Pakistan Could Have Become an Asian Tiger By Now

[MohitV]

well yeah there are more poor in india.....due to various reasons like....huge population....corruption..discrimination....diversity.....still our economy is doing good...tatz all we want for now...soon this issue of poverty will be taken care of.....

 

[RiazHaq]

The figures from world bank are for 2011 january . it is nearly 2014 january so there has been a decrease in that time interval as well

Look at the definition before talking about numbers.

 

[INDIC]

Indian figures are based on India's definition of poverty. World Bank has its figures based on $1.25 for extreme poverty.

Haq's Musings: World Bank on Poverty Across India in 2011

Show me India's poverty rate aren't according with World Bank's designated poverty line of $1.25(PPP).

 

[chuchdi ka chucha]

Terror Harvesting and Growth does not go hand in hand. Pakistan paid the price by becoming a Terrorist Supporting Nation.

 

[INDIC]

Look at the definition before talking about numbers.

Pakistan's poverty line in 2005-06 was Rs.948.47/month about 31/day or 50 cents/day based on exchange rate of 2006.

http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapter_10/09_Poverty.pdf

 

[RiazHaq]

Show me India's poverty rate aren't according with World Bank's designated poverty line of $1.25(PPP).

Look at fig 1 page 3. Indian poverty line is $1.03 per person per day, not $1.25

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/extern...d/PDF/574280PUB0Pers1351B0Extop0ID0186890.pdf

Pakistan's poverty line in 2005-06 was Rs.948.47/month about 31/day or 50 cents/day based on exchange rate of 2006.

http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapter_10/09_Poverty.pdf

World Bank's Poverty line of $1.25 is in PPP $, not nominal exchange rates.

 

[INDIC]

Look at fig 1 page 3. Indian poverty line is $1.03 per person per day, not $1.25

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/extern...d/PDF/574280PUB0Pers1351B0Extop0ID0186890.pdf

World Bank's Poverty line of $1.25 is in PPP $, not nominal exchange rates.

Did you miss something, previously world bank set $1/day as a poverty line which they perhaps in increased it to 1.25%. The link you provided is taking about $1.03/day poverty line from early 1990s when world bank designated poverty line was $1/day. BTW what was the need of above chart.

The figures from world bank are for 2011 january . it is nearly 2014 january so there has been a decrease in that time interval as well

World Bank website don't show a poverty line of 42% in 2011. Its only coming from his chart.

 

[RiazHaq]

Did you miss something, previously world bank set $1/day as a poverty line which they perhaps in increased it to 1.25%. The link you provided is taking about $1.03/day poverty line from early 1990s when world bank designated poverty line was $1/day. BTW what was the need of above chart.



World Bank website don't show a poverty line of 42% in 2011. Its only coming from his chart.

You asked for it.

This is from 2011 World Bank report on poverty in India. Look at the 40 percentile bar for $1.25 poverty level in rural and urban India.

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/extern...d/PDF/574280PUB0Pers1351B0Extop0ID0186890.pdf

Also look at the following graph:

Then watch the following video:

 

[INDIC]

You asked for it.

This is from 2011 World Bank report on poverty in India. Look at the 40 percentile bar for $1.25 poverty level in rural and urban India.

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/extern...d/PDF/574280PUB0Pers1351B0Extop0ID0186890.pdf

Also look at the following graph:

Don't confuse me, you claimed that India don't follow world Bank's 1.25(PPP) now, you need to prove it. Even Pakistan's poverty line is about 50cent/day. The new poverty figure of 21.9% is the latest report from the government of India dated July 2013.

 

[RiazHaq]

Don't confuse me, you claimed that India don't follow world Bank's 1.25(PPP) now, you need to prove it. Even Pakistan's poverty line is about 50cent/day. The new poverty figure of 21.9% is the latest report from the government of India dated July 2013.

It's hard to argue with someone who lacks basic understanding of obvious data and clear words.

It's small wonder that Indian kids rank at the bottom of PISA and TIMSS world rankings.

