Pakistan's Declining Economy Since 2008

[Hulk]

He was not referring to remittances as Aid - you should have read beyond that line and looked at the link right below the paragraph you quoted:

I do not take RaizHaq site as valid link, you cannot support your own argument by pointing link to your own post.

There is a difference between AID as well.
Is the GOI asking for AID?
Has the Aid given to GOI or its programs.

There are NGO's and other private institutions that get Aid, it cannot be considered in same category as country asking for Aid.

GOI has always refused for Aid even from 90's as they believe we can handle or own situation. I remember refusal of Aid at the time on Tsunami.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I do not take RaizHaq site as valid link, you cannot support your own argument by pointing link to your own post.

There is a difference between AID as well.
Is the GOI asking for AID?
Has the Aid given to GOI or its programs.

There are NGO's and other private institutions that get Aid, it cannot be considered in same category as country asking for Aid.

GOI has always refused for Aid even from 90's as they believe we can handle or own situation. I remember refusal of Aid at the time on Tsunami.

You can disagree with Haq's opinions and conclusions, but he usually bases them on valid sources, which are usually referred to in his blog posts:

Why are we giving India £1 billion in aid if it can afford Moon missions? – Telegraph Blogs

While your point is valid that all this aid might be going to 'non-government organizations', you have to provide a breakdown of this aid to illustrate that.

And even if this was going primarily to NGO's, it is aid being arranged officially by a government for a specific nation, instead of private organizations, foundations or charities funding their programs or programs they support in India. That this was done by the UK government means the GoI could have told them to not provide British Government aid to India - it apparently did not do that.

 

[RiazHaq]

For your kind information "Remittances" does not mean AID. foreign Remittances is the money sent by the diaspora to their kin. AID is a foreign government assistance.

No I am not talking about remittances.
India has received more foreign aid than any other developing nation since the end of World War II--estimated at almost $100 billion since the beginning of its First Five-Year Plan in 1951. And it continues to receive more foreign aid in spite of impressive economic growth for almost a decade. At the recent G20 meeting, India has asked the World Bank to raise the amount of money India can borrow from the bank for its infrastructure projects, according to Times of India. At present, India can borrow up to $15.5 billion as per the SBL (single borrower limit) fixed by the Bank.

Britain will spend over $1.5 billion during the next three years in aid to Shining India, a nuclear-armed power that sent a spacecraft to the moon recently, to lift "hundreds of millions of people" out of poverty, the British secretary of state for international development said last November, according to the Guardian newspaper.

Douglas Alexander, the first cabinet minister to visit India's poorest state Bihar, said that despite "real strides in economic growth" there were still 828 million people living on less than $2 a day in India.

UK's Department of International Development says if the UN's millennium development goals - alleviating extreme poverty, reducing child mortality rates and fighting epidemics such as Aids - are left unmet in India, they will not be met worldwide. Some 43% of children go hungry and a woman dies in childbirth every five minutes.

British Minister Alexander contrasted the rapid growth in China with India's economic success - highlighting government figures that showed the number of poor people had dropped in the one-party communist state by 70% since 1990 but had risen in the world's biggest democracy by 5%.

The World Bank said recently it will lend India $14 billion by 2012 to help the country overhaul its creaking infrastructure and increase living standards in its poor states, according to Financial Express.

The Indian government has estimated it needs $500 billion over the five years to 2012 to upgrade infrastructure such as roads, ports, power and railways.

A recent issue of San Jose Mercury News has a pictorial about grinding poverty in India done by John Boudreau and Dai Sugano. This heartbreaking pictorial illustrates the extent of the problem that India faces, a problem that could potentially be very destabilizing and put the entire society at the risk of widespread chaos and violence.

Left Behind | By Dai Sugano/San Jose Mercury News

 

[TechLahore]

No I am not talking about remittances.
India has received more foreign aid than any other developing nation since the end of World War II--estimated at almost $100 billion since the beginning of its First Five-Year Plan in 1951. And it continues to receive more foreign aid in spite of impressive economic growth for

Riaz sb, with respect, I believe you have it the wrong way round. India has "impressive economic growth" BECAUSE of over $100B of aid/assistance it has received over the years.

 

[Hulk]

You can disagree with Haq's opinions and conclusions, but he usually bases them on valid sources, which are usually referred to in his blog posts:

Why are we giving India £1 billion in aid if it can afford Moon missions? – Telegraph Blogs

While your point is valid that all this aid might be going to 'non-government organizations', you have to provide a breakdown of this aid to illustrate that.

And even if this was going primarily to NGO's, it is aid being arranged officially by a government for a specific nation, instead of private organizations, foundations or charities funding their programs or programs they support in India. That this was done by the UK government means the GoI could have told them to not provide British Government aid to India - it apparently did not do that.

