What's new

Comparing India and Pakistan 2010

Status
Not open for further replies.

RiazHaq

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
6,611
Reaction score
70
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Dr. Ishrat Husain, a former World Bank senior official and an ex governor of the State Bank of Pakistan, wrote an article captioned "India, Pakistan: a comparison" at the end of the first five decades of two nations' existence as independent states. To my knowledge, Dr. Hussain has not done an update of his article since it was first published. Although about three years too late, this post is my attempt to present a comparison of the two South Asian nations after sixty years of independence.

Here is a partial update:

1. Per capita incomes in both nations have more than doubled in the last ten years, in spite of significant increases in population. The most recent and detailed real per capita income data was calculated and reported by Asian Development Bank based on a detailed study of a list of around 800 household and nonhousehold products in 2005 and early 2006 to compare real purchasing power for ADB's trans-national income comparison program (ICP). The ABD ICP concluded that Pakistan had the highest per capita income at HK$ 13,528 (US $1,745) among the largest nations in South Asia. ADB reported India’s per capita as HK $12,090 (US $1,560).

2. The incidence of poverty (defined as $1.25 per day) has also come down in both nations, although the number of poor in South Asia still remains very high. According to the 2009 UN Human and Income Poverty Report, the people living under $1.25 a day in India is 41.6 percent, about twice as much as Pakistan's 22.6 percent. The most recent estimates by UNDP in Pakistan for 2007-2008 indicate poverty level at 17.2%.

3. Food production has barely kept pace with the rise of population, particularly in Pakistan. There have been higher food prices and shortages of various commodities such as wheat and sugar. There is widespread hunger and malnutrition in all parts of India. India ranks 66th on the 2008 Global Hunger Index of 88 countries while Pakistan is slightly better at 61 and Bangladesh slightly worse at 70. The first India State Hunger Index (Ishi) report in 2008 found that Madhya Pradesh had the most severe level of hunger in India, comparable to Chad and Ethiopia. Four states — Punjab, Kerala, Haryana and Assam — fell in the 'serious' category. "Affluent" Gujarat, 13th on the Indian list is below Haiti, ranked 69. The authors said India's poor performance was primarily due to its relatively high levels of child malnutrition and under-nourishment resulting from calorie deficient diets.

4. Though the nutritional status has improved in both nations, there are still very high levels of malnutrition, particularly among children. In spite of the fact that there is about 22% malnutrition in Pakistan and the child malnutrition being much higher at 40% (versus India's 46%), the average per capita calorie intake of about 2500 calories is within normal range. But the nutritional balance necessary for good health appears to be lacking in Pakistanis' dietary habits. Senior Indian official Syeda Hameed has acknowledged that Pakistan and Bangladesh have done better than India in meeting the nutritional needs of their populations.

5. India's economy has grown more rapidly than Pakistan's in the last ten years. However, both nations have accepted and implemented significant economic reforms that have opened up their economies and brought about rapid growth, more than doubling the size of each economy in the last ten years.

Let me conclude with an excerpt from a British writer William Dalrymple's article, published on 14 August, 2007 in The Guardian:

"On the ground, of course, the reality is different and first-time visitors to Pakistan are almost always surprised by the country's visible prosperity. There is far less poverty on show in Pakistan than in India, fewer beggars, and much less desperation. In many ways the infrastructure of Pakistan is much more advanced: there are better roads and airports, and more reliable electricity. Middle-class Pakistani houses are often bigger and better appointed than their equivalents in India.

Moreover, the Pakistani economy is undergoing a construction and consumer boom similar to India's, with growth rates of 7%, and what is currently the fastest-rising stock market in Asia. You can see the effects everywhere: in new shopping centers and restaurant complexes, in the hoardings for the latest laptops and iPods, in the cranes and building sites, in the endless stores selling mobile phones: in 2003 the country had fewer than three million cellphone users; today there are almost 50 million."


