Pakistani and Malaysian economies compared, Why is Malaysia doing better, lol?

[Indos]

Half of Pakistan's problems will be solved the day it stops funding it's corrupt army and makes peace with india. They can enjoy the fruit of development just like Bangladesh, Indonesia, vietnam , phillipines and India are doing right now. The biggest problem for Pakistan is the military dictatorship, they always try to find a way to make themselves relevant to the public and hence pick up unwinnable fights against a much larger and powerful india for which Pakistan dosent have the resources to fight. Pakistan is not blessed with natural resources which automatically rules out development models based on the gulf states. It neither has a well educated workforce to work in IT and financial services sector like india and Phillipines nor does it have the skilled labour to manufacture value added goods like vietnam and indonesia does

PAK could have spent more on education during 1965- present, and could have replicated Indian IT industry success provided they focused on institution and economic development since PAK early birth as a nation.

As British former colony, PAK has relatively better English than most developing nations. Indian uses their English capability to penetrate Western market IT service and the value is huge.

Since 2004, Indonesia spend 20 % of its state budget for education system. Currently our teachers salary is pretty good, the same like medical specialist.

It is stated in our law since 2004 that education should have had 20 % portion of state budget. Our 2023 state budget is more than 200 billion USD.

This equal to 40 billion USD, while our defense budget is 8.3 billion USD. The best schools and universities in Indonesia are highly dominated by public schools. The best high school in Indonesia for many years is taken by state Madrasah located in Banten province (Java Island ). It is also boarding school like typical Islamic Madrasah in Indonesia. 90 percent of the graduates end up in best Indonesian universities which are all public universities like University of Indonesia ( UI ), Institute Technology Bandung ( ITB), UGM, ITS, UNPAD, and so on.....

We also have many state Islamic universities funded by central Gov. We have around 33 province, and almost each Indonesian province has one. From there our Ulama (Indians like to call it as Mullah ) generally comes from. Not all end up as Ulama as well, many becomes journalists, entrepreneurs, and other profession like marketing, sales etc that dont need specifict worldly scientific knowledge. But common jobs for them are Islamic religious teachers where from before kindergarden like TPA until universities we need them, regardless what faculty we enter in our university, for 2 semesters we have Islamic Study as study objects.

 

[nahtanbob]

I dont say Pakistan can get more FDI than India, what I said is that Pakistan will get more FDI than what it currently has.

That is possible. It won't be because Pakistan is closer to Europe than India

PAK could have spent more on education during 1965- present,

1951 stats for India & Pakistan
India - 18% Pakistan 17%

1961 stats
India - 29% Pakistan 18%

The game was pretty much over by 1965

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

On word answer Bhutto.

in 1965, after a decade of Ayuban rule, Pakistan was by far the most promising (large) Asian nation outside Japan. So much so that even Koreans sent a delegation to learn from Pak's model, Pak was set to become the first Asian Tiger (long before the term was coined) Then Bhutto led Pak into a war and we all know what happened next.

Regards

The wars were big contributing factors, but the cause was Bhutto's "nationalization" scheme, a multi-pronged attack on Pakistan's productive energies.

First, it permanently scuttled Pakistani interest in investing in capital-intensive industries like mining, energy, manufacturing, etc. Next, Bhutto started staffing once productive SOEs with unproductive loyalists, setting a precedent for future leaders to do the same across governments, SOEs, national institutions, etc.

If not for "nationalization," Pakistan could've recovered from the 1965 and 1971 wars provided it retained its nation's entrepreneurial spirits, industrial development course, and investments in education. However, Bhutto scuttled the economic side, while future leaders (politicians and army dictators alike) never paid attention to education and human development (which, due to a relatively weak economic, wouldn't have been absorbed anyways).

We're so far, yet in some ways, also very close. Despite its problems, one can always utilize the country's geo-strategic position, massive population, and other strengths provided they build strong and sincere leadership. IMO, if Pakistan gains such a leadership, it'll recover quickly and put itself back in position to pursue its regional interests.

 

[Indos]

That is possible. It won't be because Pakistan is closer to Europe than India

Pakistan close geographic location to Europe is always one positive thing that can be utilized, of course it needs other things to make it competitive place as investment hub for manufacturer eager to penetrate South Asian, Europe, Gulf market.

As I have said already that Indonesian company called Bukaka needs to build a factory in India in order to penetrate European market. Based on their team assessment, it will not be competitive enough to just rely on their factories in Indonesia if the target is European market.

Their products are pretty large, it can cost them huge money to ship them from Indonesia to European continent.

 

[nahtanbob]

Pakistan close geographic location to Europe is always one positive thing that can be utilized

Pakistan is not close to Europe. In any case it is not any closer than India.

The wars were big contributing factors, but the cause was Bhutto's "nationalization" scheme, a multi-pronged attack on Pakistan's productive energies.

First, it permanently scuttled Pakistani interest in investing in capital-intensive industries like mining, energy, manufacturing, etc. Next, Bhutto started staffing once productive SOEs with unproductive loyalists, setting a precedent for future leaders to do the same across governments, SOEs, national institutions, etc.

If not for "nationalization," Pakistan could've recovered from the 1965 and 1971 wars provided it retained its nation's entrepreneurial spirits, industrial development course, and investments in education. However, Bhutto scuttled the economic side, while future leaders (politicians and army dictators alike) never paid attention to education and human development (which, due to a relatively weak economic, wouldn't have been absorbed anyways).

We're so far, yet in some ways, also very close. Despite its problems, one can always utilize the country's geo-strategic position, massive population, and other strengths provided they build strong and sincere leadership. IMO, if Pakistan gains such a leadership, it'll recover quickly and put itself back in position to pursue its regional interests.

I can see why you blame Bhutto's nationalization. There are plenty of 3rd world populists who have done the same. With a low literacy rate it does not matter. You would have failed anyway