@AM
I read the link you provided which is talking about India's spending on moon mission. That point is not valid as ISRO earns more money then it spends so in total its a profit organization.

About GOI not asking any government not to give is not valid argument.

The topic of discussion is not India and if we want to discuss India's aid a new thread should be opened.

 

[RiazHaq]

In spite of increase of British aid to $500 billion a year, India will remain the biggest recipient of Japan's official development assistance (ODA) in the near future. Since Japan's first ODA to India in 1958, the country has received monetary aid worth Rs 89,500 crore (Rs 895 billion) so far, according to Noro Motoyoshi, Japanese consul general in Kolkata. In 2008, Japan's ODA to India was up by more than 18% compared to 2007 at Rs 6916 crore (Rs 69.16 billion).

Haq's Musings: Foreign Aid Continues to Pour in Resurgent India

 

[qsaark]

Haque Sahab,

Take these figures and try to convince a common Pakistani about the growth and what not. I am afraid you'll need Police protection as well, because I do not think that this statistical juggling will impress an average Pakistani household earning less than $200 and trying to survive where inflation is well into two digits. These figures look nice on the papers, but they have little if any relevance with the facts on the ground. In Pakistan, merely 8.5% people are paying taxes, and they are mostly government or private employee. Rest of the 91.5% people are simply not paying any kind of tax, means that the government/financial institutions have no record of any kind of their earning/spending etc. In a country where the economy is this much documented, you are talking about statistics?

Dont tell me about the percentage of the growth rate, this is meaningless; tell me how an average Pakistani household earning less than US$200 survive in kind of inflation rampant in Pakistan? Where prices are revised not every month, or every week, but daily.

 

[RiazHaq]

Riaz sb, with respect, I believe you have it the wrong way round. India has "impressive economic growth" BECAUSE of over $100B of aid/assistance it has received over the years.

I think you are right. Without the Green Revolution funded by massive US aid, Indians would probably not have survived in the 1960s-1970s and beyond. India's poverty, hunger and malnutrition would be far worse than the woeful situation that exists there today.

In 1961 India was on the brink of mass famine. Borlaug was invited to India by the adviser to the Indian minister of agriculture M. S. Swaminathan. Despite bureaucratic hurdles imposed by India's grain monopolies, the Ford Foundation and Indian government collaborated to import wheat seed from CIMMYT. Punjab was selected by the Indian government to be the first site to try the new crops because of its reliable water supply and a history of agricultural success.

USAID has been an active participant in India's development process for more than half a century.

US economic assistance to India began in 1951 with food aid. The 1960s saw massive US resource transfers that helped India create the physical and human infrastructure necessary for development. Tremendous achievements were realized in health, education, infrastructure development, and poverty alleviation. By the mid-1980s, the focus of US assistance shifted to science and technology, health and family planning, agricultural research, social forestry, irrigation, and water resources management.

USAID has been an active participant in India's development process for more than half a century. The new assistance strategy builds on those foundations as it focuses on the last remaining critical needs for India's economic and social development.

 

[BlackenTheSky]

Well our country is in status of war,so indeed their will be problem with our economy.during war we cant expect our economy to grow.

 

[qsaark]

Without the Green Revolution funded by massive US aid, Indians would probably not have survived in the 1960s-1970s and beyond. India's poverty, hunger and malnutrition would be far worse than the woeful situation that exists there today.

Apni shalwar sanbhal nahin rahi, doosron ki dhoti ki fikar hey. Why the hell do we have to bring India into every thing? Why do we find it compulsory as if its written in Quran, that whenever we'll talk about Pakistan, we'll drag India into it? How Indian economy survived, revived, or whatever, is this really our business? OK, India grabbed tons of money in aids, so did Pakistan; what is the result? where are they, and where are we? Cant we just concentrate on our problems while setting aside India for a while?

 

[Hulk]

In spite of increase of British aid to $500 billion a year, India will remain the biggest recipient of Japan's official development assistance (ODA) in the near future. Since Japan's first ODA to India in 1958, the country has received monetary aid worth Rs 89,500 crore (Rs 895 billion) so far, according to Noro Motoyoshi, Japanese consul general in Kolkata. In 2008, Japan's ODA to India was up by more than 18% compared to 2007 at Rs 6916 crore (Rs 69.16 billion).

Haq's Musings: Foreign Aid Continues to Pour in Resurgent India

I guess topic is not Aid to India, so you will try to post on topic. I am reporting the post for repetitively posting off-topic post.

