23 replies to this topic

[Pak-Eagle]

ISLAMABAD: While publicly it criticizes former President Musharraf for the present economic mess, the government in its official documents has appreciated the economic policies of the previous regime that became a strong base for seeking loans from multilateral donors and friends of Pakistan.

The PPP-led coalition partners have been blaming Musharraf regime in public speeches for fudging economic figures to paint a rosy picture, while its overall policies pushed the country into economic crisis.

The letter of intent (LoI), on the basis of which, Pakistan sought the much-needed $7.6 billion bailout package from the International Monitory Fund (IMF), has bit by bit appreciated the Musharraf policies since 2000.

During the past one decade (1999-2007), the LoI says Pakistan’s economy witnessed a major economic transformation from substantial increase in the volume of gross domestic product (GDP) to greater international trade.

Talking to Dawn on Thursday former Finance Minister Ishaq Dar said whatever he said about the health of economy was based on the balance sheet existed on March 31, 2008. He said the balance sheet was dully approved by the then cabinet headed by Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani.

He said no body denied the contents of the balance sheet. The focus of the previous economic policy was on promotion of consumerism without supporting the industrial base.

Apparently not willing to agree with the LoI contents, he said though he has a different view of the past economic growth but quickly added the same was destroyed in the last 15 months of the military led dictator.

An official source requesting not to be named said the economic wizards in the finance ministry are not politicians to make only speeches but they have to look into ground realities. ‘We reported to IMF whatever is factual and based on evidence,’ the official added.

The LoI said the country’s real GDP increased from $60 billion in 2000-01 to $170 billion in 2007-08 with per capital income rising from under $500 to over $1000. During the same period, the volume of international trade increased to nearly $60 billion from $20 billion.

For most of this period, real GDP grew at more than 7 per cent a year with relative price stability. The improved macroeconomic performance enabled Pakistan to re-enter the international capital markets in the mid-2000s. Buoyant output growth, low inflation, and the government’s social policies contributed to a reduction in poverty and an improvement in many social indicators.

Former Finance Minister Dr Salman Shah told this scribe the government has made the 170 million people fool while telling them pack of lies in the past nine months about the economic policies of the Mushrraf regime.

He said that as the present government acknowledged in black and white, the impressive past growth made their way easier to make access to the new facility of the IMF for emerging markets hit by the crisis to support the balance of payment problems.

Had growth not been achieved, Pakistan would have to apply for other long term IMF financing facilities like poverty reduction, structural adjustments etc, Shah said adding government should tell truth to the nation if they have confidence.

‘The recruitment made so far for running the finances of this country is very depressing. This shows this government has neither commitment nor capabilities to take the country out of the current crisis,’ Dr Salman said.

He said the government admitted in the LoI, the current crisis was because of price shocks, global financial turmoil and policy inaction during the political transition to the new government. He blamed the current government for blocking inward movement of $5 billion by suspending privatization of major transactions.

The short term liquidity facility established by IMF was for those countries that have a good track record of sound policies, access to capital markets and sustainable debt burdens with a size of loan up to 500 percent of quota with a three month maturity.

[ABBASIA]

Grow Pakistan, Grow. We got 750 million dollar FDI in month of Dec 2008. Which is surprising, this bodes the underneath dynamicism of our country.

[*Zarrar Jareeh*]

Link please.

[demonslayer]

The question remains, will this govt let the hard work done by former President Musharraf go down the drain or continue with the work? We need to quickly sort out the economic mess and continue on the path of economic growth and thus producing more jobs and increasing FDI. This is the key to reducing the problems of terrorism in the country. If this govt manages to do that than Pakistan still have a chance to save itself from its enemies.
If this govt is sincere than everyone should support it to finish its five year term in office. Right now we really dont need another coup or mid term elections. Pakistan needs stability.

[Pikes]

I just have one thing to say.. shut the f_ck up now..
ab kiya faida appreciating his economic policies. hum kiya bakwas kertay thay pehley  

[Mangla]

Link is Dawn

http://www.dawn.net/wps/wcm/connect/Dawn%2...rraf-regime-aah


Who has a an account with PKPolitics and other lying political parties websites should post it!

