Bangladesh has set up the largest single sewage treatment plant in South Asia, capacity of 500,000 cu.mtrs per day

[bluesky]

The industries of Bangladesh and China are complementary, and better cooperation is a good vision for both parties

A nation of 180 million should be able to build any industries that China or any other country can build.

Unfortunately, our govt wants the country to produce only low-value goods like garments and import high-value industrial goods which I find illogical.

However, I would blame our govt Cabinet is formed of the lowly peasants from the interior. They have little knowledge of industrialization. But, since the country is going through a foreign currency crunch at present, they will come up with ideas on how to support local industries.

 

[从八品主簿]

A nation of 180 million should be able to build any industries that China or any other country can build.

Unfortunately, our govt wants the country to produce only low-value goods like garments and import high-value industrial goods which I find illogical.

However, I would blame our govt Cabinet is formed of the lowly peasants from the interior. They have little knowledge of industrialization. But, since the country is going through a foreign currency crunch at present, they will come up with ideas on how to support local industries.

Due to various reasons, Bangladesh's infrastructure, power stability, business environment, labor force and talent education, laws and regulations and financial environment all restrict Bangladesh's industrial transformation and upgrading

A nation of 180 million should be able to build any industries that China or any other country can build.

Unfortunately, our govt wants the country to produce only low-value goods like garments and import high-value industrial goods which I find illogical.

However, I would blame our govt Cabinet is formed of the lowly peasants from the interior. They have little knowledge of industrialization. But, since the country is going through a foreign currency crunch at present, they will come up with ideas on how to support local industries.

The textile and garment industry also has an industrial system effect. There is room for exploration in multiple industrial chains such as textile machinery, chemical dyes, fabrics, chemical fibers, and materials. The other is the clothing design industry/marketing. Other plush toys/shoemaking industries have similar industrial systems

 

[bluesky]

The textile and garment industry also has an industrial system effect. There is room for exploration in multiple industrial chains such as textile machinery, chemical dyes, fabrics, chemical fibers, and materials. The other is the clothing design industry/marketing. Other plush toys/shoemaking industries have similar industrial systems

Yes, industries and industrial machinery related to the garments/ textile industries should be explored on a priority basis because there is a market for those industrial goods.

However, you can see it is not happening that way. So, investment by foreign companies including those from China should be encouraged to invest in BD.

 

[从八品主簿]

Yes, industries and industrial machinery related to the garments/ textile industries should be explored on a priority basis because there is a market for those industrial goods.

However, you can see it is not happening that way. So, investment by foreign companies including those from China should be encouraged to invest in BD.

There should be relevant enterprises in China investing there, and there should be many textile enterprises.

There is a company in my hometown that has a branch in Bangladesh. Have you ever heard of XCMG?

Yes, industries and industrial machinery related to the garments/ textile industries should be explored on a priority basis because there is a market for those industrial goods.

However, you can see it is not happening that way. So, investment by foreign companies including those from China should be encouraged to invest in BD.

 

[bluesky]

There should be relevant enterprises in China investing there, and there should be many textile enterprises.

There are thousands and thousands of garment factories in BD. But, due to some hidden reasons, the Chinese sewing companies are more interested to export and do not want to invest.

Maybe, our BAL party wants to import because this is how the top brats get their commissions. Very unfortunate.

 

[从八品主簿]

There should be relevant enterprises in China investing there, and there should be many textile enterprises.

There is a company in my hometown that has a branch in Bangladesh. Have you ever heard of XCMG?

The list of major Chinese large companies in Bangladesh that I found in the Ministry of Commerce of China

 

[Bilal9]

Guys - can we stay on topic please?

India and its lack of sewage hygiene is off topic for this thread.

 

[Bilal9]

@Bilal9

Bilal bhai,

Yet you keep abusing SHW and BAL.

Regards

Sheikh Hasina and BAL never planned anything to upgrade sewage treatment.

The plan was proposed and implemented by Chinese Govt. and also financed by Chinese banks.

