[Kursed]

Originally Posted by MummyDaddy

Do you honestly believe that these things wouldn't have happened under ANY government? It's not really very difficult to open your market up to lots of phone and computer imports. Would we be living in the Stone Age if there had been a democratic government?

MD, why don't you see the honest intentions that Gen. Musharraf brought along with him? The country in the days of Nawaz Sharif, was already at the brink of going bankrupt, how could they possibly attract more business from the outside world? We were about to go default on our loan payments, and that would have made life hell for the people of Pakistan. Gen. Musharraf changed that for us, even during his tenure between 1999 and 2001. Did he not?

Why are you not thankful to him for that? At least they did something, instead of the wasted 90s.

And while yes, Mobilink was set-up before Gen. Musharraf, the real boom in the telecom sector and it's expansion came after the declaration of his telecom policies. Before that, Mobilink was the sole GSM cellular service provider in Pakistan, now we've 5.

As for Wateen and all the Middle Eastern investment... after 9/11, Arab investors simply pulled their money out of the US and Europe, and diverted it to new markets such as Pakistan. Musharraf got lucky. Any democratic government in his place would have done the exact same things. When you see how interlinked the global economy is, you begin to understand how limited the options available to governments are. Any other government would have done the same.

Even if, Musharraf got lucky, you've to give him the credit for capitalizing on that lucky chance, no? Because these type of 'lucky chances' also came in 80's and 90's, but instead of being grabbed with both hands, were wasted, and whatever little they offered, was being used in building Palaces.

Why don't you understand the difference between 'what actually happened' and 'what could have happened'? If a democratic government, (which you call s dictatorship) had not intervened and saved Pakistan from that disastrous situation.

Let me see... the development of a strong export economy that isn't dependent on primary commodities like cotton. The equitable distribution of wealth within the country, with a relatively large, well-funded public sector providing an economically sustainable level of welfare. The development of indigenous industries capable of producing quality capital goods.

MD, when people here say 'growing' or 'flourishing' economy, they are not comparing it with the best economies in the world like China, America, etc, having the best exports. But are trying to differentiate the current, on-track economy, from our past of a pathetic and looted economy.

We've never had such a good growing economy ever in the history of Pakistan. That of course does not means, that there is not a lot that still needs to be done. But whatever has been done, is an indicator of what good there is to come. So why are you not thankful to him for that?

As for the FDIs and a 'strong export economy', please tell me just one way, in which you could have a "strong export economy" or a 'equitable distribution of wealth' or 'indigenous industries' , when your country almost got bankrupt few years ago.

Will you first try to get the economy on its feet, allow sufficient money to flow in, or will you directly jump to achieve a 'strong export economy', with insufficient money?

You will first allow sufficient money to come in and set along building the country, and that by creating good environment, allowing FDI's to flow in, set major industries like IT industry etc, set multinational firms, set up major construction work all around, build up more private sectors and give them roles, increase your GDP growth, repair all that bad which was done, etc etc.

This is called foundation, and even this was not seen before, and this is what we're call as 'growth' in the economy, not a 'perfect' economy.

BTW... here's an article on "export growth": (especially read last 3 para's)
Can exports be engine of growth in Pakistan? -DAWN - Business; September 15, 2003
and this one Pakistan Books 26.5% Textiles Export Growth Despite Challenges.

But what about the guy living in Chak 50, district Sargodha, who has to feed a family of 6 on Rs. 2000/month. According to the UNDP, 72% of Pakistan's population lives on less than $2/day. That basically means that in a nation of 150 million people, 108 million live on less than Rs. 3500 a month. Does that look like economic growth to you?

MD, you went on to quote that 72% of the people live under $2/day, but you did not mention the decrease which has taken place in these numbers, i.e during 90's, the poverty rate increased by 10-14% as compared to 80's, but has under Gen. Musharraf, decreased by 5-9% as compared to the 90's, which means that IF, 72% of population lives under $2/day today (IF, because I'm not sure) then almost 80% of population used to live under $2/day before Musharraf.

Doesn't this decrease in poverty level looks like growth to you? Or is it that if someone claims 'economic growth', you automatically assume poverty levels to be decreased to a complete 0% and that anything over 0% does not mean economic growth to you?

Here is some data,

This is what was happening pre-1999, i.e before Musharraf:

PAKISTAN: NOW, THE POVERTY BOMB GOES OFF
http://www.adb.org/Documents/news/PR...prm_200203.asp

This is what happened since he came:

World Bank lauds Pakistan’s poverty reduction efforts -DAWN - Top Stories; October 19, 2006
https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/pk.html
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTE...579398,00.html

Mir, Malik,Masood and other "super analysts", will not tell you this, becoz they are not paid to.

And what about the social sector? Was there any noticeable increase, under Musharraf, in education or health spending? No. What we did see more of was debt servicing and military spending.

Social Sector:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...12-2006_pg5_21
Country Strategy and Program Update 2006-2008 - Pakistan - ADB.org

While, its true that Pakistan military got a good amount of spending, but education and health sector also received an increase in funding, which was not even seen in the 90's.

So, please compare and then check whether we're on the right path or not, as being on the right path is the most important thing.

What has Musharraf given us? Investment in Telecom and construction... and? What local development has there been? All I see is a large number of multinational firms, an overvalued stock market driven up by speculation, a bursting housing bubble, and a growing balance of payments problem.

Again, not studying the importance of what progress has been made, and being unaware of what has been achieved, especially as compared to the 90's.