Haq's Musings: PISA & TIMSS Confirm Low Quality of Indian Education

 

[Developereo]

All of these components made significant progress in years 2000-2007.

Poverty was cut in half from 34% to 17%

Education spending dramatically increased as reflected in faster human development.

Number of universities more than doubled.

Electricity was much more reliable.

That's my point, Riaz bhai!

Everything that Musharraf did has been undone as soon as he left.

Poverty has jumped back to 37.5% in Zardari's tenure (Jump in Pakistan’s poverty level | Newspaper | DAWN.COM)

Power generation and education standards are back to their abysmal levels.

Musharraf only made surface changes that depended on him personally overseeing things. He did not make fundamental changes and create lasting institutions to keep subsequent administrations in check.

Do Harvard and Stanford regress to pre-medieval levels when the US administration changes?
Does electricity supply in developed countries depend so much on who's running the country?

Like I wrote before, without robust institutions, all we will get is temporary relief at best. Without removing the cancer at the heart of Pakistan, it will be a long slow plod.

 

[RiazHaq]

That's my point, Riaz bhai!

Everything that Musharraf did has been undone as soon as he left.

Poverty has jumped back to 37.5% in Zardari's tenure (Jump in Pakistan’s poverty level | Newspaper | DAWN.COM)

Power generation and education standards are back to their abysmal levels.

Musharraf only made surface changes that depended on him personally overseeing things. He did not make fundamental changes and create lasting institutions to keep subsequent administrations in check.

Do Harvard and Stanford regress to pre-medieval levels when the US administration changes?
Does electricity supply in developed countries depend so much on who's running the country?

Like I wrote before, without robust institutions, all we will get is temporary relief at best. Without removing the cancer at the heart of Pakistan, it will be a long slow plod.

Not all changes undone.

Scores of new universities are still there as are thousands of new graduates contributing in an economy 4X the size it was when Musharraf took over in 1999.

New telecom and independent media sectors are still there and growing albeit slowly.

Cement factories are still there producing 3X the amount of cement they were back in 1999.

Tens of thousands of tractors built and sold to farmers are still there helping produce a lot more crops with fewer workers.

Greatly expanded middle class is still there contributing to $240 billion economy, 4X the size it was in 1999.

What is different is that growth has dramatically slowed under new management by politicians.

 

[AhsanAmin]

Nawaz Sharif's track record is very poor. He, along with Benzir Bhutto, gave us the lost decade of 1990s.
In the 1990s, economic growth plummeted to between 3% and 4%, poverty rose to 33%, inflation was in double digits and the foreign debt mounted to nearly the entire GDP of Pakistan as the governments of Benazir Bhutto (PPP) and Nawaz Sharif (PML) played musical chairs. Before Sharif was ousted in 1999, the two parties had presided over a decade of corruption and mismanagement. In 1999 Pakistan’s total public debt as percentage of GDP was the highest in South Asia – 99.3 percent of its GDP and 629 percent of its revenue receipts, compared to Sri Lanka (91.1% & 528.3% respectively in 1998) and India (47.2% & 384.9% respectively in 1998). Internal Debt of Pakistan in 1999 was 45.6 per cent of GDP and 289.1 per cent of its revenue receipts, as compared to Sri Lanka (45.7% & 264.8% respectively in 1998) and India (44.0% & 358.4% respectively in 1998).
Pakistan became one of the four fastest growing economies in the Asian region during 2000-07 with its growth averaging 7.0 per cent per year for most of this period. As a result of strong economic growth, Pakistan succeeded in reducing poverty by one-half, creating almost 13 million jobs, halving the country's debt burden, raising foreign exchange reserves to a comfortable position and propping the country's exchange rate, restoring investors' confidence and most importantly, taking Pakistan out of the IMF Program.
Haq's Musings: A Brief History of Pakistani Economy 1947-2010

