Pakistan would become among top ten economies at its 100th anniversary: Ahsan Iqbal

[jarves]

All those words but you said nothing to counter my point! It has got nothing to do with Pakistan or me being Indian, so please avoid ad hominem attacks and focus.

Ranking of an economy doesn't say anything about the size of the economy! How does one reach to the conclusion that an 18th Rank Pakistan will be better off in terms of per capita, than a 1st place China or 2nd Place India, when you don't even know the actual size of the economy? As I said ranking of an economy is relative, it tells you absolutely nothing about the size of the economy.

Not to mention that Pakistan reaching in top 18 is complete BS.Its one of those predictions which are not even 10% right.Forget about 18 th position.Pakistan will not even manage to land in top 25.

 

[my2cents]

He said that the country's economy has been growing at average of 5 or 5.5 percent which is not sufficient adding that if "we have to put the economy on right path, we need decent growth".

He expressed the hope that the country's economy would become among top ten economies at its 100th anniversary.

Economy turns around, indicators show positive change: Ahsan Iqbal

Abhi nahi to sau saal hi sahi.

 

[my2cents]

I have reported your post for being extremely insultive and abusive. If you have nothing to add, leave.

He is lot more pragmatic about planning for next 5 years instead of day dreaming to be top 10 economies some 40 years later.

The way the things are in Pakistan any sane person will tell you the same. Get things under control on the ground and you will see the same persons agreeing to your prediction.

Things can change drastically for good or worst in 40 years. Good indicator for growth is how much of R&D is happening in your country. Pakistan does not even figure in top 20 in R&D as of now.

 

[farhan_9909]

Not to mention that Pakistan reaching in top 18 is complete BS.Its one of those predictions which are not even 10% right.Forget about 18 th position.Pakistan will not even manage to land in top 25.

Pagal hay?

18th Largest by 2050 is the minimum Pakistan can get upto.

The real potential is among the top 12 by 2050.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Not to mention that Pakistan reaching in top 18 is complete BS.Its one of those predictions which are not even 10% right.Forget about 18 th position.Pakistan will not even manage to land in top 25.

Abhe RE, Pakistan will be trillion $ GDP before 2025. In terms of PPP its already over $1 trillion as of 2014. 18th is worst case scenario by 2050. Pakistan should be around 12-13th by then or even top 10.

 

[farhan_9909]

18th or 3.3Trillion dollars is the worst case scenerio indeed.

infact anything less than 5.5Trillion dollars means Pakistan has not even worked upto half of its potential.

 

[Viper0011.]

All those words but you said nothing to counter my point! It has got nothing to do with Pakistan or me being Indian, so please avoid ad hominem attacks and focus.

Ranking of an economy doesn't say anything about the size of the economy! How does one reach to the conclusion that an 18th Rank Pakistan will be better off in terms of per capita, than a 1st place China or 2nd Place India, when you don't even know the actual size of the economy? As I said ranking of an economy is relative, it tells you absolutely nothing about the size of the economy.

Its not about per capita income you genius. Both you and I know the point I am trying to make. Per capita income has a million different uses and calculations that go into it. A country has higher per capita income but can lack in development because it takes LOT longer to go build economy, homes, factories, telecom, infrastructure, etc across 5000 miles than 500 miles. This is common sense. I can't beat your lack of it so I am goin to quit responding.

Japan has more money than the US. But the US economy is way bigger than Japan's. One of the many facts are also that becuase the money is spent on a smaller geography and thus, all infrastructure development, maintenance and ongoing expenditure are way low. So its easier to develop a smaller area than a much larger area. Remember, Japan's the size of ONE US state (similar to Montana) and the US is 49 times bigger than Japan but Japan is richer.....???? while the US is a much bigger economy and bigger in other indicators? Like I said before, a smaller family living in a smaller home needs less money to have a better life style. A much bigger family living on many acres will have more ongoing costs, needs and will require a lot more money to meet the same lifestyle that a much smalle family enjoys with less money. US and Japan are a GREAT example. Let's put the stupidity to rest please.

