IMF warns about Pakistan's deteriorating economy

[waraich66]

But it was the Army rule in the 60's. The great leader Ayub Khan took us to great heights in the 60's. But unfortunately after he resigned the country went into the wrong hands kinda reminds me of what's happening right now, a good leader like Musharraf who made economic reforms resigned and the country went into the wrong hands.

Martial law regimes infact destroyed the foundations of civil society which is based on justice ,faith and unity .

 

[blain2]

Martial law regimes infact destroyed the foundations of civil society which is based on justice ,faith and unity .

Democratic governments in Pakistan have hardly been the flag-bearers of justice, faith and unity. Its exactly their injustices, lack of faith and disunity that have brought about military rule.

I understand that its the chicken or the egg argument here, but the blame goes both ways.

In my view, the military governments bring about stability and if some civilian government can run with the spell of stability then Pakistan can gain a lot. Unfortunately this has not been the case because both our civilian and military leaders have never tried to focus on the long term policies. Everything is done for tactical and short term political gains which hurt our long term goals and development.

 

[muse]

Infact frequent martial laws derailed our economy , Army corrupted the politics and ruined whole economy .

This assertion, were it backed by facts would have merit, however, periods which saw the greatest economic development were when Ayub Khan and Musharraf ran the country -- and this was because they were focused and went according to plan ---

While I will readily agree that political instability has been at the root of the lack of economic growth, to suggest that the armed forces intervention has been the main cause of instability seems self serving and just plain at odds with reality.

 

[TechLahore]

We should worry about the deficit, but let's put it in perspective. The two percent that exceeds target is ultimately not that big of an amount. So to take this one item and assert that this means Pakistan has a "deteriorating economy" is a little absurd.

Anyway, we shall see what happens. I think that in the 2011-2013 period Pakistan will do reasonably well and will start to approach Musharraf era growth rates at the end of this period. InshaAllah.

 

[ares]

We should worry about the deficit, but let's put it in perspective. The two percent that exceeds target is ultimately not that big of an amount. So to take this one item and assert that this means Pakistan has a "deteriorating economy" is a little absurd.

Anyway, we shall see what happens. I think that in the 2011-2013 period Pakistan will do reasonably well and will start to approach Musharraf era growth rates at the end of this period. InshaAllah.

If this article is to believed then present deficit has already cause 6%(half yearly 3%) and could reach 8% of the GDP by end of this FY.

Which is double of the , 4% target set by the government.

On top of it if IMF pull out of the 2008 standby agreement and refuses to give the last tranche of $3.1 Billion...due to lack of reforms.

What real options is Pakistan left with?

 

[TechLahore]

Petrol prices have increased as of today. Oil imports had touched a historic high in Dec, and they are the largest import driver. The deficit won't even come close to 8%. Taxes in some form will be levied after the usual political back and forth. So there are plenty of options and they are being exercised.

As I said, 2% of the budget is a small amount. The article is completely unbalanced as far as its description of the enormity of the deficit challenge. It's a relatively minor issue which is already being addressed.

 

[BATMAN]

IMF has enjoyed a lot during current regime and is afraid what will happen if next Pakistani leader discard all deals done with a corrupt regime.

 

[blain2]

My main issue with the situation is that our leaders expect other nation's taxpayers to foot the bill for our development. From the standpoint of our "ghairat brigade", we should be aghast at our government's expectation that others will foot the bill to correct our economic problems.

The first thing that needs to be done is to take a serious look at what the Pakistani taxpayers *should* bear as part of their responsibility towards the development of Pakistan. Although this may be over simplification, but the most recent patrol price hike could have been cushioned somewhat if our government had some fiscal space (which can only be created by having a larger tax net increasing government's revenues).

 

[waraich66]

This assertion, were it backed by facts would have merit, however, periods which saw the greatest economic development were when Ayub Khan and Musharraf ran the country -- and this was because they were focused and went according to plan ---

While I will readily agree that political instability has been at the root of the lack of economic growth, to suggest that the armed forces intervention has been the main cause of instability seems self serving and just plain at odds with reality.