Nawaz Sharif Started economic reforms in early 90's in the country that nobody ever did before. There was a huge expansion in economy at that time. Even Indians started to introduce reforms in their country on a model similar to Nawaz had presented.
Haq has cited economic growth between 2000-07. In the time between tech bubble and sub prime crisis (By the way, I did research about some aspects of sub prime crisis and derivatives modeling and my research was invited publication in a very prestigious book), most advanced countries had a large growth rate so our exports were healthy, money was coming through legal channels which helped FX reserves, inflation and exchange rate. Though our Mushy did not show any vision, God was still not unkind to him and continued to help him with windfall measures until our Mushy, like other self-centred myopic dictators, started to have visions for himself far larger than he ever could have for the country. To prolong his rule by hook or crook, he went on to extreme crimes like sacking the entire body of Supreme Court and imposing emergency. He fell in love with "kursi"

Though dictatorship can give continuity of policies, I doubt our military has any vision to lead the country ever. The other Asian tigers who are cited for development showed extreme wisdom and sincerity a long time ago. Chinese culture and work habits are also diferent and that has to be taken into account.

Leading a country not only requires extreme sincerity, it requires extreme wisdom and vision. The saying goes,"A wise enemy is better than a stupid friend." Our military will unofficially annex the country with USA if they could have their way. They are fighting US wars in our country and continue to pressurize civilians to fight these wars instead of trying to have a peace through talks.On one hand they promote Jehadi outfits against India who start killing spree in Mumbai and on the other hand they start fighting Jehadi people and torpedo peace talks with them where American interests are involved.

Army has to be very very strictly under ministry of defence. Ministry of defence should have authority to replace any general. I know Zaradari really hurt the country due to his bad policies but he was just a mediocre brought to limelight due to his marriage with Benazir. Death of Benazir was a great loss and if she were alive, the story must have been, at least, a bit better.

 

[Developereo]

Not all changes undone.

While I will concede that a tiny aspect of Musharraf-era legacy survives, I will also leave the question open as to how much of the economic boom was due to the prevailing global factors. Although I agree that Musharraf did some good personally, the solution you seem to propose -- a long term military dictatorship -- is not viable.

How would you ensure that any military dictator is both honest and competent?

As I see it, the only solution is democracy but that will only work once we have performed the surgery I mentioned.

 

[AhsanAmin]

We should do something similar with the few feudal families in Pakistan looting the wealth of all country,only in this way we can get out of this pitiful situation.

This was a great mistake Z.A.Bhutto made. When he nationalized every private industry, it damaged the economy forever. I am not a fan of Bhutto at all. When you take such actions, you really have to look far beyond the simplistic notions of equality or justice that look very attractive to an uneducated person but can have truly bad effect on the country for decades to come. Prosperity does not follow if you take money from the rich, instead you have to give the poor everything he needs to succeed and then ask them to make their effort for that goal. A very good education, an understanding of his rights, and a resolve to succeed. Such ideas that say let us take money from the rich and give it to the poor sound very attractive but are extremely harmful in reality. Even the poor and unprivileged people have to really play their role in uplifiting themselves by working hard for a lifetime.
We do have to make rules that encourage the rich to help the rest of the country by making investments in the right direction so that more and more people are employed in the economy, people learn new skills. There is no fixed amount of wealth in a country that you have to divide between the people in a just way. We have to have a great economy and set policies so that total wealth of the country continues to increase. When there are a lot of talented and educated people in the country, it becomes more and more difficult that wealth would remain in just a few hands. In other words, economic policies have to be set so that wealth of the whole country continues to increase in as optimal way as possible.
However there also should be real social justice in the society that poor children could get very good education, health facilities and other related things.
The ideas of revolution and Inqilab sound very great to people, we need a positive and constructive revolution that comes by working hard all your life. And this is the revolution every citizen of our country needs. Every revolution that comes instantly is usually destructive and is liked by people who do not like to work hard for all their life. Things that come easy usually do not work for the benefit of the larger society.
However this is certainly very important that rich and powerful must not be allowed to break the law in any way to make money using their wealth or authority. Law has to be truly blind towards wealth, power, or position of authority when it is enforced and must totally consider these things irrelevant when it is applied.