India is such a large economy.......how come people in South Korea, Malaysia, Hong Kong and Denmark enjoy such a better lifestyle with like 10% of the population and a much smaller size fo the economy? Your answer to this also answers your question about Pakistan as to why its economic growth into top 20 would make its people to have an overall much better lifestyle than India or China for example.....let's drop the silly argument and act mature plz. Writing out of emotionality against Pakistan shouldn't take you away from facts and common sense. We come here to discuss and learn from each other. Not play bias....

 

[Viper0011.]

The above is what you posted.... do the math (if capable) and tell me if the above is correct. I have posted area and population of both states. If you further want to embarrass yourself then please do carry on.
A larger nation say like china, which has much more money to spend on it's population would be able to spend more money on it's population despite it's size because of it's massive GDP.
As far as issues with Indians are concerned , your hate filled retorts and bigotry are very well documented on the forum, please carry on similar conversation on your dinner table with you "Indian" friend, and find out what Indian nationalism is all about first hand...

1) I did the math. Help me explain, China (1.2 billion people) and Pakistan (less than Quarter of a billion, 200 million plus) so the latter is about FIVE times less smaller than the former.
2) If two people make good money and have savings, the one with two children and a small home will save a lot more than the other one who has 15 kids and 5 homes on 10 acres. Please go defy common sense and write more crap.
3) Frankly speaking, I don't have hate for India or the Indians. I actually have employees and friends that I trust a lot and they are from India. It's people like you who display so much hatred towards Pakistan that no matter how patience you try to be, you have to make the other one realize that out of their own hatred for Pakistan, they are scerewing up a valid post and discussion. Not sure which school did you go to where they taught you that.
Last, I know more economy than you can imagine. Tell me one thing, Indian economy is huge. Why is it that in Malaysia, Hong Kong, UAE, etc, people have a MUCH better lifestyle than India? Althought India is so big with population and the economy. In case of the UAE, you are talking India (10th largest economy with regards to nominal GDP) and UAE (30th economy with respect to Nominal GDP) and similar scenarios exist with others......so answer this for me??? And the same answer is applicable to this situation here with respect to Pakistanis having a much better lifestyle than India or China if they were to be in the top 20 thrivign economies.....

Business minded people can never ever take the country forward!.. I am not sure how do you draw this inference.. but fact is that now the government is in the hands of businessmen came up with rigged elections.. & what we have seen is only loans getting piled up .. nothing else.. there is not a single glimpse of industry's boom..

WOW. I am very impressed with your post. If the businessmen can't increase the job creation, better products, services and epand the overall economy then who will? The military general sitting in an armored vehicle? Just think what you posted. This has to be the weirdest, out of the reality post of the day. Never heard that the businessmen aren't responsible for the job creation, investments, etc, etc, which then drives the economy.........
To correct the record, your current government is actually respondible for doubling up your stock exchange in less than two years. That's huge. It usually takes a decade to two and a lot of investments. The SAME democratic government has actually brought you guys over 100 billions of investment. You'll see the results of this in the next 5 to 10 years. In fact, I was reading a Worldbank report, your country's overall debt dropped by a large sum due to the government policies and investment and funding that came in through building trust with other nations like China, the US, the UK, Canada, Japan, Saudia, etc. If you think your elections were 'rigged' ...you should follow the law and go file a petition in the court. You can't tell me that every judge is getting bribe from the government......????? If all of this is a part of a conspiracy theory, then let it go and be democratic. Wait for the next elections, use your voting right and bring in who you like. Till then, you should support your country's elected government and appreciate the good they do and criticize the bad they do. Don't run conspiracy theories....

 

[jarves]

Pagal hay?

18th Largest by 2050 is the minimum Pakistan can get upto.

The real potential is among the top 12 by 2050.

Yeah i know your predictions,the same way you told me about total GDP about Pakistan but we all saw the truth at last,aint we??

Get real dude there are predictions that India will be top economy by 2040 by more credible economists but we all know that it is not possible.Its time that you see the reality.

 

[MilSpec]

1) I did the math. Help me explain, China (1.2 billion people) and Pakistan (less than Quarter of a billion, 200 million plus) so the latter is about FIVE times less smaller than the former.

Go and check back your post, your claim was china's population density is 4 times that of pakistan. I hope you understand what that implies.