[smegster]

Link is Dawn

http://www.dawn.net/wps/wcm/connect/Dawn%2...rraf-regime-aah


Who has a an account with PKPolitics and other lying political parties websites should post it!

MODS can you please pin this thread.

I hope all those who have been going on and on about Short-cut Aziz fudging the figure see this article
(although I would surprised if they were to read the article as all the anti-Musharraf crowd seem to avoid the Economy related forum because their lies keep getting exposed)

[speedyturtle]

well i have posted i have posted it in my my thread in one of the forums.

http://www.friendskorner.com/forum/f137/de...atorship-86209/

If the mods got a problem with me providing the link than please delete the link.

SPEEDY
enjoy

[speedyturtle]

And as for pkpolitics i went there cause of the programs i like to watch as i cant watch them cause of my family but i refuse to register on pkpolitics as i dont think what they doing is in the interest of Pakistan

SPEEDY
enjoy

[kaka007]

But his gross negligence ignoring the building of energy shortfall is regrettable.

[must7]

But his gross negligence ignoring the building of energy shortfall is regrettable.

Gross negligence, it happens. in many economies it happens he or his team was not an angel to have realized the demand of people making illegal connections annually. I know tons & tons of people who are getting electricity on kunda system and even have split units working at home.

I also know friends in the FATA area who get electricity but have never given a dime for the supply & these are the people who do not think twice for electrical water gysers or split unit A/cs ! People talk of Islamic law, electricity supply, why do people or especially Mullahs not issue a verdict against missuse of govt. supplied electricity !

Like a Afridi friend of mine told me about the growing influence of Taleban in their area (Kambel Khail) & how things would be preceived in the future ... of course my question immediately was .. so now would you be obliged Islamically to pay the electricity bills ! Hahahah .. i know he was speechless !

[*Zarrar Jareeh*]

But his gross negligence ignoring the building of energy shortfall is regrettable.

http://www.dawn.com/2008/11/21/nat6.htm

[must7]

http://www.dawn.com/2008/11/21/nat6.htm

Zarrar : I had to post it (great find).. it geez .. what a bomb shell for people ! I remember the Nazi propaganda machine "Tell a lie so many times, than people start taking it as truth" !

Power minister eats humble pie
By Amir Wasim

ISLAMABAD, Nov 20: Federal Minister for Water and Power, Raja Pervez Ashraf, on Thursday faced an embarrassing situation when opposition members from the Pakistan Muslim League-Q (PML-Q) took him to task and asked him to retract his earlier statements on power projects in the country.

The minister got into trouble during the question hour when responding to two separate questions from his own party MNAs he told the House that six power stations with a power generation capacity of 1,965 megawatt had been added to the power system during last five years whereas Private Power and Infrastructure Board (PPIB) processed 40 multiple fuel projects with a cumulative capacity of 11,021MW throughout the country in private sector during the same period.The minister further told the House that three projects launched by the previous regime with a cumulative capacity of 615MW were expected to start electricity generation by April next year.

This information sparked the dull opposition into action. Riaz Pirzada and former minister of state for Water and Power, Amir Muqam, asked Mr Ashraf to clarify his position with regard to his earlier assertions, even on the floor of the house, that the previous regime had not initiated any power project and not a single MW of electricity had been produced during its tenure.

Mr Pirzada said they had been hearing the minister on different television channels that “our government did nothing to generate electricity.” Now, he said, the minister was saying that six projects had been added to the system in the last five years.

Hitting out at Mr Ashraf, Mr Muqam said that he was confused whether he should believe in what the minister had been stating for quiet some time or in the written replies the minister had submitted to the National Assembly. He said on the one hand, the minister was saying that no power project was launched by the previous regime, and on the other hand, he was admitting that more than 2,000 MW electricity was being generated through the projects initiated by the Shaukat Aziz government. “Should we believe in the written reply submitted by you or the allegations you have been levelling against our government that we did nothing in the last five years to generate electricity?” he asked.

Interestingly, the minister had no satisfactory reply to the points raised by the two PML-Q members and simply said that most of these projects were the brainchild of the previous PPP government led by Benazir Bhutto. He claimed that the projects being launched by the present PPP government would generate 3,700 MW electricity.

