[adventured]

It's an incredible financial challenge, to say the least.

In 1960 Pakistan had 25% the population of the US at about 2.7% the GDP per capita of the US. Today Pakistan has 60% of the population of the US at about 2.4% the GDP per capita of the US. The vast majority of developing countries have gained considerable ground on the US over that time on a per capita output basis, Pakistan has lost ground.

To bring Pakistan up to the output level per capita of China or Russia (roughly near the world average; plausibly giving them the necessary room to make considerable employment, social welfare and infrastructure improvements) - Pakistan needs to add about $1.8 trillion per year to its economic output, an economy nearly the size of Italy or Brazil. To reach the level of Croatia, their output has to climb by $2.6 trillion per year, an economy the size of France.

I don't see how the world can change anything structurally outside of Pakistan, in terms of how the world works, that will dent that enormous scale of a financial problem. Pakistan has to change dramatically internally. China and many other countries have managed that sort of prominent internal change over time, hopefully Pakistan can as well.

[shkkmo]

While the poverty of Pakistan is indeed a problem, I would argue that it is not the cause of this situation. This situation is human exploitation backed by the government. The change needed here requires political, not just economic changes. I would suggest that this form of servitude is part of the cause of Pakistan's limited economic growth. Minimum wage and the ability to declare bankruptcy would go a long way to disrupting this particular status quo.

[baybal2]

There was a man surnamed Bhutto. He tried. The thing was really not about Bhutto being a socialist or anybody, but because he touched major landlors.

Take a look at astronomical land prices in the country. Then think how land prices got so high in the country so poor.

Now look who are the biggest land owners.

[shkkmo]

Your comment would be more interesting and constructive if you you provided information (ideally with references) rather than asking rhetorical questions.

As it is, I don't really know what point you are trying to make.

[baybal2]

Will gladly provide it you. Pakistan is largely an agrarian feudal society, even with some new nouveau riche coming industrialist families.

Coincidentally many military families do make Pakistani "old money" class. Generals make for huge portion of land owners (they are even few kanals of prime rib agricultural lands in their official retirement package.) The second biggest real estate company in the country also belong the the army.

Any reform that threatens land value get instantaneously attacked by them, politicians get killed. Even when laws pass the parliament, local authorities under control of landlord class will do everything they can to sabotage their implementation though active and passive resistance.

[selimthegrim]

As I recall, the part of Punjab tenancy act from the Raj that gave tenant first right of refusal upon sale of the land was overturned by Zia’s Federal Sharia bench in 1980s

[specialist]

We should get Biblical. No half measures. Periodically forgive all debts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jubilee_(biblical)

I'm curious, but ignorant, of the Quran's notion of riba, the prohibition on interest payments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riba

More close to home, I'd like more discussion about our own debt-based economy. The emphasis on rent seeking. The "Gig Economy", where people pay for the opportunity to work, aka pay for play, franchising. All these weird MLM schemes.

Update: I forgot to mention Freedom Markets™, my pejorative for the cult of laissez faire, might makes right, I've-got-mine-screw-you, and other misanthropic notions.

[SkyBelow]

>Periodically forgive all debts.

This will be priced into debts, see short term lending rates. Those who can't make money by lending won't lend, meaning the borrowers will have to either not get the money or turn to those who don't play by the legal system.

>I'm curious, but ignorant, of the Quran's notion of riba, the prohibition on interest payments.

The money from interest is instead added to the price. It has some differences (less ability to save money by paying off early), but overall the lenders still make their money.

>I'd like more discussion about our own debt-based economy.

For starters, we can look to stop the sin tax on labor. Granted, most people don't call it a sin tax, but the difference between a sin tax and a tax appears to be marketing.

[bernawil]

> borrowers will have to either not get the money

If credit shrinks, asset prices decrease so borrowers would need less money anyway. In the end it's all about who owns the capital.

Mesopotamian civilizations had to forgive debts periodically because the economy was heavily leveraged: farmers had to rent the land. A bad harvest could mean they'd have to sell their children to slavery. They were also surrounded by nomadic tribes. Social unrest would spiral out of control pretty quickly as broke people would join the nomads and turn to pillage.

That's a lesson every Abrahamic religion learned.

[specialist]

Call it bankruptcy if that helps.

Otherwise, I agree that lenders should bear more (most?) of the burdens for risky lending.

[1996]

You clearly have an ideological opposition to capitalism, and that taint your views.

The Bible or the Quran can't protect you for the human natural desire and need to make money.

You should google about islamic banks to know what happens when interest is banned. Hint: the difference is just cosmetic.

So if christians implemented a jubilee, I have no doubt it would be baked into some credit score and automatically increase all cost for people who took advantage of it - that or something else essentially similar.

The best thing that can happen to countries like Pakistan? Capitalism. Free market.

People are not stupid. They look at the neighboring countries who have more economically liberal regimes, see what they get, and vote with their feet.

[selimthegrim]

Compared to socialist India until 1991 they were capitalist and free market

[specialist]

Are you sure that Pakistan's system of bonded service is capitalism? Perhaps we have different definitions. I checked wiki, dictionary.com and there's no mention of slavery, usury.

[1996]

It's not capitalism, which is why I say it's the best thing that can happen in the future.

India has been slowly moving away from the license raj, and turning more capitalist little by little.

[specialist]

Okay. I think I better understand what you're saying.

Reading the wikipedia entry on capitalism was a nice refresher. I am not an economist, so interpret as you wish: These farmers are not wage laborers. So capitalism doesn't apply. (Doubly so for sharecroppers, bonded labor, slaves. Obviously.)

My suggestion is in specific response to the observation that a financial fix would be impractical. I agree. So my proposal is to leverage Pakistan's Muslim cultural heritage. Jubilee's are part of the Abrahamic tradition, spanning Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. So maybe it'd find more traction where capitalism has not.

[selimthegrim]

I’m assuming these are West Pakistan stats in 1960?