Pakistan Could Have Become an Asian Tiger By Now

[Mav3rick]

I understand what Riaz is doing and I agree with him to the extent that the nation needs morale boosting and a reminder of good achievements. Especially when most of the Pakistani media excels in kicking us while we are down.

However, I disagree with him on what constitutes progress.

When I think of Pakistan, I think of the poor masses who lack even basic necessities; the young people whose potential is never realized because the government can't even give them 24 hours of electricity; or the salaried people who are stuck carrying the income tax burden while most of the richer folks hitch a free ride.

I don't measure progress by the nation's average bank balance, or the number of American fast food joints, or the number of car dealerships.

I measure it by the number of world class athletes, scientists, artists, universities that Pakistan produces. We have the potential. There were times when we could hold our own against the best of them in almost all these fields. It's sad to see how far we have fallen.

And so what other better option did we have to support the ouster of Musharraf?? And how has the so called democracy ever served us Pakistanis or Pakistan overall?

there is no land reforms in pakistan. 85% land is occupied by 10-15% populaion......fact is different on ground.... you had potential but no correct direction and in present time lot need to done to over come....all the best and work hard...no shot cuts and day dreaming

As I have said on so many previous occasions, we have not been as blessed as India has been when it comes to Leaders.

 

[Panther 57]

Whatever good Musharraf may have done was erased and the country immediately regressed when he left.

Musharraf did not make the necessary fundamental changes in society. Without those fundamental changes (land reforms, tax reforms, etc.) any "progress" will be temporary and illusory.

Very right. He got carried away with cronies recommendations in second tenure. He was the only one who had a chance to change Pakistan's political future (on the day he took over), which he missed. Still I respect him for what he did for this country.

 

[AhsanAmin]

And so what other better option did we have to support the ouster of Musharraf?? And how has the so called democracy ever served us Pakistanis or Pakistan overall?

Maverick, Democracy is not a magic wand to fix all problems like we would ideally like to solve in a few years.
Military leaders might be better than average administrators, since they can easily force their writ on people using their power etc., which can be somewhat better than anarchy. On the other hand, to truly be a modern prosperous we need strong democratic institutions and ethics. This could not happen since every third general becomes greedy and start to overstep his authority to interfere in the workings of popular government one way or the other.

We still cannot wait for really long and continue to say that democracy will work one day. I think every citizen of our country has to play their role in that. We need to criticize the wrong things and give right suggestions. Try to influence other people in a way that helps our country. If we actually give good suggestions and discuss them honestly, everything can have some positive effect. All of us have to play our role in it.

If you can see, several of the feudals who were elected in earlier governments, got defeated when they could not do good work for their constituents. There are signs of some improvement.

The political parties need to have a strong will to honestly teach general public what they should see in the candidates when they make a decision to vote.

 

[Developereo]

I remember that Musharraf used to speak of a 20 year plan for reforms in Pakistan. Perhaps the things that we speak of were on his agenda, especially land reforms.

We don't know if he didn't do land reforms because there was already too much turmoil in the region (Afghanistan) or he was the feudals' lackey, like the other generals. Perhaps he didn't think they were needed.

All we know is that he didn't do those reforms and we see what happened as soon as the old guard came back.

 

[Jade]

Because an HDI is 'a composite index measuring average achievement in three basic dimensions of human development—a long and healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living. See Technical note 1 at http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_2013_En_technotes.pdf for detailson how the HDI is calculated.' (Page 151 of the UNDP Human Development Report 2013)

Naturally we rank lower than India on the first two !

And Census aren't everything nor are they utilized by such various organizations to give their findings because one doesn't take 'a country's own survey, conducted by themselves to show how well or worse they performed' because otherwise 'objectivity' would go out the window !

The findings of National Censuses are used in Comparison to show - This is what was claimed & this is what our Findings have shown !

From the same Report heres an Extract of the Main Sources used by them for the Multidimensional Poverty Index :

Columns 1 and 2: Calculated from various household surveys, including ICF Macro Demographic and Health Surveys, united nations Children’s Fund Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys and World Health organization World Health Surveys conducted between 2000 and 2010.

Columns 3–10: Calculated based on data on household deprivations in education, health and
living standards from various household surveys as listed in column 1.

Columns 11 and 12: World Bank (2012a).

(Page 161 of the UNDP Human Development Report 2013)

Actually UN or World bank depend on national surveys/census to get their figures as UN or World bank neither have the sources or capability to conduct their surveys/census physically.

However, each organization have their own econometric models, robustness tests and error estimates - statistical and non statistical - to arrive at their figures, hence you find discrepancies in the figures they arrive at

 

[Capt.Popeye]

We don't know if he didn't do land reforms because there was already too much turmoil in the region (Afghanistan) or he was the feudals' lackey, like the other generals. Perhaps he didn't think they were needed.

All we know is that he didn't do those reforms and we see what happened as soon as the old guard came back.

Or another possibility: Musharraff did not carry out the reforms, because you (i.e. his countrymen) were not prepared to gift him 20 years in power to do so?

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Or another possibility: Musharraff did not carry out the reforms, because you (i.e. his countrymen) were not prepared to gift him 20 years in power to do so?

Big reforms are usually carried out quickly after a new administration has come in, because that is the only time when they will have enough political capital to do so.

Like Deng Xiaoping, he came in and started reforming right away.

Or Xi Jinping and the recent reforms we had. Or even Obama and his Obamacare.

