Well why didn't musharraf take action against the dam grand mansions of london if they were from "looted money"? The "pakeezgi" of his merrymen is still an example.
Most likely because of the deal that Musharraf had to offer NS because of Saudi intervention.
The jadoo of financial wizard of musharraf was that he, instead of going to IMF, borrowed from foreign commercial banks (e.g. Citibank etc) albeit expensively and told the nation that they have got rid of IMF
. Moreover, the raised money through issuing bonds in international markets (which trade in junk status these days) which was always risky for a country with negative external profile so the problems on the external front were amplified covertly and the nation was kept in dark.
Musharraf must have been a financial wizard alright since he was able to actually lower foreign debt and eliminate domestic debt. During his tenure, the debt had been reduced to roughly USD 30 Billion from USD 40-45 Billion (from memory) that was left by NS. Furthermore, NS left the USD at 84/Rupee which was pulled back by Musharraf to Rs. 60. If my calculations are correct, Musharraf put us in a position where our foreign debt had been reduced to PKR 1800 Billion!!!
On domestic front, the wizard tried to implement demand model by keeping interest rates near zero and artificially inflating the incomes of people through encouraging personal,car,home lending. However, the real incomes of people didn't grow and the bubble went burst as the rising inflation prompted SBP to raise interest rates. The deliquancies increased, banks booked losses, producers postponed their expansion plans and we ended and Pakistan was back to recession just like "Jithay de se khoti, othay e aan khaloti."
So Musharraf was actually making people poorer by lowering taxes, lowering interest rates, lowering USD, giving massive subsidies on everyday commodities and electricity and in general by allowing the common man access to personal transport, accommodation, mobile and financial security? Hmm.....
By increasing development expenditure just like Dar did. There is no economic progress without investments and peace. And thanks to Musharraf Bhai for taking away both!
Would you like to compare the total investments under Musharraf and after him, please?? We can, then, safely terminate this argument.
Even more, because debt is not the only problem, peace and security is also necessary for good economic growth. War-ridden countries don't grow at 6-7%.
Partially correct. We were still progressing @ 7% in 2005. However, unfortunately, this war was thrust upon us and we were, are and will remain a part of it whether we like it, want it or not. Had the political magicians been unable to garner the kind of support they did ever since 2005/06, Pakistan would have been in a much much better position today.
Check the link again.
Do you know the concept of implicit and explicit sovereign backing and guarantee? Okey just tell me whats the difference between the debt of Gene mae's and Fannie Mae's debt and why do they behave similarly despite having corporate differences. Okey lets qoute an example of Pakistan. Do you know how PSE's debt is issued and who owns implicit obligation to that debt?
A simple "I have no response to that argument" would have sufficed.
Point is, majority of Pakistan still voted for PML/PPP, if we ourselves aren't willing to change our bad habits, why should the expats bother?
