan will have a great (35 Million) middle class which even Brazil, China, India, Mars & Venus also will not have:

Nancy Birdsalls qualification for Middle class = USD 10 daily income. This would require a household to earn USD 10 x 365 = USD 3650 annually. So if you bring back to your memory the stored number above = 3367, by your own admission of numbers, by Nancy’s parameters, you have no middle class!!!!

Toinnnggggggggggg!

Hint for you: Now you have to get back to me saying that she is may be talking about USD 10 (PPP) (which will be lower nominal USD value) for India too in her report and I will then tell you what kind of middle class India will have with that benchmark. NCAER has enough stats on that.

Okay, second let us take you up on the hypothesis that 30-35 Million people in Pakistan are earning 10,000 USD annual (PPP) in 2007. Let us look at it from two aspects.


http://www.sbp.org.pk/reports/annual/arfy07/Chp-8.pdf

Declared labour statistics: Pakistan had a total labour work force of 49 Million in 2006. Basis growth trend of SBP data (refer to enclosed link = table 8.7) is on the least 3%. So the total labour work force in Pakistan in 2007 should be at least 50.5 Million. So if 30 Million were earning 10,000 USD (PPP) this = 60% of the total workforce in Pakistan earning USD 10,000 (PPP) per year or USD 27.40(PPP) per day.

Yet you say to another friend on this thread the following:

Why is that surprising? According to available data, 60% of Pakistanis and 75% of Indians live on less than $2 a day.

List of countries by percentage of population living in poverty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Human Development Report 2009 - Population living below $2 a day (%)

Toinnnnnnggggggggggggggggg no. 2


Let us now consider it via a link that you provided = wiki again for another angle on this.

Economy of Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And I quote from the link as following:

Growing middle class
Measured by purchasing power, Pakistan has a 30 million strong middle class, according to Dr. Ishrat Husain, Ex-Governor (2 December 1999 - 1 December 2005) of the State Bank of Pakistan.[22] It is a figure that correlates with research by Standard Chartered Bank which estimates that Pakistan possesses a "a middle class of 30 million people that Standard Chartered estimates now earn an average of about $10,000 a year."[23] Latest figures put Pakistan's Middle Class at 35 million strong.[24] In addition, Pakistan has a growing upper & upper middle class, which was estimated at 6.8 million in 2002[25] and has now grown to 17 million people as of 2010, with relatively high per capita incomes.[26]
Unquote.


So GDP of Pakistan (PPP) in 2009 = 545.6 Billion

And the middle class declared per the source= 35 Million earns x 10,000 USD = USD 350 Billion (PPP)
Plus in the same link there is also reference that Pakistan has also a “rich class” which earns “relatively more” than the above and it is = 17 Million. So since that the “relatively more” number is not provided in your source, let us assume that it is a bottom level 20% more than the 10,000 USD (PPP) of the middle class so = 10,000 x 1.2 = 12,000 (PPP).

So what is the earning of this “rich class” of 17 Million = 17 million x 12,000 USD (PPP) = USD 204 Billion (PPP)

So total of only the rich + the middle class = 350 + 204 Billion = 554 Billion (PPP)

Now the total GDP as quoted above from your source = 545.6 Billion (PPP)

So the net balance for your corporate earnings + indirect business taxes + net institutional interest earnings + other Income factors + the earnings of the other poor brethren in Pakistan (us slumdog Indian types) = 545.6 Billion – 554 Billion = Negative 8.4 Billion PPP!!!!

Toinnnnngggggggggggggggggggggg – Toinnnnggggggggggggggg – Toinnnnngggggggg – Toinnnnnnggggggggggg……

Finally Sir, a lot of times, Wiki is used as a propaganda tool. If you check the links that Wiki refers to, you will understand the reality a lot. There are circular references or references in some cases to fanboy sites. It is like Goebbels’s theory = A lie if audacious enough, and repeated enough number of times, will be believed by the masses. Please do not take this forum for a ride. A lot of them are your countrymen.

Also, please do not believe everything that Shortcut Aziz and his team said in 2007, after-all he also said that he will entice Condi Rice with his “love stare” and solve all problems of Pakistan.

So by the way, where is he now? Anyone?

[/quote]

If there is any other source, you have to point out now or accept that you have only been trying to take the forum on a false and fanciful ride.

 

[RiazHaq]

I see that some of the posters here can not see the forest from the trees. They are totally missing the big picture...and the big picture is that India's middle class figures are highly exaggerated and Pakistan's middle class size is underestimated.

Commonsense based on a combination of over $2 a day population, relative levels of urbanization and the Gini data easily leads to the conclusion that Pakistan likely has a bigger percent of its population in middle class than India.

Notwithstanding the Indian marketing hype, the figures from the UNDP, the World Bank, SBP and Standard Charter support the conclusions above.

Haq's Musings: Urbanization in Pakistan Highest in South Asia

Human Development Report 2009 - Population living below $2 a day (%)

List of countries by income equality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Skeptic]

I see that some of the posters here can not see the forest from the trees. They are totally missing the big picture...and the big picture is that India's middle class figures are highly exaggerated and Pakistan's middle class size is underestimated.

Commonsense based on a combination of over $2 a day population, relative levels of urbanization and the Gini data easily leads to the conclusion that Pakistan likely has a bigger percent of its population in middle class than India.

Notwithstanding the Indian marketing hype, the figures from the UNDP, the World Bank, SBP and Standard Charter support the conclusions above.

Haq's Musings: Urbanization in Pakistan Highest in South Asia

Human Development Report 2009 - Population living below $2 a day (&#37

List of countries by income equality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You Sir, want to talk about common sense, lets see the sense (common or otherwise) into your claim (which anyways in unsubstantiated till now). Even the report for survey is yet to be displayed by you.