Summary:

If the deteriorating security situation and current economic slump in Pakistan are not contained and managed properly, there is a strong chance that Pakistan would be left significantly behind India at the time of the next update of this comparison in 2020. However, Pakistan is just too big to fail. In spite of all of the serious problems it faces today, I remain optimistic that country will not only survive but thrive in the coming decades. With a fairly large educated urban middle class, vibrant media, active civil society, assertive judiciary, many philanthropic organizations, and a spirit of entrepreneurship, the nation has the necessary ingredients to overcome its current difficulties to build a strong economy with a democratic government accountable to its people.


Please read more at:

Haq's Musings: India and Pakistan Contrasted in 2010

Haq's Musings: India-Pakistan Military Balance
 
.
"Four states — Punjab, Kerala, Haryana and Assam — fell in the 'serious' category. "Affluent" Gujarat, 13th on the Indian list is below Haiti, ranked 69."

I have my doubts on the above figures. Punjab, Kerala and Gujarat are the top states in India and are nowhere prone to child malnutrition. In fact Punjab and Haryana are pretty much the grain bowls of India. Combined together they constitute more than half of the country's wheat and rice production. And I have traveled extensively in these states, to compare them with sub-Saharan Africa and Haiti is laughable.
 
. .
"Four states — Punjab, Kerala, Haryana and Assam — fell in the 'serious' category. "Affluent" Gujarat, 13th on the Indian list is below Haiti, ranked 69."

I have my doubts on the above figures. Punjab, Kerala and Gujarat are the top states in India and are nowhere prone to child malnutrition. In fact Punjab and Haryana are pretty much the grain bowls of India. Combined together they constitute more than half of the country's wheat and rice production. And I have traveled extensively in these states, to compare them with sub-Saharan Africa and Haiti is laughable.

You are absolutly right.....The writer has no knowledge...he just write what ever comes in his mind.Gujarat is 2nd fastest growing state in india @ 13% rate.Punjab,haryana produce feeds whole north india and the writer is saying there in malnutrition in punj,haryana
 
.
Four states — Punjab, Kerala, Haryana and Assam — fell in the 'serious' category.
I can assure you this is 100 % wrong. Please do some research before you post something.
 
.
He made the same claim about Kerala and Punjab in another thread too...I dont know where he got that idea that Punjab,Haryana,Kerala and Gujrat having serious issues??

PS..Riyas Haq is this Haq muslim your blog???
 
. .
Guys....I can say this article is seriously soft trolling.

I checked some of the information and they are wrong!! I am least bothered to post the links/sources. Just google and boom.....article goes to trash.

The article is just a chest thumping exercise to show India in a poor light. For any neutral person, I request not to read it as they would die laughing. :D

But this all was expected afterall. The source of the article is very reouted as I say. ;)

:tdown:
 
Last edited:
.
The per capita income of Punjab for the year 2005-06 stood at Rs 28605 against Haryana's per capita income of Rs 29887.

Here's the link.
Article: Punjab's per capita income lower than Chandigarh, Haryana. - PTI - The Press Trust of India Ltd. | HighBeam Research - FREE trial

Per Capita Income of the countries mentioned
Chad-$164.9
Haiti-$480.52
Here's the source-
Gross National Income (per capita) by country. Definition, graph and map.

Now for Punjab and Haryana-
Punjab-$623.4 (Rs 28605)
Haryana-$651.465 (Rs 29887)

Compare the figures in bold!

I understand that in your eagerness to denounce everything Indian as backward, you failed to use your common sense while reading this article. But in future you might want to Google and check for data yourself before posting.
 
. .
In many ways the infrastructure of Pakistan is much more advanced: there are better roads and airports, and more reliable electricity. Middle-class Pakistani houses are often bigger and better appointed than their equivalents in India.

i highly doubt tat
 
.
[
B]Middle-class Pakistani houses are often bigger and better appointed than their equivalents in India.[/B]

yup coz the real state in india is costly and infact very costly
and about better appointed have u seen indian houses
 
.
I read the first point and I stopped reading further.