All SHW and BAL did was skim bribes off the top - their primary involvement is taking bakhra.

That is also their reasoning for not standing in the way.

 

[Bilal9]

Due to various reasons, Bangladesh's infrastructure, power stability, business environment, labor force and talent education, laws and regulations and financial environment all restrict Bangladesh's industrial transformation and upgrading


The textile and garment industry also has an industrial system effect. There is room for exploration in multiple industrial chains such as textile machinery, chemical dyes, fabrics, chemical fibers, and materials. The other is the clothing design industry/marketing. Other plush toys/shoemaking industries have similar industrial systems

Textile industry is as old as millennia in Bangladesh however mechanization in carding, spinning, weaving and stitching history is relatively new (hundred years history). Stitching value addition started in the 1970's via Korean orders but the other processes including dyeing, are quite old.

Problem is - govt. is unable to grasp the need of becoming self-sufficient in mechanization inputs (even via assembly of machinery) since most of the labor is uneducated and rather unskilled. That is why the skills of low level value addition such as atitching apparel, stuffing stuffed toys or even making shoe uppers is the first stage of value addition for countries like Bangladesh today and are staples for Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam as well to some extent.

In other countries you see a spillover effect of apparel industry whereby countries like Korea and Taiwan started making (or assembling) basic things like industrial sewing machines. That has not happened in Bangladesh or say, Thailand. Ditto with carding, spinning or weaving equipment, which are even more tech intensive with some recent weaving technologies (water-jet or air-jet) beyond approach in Bangladesh.

In other sane countries (such as Taiwan, Korea or China) - govt. encourages gradual onset and introduction of low-then-medium-then-high industrial value addition by making local machinery assembly or ToT as a condition for investments, sometimes they provide generous incentives for this. Our govt. is too inept or too corrupt to do so.

 

[mb444]

Textile industry is as old as millennia in Bangladesh however mechanization in carding, spinning, weaving and stitching history is relatively new (hundred years history). Stitching value addition started in the 1970's via Korean orders but the other processes including dyeing, are quite old.

Problem is - govt. is unable to grasp the need of becoming self-sufficient in mechanization inputs (even via assembly of machinery) since most of the labor is uneducated and rather unskilled. In other countries you see a spillover effect of apparel industry whereby countries like Korea and Taiwan started making (or assembling) basic things like industrial sewing machines. That has not happened in Bangladesh or say, Thailand. Ditto with carding, spinning or weaving equipment, which are even more tech intensive with some recent weaving technologies (water-jet or air-jet) beyond approach in Bangladesh.

In other sane countries (such as Taiwan, Korea or China) - govt. encourages gradual onset of industrial value addition by making local machinery assembly or ToT as a condition for investments, sometimes they provide generous incentives for this. Our govt. is too inept or too corrupt to do so.

BD was proto-industrialised prior to the british raj. During the raj period industrialisation took place around the new port city of culcutta and to a little extent around chittagong. Post patrition this industrial base was lost to BD.

It is natural for it to take time to develop these. I think BD strategy to get as many people into jobs via rmg sector is a natural one that is also tried and tested methodology. UK industrial revolution also relied on cotton and garments. Additionally we have had garments sector for centuries and had natural advantage in the sector.

Things take time and what we are seeing is natural industrial progression. In future we will see accelerated growth as purchasing capacity incountry rises and the capital accumulation via RMG is distributed into newer fields.

 

[Bilal9]

That’s the result of 40 years of Madrasa education under BNP/JP/Jamat!

Getting to higher value garment, like designer brands, would be a fantastic next step.

In parallel, dismantle the Madrasa system and rote learning. Realistically, that will take a decade!

Abolish Madrasa and replace it with what?

I am sure people who shill for India would love to re-educate Bangladeshis to love Indian culture.

But - fat chance of that happening. Anytime the Muslim Bangladeshi underclass gets education, they choose religious education. Which means Quran and Tafseer.