Earlier, in response to a question of PPP MNA Shakila Rashid Khanum, the minister informed the house that six power projects – Ghazi Barotha Hydel Power Station (1,450MW); Rental Power Plant at Sheikhupura (150MW); Rental Power Plant at Bhikhi (136 MW); SEPCOL Power Plant (119MW); Altern Power Plant (29MW) and Malakand-III Hydel Power Plant (81MW) had been added to the system during the last five years.

In a written reply to another question of MNA Fauzia Wahab, the minister told the National Assembly that Attock Gen Power Project at Morgah in Rawalpindi (165MW), Orient Power Project at Balloki (225MW) and Sheikhupura Power Project (225MW) were expected to start electricity generation by April 2009.

The minister also provided the complete details of 40 other projects approved by the PPIB during the last five years.

[Salim]

Let see how poverty rate that changed in Pakistan during different periods ... PLUS ... How morally corrupt and disgusting some Pakistanis are (many one can find on this forum too) that when it comes to them maligning those they do not like (for instance Musharraf) they do and say everything while trying to hide behind their own dishonesty, lies, and incompetency (that eventually comes out to embarrass them even though they do not get embarrass even when  their Lies and dishonesty get exposed) ... ( from ref: http://www.daily.pk/....sharraf-10324/).

Here are figures:
Pre-Musharraf period:
1991: 22-26 percent
1999: 32-35 percent (40 percent increase in 8 years)
2008: 17.2 percent (100 percent decrease in next 9 years)

So poverty in Pakistan increased 40 percent during democrazy under PPP and PMLN but then got reduced by over 100 percent when Pakistan received corruption-free competent economic policy under Musharraf.

Reference:
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_Pakistan#cite_note-6

Incidences of poverty in Pakistan rose from 22–26% in the fiscal year 1991 to 32–35% in the fiscal year 1999. They have subsequently fallen to 25–26% according to the reports of the World Bank and the UN Development Program reports. These reports contradict the claims made by the Government of Pakistan that the poverty rates are only 23.1%.[2] Furthermore, the poverty rate declined to 17.2% in 2007-08 according to the World Bank.[7]


Anyhow, most interesting is poverty reduction report by Centre for Poverty Reduction (CPRSPD) backed by United Nations Development Program (UNDP) that further got validated by World Bank, that poverty in Pakistan reduced to 17.2 percent during fiscal year 2007-08: ... But when poverty did reduced to 17.2 percent in 2007-08 from 23.1 percent in 2005-06 (in 2 years, showing continuity of rapid reduction in poverty due to rapid economical growth during this turmoil period too similar to earlier Musharraf period) ... Liars and corrupts in government of Pakistan, for instance Dr Hafiz Pasha (don't know how he got PhD, must be in similar way KhawarKhan of this forum got his MSc in economics) ... started claiming Bu*l Sh*t figures that poverty increased to 35-40 percent in 2007-08 from 23.1 percent in 2005-06 (earlier approved figures of Pakistan by Pakistan government as well as world bodies) ... but air from their claim busted when United Nation Development program and World Bank came out with figure of 17.2 percent, embarrassing some government officials (whoever had some ‘sharaam’ ).



http://www.daily.pk/undp-reports-Pakistan-...usharraf-10324/

UNDP Reports Pakistan Poverty Declined to 17%, Under Musharraf

Center for Poverty Reduction (CPRSPD), backed by the United Nations Development Program(UNDP), is reporting that Pakistan’s poverty at national level declined sharply from 22.3 percent in 2005-06 (versus India’s poverty rate of 42%) to 17.2 percent in 2007-08. This poverty estimate has been validated by the World Bank.