Sir Middle class - does not simply sit on income - it consumes as well. Shall we discuss consumption statistics?? Since these are ratios, total volume does not make a difference.

Television per thousand People - India has 3 times compared to Pakistan.
Cars per Capita - India has twice as compared to Pakistan.
Education: India has more than 3 times people going for higher education than Pakistan.

And Pakistan has half the saving rate compared to India. So all these commodities are purchased and still Indians on an average save twice of what Pakistanis do.... What does your common sense say to this??

As for your only argument, why dont we look at a country like South Africa with per capita Income of over $10,000(PPP), still about 50% of the population lives below $2 per day. Or for Brazil - Again PCI over 10,000 and 35% of population lives below $2 per day.

Your line of reasoning does not appeal to common sense. If we were to determine number of people over $3650 per year, we need not the average but median atleast to determine the clustering.

And anyways - you are yet to show the actual report and the methodology employed by it. What was the sampling method? Which areas were covered? Was the sampling done in just Urban areas or was it in Rural as well. What was the average income of the remaining Group as per that report. Sir, common sense also says that a report does not give 1 single statistic. Was this report Part of Musharraf's campeign to garner support for himself from the alldged middle class?? How a country with Higher education (Graduation) of 4% of people have a middle class of 20% (that too beyond 5% elite segment) does not come in realm of Common Sense.

Lots of question and you are relying plainly on a wikipedia entry??

 

[RiazHaq]

You Sir, want to talk about common sense, lets see the sense (common or otherwise) into your claim (which anyways in unsubstantiated till now). Even the report for survey is yet to be displayed by you.

Sir Middle class - does not simply sit on income - it consumes as well. Shall we discuss consumption statistics?? Since these are ratios, total volume does not make a difference.

Television per thousand People - India has 3 times compared to Pakistan.
Cars per Capita - India has twice as compared to Pakistan.
Education: India has more than 3 times people going for higher education than Pakistan.

And Pakistan has half the saving rate compared to India. So all these commodities are purchased and still Indians on an average save twice of what Pakistanis do.... What does your common sense say to this??

As for your only argument, why dont we look at a country like South Africa with per capita Income of over $10,000(PPP), still about 50% of the population lives below $2 per day. Or for Brazil - Again PCI over 10,000 and 35% of population lives below $2 per day.

Your line of reasoning does not appeal to common sense. If we were to determine number of people over $3650 per year, we need not the average but median atleast to determine the clustering.

And anyways - you are yet to show the actual report and the methodology employed by it. What was the sampling method? Which areas were covered? Was the sampling done in just Urban areas or was it in Rural as well. What was the average income of the remaining Group as per that report. Sir, common sense also says that a report does not give 1 single statistic. Was this report Part of Musharraf's campeign to garner support for himself from the alldged middle class?? How a country with Higher education (Graduation) of 4% of people have a middle class of 20% (that too beyond 5% elite segment) does not come in realm of Common Sense.

Lots of question and you are relying plainly on a wikipedia entry??

You are attempting to obscure the definition and size of the middle class in South Asia by bringing in misleading consumption figures.

Relative to their populations, there are so few cars in India and Pakistan that the vast majority of such owners most likely belong to the upper class..not the middle class of these countries.

Let's take households with TV for example. 68% of Pakistani households and 64% of Indian households have televisions.

11% of Pakistanis and 7% of Indians have Internet access.

Two-thirds of Pakistanis have cell phones versus less than half of Indian population with mobile phones.

ATAC | Asia Television Advertising Coalition | Countries | Pakistan

http://www.riazhaq.com/2008/01/pakistans-telecom-boom-continues.html

 

[Skeptic]

You are attempting to obscure the definition and size of the middle class in South Asia by bringing in misleading consumption figures.

Relative to their populations, there are so few cars in India and Pakistan that the vast majority of such owners most likely belong to the upper class..not the middle class of these countries.

Let's take households with TV for example. 68% of Pakistani households and 64% of Indian households have televisions.

11% of Pakistanis and 7% of Indians have Internet access.

Two-thirds of Pakistanis have cell phones versus less than half of Indian population with mobile phones.

ATAC | Asia Television Advertising Coalition | Countries | Pakistan

Haq's Musings: Pakistan's Telecom Boom Continues

Pakistan has 19 Television per thousand people India has 58.
Televisions (per capita) (most recent) by country

You can not conveniently switch between Household and per capita.

Internet Access can be due to higher urbanization and not due to high income. Source is not reliable anyways.

I am waiting for a reply to rest of the post and the report of the survey.

 

[RiazHaq]

Pakistan has 19 Television per thousand people India has 58.
Televisions (per capita) (most recent) by country

You can not conveniently switch between Household and per capita.

Internet Access can be due to higher urbanization and not due to high income. Source is not reliable anyways.

I am waiting for a reply to rest of the post and the report of the survey.

Again, you have given about 10 years old data on TV sets ownership, when Pakistan had only a couple of TV channels. Today, there are over 100 channels in Pakistan.

The data I have given you about 68% of TV households in Pakistan vs 64% in India is from an Asian trade group that includes both Indian and Pakistani advertisers. It's in their own best interest to have accurate data for their clients and their business.

ATAC | Asia Television Advertising Coalition | Countries | Pakistan

Haq's Musings: Newsweek Joins Pakistan's Media Revolution

As to the Internet access data showing 11% access in Pak vs 7% in India, it's also available from ITU, the international telecom body.

Asia Internet Usage Stats and Population Statistics