You know Miltery regimes always entered through back door and tried to make short term policies just to prolong their rule ,unfortunately they destroyed national unity by use of power in Balouchistan and NWFP .

Ayub , Zia and Musaraf created PPP,MQM and MLQ just to divide the nation into small pressure groups and weaken the political institutions.

I think ISI political wing is much stronger than any political party of Pakistan.

We need to close all doors of Army to involve in power politics for future development of Pakistan.

 

[PashtunPak]

The International Monetary Fund has warned Pakistan about its state of economy saying it is far worse that estimated and asked Islamabad to take steps to cut its spiralling budget deficit.

this wouldn't be a problem if zardari didn't up his pay level from mr. 10% to mr. 100%

 

[waraich66]

Democratic governments in Pakistan have hardly been the flag-bearers of justice, faith and unity. Its exactly their injustices, lack of faith and disunity that have brought about military rule.

I understand that its the chicken or the egg argument here, but the blame goes both ways.

In my view, the military governments bring about stability and if some civilian government can run with the spell of stability then Pakistan can gain a lot. Unfortunately this has not been the case because both our civilian and military leaders have never tried to focus on the long term policies. Everything is done for tactical and short term political gains which hurt our long term goals and development.

Army has no role in politics according to our constitution . The prime role of miltery is to defend the boarders during war and preparation for war in peace time.

We need to read the history of developed nations US,CANADA,FRANCE,UK etc they gained strong democratic institutions through long struggle but not through the miltery interference.

Unfortunately no action had taken against Ayub,Zia and Musharaf for their unconstitutional miltery coups.

 

[deckingraj]

Petrol prices have increased as of today. Oil imports had touched a historic high in Dec, and they are the largest import driver. The deficit won't even come close to 8%. Taxes in some form will be levied after the usual political back and forth. So there are plenty of options and they are being exercised.

As I said, 2% of the budget is a small amount. The article is completely unbalanced as far as its description of the enormity of the deficit challenge. It's a relatively minor issue which is already being addressed.

Are you serious when you say 2% is not a big amount??? Please do understand that Pak is in economic mess and IMF loan is helping you keep the economy running which is helping you keep somewhat check on the deficit..Now the targets are set with some figures in mind which will help in repaying the loan and bring Pak economy back to its feet.... If the target was 4% and you reched 6%-8% then you missed the target by 50%-100% which literally means that the reforms you have put(or lack of reforms) in are not working the way you would like them to...This is serious....Just look at US economy....they pumped in $800 billion in order to bring the economy out of recession however even in 2 years the job market has still not recovered forcing them to pump in even more money.....Pak will not get loans to bail out economy till eternity... the more you will miss targets the less chance of getting more loans and even if you manage to get loans the interest rate would be disgustingly high(due to high risk adjustment)...

Look fiscal deficit is dangerous if it is revenue based. Had it been due to investments in some projects for which benefits will come in future i can understand, however that is not the case here and missing targets by almost 50%-100% especially during the time when global economy is out of recession is definitely not good news....This will further erode the Pakistani rupee value and will make the interest amounts of existing loans even more dearer....

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Pakistan needs to tax india

 

[unicorn148]

Pakistan will not develop until all the terror groups are eliminated because it will be difficult for foreign investments to come in and at such a time when there is no money in the country for investment it will be better to allow outside investments to come in and all this will will generate more income to the govt
Increasing the taxes will become a burden on the people because this is the time when inflation is so high if you increase the taxes it will be a double burden on the people
So the best thing is to invest more money on Infrastructure and making special zones for Investments and thus generating money for the govt...........

 

[unicorn148]

Pakistan needs to tax india

for what i think India should tax in return because of you India has to divert so much money on defense and anti terror.........