2) If two people make good money and have savings, the one with two children and a small home will save a lot more than the other one who has 15 kids and 5 homes on 10 acres. Please go defy common sense and write more crap.

thus the ratio... person making $60,000 with two small children compare that with the person making a milion dollar with 15 kids... keyword money to population ratio

3) Frankly speaking, I don't have hate for India or the Indians. I actually have employees and friends that I trust a lot and they are from India. It's people like you who display so much hatred towards Pakistan that no matter how patience you try to be, you have to make the other one realize that out of their own hatred for Pakistan, they are scerewing up a valid post and discussion. Not sure which school did you go to where they taught you that.

it's funny, you insist on making a fool out of yourself and then want to cook up some discussion without any comprehension or logic... making snide remarks at my education is futile, it will probably stack up better than yours.

Last, I know more economy than you can imagine.

says someone who claims china's population density 4 is times larger than pakistan. I don't claim to be an expert or know more than you about anything.

Tell me one thing, Indian economy is huge. Why is it that in Malaysia, Hong Kong, UAE, etc, people have a MUCH better lifestyle than India? Althought India is so big with population and the economy.

Because of per capita income, if you know what that means. (ratio of money to population) -

In case of the UAE, you are talking India (10th largest economy with regards to nominal GDP) and UAE (30th economy with respect to Nominal GDP) and similar scenarios exist with others......so answer this for me??? And the same answer is applicable to this situation here with respect to Pakistanis having a much better lifestyle than India or China if they were to be in the top 20 thrivign economies.....
.

You just proved my point.... How much money can UAE spend per person compared to India?

You should quit now... it's getting silly.. Please stop embarrassing yourself further.

 

[Viper0011.]

Go and check back your post, your claim was china's population density is 4 times that of pakistan. I hope you understand what that implies.
You just proved my point.... How much money can UAE spend per person compared to India?
You should quit now... it's getting silly.. Please stop embarrassing yourself further.

HA!!! You STILL didn't get it!!!!! You are too busy trying to prove silly terminologies to me that I read 8 years ago during my accounting courses. I am referring to something beyond the basic concepts of GDP, PPP, etc. Do me a favor, please RE-READ my post a few times and tell me what you think (put your ego and bias against Pakistan to sleep for about ten minutes).

Just to give you a hint, it is RELATED to the GDP and the size of the economy but it is NOT ALL based on GDP and the Economy. The GDP and PPP are basic indicators. If the economic systems were this shallow that they run off of two KPI's.....you wouldn't have a clue as to how life really works from a money management, growth, budget vs. actuals / financial planning and consolidation's standpoint.

Per person spending comparison is actually stupid. No government can spend beyond a certain limit, for one. If the US can AFFORD to spend $ 50K on its people, do you think it'll actually do that? HELL NO. That's crazy. The extra money should go towards debt payoffs or treasury-savings or bond or asset purchases or into programs like job creation, stimulating the under developed areas, etc, etc to create more jobs and taxes. Not money spent on people that's a waste as enough money is already being spent.
Second, if you took the UAE's example as you explained "How much money can the UAE spend on each of its individuals?"
The simple answer is......it can spend A LOT more than India (Despite the much much larger size of the Indian economy and the GDP and the PPP).......because its government is building infrastructure, public welfare systems, etc, in a much smaller place. So people living there can enjoy a better lifestyle. You quadrupole the population and the money and the size....you won't be able to provide that same lifestyle because of the size and population. Your strongest point is always your weakest link........and which you don't want to admit.
Welcome to the real world that has a LOT more variables involved in the economy than just over simplified GDP and PPP!

 

[MilSpec]

HA!!! You STILL didn't get it!!!!! You are too busy trying to prove silly terminologies to me that I read 8 years ago during my accounting courses. I am referring to something beyond the basic concepts of GDP, PPP, etc. Do me a favor, please RE-READ my post a few times and tell me what you think (put your ego and bias against Pakistan to sleep for about ten minutes).

And that is exactly why I simplified it beyond reason by explaining definitions as well as numerical data... but you are to arrogant to understand a simple point.

Just to give you a hint, it is RELATED to the GDP and the size of the economy but it is NOT ALL based on GDP and the Economy. The GDP and PPP are basic indicators. If the economic systems were this shallow that they run off of two KPI's.....you wouldn't have a clue as to how life really works from a money management, growth, budget vs. actuals / financial planning and consolidation's standpoint.

Why do you keep trying to deride me personal attacks, it always backfires... but still I will play, what are basic indicators based on? GDP is not an indicator of personal wealth but a national indicator, now when the context is of capability of the government to do more for it's people, we are refering to macroeconomic reforms such as unemployment, price indices, inflation etc which directly affects the populace as these are determinant factors of the economic growth. Now when you look at micro economic indicators such as per capita income, market structure and deman supply equilibrium, countries like brazil and china both superseded the forecasted growth vis-a-vis pakistan.

Per person spending comparison is actually stupid. No government can spend beyond a certain limit, for one. If the US can AFFORD to spend $ 50K on its people, do you think it'll actually do that? HELL NO. That's crazy. The extra money should go towards debt payoffs or treasury-savings or bond or asset purchases or into programs like job creation, stimulating the under developed areas, etc, etc to create more jobs and taxes. Not money spent on people that's a waste as enough money is already being spent.

Ok, I admit that my explanation was oversimplification based on micro indicators as per your original post that I replied to based on population density. Your outright claim was, countries like China and Brazil would be able to provide less to it's people than pakistan. Now applying your same argument of utlization of "extra money", China and brazil, would utilize it for macro-economical reforms, but in some wierd dimension the same wont apply to pakistan?

Second, if you took the UAE's example as you explained "How much money can the UAE spend on each of its individuals?"
The simple answer is......it can spend A LOT more than India (Despite the much much larger size of the Indian economy and the GDP and the PPP).......because its government is building infrastructure, public welfare systems, etc, in a much smaller place. So people living there can enjoy a better lifestyle. You quadrupole the population and the money and the size....you won't be able to provide that same lifestyle because of the size and population. Your strongest point is always your weakest link........and which you don't want to admit.

Now isn't that laughable, Ratio is key indicator here.... 10 people in an economy of 100,000, utilization is as you like; with same ratio of allocation imagine 20 people within an economy worth 1,00,000 (twice the population economy 10 times, similar comparison with pakistan and brazil, being extremely liberal with population ratio favoring pakistan)... It is evident that second instance has larger ratio and thus will be able to undertake more micro as well as macro economic reforms with substantial amount of surplus left. The weak link in your argument is self contained, which I do not need to rub in...

Welcome to the real world that has a LOT more variables involved in the economy than just over simplified GDP and PPP!

Your case is a joke here... your comparison was with brazil and china with pakistan.
China has lower population density- and an economy that is 36 times bigger than Pakistan... China's landmass and population are bigger than pakistan.

Your other end on the spectrum is brazil whose economy is 10 times bigger than pakistan... population density 10 times lower than pakistan, as well as population slightly higher than pakistan...

But according to you people in pakistan will be better off than both china and brazil... What else can I say, I guess you should have paid more attention in your accounting class.

 

[Roybot]

Its not about per capita income you genius. Both you and I know the point I am trying to make. Per capita income has a million different uses and calculations that go into it. A country has higher per capita income but can lack in development because it takes LOT longer to go build economy, homes, factories, telecom, infrastructure, etc across 5000 miles than 500 miles. This is common sense. I can't beat your lack of it so I am goin to quit responding.

Japan has more money than the US. But the US economy is way bigger than Japan's. One of the many facts are also that becuase the money is spent on a smaller geography and thus, all infrastructure development, maintenance and ongoing expenditure are way low. So its easier to develop a smaller area than a much larger area. Remember, Japan's the size of ONE US state (similar to Montana) and the US is 49 times bigger than Japan but Japan is richer.....???? while the US is a much bigger economy and bigger in other indicators? Like I said before, a smaller family living in a smaller home needs less money to have a better life style. A much bigger family living on many acres will have more ongoing costs, needs and will require a lot more money to meet the same lifestyle that a much smalle family enjoys with less money. US and Japan are a GREAT example. Let's put the stupidity to rest please.

India is such a large economy.......how come people in South Korea, Malaysia, Hong Kong and Denmark enjoy such a better lifestyle with like 10% of the population and a much smaller size fo the economy? Your answer to this also answers your question about Pakistan as to why its economic growth into top 20 would make its people to have an overall much better lifestyle than India or China for example.....let's drop the silly argument and act mature plz. Writing out of emotionality against Pakistan shouldn't take you away from facts and common sense. We come here to discuss and learn from each other. Not play bias....