Muslim Bangladeshi underclass don't want to learn about 52 crore Dev/Devi and 53 crore Avatars. Of course Hindus will have that education. Get that drilled into your head please. There is no alternative for Madrasa education.

And what kind of a Sylheti are you?

You cry about the bombing of Shahjalal's mazaar on one hand, and on the other you oppose Madrasa education like a bhakt ? Showing your true colors now?

@Abu Shaleh Rumi we found your makal fal beradar - Sylheti who can't speak Sylheti....

I am not a shill for BNP/JP/Jamaat (could care less about their politics) so I don't know why you keep on harping about @bluesky bhai and me shilling for them.

I don't want to speak for @bluesky bhai - but what sane people in this forum (him and me included) want is just for corrupt good-for-nothing Hasina and BAL to be gone. Their autocratic regime has run its course and its time for more educated leadership, appropriate for the next economic stage of our country.

Take a nice poll of the real Bangladeshi posters here in our sub-section (not the dozen or so overt false flagger Indians), and I guarantee that they will all want Hasina and Indian influence/exploitation gone from our country. You cannot oppose popular will for the long term, not with any semblance of RAW and BJP/RSS induced dhokeybaji.

Most Bangladeshis weren't clueful until the last generation, but this generation is different. They all know what they want - and being a part of greater Hindu Rashtra is not one of them.

 

[Bilal9]

BD was proto-industrialised prior to the british raj. During the raj period industrialisation took place around the new port city of culcutta and to a little extent around chittagong. Post patrition this industrial base was lost to BD.

It is natural for it to take time to develop these. I think BD strategy to get as many people into jobs via rmg sector is a natural one that is also tried and tested methodology. UK industrial revolution also relied on cotton and garments. Additionally we have had garments sector for centuries and had natural advantage in the sector.

Things take time and what we are seeing is natural industrial progression. In future we will see accelerated growth as purchasing capacity incountry rises and the capital accumulation via RMG is distributed into newer fields.

Well sometimes saying in resignation "things take time" is not good enough.

Sometimes helping the process along is preferable with govt. policy which is what Asian tigers like Taiwan and Korea did.

Asian tiger governments in East Asia, had the ability and the resources to identify and exploit comparative advantages. Export Oriented Industrialization has, therefore, been supported as a development strategy for poorer countries like Bangladesh, Cambodia and also Vietnam - because of its proven success in the Four Asian Tigers.

Growth in per capita GDP in the tiger economies between 1960 and 2014

These four countries focused on investing heavily in their infrastructure as well as education to benefit their country through skilled workers and higher level value-addition export product jobs. The policy was generally successful and helped develop the countries into more advanced and high-income industrialized developed countries.

In relation to secondary / higher level educations, there are many prestigious colleges as in most developed countries. Notable schools include the National Taiwan University, Seoul National University, National University of Singapore, Nanyang Technological University[citation needed] and University of Hong Kong, Faculty of Dentistry, which as of 2017, was ranked as one of the top dental schools in the world.[17][18]

The role of Confucianism has been used to explain the success of the Four Asian Tigers. This conclusion is similar to the Protestant work ethic theory in the West promoted by German sociologist Max Weber in his book The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. The culture of Confucianism is said to have been compatible with industrialization because it valued stability, hard work, discipline, and loyalty and respect towards authority figures.[19] There is a significant influence of Confucianism on the corporate and political institutions of the Asian Tigers. Prime Minister of Singapore Lee Kuan Yew advocated Asian values as an alternative to the influence of Western culture in Asia.[20]

The catalyst for Korea's industrialization starting in 1960's was as follows:

Rapid growth from 1960s to 1980s[edit]​

Economy of South Korea, compared to North Korea. North Korea began to lose the economic competition with South Korea after the adoption of Juche in 1974 by North Korea.

With the coup of General Park Chung-hee in 1961, which at first caused political instability and an economic crisis, a protectionist economic policy began, pushing a bourgeoisie that developed in the shadow of the State to reactivate the internal market.

To promote development, a policy of export-oriented industrialization was applied in Korea, closing the entry into the country of all kinds of foreign products, except raw materials. (In our case that means closing entry for Indian-manufactured products in Bangladesh!!)

Agrarian reforms were carried out and General Park nationalized the financial system to swell the powerful state arm, whose intervention in the economy was through five-year plans.[38]

The most significant factor in rapid industrialization in S. Korea was the adoption of an outward-looking strategy in the early 1960s.[46][40] This strategy was particularly well-suited to that time because of South Korea's low savings rate and small domestic market. The strategy promoted economic growth through labor-intensive manufactured exports, in which South Korea could develop a competitive advantage. Government initiatives played an important role in this process.[40]

Through the model of export-led industrialization, the South Korean government incentivized corporations to develop new technology and upgrade productive efficiency to compete the global market.[47] By adhering to state regulations and demands, firms were awarded subsidization and investment support to develop their export markets in the evolving international arena.[47] In addition, the inflow of foreign capital was encouraged to supplement the shortage of domestic savings. These efforts enabled South Korea to achieve growth in exports and subsequent increases in income.[40]

Please also review the following writeup:

IN THE FIRST THREE decades after the Park Chung Hee government launched the First Five-Year Economic Development Plan in 1962, the South Korean economy grew enormously and the economic structure was radically transformed. South Korea's real gross national product (GNP) expanded by an average of more than 8 percent per year, from US$2.3 billion in 1962 to US$204 billion in 1989. Per capita annual income grew from US$87 in 1962 to US$4,830 in 1989. The manufacturing sector grew from 14.3 percent of the GNP in 1962 to 30.3 percent in 1987. Commodity trade volume rose from US$480 million in 1962 to a projected US$127.9 billion in 1990. The ratio of domestic savings to GNP grew from 3.3 percent in 1962 to 35.8 percent in 1989.

The rapid economic growth of the late 1980s, however, slowed considerably in 1989. The growth rate was cut almost in half from the previous year (to a still-robust approximate 6.5 percent), the inflation rate increased as wages soared even higher, and there was speculation concerning a small trade deficit in the early 1990s. These developments all pointed to a gradual slowing of the expansion of the rapidly maturing economy. Nevertheless, it also was clear that rapidly rising domestic demand would keep the economy healthy (even with a slight drop-off of exports), unless a major political crisis were to shock the country.

The most significant factor in rapid industrialization was the adoption of an outward-looking strategy in the early 1960s. This strategy was particularly well suited to that time because of South Korea's poor natural resource endowment, low savings rate, and tiny domestic market. The strategy promoted economic growth through labor-intensive manufactured exports, in which South Korea could develop a competitive advantage. Government initiatives played an important role in this process. The inflow of foreign capital was greatly encouraged to supplement the shortage of domestic savings. These efforts enabled South Korea to achieve rapid growth in exports and subsequent increases in income.

By emphasizing the industrial sector, Seoul's export-oriented development strategy left the rural sector relatively underdeveloped. Increasing income disparity between the industrial and agricultural sectors became a serious problem by the 1970s and remained a problem, despite government efforts to raise farm income and improve living standards in rural areas.

By the early 1970s, however, the industrial sector had begun to face problems of its own. Up to that time, the industrial structure had been based on low value-added and labor-intensive products, which faced increasing competition and protectionism from other developing countries. The government responded to this problem in the mid-1970s by emphasising the development of heavy and chemical industries and by promoting investment in high value-added, capital-intensive industries.

The structural transition to high value-added, capitalintensive industries was difficult. Moreover, it occurred at the end of the 1970s, a time when the industrial world was experiencing a prolonged recession following the second oil price shock of the decade and protectionism was resulting in a reduction of South Korean exports. By 1980 the South Korean economy had entered a period of temporary decline: negative growth was recorded for the first time since 1962, inflation had soared, and the balance-of-payments position had deteriorated significantly.

In the early 1980s, Seoul instituted wide-ranging structural reforms. In order to control inflation, a conservative monetary policy and tight fiscal measures were adopted. Growth of the money supply was reduced from the 30 percent level of the 1970s to 15 percent. Seoul even froze its budget for a short while. Government intervention in the economy was greatly reduced and policies on imports and foreign investment were liberalized to promote competition. To reduce the imbalance between rural and urban sectors, Seoul expanded investments in public projects, such as roads and communications facilities, while further promoting farm mechanization.

These measures, coupled with significant improvements in the world economy, helped the South Korean economy regain its lost momentum in the late 1980s. South Korea achieved an average of 9.2 percent real growth between 1982 and 1987 and 12.5 percent between 1986 and 1988. The double digit inflation of the 1970s was brought under control. Wholesale price inflation averaged 2.1 percent per year from 1980 through 1988; consumer prices increased by an average of 4.7 percent annually. Seoul achieved its first significant surplus in its balance of payments in 1986 and recorded a US$7.7 billion and a US$11.4 billion surplus in 1987 and 1988 respectively. This development permitted South Korea to begin reducing its level of foreign debt. The trade surplus for 1989, however, was only US$4.6 billion dollars, and a small negative balance was projected for 1990.

In the late 1980s, the domestic market became an increasing source of economic growth. Domestic demand for automobiles and other indigenously manufactured goods soared because South Korean consumers, whose savings had been buoyed by double-digit wage increases each year since 1987 and whose average wages in 1990 were about 50 percent above what they had been at the end of 1986, had the wherewithal to purchase luxury items for the first time. The result was a gradual reorientation of the economy from a heavy reliance on exports toward greater emphasis on meeting the needs of the country's nearly 43 million people. The shifts in demand and supply indicated that economic restructuring was underway, that is, domestic consumption was rising as net foreign demand was falling. On the supply side, the greater growth in services mirrored what the people wanted--more goods, especially imports, and many more services.

By 1990 there was evidence that the high growth rates of the late 1980s would slow during the early 1990s. In 1989 real growth was only 6.5 percent. One reason for this development was the economic restructuring that began in the late 1980s--including the slower growth of major export industries that were no longer competitive on the world market (for example, footwear) and the expansion of those industries that were competitive, such as electronics.

 

[EasyNow]

To promote development, a policy of export-oriented industrialization was applied, closing the entry into the country of all kinds of foreign products, except raw materials. (In our case that means Indian-manufactured products !!)

Dude I hope you're feeling ok? Your writing style shows that you're under major stress.

Is it that important for BNP to take power for you, that you will risk your mental calm?


Anyway, on topic: if you did your research you would know that the vast majority of BD imports from India ARE raw materials.

https://bsmedia.business-standard.com/_media/bs/img/article/2021-12/28/full/1640632680-004.jpg

Bangladesh may become India's fourth largest export destination in FY22

Bangladesh's growth stems largely from its success as an exporter of garments, which account for around 80 per cent of its total exports

wap.business-standard.com

 

[mb444]

Well sometimes saying in resignation "things take time" is not good enough.

Sometimes helping the process along with govt. policy which is what Asian tigers like Taiwan and Korea did.

Asian tiger governments in East Asia, had the ability and the resources to identify and exploit comparative advantages. Export Oriented Industrialization has, therefore, been supported as a development strategy for poorer countries like Bangladesh, Cambodia and also Vietnam - because of its proven success in the Four Asian Tigers.

Growth in per capita GDP in the tiger economies between 1960 and 2014

These four countries focused on investing heavily in their infrastructure as well as education to benefit their country through skilled workers and higher level value-addition export product jobs. The policy was generally successful and helped develop the countries into more advanced and high-income industrialized developed countries.

In relation to secondary / higher level educations, there are many prestigious colleges as in most developed countries. Notable schools include the National Taiwan University, Seoul National University, National University of Singapore, Nanyang Technological University[citation needed] and University of Hong Kong, Faculty of Dentistry, which as of 2017, was ranked as one of the top dental schools in the world.[17][18]

The role of Confucianism has been used to explain the success of the Four Asian Tigers. This conclusion is similar to the Protestant work ethic theory in the West promoted by German sociologist Max Weber in his book The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. The culture of Confucianism is said to have been compatible with industrialization because it valued stability, hard work, discipline, and loyalty and respect towards authority figures.[19] There is a significant influence of Confucianism on the corporate and political institutions of the Asian Tigers. Prime Minister of Singapore Lee Kuan Yew advocated Asian values as an alternative to the influence of Western culture in Asia.[20]

The catalyst for Korea's industrialization starting in 1960's was as follows:

Rapid growth from 1960s to 1980s[edit]​

Economy of South Korea, compared to North Korea. North Korea began to lose the economic competition with South Korea after the adoption of Juche in 1974 by North Korea.

With the coup of General Park Chung-hee in 1961, which at first caused political instability and an economic crisis, a protectionist economic policy began, pushing a bourgeoisie that developed in the shadow of the State to reactivate the internal market.

To promote development, a policy of export-oriented industrialization was applied, closing the entry into the country of all kinds of foreign products, except raw materials. (In our case that means Indian-manufactured products !!)

Agrarian reforms were carried out and General Park nationalized the financial system to swell the powerful state arm, whose intervention in the economy was through five-year plans.[38]

The most significant factor in rapid industrialization in S. Korea was the adoption of an outward-looking strategy in the early 1960s.[46][40] This strategy was particularly well-suited to that time because of South Korea's low savings rate and small domestic market. The strategy promoted economic growth through labor-intensive manufactured exports, in which South Korea could develop a competitive advantage. Government initiatives played an important role in this process.[40]

Through the model of export-led industrialization, the South Korean government incentivized corporations to develop new technology and upgrade productive efficiency to compete the global market.[47] By adhering to state regulations and demands, firms were awarded subsidization and investment support to develop their export markets in the evolving international arena.[47] In addition, the inflow of foreign capital was encouraged to supplement the shortage of domestic savings. These efforts enabled South Korea to achieve growth in exports and subsequent increases in income.[40]

Please also review the following writeup:

IN THE FIRST THREE decades after the Park Chung Hee government launched the First Five-Year Economic Development Plan in 1962, the South Korean economy grew enormously and the economic structure was radically transformed. South Korea's real gross national product (GNP) expanded by an average of more than 8 percent per year, from US$2.3 billion in 1962 to US$204 billion in 1989. Per capita annual income grew from US$87 in 1962 to US$4,830 in 1989. The manufacturing sector grew from 14.3 percent of the GNP in 1962 to 30.3 percent in 1987. Commodity trade volume rose from US$480 million in 1962 to a projected US$127.9 billion in 1990. The ratio of domestic savings to GNP grew from 3.3 percent in 1962 to 35.8 percent in 1989.

The rapid economic growth of the late 1980s, however, slowed considerably in 1989. The growth rate was cut almost in half from the previous year (to a still-robust approximate 6.5 percent), the inflation rate increased as wages soared even higher, and there was speculation concerning a small trade deficit in the early 1990s. These developments all pointed to a gradual slowing of the expansion of the rapidly maturing economy. Nevertheless, it also was clear that rapidly rising domestic demand would keep the economy healthy (even with a slight drop-off of exports), unless a major political crisis were to shock the country.

The most significant factor in rapid industrialization was the adoption of an outward-looking strategy in the early 1960s. This strategy was particularly well suited to that time because of South Korea's poor natural resource endowment, low savings rate, and tiny domestic market. The strategy promoted economic growth through labor-intensive manufactured exports, in which South Korea could develop a competitive advantage. Government initiatives played an important role in this process. The inflow of foreign capital was greatly encouraged to supplement the shortage of domestic savings. These efforts enabled South Korea to achieve rapid growth in exports and subsequent increases in income.