It should not be a big surprise, given the close relationship between poverty reduction and robust economic growth that Pakistan saw from 2005-06 to 2007-08. The economic slowdown has only occurred in 2008-09, which appears to have resulted in some visible poverty increase on the ground since the middle of last year. However, there seems to be a deliberate effort being made by some politically motivated Pakistani economists and politicians to delay the release of CPDSPD data and deny what Dr. Ashfaq Khan of NUST calls “the major economic and social achievements of the last one decade” under President Musharraf. Here’s an interesting OpEd published in the News by Dr Ashfaque H Khan on how poverty statistics in Pakistan are fair game for the various “experts” with an ax to grind:

The present government is facing real embarrassment on poverty estimates for 2007-08. The Panel of Economists, formed by the government in April 2008 under the leadership of Dr Hafiz Pasha, found that 35-40 percent people of Pakistan were living below the poverty line in 2007-08 – up from 22.3 percent in 2005-06. The political leadership, unaware of the technical details of the estimation techniques, took the estimates of the Panel seriously and everybody, including the ministers, the prime minister and the president started mentioning the numbers within and outside the country. The political leadership had no reason to distrust the professional skills of the Panel of Economists. Their only fault was that they could not realize that some members of the Panel of Economists were positioning themselves to get ministerial jobs and some retired “experts” were trying to secure their jobs in the government. These people could have moved their way to the present regime only if they would paint a bleak picture of the state of the economy, including the substantial rise in poverty. I am positive that this Panel of Economists has had no courage to write similar three paragraphs as documented in the Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies attached with the Letter of Intent, signed by the Government of Pakistan on Nov 20, 2008 with the IMF. These three paragraphs, written by the present regime, very aptly summarize the major economic and social achievements of the last one decade, including the “reduction in poverty and an improvement in many social indicators.” It appears that the Panel of Economists was trying to become more Christian than the Pope and as such came up with poverty estimates based on flawed methodology.

On the other hand, the Centre for Poverty Reduction and Social Policy Development (CPRSPD), using the(Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement (PSLM) Survey 2007-08, also estimated poverty for the year 2007-08. They found that poverty at national level declined sharply from 22.3 percent in 2005-06 to 17.2 percent in 2007-08. Poverty, both in rural and urban areas also registered sharp declines. The estimates of the CPRSPD were also validated by the experts from the World Bank. The “experts” from the Planning Commission are of the view that a sharp decline in poverty in 2007-08 does not depict the ground reality. Why should it depict the ground reality? Firstly, the period it covers is from July 2007 to June 2008. Secondly, poverty estimates are not like the growth number, money supply or inflation which change yearly. Poverty number reflects the changes in the lives of the people which are affected by the policies pursued for a fairly long period of time. To be fair to the government, how can they say now that the poverty in Pakistan has declined substantially in 2007-08 as opposed to their earlier stance that it had increased to the range of 35-40 percent? In other words, how can they say that at the time of taking charge of the state of affairs only 17.2 percent people were living below the poverty line and that there are indications that poverty is on the rise once again in Pakistan.

This is indeed the real embarrassment for the government caused by the Panel of Economists.

Poverty estimates are highly sensitive to changes in different variables. For example, should we use calorie intake or basic need approach or should we use 2550, 2250 or 2350 calorie to draw the poverty line? Should we use CPI, SPI, WPI or prices derived from the Survey itself to adjust the poverty line or should we use consumption or income? The basket of commodities may differ across researchers and even the cleaning protocol of data may give different poverty estimates. Thus, at any given point in time there can be different poverty estimates with same or different data sets. What is required, therefore, is that we continue to use the same methodology irrespective of its strength and weaknesses, lest we should never be able to know as to what is happening on poverty front.

There are views about the methodology used by the Panel of Economists. One, that in the absence of PSLM Survey data for 2007-08 the Panel simply adjusted the poverty line upward to the extent of cumulative inflation (20 percent) for the period 2006-07 and 2007-08. On the other hand, they used household consumption expenditure for the year 2005-06, which was not adjusted upward to match the poverty line. In other words, apple was compared with orange. Naturally, such a flawed methodology was bound to produce erroneous results. Second, that the Panel used an equation to forecast poverty. This equation has many exogenous variables, such as food inflation, remittances, openness of trade, development expenditure as percentage of GDP, etc. Giving the value of each variable for 2007-08 and using the estimated parameters it predicted poverty for 2007-08. Forecasting is a complex exercise and requires transparency in the use of data. The Panel did not release those numbers which went into the model. Thirdly, they used the preliminary version of the model whose parameters changed substantially in subsequent revisions. The Panel never bothered to contact the author of the model. Had they contacted him, he could have saved the Panel from such disgrace.

At the end, let me once again appeal to the Planning Commission to release the poverty numbers for 2007-08. Not releasing the number is not a good idea. The number is already out. Don’t embarrass the government any more. Forget the Panel’s report and trust your own young economists at the CPRSPD.

[haroons222]

Let see how poverty rate that changed in Pakistan during different periods ... PLUS ... How morally corrupt and disgusting some Pakistanis are (many one can find on this forum too) that when it comes to them maligning those they do not like (for instance Musharraf) they do and say everything while trying to hide behind their own dishonesty, lies, and incompetency (that eventually comes out to embarrass them even though they do not get embarrass even when  their Lies and dishonesty get exposed) ... ( from ref: http://www.daily.pk/....sharraf-10324/).

Here are figures:
Pre-Musharraf period:
1991: 22-26 percent
1999: 32-35 percent (40 percent increase in 8 years)
2008: 17.2 percent (100 percent decrease in next 9 years)

So poverty in Pakistan increased 40 percent during democrazy under PPP and PMLN but then got reduced by over 100 percent when Pakistan received corruption-free competent economic policy under Musharraf.

Reference:
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_Pakistan#cite_note-6

Incidences of poverty in Pakistan rose from 22–26% in the fiscal year 1991 to 32–35% in the fiscal year 1999. They have subsequently fallen to 25–26% according to the reports of the World Bank and the UN Development Program reports. These reports contradict the claims made by the Government of Pakistan that the poverty rates are only 23.1%.[2] Furthermore, the poverty rate declined to 17.2% in 2007-08 according to the World Bank.[7]


Anyhow, most interesting is poverty reduction report by Centre for Poverty Reduction (CPRSPD) backed by United Nations Development Program (UNDP) that further got validated by World Bank, that poverty in Pakistan reduced to 17.2 percent during fiscal year 2007-08: ... But when poverty did reduced to 17.2 percent in 2007-08 from 23.1 percent in 2005-06 (in 2 years, showing continuity of rapid reduction in poverty due to rapid economical growth during this turmoil period too similar to earlier Musharraf period) ... Liars and corrupts in government of Pakistan, for instance Dr Hafiz Pasha (don't know how he got PhD, must be in similar way KhawarKhan of this forum got his MSc in economics) ... started claiming Bu*l Sh*t figures that poverty increased to 35-40 percent in 2007-08 from 23.1 percent in 2005-06 (earlier approved figures of Pakistan by Pakistan government as well as world bodies) ... but air from their claim busted when United Nation Development program and World Bank came out with figure of 17.2 percent, embarrassing some government officials (whoever had some ‘sharaam’ ).



http://www.daily.pk/undp-reports-Pakistan-...usharraf-10324/

UNDP Reports Pakistan Poverty Declined to 17%, Under Musharraf

Center for Poverty Reduction (CPRSPD), backed by the United Nations Development Program(UNDP), is reporting that Pakistan’s poverty at national level declined sharply from 22.3 percent in 2005-06 (versus India’s poverty rate of 42%) to 17.2 percent in 2007-08. This poverty estimate has been validated by the World Bank.

It should not be a big surprise, given the close relationship between poverty reduction and robust economic growth that Pakistan saw from 2005-06 to 2007-08. The economic slowdown has only occurred in 2008-09, which appears to have resulted in some visible poverty increase on the ground since the middle of last year. However, there seems to be a deliberate effort being made by some politically motivated Pakistani economists and politicians to delay the release of CPDSPD data and deny what Dr. Ashfaq Khan of NUST calls “the major economic and social achievements of the last one decade” under President Musharraf. Here’s an interesting OpEd published in the News by Dr Ashfaque H Khan on how poverty statistics in Pakistan are fair game for the various “experts” with an ax to grind:

The present government is facing real embarrassment on poverty estimates for 2007-08. The Panel of Economists, formed by the government in April 2008 under the leadership of Dr Hafiz Pasha, found that 35-40 percent people of Pakistan were living below the poverty line in 2007-08 – up from 22.3 percent in 2005-06. The political leadership, unaware of the technical details of the estimation techniques, took the estimates of the Panel seriously and everybody, including the ministers, the prime minister and the president started mentioning the numbers within and outside the country. The political leadership had no reason to distrust the professional skills of the Panel of Economists. Their only fault was that they could not realize that some members of the Panel of Economists were positioning themselves to get ministerial jobs and some retired “experts” were trying to secure their jobs in the government. These people could have moved their way to the present regime only if they would paint a bleak picture of the state of the economy, including the substantial rise in poverty. I am positive that this Panel of Economists has had no courage to write similar three paragraphs as documented in the Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies attached with the Letter of Intent, signed by the Government of Pakistan on Nov 20, 2008 with the IMF. These three paragraphs, written by the present regime, very aptly summarize the major economic and social achievements of the last one decade, including the “reduction in poverty and an improvement in many social indicators.” It appears that the Panel of Economists was trying to become more Christian than the Pope and as such came up with poverty estimates based on flawed methodology.

On the other hand, the Centre for Poverty Reduction and Social Policy Development (CPRSPD), using the(Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement (PSLM) Survey 2007-08, also estimated poverty for the year 2007-08. They found that poverty at national level declined sharply from 22.3 percent in 2005-06 to 17.2 percent in 2007-08. Poverty, both in rural and urban areas also registered sharp declines. The estimates of the CPRSPD were also validated by the experts from the World Bank. The “experts” from the Planning Commission are of the view that a sharp decline in poverty in 2007-08 does not depict the ground reality. Why should it depict the ground reality? Firstly, the period it covers is from July 2007 to June 2008. Secondly, poverty estimates are not like the growth number, money supply or inflation which change yearly. Poverty number reflects the changes in the lives of the people which are affected by the policies pursued for a fairly long period of time. To be fair to the government, how can they say now that the poverty in Pakistan has declined substantially in 2007-08 as opposed to their earlier stance that it had increased to the range of 35-40 percent? In other words, how can they say that at the time of taking charge of the state of affairs only 17.2 percent people were living below the poverty line and that there are indications that poverty is on the rise once again in Pakistan.

This is indeed the real embarrassment for the government caused by the Panel of Economists.

Poverty estimates are highly sensitive to changes in different variables. For example, should we use calorie intake or basic need approach or should we use 2550, 2250 or 2350 calorie to draw the poverty line? Should we use CPI, SPI, WPI or prices derived from the Survey itself to adjust the poverty line or should we use consumption or income? The basket of commodities may differ across researchers and even the cleaning protocol of data may give different poverty estimates. Thus, at any given point in time there can be different poverty estimates with same or different data sets. What is required, therefore, is that we continue to use the same methodology irrespective of its strength and weaknesses, lest we should never be able to know as to what is happening on poverty front.

There are views about the methodology used by the Panel of Economists. One, that in the absence of PSLM Survey data for 2007-08 the Panel simply adjusted the poverty line upward to the extent of cumulative inflation (20 percent) for the period 2006-07 and 2007-08. On the other hand, they used household consumption expenditure for the year 2005-06, which was not adjusted upward to match the poverty line. In other words, apple was compared with orange. Naturally, such a flawed methodology was bound to produce erroneous results. Second, that the Panel used an equation to forecast poverty. This equation has many exogenous variables, such as food inflation, remittances, openness of trade, development expenditure as percentage of GDP, etc. Giving the value of each variable for 2007-08 and using the estimated parameters it predicted poverty for 2007-08. Forecasting is a complex exercise and requires transparency in the use of data. The Panel did not release those numbers which went into the model. Thirdly, they used the preliminary version of the model whose parameters changed substantially in subsequent revisions. The Panel never bothered to contact the author of the model. Had they contacted him, he could have saved the Panel from such disgrace.

At the end, let me once again appeal to the Planning Commission to release the poverty numbers for 2007-08. Not releasing the number is not a good idea. The number is already out. Don’t embarrass the government any more. Forget the Panel’s report and trust your own young economists at the CPRSPD.