Read the first point again -

Here is a partial update:

1. Per capita incomes in both nations have more than doubled in the last ten years, in spite of significant increases in population. The most recent and detailed real per capita income data was calculated and reported by Asian Development Bank based on a detailed study of a list of around 800 household and nonhousehold products in 2005 and early 2006 to compare real purchasing power for ADB's trans-national income comparison program (ICP). The ABD ICP concluded that Pakistan had the highest per capita income at HK$ 13,528 (US $1,745) among the largest nations in South Asia. ADB reported India’s per capita as HK $12,090 (US $1,560).

This is a classic example of 'cherry picking'. To those who are not aware of the term, read -

Cherry picking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have no clue from where the per capita figures cited by the author came from, but they are definitely nominal figures. Now, that very same ADB, which is used as a source by the author, says this on page 168 of this 2009 report -

http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/Key_Indicators/2009/pdf/Key-Indicators-2009.pdf

"Real comparison" can only be made using PPP. Using PPPs eliminates differences due to price levels so that comparisons reflect only differences in the volumes of goods and services for final use.

Any person who has studied even basic micro and macroeconomics will find the above statement obvious. Now, on that page itself India's per capita income is given as $2,923 and Pakistan's $2,657.

Even a first year economics student can easily conclude that Pakistan's nominal per capita income is higher compared to India's because it has higher price levels but the size of its economy per capita is lower than that of India's (as reflected by the PPP figures). The author purposely ignored PPP comparison to show Pakistan in better light.

So continue with the 'cherry picking'.
 
.
Four states — Punjab, Kerala, Haryana and Assam — fell in the 'serious' category. "Affluent" Gujarat, 13th on the Indian list is below Haiti, ranked 69.

As a Keralite I didnt knew that...Gees I was in a fools paradise..;)


Any way thank you for a good :rofl:
 
.
For those of you who have trouble dealing with the truth about resurgent India's poverty, hunger and malnutrition, here is the link to the India State Hunger Index (ISHI) 2008 report that talks about terrible hunger across the "affluent" states in India.

http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/pubs/cp/ishi08.pdf

And here's the International Food Report talking about India's hunger:

India Faces Urgent Hunger Situation | International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)

Babu Matthew, country director for ActionAid India, recently said: "The dark side of India's economic growth has been that the excluded social groups have been further marginalized, compounding their hunger, malnutrition and even leading to starvation deaths."

Among the developing countries ranked by Action Aid for Hunger, Brazil wins the top spot with B grade (no country gets an A on a scale from A to E), with the aid agency praising President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva's support for land reform and community kitchens for the poor.

ActionAid said Brazil's success shows "what can be achieved when the state has both resources and political will to tackle hunger".

China (B grade) is also gets high marks for cutting the number of hungry by 58 million in 10 years through strong state support for smallholder farmers.

But the report is critical of resurgent India, which receives the lowest possible E (essentially an F) grade for hunger. It says 30 million Indians have been added to the ranks of the hungry since the mid-1990s and 46% of children are underweight. Pakistan, with grade D, is also ranked low, with 31% of its children underweight. Bangladesh, receiving C grade, is praised for reducing the number of chronically food-insecure people from 40 million to 27 million in the past 10 years and for improving childhood nutrition in the past two decades. But the report says Bangladesh has a long way to go to reduce overall malnutrition and build a sustainable agricultural system.

A recent British government report has described India as nutritional weakling. There is widespread hunger and malnutrition in all parts of India. India ranks 66th on the 2008 Global Hunger Index of 88 countries while Pakistan is slightly better at 61 and Bangladesh slightly worse at 70. The first India State Hunger Index (Ishi) report in 2008 found that Madhya Pradesh had the most severe level of hunger in India, comparable to Chad and Ethiopia. Four states — Punjab, Kerala, Haryana and Assam — fell in the 'serious' category. "Affluent" Gujarat, 13th on the Indian list is below Haiti, ranked 69. The authors said India's poor performance was primarily due to its relatively high levels of child malnutrition and under-nourishment resulting from calorie deficient diets.

India's planning commission official Syeda Hamed has acknowledged that "ountries like Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka are better" than India in providing basic nutrition to their children.

'India worse than Pakistan, Bangladesh on nourishment' ? Sulekha News

Haq's Musings: Grinding Poverty in Resurgent India
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom