World Affairs Board - View Single Post - Fooling pakistani ppl With Fudged Economic Figures and Frivolous Fantasies

Aryan · 07-12-2005, 15:02 PM

Did anyone here actually bother reading the article, or did everyone just read the title of the thread and then post their opinions?

The author is saying macroeconomic inicators are not a valid way to measure the success of a country...virtually every economic publication uses figures such as GDP, GDP growth to indicate growth, either over a year or a number of years. True macroeconomic indicators are not a accurate tool to measure poverty or the health of a nation, but that isn't whats being asked here. The author is deliberately playing with the two entities to try and create an artifical link between them.

Then there is the basis of his analysis of GDP growth. He's using historical patterns to suggest growth. This argument is so ridiculous, the fact he's chosen to use it destroys the credibility on this subject as a whole. In the 80s there was no large scale privatisation of inefficient nationally owned companies such as PIA and PTCL, creation of tax free trade zones, liberalisation of economic policy, there has been under the present regime. There is no or little correlation with foreign loans, as loans were given throught the 70s and 90s, yet economic growth in these years was small. The transfer of power of Ayub Khan to Bhutto reduced economic growth not because a lack of foreign loans, but because the socialist policies of the Bhutto administration pushed away investors and business.

The author also talks about a social action programme. No wonder he missed out the details. It was partially funded by foreign organisations in the form of loans 20%. Data originally suggested that is had worked and school enrolment had increased, but these were government figures. NGOs actually found a decrease in enrolment and literacy over this period, despite the increase in spending. I'm sure you can all guess where the money was going to....

This article does a good job of summarising the SAP:

http://www.yespakistan.com/people/sap.asp

The present region has increased the development spending to more than any other occasion in history, and for the first time school education is free. The SAP hindered NGO work in improving education (one of the reasons for a declining enrolment rate). NGOs generally are better administrated and have better experience in working in poverty striken areas than any government body. The present regime has liberalised the policy and now NGOs are free to operate in Pakistan. Enrolment and literacy rates have improved and are higher than at any other time.

The author also makes a number of factual mistakes in his article:

"During the Musharraf years, allocation for education has gone down from 2.4 per cent of GNP to 1.7 per cent. "

Wrong. Education spending has increased since the Sharif regime (see above), and has become more efficient. 5% of the GDP is spent on social development now, more than any other time before.

"Meanwhile, the expenditure on the external front keeps increasing, with Rs19 billion for internal security against Rs250 billion for external security. Each year, the expenditure on military overshoots the target while the development budget is not large enough. This shows how necessary it is to unify numbers with political realities in the context of a comprehensive political economy framework."

Some truth, but the military spending this year as a porportion of the GDP has decreased. Funny how the author didn't mention that.

I could go on...but there's no point.

07-12-2005, 15:02 PM	#15 (permalink)
Aryan Banished Join Date: 05-02-04 Posts: 1,532	Did anyone here actually bother reading the article, or did everyone just read the title of the thread and then post their opinions? The author is saying macroeconomic inicators are not a valid way to measure the success of a country...virtually every economic publication uses figures such as GDP, GDP growth to indicate growth, either over a year or a number of years. True macroeconomic indicators are not a accurate tool to measure poverty or the health of a nation, but that isn't whats being asked here. The author is deliberately playing with the two entities to try and create an artifical link between them. Then there is the basis of his analysis of GDP growth. He's using historical patterns to suggest growth. This argument is so ridiculous, the fact he's chosen to use it destroys the credibility on this subject as a whole. In the 80s there was no large scale privatisation of inefficient nationally owned companies such as PIA and PTCL, creation of tax free trade zones, liberalisation of economic policy, there has been under the present regime. There is no or little correlation with foreign loans, as loans were given throught the 70s and 90s, yet economic growth in these years was small. The transfer of power of Ayub Khan to Bhutto reduced economic growth not because a lack of foreign loans, but because the socialist policies of the Bhutto administration pushed away investors and business. The author also talks about a social action programme. No wonder he missed out the details. It was partially funded by foreign organisations in the form of loans 20%. Data originally suggested that is had worked and school enrolment had increased, but these were government figures. NGOs actually found a decrease in enrolment and literacy over this period, despite the increase in spending. I'm sure you can all guess where the money was going to.... This article does a good job of summarising the SAP: http://www.yespakistan.com/people/sap.asp The present region has increased the development spending to more than any other occasion in history, and for the first time school education is free. The SAP hindered NGO work in improving education (one of the reasons for a declining enrolment rate). NGOs generally are better administrated and have better experience in working in poverty striken areas than any government body. The present regime has liberalised the policy and now NGOs are free to operate in Pakistan. Enrolment and literacy rates have improved and are higher than at any other time. The author also makes a number of factual mistakes in his article: "During the Musharraf years, allocation for education has gone down from 2.4 per cent of GNP to 1.7 per cent. " Wrong. Education spending has increased since the Sharif regime (see above), and has become more efficient. 5% of the GDP is spent on social development now, more than any other time before. "Meanwhile, the expenditure on the external front keeps increasing, with Rs19 billion for internal security against Rs250 billion for external security. Each year, the expenditure on military overshoots the target while the development budget is not large enough. This shows how necessary it is to unify numbers with political realities in the context of a comprehensive political economy framework." Some truth, but the military spending this year as a porportion of the GDP has decreased. Funny how the author didn't mention that. I could go on...but there's no point.