Well Pakistan was running on 5bnéyr amreeki aid.That and we sold a whole bunch of state owned assets and low prices(remember the steel mills controversy)..with all that money coming in, we cud have done major work in reviving our industry,setting up new industry but the only growth that came was introducing credit system to Pk, change us into a consumer driven economy. the only real work that was done in my opinion was telecom,end of story...this in no way means that the 90s civilian govts. were great, but Mush had way more resources, and historically American friendship periods have always resulted in temporary booms, even when knuckleheads are in charge.But the real legacy of that regime will be total disastor as far as our foreign policy, diplomacy with Indians is concerned, creating so many fronts at home, flarring up nationalists and extremist groups in Balochistan and NWFP, our roll back on Kashmir, bowing down to indian pressure time and again, selling our ppl to see i a like garbage, the list goes on.I wonder if he ever thinks of afia when he lays around in his london mansion!

[demion]

I just have one thing to say.. shut the f_ck up now..
ab kiya faida appreciating his economic policies. hum kiya bakwas kertay thay pehley  

LOL. That was funny. i agree with your discontent.

[instantexcess]

Well Pakistan was running on 5bnéyr amreeki aid.

Ameriki air + loans have gone up 4~6 folds since his departure yet, no one is keeping up even 1/3 the growth rate Pakistan enjoyed in Musharraf years.

That and we sold a whole bunch of state owned assets and low prices(remember the steel mills controversy)..

yea, now we have buyers lined up by teh dozens willing to pay 5~8 times that price and offcourse, Chutia Justice will be paying the 22 Arab Rupee loss to Steel mills from his personal Bribes recieved from Nawaz.

with all that money coming in, we cud have done major work in reviving our industry,setting up new industry but the only growth that came was introducing credit system to Pk, change us into a consumer driven economy.

Ishaq dar thought every village idiot the word "consumer driven economy", last i checked every economy is consumer driven, some consumers are industrials, others financial, others commercial, others rural etc. etc.


har aik chutia yeh nai cheez sekhi hai ...

the only real work that was done in my opinion was telecom,end of story...this in no way means that the 90s civilian govts. were great, but Mush had way more resources, and historically American friendship periods have always resulted in temporary booms, even when knuckleheads are in charge.But the real legacy of that regime will be total disastor as far as our foreign policy, diplomacy with Indians is concerned, creating so many fronts at home, flarring up nationalists and extremist groups in Balochistan and NWFP, our roll back on Kashmir, bowing down to indian pressure time and again, selling our ppl to see i a like garbage, the list goes on.I wonder if he ever thinks of afia when he lays around in his london mansion!

meh same ol' bullshit.

Pakistan told india to ###### off multiple times, everytime they staged a false flag operation.


Musharraf govt collected money for handing over Foreign nationals, No Pakistani was handed over.

I am sure you have the judgement of Missing Persons case on your desk right now? What? No ... really?

Our foreign policy kicked ass, Musharraf sent a base-commander to receive President Bush when he visited, as opposed to Ganja's selling of Kashmir to a single hand shake with Bill Clinton.

[maglomanic]

Just amazing the limits people go to stretch out the concept of reason for discrediting Musharraf.



IE , you signature says it all

"Zardari, Nawaz & Iftikhar Choor will make Pakistanis eat their own excrement and Pakistanis will like it and gloat about it" - Instantexcess

[haroons222]

Ameriki air + loans have gone up 4~6 folds since his departure yet, no one is keeping up even 1/3 the growth rate Pakistan enjoyed in Musharraf years.



yea, now we have buyers lined up by teh dozens willing to pay 5~8 times that price and offcourse, Chutia Justice will be paying the 22 Arab Rupee loss to Steel mills from his personal Bribes recieved from Nawaz.





Ishaq dar thought every village idiot the word "consumer driven economy", last i checked every economy is consumer driven, some consumers are industrials, others financial, others commercial, others rural etc. etc.


har aik chutia yeh nai cheez sekhi hai ...






meh same ol' bullshit.

Pakistan told india to ###### off multiple times, everytime they staged a false flag operation.


Musharraf govt collected money for handing over Foreign nationals, No Pakistani was handed over.

I am sure you have the judgement of Missing Persons case on your desk right now? What? No ... really?

Our foreign policy kicked ass, Musharraf sent a base-commander to receive President Bush when he visited, as opposed to Ganja's selling of Kashmir to a single hand shake with Bill Clinton.

