Can Indian Economy Avert Crash Landing in 2011?

[CaptainJackSparrow]

@ Mr. Haq,

Your expert opinion is needed here.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/econom...ns-about-pakistans-deteriorating-economy.html

 

[RiazHaq]

@ Mr. Haq,

Your expert opinion is needed here.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/econom...ns-about-pakistans-deteriorating-economy.html

This post is about Indian economy, not Pakistan's economy.

But if you really want to know my opinion on Pakistan's economy, here is what I think:

IMF is on Pakistan's case, and I expect some basic reforms to happen there under pressure. There is currently no such pressure on the Indian policy makers to get their act together to address India's rising inflation and growing twin deficits.

Pakistan's conomy is so far down that the only place for it to go is up from here. The first indication of it is the fact that Pakistani stocks outpaced Indian stocks by about 2:1 in 2010.

If you had invested $100 in KSE-100 stocks on Dec. 31, 1999, you'd have over $1000 today, while $100 invested in Mumbai's Sensex stocks would be worth about $400. Investment of $100 in emerging-market stocks in general on Dec. 31, 1999 would get you about $300 today, while $100 invested in the S&P500 would be essentially flat at $100 today.

Haq's Musings: Pakistan Shares Exceed BRIC Gains in 2010

 

[CaptainJackSparrow]

This post is about Indian economy, not Pakistan's economy.

But if you really want to know my opinion on Pakistan's economy, here is what I think:

IMF is on Pakistan's case, and I expect some basic reforms to happen there under pressure. There is currently no such pressure on the Indian policy makers to get their act together to address India's rising inflation and growing twin deficits.

Pakistan's conomy is so far down that the only place for it to go is up from here. The first indication of it is the fact that Pakistani stocks outpaced Indian stocks by about 2:1 in 2010.

If you had invested $100 in KSE-100 stocks on Dec. 31, 1999, you'd have over $1000 today, while $100 invested in Mumbai's Sensex stocks would be worth about $400. Investment of $100 in emerging-market stocks in general on Dec. 31, 1999 would get you about $300 today, while $100 invested in the S&P500 would be essentially flat at $100 today.

Haq's Musings: Pakistan Shares Exceed BRIC Gains in 2010

Are you afraid that people might rip apart your 'economics' in that thread?

Is that why you didn't post your 'expert opinion' there?

C'mon! Man up and just post in that thead what you feel about that thread, not in this thread.

 

[RiazHaq]

Are you afraid that people might rip apart your 'economics' in that thread?

Is that why you didn't post your 'expert opinion' there?

C'mon! Man up and just post in that thead what you feel about that thread, not in this thread.

Your juvenile response just makes it clear that you have no interest in answers to your questions.

 

[BATMAN]

^^ Indians are more interested in 'rip apart' any thing from Pakistan.
They can't hide there emotions towards Pakistan.

 

[DesiGuy]

^^ Indians are more interested in 'rip apart' any thing from Pakistan.
They can't hide there emotions towards Pakistan.

maybe you should focus more positively on Pakistan than focusing negatively on India.
that would help lot.

 

[Hutchroy]

It's interesting to note that the Economist suddenly decided to increase Pakistan's population to an imaginary new high figure of 190 million...which it then used as denominator to depress Pakistan's per capita GDP to less than $1000.

What a neat trick! I am truly impressed by the "ingenuity" of Indian staff at the Economist!

Mr. Haq – It is the Pakistani Finance Ministry playing a neat trick.

Please refer to the following report from the State Bank of Pakistan :

http://www.sbp.org.pk/reports/annual/arFY10/SocialSectorDevelopments.pdf

STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN – Annual Report 2009-2010 (Vol-I) :
Chapter 8 Social Sector Developments (Page 2)​

8.1 Population

With an annual growth rate of more than two percent, the population of Pakistan has jumped to 184 million in 2010 from 119 million (see Table 8.1) in 1990. This rise has been without any significant changes in regional (rural, urban) biferaction; more than 65 percent of population still resides in rural areas.

Thus the EIU’s estimation of Pakistani Population being 189.6 Million for the Year 2011 is not a neat Trick but an Educated Estimate.

Kapish!

Of course the Population Figure of about 166 Million as given in the GDP Calculations of Pakistan’s Economic Survey for the Year 2009-10 is nothing but a --- Trick.

Remember the E I U is a British Institution and has nothing to do with Indians.

Have a Nice Day and a Happy New Year 2011.

 

[RiazHaq]

Mr. Haq – It is the Pakistani Finance Ministry playing a neat trick.

Please refer to the following report from the State Bank of Pakistan :

http://www.sbp.org.pk/reports/annual/arFY10/SocialSectorDevelopments.pdf

STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN – Annual Report 2009-2010 (Vol-I) :
Chapter 8 Social Sector Developments (Page 2)​

8.1 Population

With an annual growth rate of more than two percent, the population of Pakistan has jumped to 184 million in 2010 from 119 million (see Table 8.1) in 1990. This rise has been without any significant changes in regional (rural, urban) biferaction; more than 65 percent of population still resides in rural areas.

Thus the EIU’s estimation of Pakistani Population being 189.6 Million for the Year 2011 is not a neat Trick but an Educated Estimate.

Kapish!

Of course the Population Figure of about 166 Million as given in the GDP Calculations of Pakistan’s Economic Survey for the Year 2009-10 is nothing but a --- Trick.

Remember the E I U is a British Institution and has nothing to do with Indians.

Have a Nice Day and a Happy New Year 2011.

Since when is 184 million the same as 190 million?

And where did the Indian GDP of $1.8 trillion come from?

Isn't it shoddy journalism?

What happened to fact-checking at the Economist magazine?

Aren't these figments of The Economist's imagination?

The Economist is British in the name only...it's dominated by bigoted Indian staff that regularly bashes Pakistan.

 

[SMC]

Are you afraid that people might rip apart your 'economics' in that thread?

Is that why you didn't post your 'expert opinion' there?

C'mon! Man up and just post in that thead what you feel about that thread, not in this thread.

How old are you seriously? What's with this child-like responses?

 

[SMC]

Ah here we go again, typical diversion tactics being used by bharatis. Why don't you worry about your own country, etc. Well why don't bharatis worry about their own country too and stop discussing Pakistan's issue then.

 

[Hutchroy]

Since when is 184 million the same as 190 million?

And where did the Indian GDP of $1.8 billion come from?

Isn't it shoddy journalism?

What happened to fact-checking at the Economist magazine?

Aren't these figments of The Economist's imagination?

The Economist is British in the name only...it's dominated by bigoted Indian staff that regularly bashes Pakistan.

Mr. Haq your are one of a kind.

The Pakistani Population Figure of 184 Million is for 2010.

The EIU estimate of the Pakistani Population being 189.6 Million is for the Year 2011 - It is an increase of about 3% which is not beyond the Capability of the Pakistani People.

As per the SBP Report the Pakistani Population since 1991 increased by over 2% as the Population of 119 Million in 1991 has increased to 184 Million in 2010 and as such the figure of 189.6 Million for the Year 2011 is not "Excessive".

They say "Everything looks Yellow to the Jaundiced Eye" - which is the reason for your considering the Bigoted Indian Staff at the Economist-EIU.

So now who is the bigot!

P.S. The Indian GDP of US$ 1.8 Trillion is the "Estimate" for the Year 2011.

Watch this Space

 

[ares]

^^1.8 T is not possible even at the end of 2011..max they can punch out is 1.5 T at a growth rate of 10 %

 

[Hutchroy]

^^1.8 T is not possible even at the end of 2011..max they can punch out is 1.5 T at a growth rate of 10 %

The Last Indian Calculation was for Financial Year 2009 i.e. April 2009 to March 2010.

The Year 2011 for India would be April 2011 to March 2012 i.e. Two Years.

At the end of the day it is an Estimate.

 

[SMC]

Most sources show a figure of 1.3 trillion. 1.8 trillion is a false figure won't happen till 2013 or 2014.

 

[ares]

The Last Indian Calculation was for Financial Year 2009 i.e. April 2009 to March 2010.

The Year 2011 for India would be April 2011 to March 2012 i.e. Two Years.

At the end of the day it is an Estimate.

I understand you are calculating for financial year and not calendar year.
Indian GDP stood at $1296 Billion at the end of FY 2009-10.

If Indian GDP even grows by 9% this FY ..it will have a GDP of $1412 B.

In next FY(2011-12) if Indian economy grows by 10%(very optimistic) it will stand at $1.55 Trillion


but IMF does its calculation for the calendar year and not finacial year.
As of 2010(in middle of present FY), Indian economy stands at $1367.22 billion.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/india/indicators/