By emphasizing the industrial sector, Seoul's export-oriented development strategy left the rural sector relatively underdeveloped. Increasing income disparity between the industrial and agricultural sectors became a serious problem by the 1970s and remained a problem, despite government efforts to raise farm income and improve living standards in rural areas.

By the early 1970s, however, the industrial sector had begun to face problems of its own. Up to that time, the industrial structure had been based on low value-added and labor-intensive products, which faced increasing competition and protectionism from other developing countries. The government responded to this problem in the mid-1970s by emphasising the development of heavy and chemical industries and by promoting investment in high value-added, capital-intensive industries.

The structural transition to high value-added, capitalintensive industries was difficult. Moreover, it occurred at the end of the 1970s, a time when the industrial world was experiencing a prolonged recession following the second oil price shock of the decade and protectionism was resulting in a reduction of South Korean exports. By 1980 the South Korean economy had entered a period of temporary decline: negative growth was recorded for the first time since 1962, inflation had soared, and the balance-of-payments position had deteriorated significantly.

In the early 1980s, Seoul instituted wide-ranging structural reforms. In order to control inflation, a conservative monetary policy and tight fiscal measures were adopted. Growth of the money supply was reduced from the 30 percent level of the 1970s to 15 percent. Seoul even froze its budget for a short while. Government intervention in the economy was greatly reduced and policies on imports and foreign investment were liberalized to promote competition. To reduce the imbalance between rural and urban sectors, Seoul expanded investments in public projects, such as roads and communications facilities, while further promoting farm mechanization.

These measures, coupled with significant improvements in the world economy, helped the South Korean economy regain its lost momentum in the late 1980s. South Korea achieved an average of 9.2 percent real growth between 1982 and 1987 and 12.5 percent between 1986 and 1988. The double digit inflation of the 1970s was brought under control. Wholesale price inflation averaged 2.1 percent per year from 1980 through 1988; consumer prices increased by an average of 4.7 percent annually. Seoul achieved its first significant surplus in its balance of payments in 1986 and recorded a US$7.7 billion and a US$11.4 billion surplus in 1987 and 1988 respectively. This development permitted South Korea to begin reducing its level of foreign debt. The trade surplus for 1989, however, was only US$4.6 billion dollars, and a small negative balance was projected for 1990.

In the late 1980s, the domestic market became an increasing source of economic growth. Domestic demand for automobiles and other indigenously manufactured goods soared because South Korean consumers, whose savings had been buoyed by double-digit wage increases each year since 1987 and whose average wages in 1990 were about 50 percent above what they had been at the end of 1986, had the wherewithal to purchase luxury items for the first time. The result was a gradual reorientation of the economy from a heavy reliance on exports toward greater emphasis on meeting the needs of the country's nearly 43 million people. The shifts in demand and supply indicated that economic restructuring was underway, that is, domestic consumption was rising as net foreign demand was falling. On the supply side, the greater growth in services mirrored what the people wanted--more goods, especially imports, and many more services.

By 1990 there was evidence that the high growth rates of the late 1980s would slow during the early 1990s. In 1989 real growth was only 6.5 percent. One reason for this development was the economic restructuring that began in the late 1980s--including the slower growth of major export industries that were no longer competitive on the world market (for example, footwear) and the expansion of those industries that were competitive, such as electronics.

Agree with your post, however i would strongly contend that the catalyst for the tiger economy was USA and the cold war. Without US money these economies would have also taken perhaps as long as BD to develop.

 

[Valar.]

Agree with your post, however i would strongly contend that the catalyst for the tiger economy was USA and the cold war. Without US money these economies would have also taken perhaps as long as BD to develop.

There are multiple other factors too like society's response for development, education and population etc.

Population in 1951:
Pakistan - 34 million
Bangladesh - 42 m
South Korea - 20 m

Population in 2020:
Pakistan - 230 million
Bangladesh - 165 m
South Korea - 52 m