Being a Mod, you especially need to observe the decorum of a civilized debate...I am expressing my point of view and you can express yours, but there is no reason to be smug or get personal.
This is the reason i havent posted on Mush. threads lately, it gets personal for ppl

We need to take down this hate like a notch or ten(im not just talking abt this post)...our views dont have to translate into personal hate,i got nothing against anyone here and coincidentally most of my friends are MQM and mush sympathizers, and we get by great!

[demion]

I just have one thing to say.. shut the f_ck up now..
ab kiya faida appreciating his economic policies. hum kiya bakwas kertay thay pehley  

LOL! Now that came from the heart. It is frustrating. But what is worse is the jahalat in the general population that doesn't know better.

[Sanguine]

  
The story of all the economic growth is incomplete unless we examine the results and consequences of that growth. So what indicators are we going to choose and with whom are we going to compare ourselves? Many of the countries that had pretty much same problems as we had at the time of independence, now fall in the category of newly industrializing countries, while we are still the 39^th poorest nation as per World Bank (using GNP per capita as the main criterion) out of the 203 classified by WB. One measure of success is the extent of autonomy or sovereignty acquired by a country. Who pledged our sovereignty is something known to most of us. For Pakistanis, whether they are rich or poor, the deteriorating law and order situation, with no protection for life or property is perhaps the most important negative consequence of inequitable growth. And yes, I do question the claims made by politicians, economists and others who feed us with some rose-colored statistics all the time, when did Pakistan make any progress? Because for people like me, lower growth with more personal security and freedom is  a preferred choice.

  

[Taha]

we need a new prime minister now, so why dont they invite Musharraf for that position

[SUPARCO]

Salaam,

The least Pervaiz Musharraf could've done was get the Western world to write off all of Pakistan's debts... but he couldn't do it could he in almost a decade of his military rule.  This is despite the whole Western world suddenly found themselves dependent on Pakistan.

Maybe he needed to rule for another few decades to achieve that.

Salaam

[Saqr]

Fatima47, on 14 April 2012 - 06:15 AM, said:

  
The story of all the economic growth is incomplete unless we examine the results and consequences of that growth. So what indicators are we going to choose and with whom are we going to compare ourselves? Many of the countries that had pretty much same problems as we had at the time of independence, now fall in the category of newly industrializing countries, while we are still the 39^th poorest nation as per World Bank (using GNP per capita as the main criterion) out of the 203 classified by WB. One measure of success is the extent of autonomy or sovereignty acquired by a country. Who pledged our sovereignty is something known to most of us. For Pakistanis, whether they are rich or poor, the deteriorating law and order situation, with no protection for life or property is perhaps the most important negative consequence of inequitable growth. And yes, I do question the claims made by politicians, economists and others who feed us with some rose-colored statistics all the time, when did Pakistan make any progress? Because for people like me, lower growth with more personal security and freedom is  a preferred choice.

This is an older post, but I think it is very important to discuss...

Strong GDP growth is a good thing, it indicates that a country's economy is in fact expanding and that new wealth is being generated. At the same time however GDP growth is only one dimension of progress and prosperity. The other aspect, which is just as important, is distribution and how far that newly generated wealth is making its way to all participants of the economy. For some economists, the privatization of natural resources is a good method to achieving the best possible growth within an economy - and they're correct. However, while a lot of wealth is being generated we also have to look into who is most benefiting from that growth, and with privatized resources it would be the private shareholders, not the general population. On the other hand, public management of natural resources can (in most cases) be economically inefficient, meaning that growth in that industry is not as solid as it should be (but it is still growing, nonetheless). In this scenario your growth isn't going to be as high, but the wealth is making its way into more hands, and in turn those recipients can be in a position to undertake private ventures that can be economically efficient.

Simply put, my point is that we can achieve immense growth and prosperity (definitely more than what we're seeing today) provided we implement proper economic policies that are coupled with the right political and social stances. It doesn't necessarily have to be that in return for greater state sovereignty and freedom we would be economically less well-off. Things can turn out that way, but things can also go the other way as well - the world is a big place with countless actions, transactions, exchanges, etc happening within every second. A strong society can for a years possess a lot of wealth, and in other years it can suffer from drought, famine and poverty.