If an Administration comes in, and drags their feet on reform, you can guess they won't be reforming later either, when their political capital has run down so low that they couldn't even push through reforms even if they wanted to.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

As I have said on so many previous occasions, we have not been as blessed as India has been when it comes to Leaders.

Our (Indian) leaders are not God's Gifts either!!!!!
Just that we frequently remind them that we will kick their A$$ES very hard, at the time of every elections, that helps to keep them in check.
Try the same formula, it will work !

Big reforms are usually carried out quickly after a new administration has come in, because that is the only time when they will have enough political capital to do so.

Like Deng Xiaoping, he came in and started reforming right away.

Or Xi Jinping and the recent reforms we had. Or even Obama and his Obamacare.

If an Administration comes in, and drags their feet on reform, you can guess they won't be reforming later either, when their political capital has run down so low that they couldn't even push through reforms even if they wanted to.

In that particular instance that I was referring to: there was simply no intention to reform anything.
The man usurped the Chair simply to save his own back-side.
His Country had nothing to do with it.

 

[Friei Indien]

bullshit article, pakistan an asian tiger? sounds to me more like a joke

 

[Developereo]

Or another possibility: Musharraff did not carry out the reforms, because you (i.e. his countrymen) were not prepared to gift him 20 years in power to do so?

Well, no one should be gifted 20 years; there should be sustained pressure to perform and they should earn their tenure.

Also, it's a chicken and egg situation. Most people in Pakistan live in rural areas which are always more conservative and traditional. The rural masses vote for the status quo partly because they are afraid of the feudal lord, partly out of respect for traditions, and partly because they simply don't know the benefits of change.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Well, no one should be gifted 20 years; there should be sustained pressure to perform and they should earn their tenure.

Also, it's a chicken and egg situation. Most people in Pakistan live in rural areas which are always more conservative and traditional. The rural masses vote for the status quo partly because they are afraid of the feudal lord, partly out of respect for traditions, and partly because they simply don't know the benefits of change.

Which simply brings us around to what you correctly stated in an earlier post; simply keep the Awaam-e-Miskeen in a state of perpetual ignorance and disempowerment.

Which is best aided by a medieval education system among other things; like the fear of a military jack-boot treading over them intermittently.
Nothing can work better than that to maintain Status-Quo.

 

[Developereo]

Which simply brings us around to what you correctly stated in an earlier post; simply keep the Awaam-e-Miskeen in a state of perpetual ignorance and disempowerment.

Which is best aided by a medieval education system among other things; like the fear of a military jack-boot treading over them intermittently.
Nothing can work better than that to maintain Status-Quo.

I don't think the vast majority of Pakistani people fear the military. Quite the opposite, in fact.

The military is probably one of the best loved and respected institutions in the country.

The urban elite's criticisms of the army are not at all representative of the masses.

Even in the cities, people love the military. I remember hearing stories about the area where I lived in Karachi. Nearby, the shop owners had gradually encroached first onto the footpath and then even onto the street itself, so that there was hardly anything left of the actual road. Even a bicycle could barely pass through.

Needless to say, the civilian authorities were completely paid off.

When Musharraf came, one of his military men announced that he was going to drive his truck down the road and anything which got in the way would be torn down.

And he did!

 

[Mav3rick]

Our (Indian) leaders are not God's Gifts either!!!!!
Just that we frequently remind them that we will kick their A$$ES very hard, at the time of every elections, that helps to keep them in check.
Try the same formula, it will work !

That may indeed be true today, however, you guys were lucky because your founding fathers lived long lives and helped establish the country.......the land reforms in India alone laid a solid foundation upon which she was built. Such was not the case with Pakistan as we lost our true leaders quickly and one after the other.

Maverick, Democracy is not a magic wand to fix all problems like we would ideally like to solve in a few years.
Military leaders might be better than average administrators, since they can easily force their writ on people using their power etc., which can be somewhat better than anarchy. On the other hand, to truly be a modern prosperous we need strong democratic institutions and ethics. This could not happen since every third general becomes greedy and start to overstep his authority to interfere in the workings of popular government one way or the other.

We still cannot wait for really long and continue to say that democracy will work one day. I think every citizen of our country has to play their role in that. We need to criticize the wrong things and give right suggestions. Try to influence other people in a way that helps our country. If we actually give good suggestions and discuss them honestly, everything can have some positive effect. All of us have to play our role in it.

If you can see, several of the feudals who were elected in earlier governments, got defeated when they could not do good work for their constituents. There are signs of some improvement.

The political parties need to have a strong will to honestly teach general public what they should see in the candidates when they make a decision to vote.

My friend, unfortunately I cannot agree with you. It's mostly because you have too much faith in democracy which simply does not work in the current shape and form. Let me give you just 1 example, Karachi gives its mandate to MQM (we shall not indulge in the legitimacy of the mandate for the time being) yet MQM does not have the power to do anything in the city. 2nd example is the administration of local governments which does not exist in spirit and will not exist until a military dictator takes over and does something magical which boots out the feudals and landlords for once and all.

This is not democracy, this is a selection process. The highest bidder gets all.

 

[Janmejay]

bullshit article, pakistan an asian tiger? sounds to me more like a joke

we can be friends,what do you think?

 

[BJP*]

India's poor is concentrated in BIMARU states and within that Bihar and Madhya pradesh already maintain GDP growth of 10-12% for last 10 years,rest of South India and West India and some northern states already light years ahead .

It is Maharastra and Uttar Pradesh which have registered top growth rates instead of Bihar and Madhya Pradesh (this data is from 2004 to 2012)
List of Indian states by GDP - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia