Pakistan's Remittances rise to all-time high of $2.8bn in April, up 56% YoY

[Chakar The Great]

And yet there are so many people buying those $7 chocolates. And the supply, legal and illegal, will find a way to meet that demand. Please keep in mind that remittance receivers are immune from the inflationary effects of the devaluation of the PKR.

Sir that's again untrue. Most of the remittances are sent from Middle East, those are pour labourers. They are defiantly effected by inflation.

You dont seem to have any clue on what's happening on the ground.

 

[VCheng]

Sir that's again untrue. Most of the remittances are sent from Middle East, those are pour labourers. They are defiantly effected by inflation.

You dont seem to have any clue on what's happening on the ground.

The remittances distort local markets, that is inescapable.

 

[Chakar The Great]

The remittances distort local markets, that is inescapable.

Lets agree to disagree on that. I believe remittance provide that breathing space specially in the context of Pakistan interns if massive balance of payment crisis Pakistan is suffering. Steps should be taken to further increase it.


Having said that they are no substitute for exports. But exports dont increase in a day, they take at least 5-10 years of constantly and FDI. Pakistan is on the right track. Lets be patient and cherish the good news. However Pakistan is no way near to its potential.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

It is not just luxury items. Houses, construction materials, energy costs, etc and it is not the percentage of families that is important, but the percentage of their revenues in the overall economic pie. It is certainly enough to cause adverse distortions.

Great point. The inflows from ex-pats has huge impact inside Pakistan or as you say "distorts" the economy.

 

[Path-Finder]

Thank you Imran Khan.

NO, nawaj sharif

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

And yet there are so many people buying those $7 chocolates. And the supply, legal and illegal, will find a way to meet that demand. Please keep in mind that remittance receivers are immune from the inflationary effects of the devaluation of the PKR.

No there are not many, especially not those who receive remittances barely to support themselves which is the case of vast majority. You are maybe talking about few rich people.

 

[VCheng]

No there are not many, especially not those who receive remittances barely to support themselves which is the case of vast majority. You are maybe talking about few rich people.

As I said above, it is not the percentage of families that is important, but the percentage of their revenues in the overall economic pie. It is certainly enough to cause adverse distortions.

 

[RIP Pak LAW]

Two main reaons for higher remittance last month :

1) Month of Ramadan, zakat inflows into Pakistan
2) Roshan Digital Account for overseas Pakistanis massive success and growing popularity

 

[TheDarkKnight]

German chocolates are generally quite good.


You could try reading the rest of the thread including several of my replies above.

I did and as usual you are beating around the bush. I guess you don’t have any sources or numbers to backup your claims or conclusions - which is fine by me, the readers should know it now.

 

[VCheng]

I did and as usual you are beating around the bush. I guess you don’t have any sources or numbers to backup your claims or conclusions - which is fine by me, the readers should know it now.

Let me ask you this: Where do you think all those remittance are spent within Pakistan? It is an amount almost equal to the entire exports in the hands of the recipients. What do they do with it?

After all, there is no proof that the military dabbles in politics in Pakistan, either. Things just work mysteriously in Pakistan in many areas, including economics.

 

[Mrc]

This month shud b even higher due to eid

 

[TheDarkKnight]

Let me ask you this: Where do you think all those remittance are spent within Pakistan? It is an amount almost equal to the entire exports in the hands of the recipients. What do they do with it?

After all, there is no proof that the military dabbles in politics in Pakistan, either. Things just work mysteriously in Pakistan in many areas, including economics.

WoW - And the reward for best form of Whataboutism goes to ...

I mean it may seem frustrating but I do admire the skill at display here, to drag an unrelated subjective topic and argument from no where.

Anyway, I had requested you to provide some evidence or verifiable facts, but you are now back to the usual track. Please read my previous post again, what I tried to state was that remittances should still provide an over all net positive inflow. No matter what those families spend, it cannot result in more imports for whats being received - in a simple ideal case if we get $10 in then at the most we may import $10 worth of goods. Now how those families spend their money is highly speculative, atleast for me, but it definitely should result in a portion to be spent in Pakistan (rent, fees, education etc). The overall balance of trade is something we can easily check from SBP, and with these increased remittances, Pakistan has been able to meet trade deficits. All international orgs like IMF and ADB have not flagged it as a negative as you are trying to portray it. Unless you have something really enlightening to share that can prove otherwise (other than the usual theory that Pakistan army and isi cabal has a secret method that some how turns $10 to $20 and we end up importing more from the money actually being input via remittances- maybe there is an ISI Agent Double Shah).

 

[VCheng]

WoW - And the reward for best form of Whataboutism goes to ...

I mean it may seem frustrating but I do admire the skill at display here, to drag an unrelated subjective topic and argument from no where.

Anyway, I had requested you to provide some evidence or verifiable facts, but you are now back to the usual track. Please read my previous post again, what I tried to state was that remittances should still provide an over all net positive inflow. No matter what those families spend, it cannot result in more imports for whats being received - in a simple ideal case if we get $10 in then at the most we may import $10 worth of goods. Now how those families spend their money is highly speculative, atleast for me, but it definitely should result in a portion to be spent in Pakistan (rent, fees, education etc). The overall balance of trade is something we can easily check from SBP, and with these increased remittances, Pakistan has been able to meet trade deficits. All international orgs like IMF and ADB have not flagged it as a negative as you are trying to portray it. Unless you have something really enlightening to share that can prove otherwise (other than the usual theory that Pakistan army and isi cabal has a secret method that some how turns $10 to $20 and we end up importing more from the money actually being input via remittances- maybe there is an ISI Agent Double Shah).

Apparently, you do not know the difference between an analogy and whataboutery, perhaps intentionally. Let me help you:

a·nal·o·gy

noun
a comparison between two things, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification.
"an analogy between the workings of nature and those of human societies"
a correspondence or partial similarity.
"the syndrome is called deep dysgraphia because of its analogy to deep dyslexia"
a thing which is comparable to something else in significant respects.
"works of art were seen as an analogy for works of nature"

Just as there is no proof that the the military dabbles in politics in Pakistan, there is no proof that remittances have any adverse effects on the local economy. Obviously, things just work "mysteriously" in Pakistan in many areas, including economics.

Once the remittances are transferred into local accounts, they are not pumped into the economy to cause inflation and skew consumption patterns, since there is no verifiable proof for those who do not wish to see.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

Apparently, you do not know the difference between an analogy and whataboutery, perhaps intentionally. Let me help you:

a·nal·o·gy

noun
a comparison between two things, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification.
"an analogy between the workings of nature and those of human societies"
a correspondence or partial similarity.
"the syndrome is called deep dysgraphia because of its analogy to deep dyslexia"
a thing which is comparable to something else in significant respects.
"works of art were seen as an analogy for works of nature"

Just as there is no proof that the the military dabbles in politics in Pakistan, there is no proof that remittances have any adverse effects on the local economy. Obviously, things just work "mysteriously" in Pakistan in many areas, including economics.

Once the remittances are transferred into local accounts, they are not pumped into the economy to cause inflation and skew consumption patterns, since there is no verifiable proof for those who do not wish to see.

Sure just like one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist; fine this is an analogy for you. But if you meant to use it as an a·nal·o·gy, then the way you are using it to explain away appears to be a case of false equivalence:
“ False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.[1]Colloquially, a false equivalence is often called "comparing apples and oranges."
“
So the mysteriousness of Pakistani politics cannot explain any mystery in this subject under discussion. For example, I find Pakistani Panadol to be more effective than US Tylenol, the answer is not supposed to be:
“ After all, there is no proof that the military dabbles in politics in Pakistan, either. Things just work mysteriously in Pakistan in many areas, including medicines.”
No - medicines are chemicals and need to be discussed chemically, and any arguments for or in favor of an opinion needs to be primarily in that subject matter ie. medicine or chemistry NOT politics or history.
Similarly, an economic issue needs to be argued or discussed primarily in terms of economics or finance. Read my previous posts, I have already laid out a simple example. I am still waiting for an explanation of how remittances can cause more to be imported than whats being injected, and how we can use SBP imports and export figures. You know what; if you want to use ISI Agent “double shah” theory to explain how $10 remmited to Pakistan causes $20 imports, and SBP , IMF, and WB etc. dont know this mystery then please enlighten us. Or I suppose the a·nal·o·gy is all that you have to say about this - which is fine by me honestly.

PS. I don’t know who told you its a mystery:

 

[VCheng]

Sure just like one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist; fine this is an analogy for you. But if you meant to use it as an a·nal·o·gy, then the way you are using it to explain away appears to be a case of false equivalence:
“ False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.[1]Colloquially, a false equivalence is often called "comparing apples and oranges."

So the mysteriousness of Pakistani politics cannot explain any mystery in the subject under discussion. For example I find Pakistani Panadol to be more effective than US Tylenol, the answer is not supposed to be:
“ After all, there is no proof that the military dabbles in politics in Pakistan, either. Things just work mysteriously in Pakistan in many areas, including medicines.”
No - the medicines are chemicals and need to be analyzed chemically, and any arguments for or in favor needs to be in that subject matter ie. medicine or chemistry NOT politics or history.
Similarly, an economic issue needs to be argued or discussed primarily in terms of economics or finance. Read my previous posts I have already laid out a simple example. I am still waiting for an explanation of how remittances can cause more to be imported than whats being injected, and how we can use SBP imports and exports figures. You know what; if you want to use ISI Agent double shah to explain how $10 remmited to Pakistan causes $20 imports, and SBP , IMF, and WB etc. dont know this mystery then please enlighten us. Or I suppose the a·nal·o·gy is all that you could add - which is fine by me honestly.

PS. I don’t know who told you its a mystery:
View attachment 750136

LOL. Let me show the false equivalence here. You are dishonest enough to first attribute a falsehood to me - which was never said - and then attempt to ridicule it.

Please show me where I have stated that "remittances can cause more to be imported than whats being injected" or even "how $10 remmited to Pakistan causes $20 imports"? Go ahead and read all my posts in this topic again and understand them properly before proceeding.

If you still waiting for an explanation of the above falsehoods, I think you may need to wait for a very long time for your lying to be explained, but not by me.

Or may be, being charitable, you simply do not have the intellectual capacity to discuss such an evolved topic.

Either way, ignoring a pathetic liar at worst, or an intellectual pygmy at best, would be the better way forward.



(PS: Interesting that you claim that Double Shah was an ISI agent. )