Statistical Comparison Between Musharraf and Preceding Governments

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
1

This thread will focus only on Economic & Social statistics, comparing the 1990’s to Musharraf’s era.

Please share your views, especially those who said Musharraf brought nothing to Pakistan.

I will start off by a comparison of inflation:

Table 8.3: Historical Inflationary Trends*

**Overall CPI
**Average 1990s - 9.7%
Average 2000-07 - 5.8%

Food
Average 1990s - 10.1%
Average 2000-07 - 6.4%

Non food
Average 1990s - 9.3 %
Average 2000-07 - 5.5%

Core
Average 1990s - 8.9%
Average 2000-07 - 4.6%

WPI
Average 1990s - 10%
Average 2000-07 - 6.6%

**SPI
**Average 1990s - 9.9%
Average 2000-07 - 6.9%

Economic Survey of Pakistan 2006/2007

2

Public Debt

FY99 - 100.3%
FY07 - 53.4%

Page 33

woh humsafar tha magar us say humnawaayi na thi
3

Re: Statistical Comparison Between Musharraf and Preceding Governments

Trade Deficits gone up…

http://www.paklinks.com/gsmedia/files/59473/Export_Import_1990_2007.JPG

4

Best you can do? Read up on economics a little more.

Is it ok to copy designer joras?
5

Re: Statistical Comparison Between Musharraf and Preceding Governments

Economy was far better under Musharraf era, their was no shortage of anything. People were happy, business was booming, stock market was sky rockting, except some people who can't made fortune from the boom.

90% textile market in Pakistan closed in within last 3-6 months. What happened suddenly? Lawyers, APDM and others should understand they are destroying Pakistan. Accept the reality and try to live with it or say good bye Pakistan.

One dish system in PAKISTAN
6


yeah, I heard there were rivers of milk, honey and electricity.

7

Pakistan Real per capita income growth:

1988-1999: … 1.08 percent real average per capita income growth per year (Total increase was 12.6 percent over 11 years)

3 years before Musharraf came to power:
1996-1999: … - 0.5 (minus 0.5) percent real per capita income growth during those 3 years (negative growth of 0.5 percent)

This is nothing to do with nuclear test as actually there was negative per capita income growth for year 1996-97 as well as for year 1997-98 (Both pre-nuclear test years).

All ‘nuclear test fallouts’ plus ‘Kargil fallouts’ was during Musharraf period as it takes time for economy to get effected of such fall outs.

Musharraf period:
2000-2007: … 2.95 percent real average per capita income growth per year

Well, if we start from 2002:
2002-2007: … 3.55 percent real average per capita income growth per year

For year:
2005-2006: … 4.45 percent real average per capita income growth for this year.
2006-2007: … 5.05 percent real average per capita income growth for this year.
(If Pakistan per capita real income grows at this rate (around 5 percent) continuously than it would take less than 50 years for Pakistan to be part of developed world).

Ref (for ‘Real’ per capita income data):
http://www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/fbs/statistics/national_accounts/table3.pdf

8

Re: Statistical Comparison Between Musharraf and Preceding Governments

Facts are bad for the anti-pakistan group.

what does it mean? any guesses?
9

So all those threads you recently created about economy going down the gutter because of "current govt" was for what? Does it actually mean that economy now showing results of last year's misadventures?

10

In all these “GDP”/per capita/income number crunching, where is trade deficit actually used? What does trade deficit do for a country’s economy (in long/short run)?

11

No, the political instability initiated by you know who, and some missteps of the interim government, combined with worldwide economic pressures is the reason.

12

That is great,

Now please tell us what were the factors which caused the high growth in above mentioned…i mean, which sectors of economy boomed and had this +ve effect on the economy.

a simple & short answer, instead of long tales will be more than enough.

Time to do some change in Life1
13

Alhamdulilallah. God Bless the Unprecedented Economic Growth under the Great leadership of Great President Musharaf.

No doubt, as soon as Great Zardari sorts out the EX CJ and the Presidential issue, the promised ‘Roti, Kapda, Aur Makan’ will be the next target, and the above figures will pale in comparison. :slight_smile:

14

Foreign Investment
Credit Ratings
Iraq/Afghanistan War
Telecom/IT/Real Estate/Banking Boom
China & India needs of energy

15

**
Also political stability and continuity of policies.**

16

Please tell me

How much energy we are selling to China and India? and how does the growing demand of energy in the said countries is benefiting Pakistan, i.e., Is Pakistan one of the supplier of energy related products or what? do clarify and then we will proceed.

17

If buying all the corrupt politicians into one party, and feeding them to fill their pots of greed, then yes it was political satability but i didn't understood one thing, how come People of Pakistan ( when given the choice) rejected those so-called political parties in the elections?

please try to be logical.

18

Maybe Altaf Hussain Inst. of Bhattakhoori doesn’t touch on such things, but a HUGE trade deficit is always bad for a country, in fact just to show how bad it is, read this, and the statistics clearly show that there was an unprecedented increase in the deficit during the Musharraf dictatorship, thanks to the increase in imports.

19

The interim Govt was handpicked by Musharraf himself, and they were leaches from his Kings Party, and even Shaukat Aziz has blamed them for this economic fiasco, and not the present Govt. Besides, when this crisis was happening in the PML[Q] time, it was all due to global increases in prices, famine and other calamities, and after they left I guess they were due to the new govt’s incompetence? :hehe:

Also, doesn’t the new Govt include the MQM? I guess the MQM should resign now that they have shown they are incapable and cannot handle pressure.

20

Re: Statistical Comparison Between Musharraf and Preceding Governments

Hopes fast fading

WITH the change on the top, especially coming into from a new economic management team, expectation arose that fiscal and financial polices will also be amended and become people-friendly. However, the extravaganzas of ruling class as disclosed by Mansoor Ul Hque Solangi in the letter, ‘A matter of shame’ ((June 4),dampened the expectation. But after looking to the budget proposals appearing in dailies all hopes have simply evaporated in the air.

The most affluent and high income class, i.e. stock dealers, who have been making stupendous capital gains on the sale of shares for the last eight years by hoodwinking the gullible, has been exempted from tax for further two years, though they had requested one year reprieve (‘Stocks surge by 610 points on tax exemptions’, June 5).

This act of badly-timed magnanimity on the part of the government, when the general public is reeling under pressure of food and oil price rise and burden of indirect taxation in the shape of sales and withholding taxes, is beyond belief.

It is also reported that in the upcoming budget five per cent surcharge is being proposed on imports as ‘energy surcharge’. Do the makers of budget realise that the incidence of this levy will increase the prices of goods further? Obviously the trader will not pay this increase from his pocket but will conveniently pass on the same to unobtrusive purchaser/consumer who inevitably will bear increase in the cost of product.

I fail to understand why the most appropriate proposal of charge on income (‘Oil levy on income’, May 30) has not been considered by the financial wizards of the government.

It is time the business/trade/industrial community of the country came forward and paid taxes on the their incomes correctly.

The government should also come out with people-friendly policy by taxing those who are making profits and have the ability to pay and not burden those whose capacity has completely eroded, so much so that they are not even able to meet their ends.

BADAR JATOI
Port Coquitlam,
BC, Canada.