 

[Dark Angel]

Indian success



Main article: Green Revolution in India


With the experience of agricultural development begun in Mexico by Norman Borlaug in 1943 judged as a success, the Rockefeller Foundation sought to spread it to other nations. The Office of Special Studies in Mexico became an informal international research institution in 1959, and in 1963 it formally became CIMMYT, The International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center.

In 1961 India was on the brink of mass famine[5]. Borlaug was invited to India by the adviser to the Indian minister of agriculture M. S. Swaminathan. Despite bureaucratic hurdles imposed by India's grain monopolies, the Ford Foundation and Indian government collaborated to import wheat seed from CIMMYT. Punjab was selected by the Indian government to be the first site to try the new crops because of its reliable water supply and a history of agricultural success. India began its own Green Revolution program of plant breeding, irrigation development, and financing of agrochemicals.[6]

India soon adopted IR8 - a semi-dwarf rice variety developed by the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) that could produce more grains of rice per plant when grown with certain fertilizers and irrigation. In 1968, Indian agronomist S.K. De Datta published his findings that IR8 rice yielded about 5 tons per hectare with no fertilizer, and almost 10 tons per hectare under optimal conditions. This was 10 times the yield of traditional rice.[7] IR8 was a success throughout Asia, and dubbed the "Miracle Rice". IR8 was also developed into Semi-dwarf IR36.

In the 1960s, rice yields in India were about two tons per hectare; by the mid-1990s, they had risen to six tons per hectare. In the 1970s, rice cost about $550 a ton; in 2001, it cost under $200 a ton.[8] India became one of the world's most successful rice producers, and is now a major rice exporter, shipping nearly 4.5 million tons in 2006

 

[RiazHaq]

Haque Sahab,

Take these figures and try to convince a common Pakistani about the growth and what not. I am afraid you'll need Police protection as well, because I do not think that this statistical juggling will impress an average Pakistani household earning less than $200 and trying to survive where inflation is well into two digits. These figures look nice on the papers, but they have little if any relevance with the facts on the ground. In Pakistan, merely 8.5% people are paying taxes, and they are mostly government or private employee. Rest of the 91.5% people are simply not paying any kind of tax, means that the government/financial institutions have no record of any kind of their earning/spending etc. In a country where the economy is this much documented, you are talking about statistics?

Dont tell me about the percentage of the growth rate, this is meaningless; tell me how an average Pakistani household earning less than US$200 survive in kind of inflation rampant in Pakistan? Where prices are revised not every month, or every week, but daily.

Unfortunately, I can not disagree with you today. This is the bitter harvest of feudal democracy Pakistanis have voted for.

Many Pakistanis who were lifted out of poverty as a result of healthy economic and job growth are now slipping back into poverty since mid-2008. As Dr. Ashfaque argues, Pakistan has had to return back to the IMF which has imposed tough conditions to control inflation as price for its loans.

By current government's own admission in its MOU with IMF, it inherited a relatively sound economy, and current decline is the result of policy inaction when there was no one really in charge of Pakistan's economy in mid-2008. Economies don't run on auto-pilot. They have to be carefully and closely managed to respond to changing conditions.

 

[Dark Angel]

Haque Sahab,

Take these figures and try to convince a common Pakistani about the growth and what not. I am afraid you'll need Police protection as well, because I do not think that this statistical juggling will impress an average Pakistani household earning less than $200 and trying to survive where inflation is well into two digits. These figures look nice on the papers, but they have little if any relevance with the facts on the ground. In Pakistan, merely 8.5% people are paying taxes, and they are mostly government or private employee. Rest of the 91.5% people are simply not paying any kind of tax, means that the government/financial institutions have no record of any kind of their earning/spending etc. In a country where the economy is this much documented, you are talking about statistics?

Dont tell me about the percentage of the growth rate, this is meaningless; tell me how an average Pakistani household earning less than US$200 survive in kind of inflation rampant in Pakistan? Where prices are revised not every month, or every week, but daily.

very well explained, it was info at ground level ......India or Pakistan we should pray for better economy as it is the only solution to all our problems

 

[Trisonics]

The abominable and cheap posts against India continue from Mr.Haq

Lets look at his posts clearly:

he says:

India has received more foreign aid than any other developing nation since the end of World War II--estimated at almost $100 billion since the beginning of its First Five-Year Plan in 1951

This line is directly copied without any citation to a professor fro Harvard. The professor is Indian, and he had published this article in 1992

Secondly, the figure is misquoted!!!! It is 55billion and not 100
"India has received more foreign aid than any other developing nation since the end of World War II--estimated at almost $55 billion since the beginning of its First Five-Year"
Foreign Aid and India: Financing the Leviathan State

Mr Riaz Haq, if you do not reference the above and correct it I will report you for plagiarism, unless you can prove the link I have posted is wrong!

what level do people go to? this is so cheap and disgusting!!!!!