Haha still no control over your little jibes eh. But I guess its silly of me to expect little bit of maturity from a manchild ( see two can play this game)

For every example you gave, there are counter examples.

USA: World's Largest Economy, 16.8 Trillion dollars, Population :310 Million, Area: 9,826,675 km²
Turkey: 17th Largest Economy, 800 Billion Dollars, Population: : 74 Million, Area: 783,562 km²

Now tell me, with a population, 4.5 times more than Turkey, and land area 12 times more than Turkey, how is America able to provide better services to its people, and why are Americans much richer than Turks?

Reiterating what I said earlier, that the ranking of an economy is relative and it doesn't tell you anything about the size of the economy. So for you to claim that an 18th Ranked Pakistani economy will be wealthier and better off compared to 1st Ranked China, without actually knowing the size of each economy is ridiculous at best.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Haha still no control over your little jibes eh. But I guess its silly of me to expect little bit of maturity from a manchild ( see two can play this game)

For every example you gave, there are counter examples.

USA: World's Largest Economy, 16.8 Trillion dollars, Population :310 Million, Area: 9,826,675 km²
Turkey: 17th Largest Economy, 800 Billion Dollars, Population: : 74 Million, Area: 783,562 km²

Now tell me, with a population, 4.5 times more than Turkey, and land area 12 times more than Turkey, how is America able to provide better services to its people, and why are Americans much richer than Turks?

Reiterating what I said earlier, that the ranking of an economy is relative and it doesn't tell you anything about the size of the economy. So for you to claim that an 18th Ranked Pakistani economy will be wealthier and better off compared to 1st Ranked China, without actually knowing the size of each economy is ridiculous at best.

Yep its ridiculous, thats why people judge on GDP per capita basis and not how much bigger economy one have.

 

[Viper0011.]

USA: World's Largest Economy, 16.8 Trillion dollars, Population :310 Million, Area: 9,826,675 km²
Turkey: 17th Largest Economy, 800 Billion Dollars, Population: : 74 Million, Area: 783,562 km²

Now tell me, with a population, 4.5 times more than Turkey, and land area 12 times more than Turkey, how is America able to provide better services to its people, and why are Americans much richer than Turks?

You turned my example around. The US is a much bigger country with a bigger economy and a population. Of course it'll provide better for its people. The question was the other way around and you couldn't answer it so your turned the equation upside down and put it back on me. Not smart.
The questin was, WHY is itthat the UAE, a MUCH smaller country in every way (Economy, Size and Population) able to provide a MUCH better lifestyle to its people compared to a much bigger economy called India with such a massive size and population? Answer this, don't turn anything around. Read above and answer it, then I'll answer to your post. You can't twist the question you can't answer and try to verbally win the argument. Here's the question so you stay focus:

WHY is it that the UAE, a MUCH smaller country in every way (Economy, Size and Population) able to provide a MUCH better lifestyle to its people compared to a much bigger economy called India with such a massive size and population?

And that is exactly why I simplified it beyond reason by explaining definitions as well as numerical data... but you are to arrogant to understand a simple point.

Ok, I admit that my explanation was oversimplification based on micro indicators as per your original post that I replied to based on population density.

But according to you people in pakistan will be better off than both china and brazil... What else can I say, I guess you should have paid more attention in your accounting class.

s

That's not what I said...... go read my post and try to understand what I was trying to tell you with so many examples. Think about this, the US is by far the largest economy, with wealth, etc, etc. But if you go to places like Denmark, Norway, the Scotland, Holland, etc, etc, these countries from both, a population and from an economic standpoint are a fraction of what the US is. BUT....their people enjoy a much similar lifestyle than the US. If you consider social services like free healthcare, benefits, etc, they surpass the US (whether it is good to have a socialist system or not is an entirely different conversation). So why is that? SAME logic applies here. When Pakistan gets into the top 20 economies, it's people will enjoy the same lifestyle or in some cases better to some degree just like the example I just gave you ( and btw, it is just a matter of time, the talk is everywhere actually and businesses are investing heavily into Pakistan, Mexico, and a couple of others as India and China are becoming expensive. Pakistan's main issue is the Taliban crap. The clean up their mess today they'll get a ton of investment tomorrow). So now take a look at my example and tell me your opinion.