What is the cause of poverty in South Asia?

[big_pappa_cricket99]

I can say with some conviction that the entirety of south asia's problems ; Poverty , waste , Pollution corruption and many other issues are caused by mainly one factor - overpopulation . A pie can only be divided in to so many portions until theres nothing left. Our PM needs to introduce some measures to curb our Birth rate immediately and ignore the Molvi fraternity for the sake of our nation.

 

[sweep_shot]

Overpopulation is the top reason. Second reason is extreme corruption.

Things can dramatically improve if these two problems can be solved.

 

[Buffet]

Industrialization is yet to happen. It's in an early stage.

 

[UP]

Unplanned cities/towns, massive population, extreme corruption, unpicked garbage waste, has led to this dirty mess.

Unplanned cities are often not discussed but it plays/played a major role in us being the third world. All developed countries have been planned right from the start and that built their foundation up. Compare satellite map between a developed country’s city and the third world city - you can pick cities of your choice and you may understand what I’m talking about.

No planning = no future

 

[Itachi]

I can say with some conviction that the entirety of south asia's problems ; Poverty , waste , Pollution corruption and many other issues are caused by mainly one factor - overpopulation . A pie can only be divided in to so many portions until theres nothing left. Our PM needs to introduce some measures to curb our Birth rate immediately and ignore the Molvi fraternity for the sake of our nation.

May I ask in which country you live?

 

[Slog]

Base.

Even in the so called golden period the focus was on building great monuments and great armies for battle rather than education and human development.

Yes some will come and point to ancient universities of India but they were nearly not enough.

Even in the so called golden periods; the life of the common man was very bad. It’s almost certain that a poorer man in subcontinent is better off now than these fore said periods.

 

[Slog]

May I ask in which country you live?

He’s talking about Pakistan. Can’t be India and Bangladesh this problem is not much now

 

[Itachi]

He’s talking about Pakistan. Can’t be India and Bangladesh this problem is not much now

Slog, it doesn't matter if it is Pakistan, India or Bangladesh because each of these countries have more or less similar circumstances in the past. So problems will be common across the countries.

What irks me is, when talking about poverty, backwardness or any other negative aspects, the blame directly goes to the system of that country.

Upto an extent, you can blame but what happened to history of colonisation? When the rest of the world was going through industrial revolution and building the base from where they have come upto this point, these third world countries were fighting even for basic rights. Where was the mention of those lost time?

I understand it can be easily (ab)use by many people to hide away the corruption and lack of ability of the current system but still.... Does that not matter at all?we are talking about hundreds of years of struggle here.

 

[saeedhk]

Overpopulation is the root cause. While India and Bangladesh have made great strides in controlling their populations, Pakistan has been awfully failed in checking its population growth.

There are daily 12000 births that take place in Pakistan! The number is appalling for a resource-deficient country. Moreover, the fertility rate of Pakistan is the highest in Asia at 3.58. In other words, married Pakistani women give birth to almost 4 children in their lifetimes. On other hand, married Bangladeshi women give birth to two children in their lifetimes!


Pakistan is doomed; it is too late and there is no going back!

 

[Mesozoic]

Overpopulation is the root cause. While India and Bangladesh have made great strides in controlling their populations ,Pakistan has been awfully failed in checking its population growth.

There are daily 12000 births that take place in Pakistan! The number is appalling for a resource-deficient country. Moreover, the fertility rate of Pakistan is the highest in Asia at 3.58. In other words, married Pakistani women give birth to almost 4 children in their lifetimes. On other hand, married Bangladeshi women give birth to two children in their lifetimes!


Pakistan is doomed; it is too late and there is no going back!

You've got to be kidding me.

 

[King-Misbah]

You've got to be kidding me.

He is Mamoon Part 2, I would not take him seriously. There is poverty in Pakistan due to corruption, mis-management and lack of education. These are the root cause of the issue.

 

[saeedhk]

You've got to be kidding me.

Compare the fertility rates and population growth rates so that you do not sound ignorant. Thanks!

 

[saeedhk]

He is Mamoon Part 2, I would not take him seriously. There is poverty in Pakistan due to corruption, mis-management and lack of education. These are the root cause of the issue.

There is poverty in Pakistan because there is no family planning and Pakistanis believe Allah will provide for every soul which comes to this world. Also, most Pakistanis have strong religious beliefs against family planning and contraceptives.

Pakistanis keep procreating despite not having any means for income.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Socialism. Bhutto with his nationalization policies destroyed Pakistan's economy. Pakistan was doing well economically until his arrival. India was socialist until early 90's, however once they started going away from that their economy started improving.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Overpopulation is the root cause. While India and Bangladesh have made great strides in controlling their populations, Pakistan has been awfully failed in checking its population growth.

There are daily 12000 births that take place in Pakistan! The number is appalling for a resource-deficient country. Moreover, the fertility rate of Pakistan is the highest in Asia at 3.58. In other words, married Pakistani women give birth to almost 4 children in their lifetimes. On other hand, married Bangladeshi women give birth to two children in their lifetimes!


Pakistan is doomed; it is too late and there is no going back!

Check the fertility rate fro 50 years ago, there has been a considerate downward trend. Best way to lower population is having educated females.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

He is Mamoon Part 2, I would not take him seriously. There is poverty in Pakistan due to corruption, mis-management and lack of education. These are the root cause of the issue.

Unfortunately i have noticed the same thing.

 

[saeedhk]

Check the fertility rate fro 50 years ago, there has been a considerate downward trend. Best way to lower population is having educated females.

Yes, but the decrease is extremely slow. No hope in sight!

 

[MMHS]

Over population. These places are over populated from the first days of civilisation because of the fertile land and favourable (warm) climate.

Problem for over population is that there is a significant portion of unskilled population that’s are just consumers. At the end it’s the natural resources that’s behind the prosperity- natural resources not only in terms of minerals or fossil fuels, rather it’s land, water, sunlight, wind, coast line.... South Asia in total is half the size of USA or Canada and five times more populated. No matter what one does, you cannot accommodate Canada’s total population in an area equal to greater Toronto city (35 million in 1500 sq. Km - that’s Dhaka metro for you)

None of India, PAK or BD Govt. are poor; but the people are because the national income is divided by at least 10 to 12 times more mouths than it should have been. I read lots of theories about corruption, lack of education & poor planning .... make the resources to be distributed in 3.5 bn people instead of 350mn; USA will be more corrupt & unplanned than South Asia. (It was the case all through in history - Emperor Akbar was arguably the richest & more powerful man at his peak..... and his empire covered 2% of the land mass of known world & 1/3rd of population).

Unpopular comment, but I have to say we are cursed by God with fertile land and warm weather - that has resulted into massive inhabitants over the course history, far more than the capacity and unfortunately has brought lots of opportunists from abroad - the Europeans, Mughals, Persians, Arabs .... when there is scarcity of basic resources (or too many hands to cut a little pie), there will be cracks in the society (& in their morals), which has been brutally exploited by those invaders - result is today’s corruption, lack of planning and whatever else is mentioned here. The birth/growth rate of IND-PAK-BD is not a problem now only, it started from the time of emperor Ashok or may be even earlier; today it has just cumulatively busted. Had South Asia’s 90% land been mountains, ice lands & deserts without much rainfall and not much sources of fresh water, population could have been 200 million instead of 2 billion now and this region would have been among the strongest nations in earth with same corruption & other factors intact. This is one of the most ancient civilisations in history of mankind and most developed in medieval era as well. In 1644, Bengal had the highest per capita GDP (or among highest) in world - today 29 crore people lives in a place of the size of Michigan ..... beat that.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Over population. These places are over populated from the first days of civilisation because of the fertile land and favourable (warm) climate.

Problem for over population is that there is a significant portion of unskilled population that’s are just consumers. At the end it’s the natural resources that’s behind the prosperity- natural resources not only in terms of minerals or fossil fuels, rather it’s land, water, sunlight, wind, coast line.... South Asia in total is half the size of USA or Canada and five times more populated. No matter what one does, you cannot accommodate Canada’s total population in an area equal to greater Toronto city (35 million in 1500 sq. Km - that’s Dhaka metro for you)

Singapore has a higher population density than any of the subcontinent countries. No one says its overpopulated. Neither does Singapore have great natural resources. Yet its a one of the wealthiest places in the world.

Unpopular comment, but I have to say we are cursed by God with fertile land and warm weather - that has resulted into massive inhabitants over the course history, far more than the capacity and unfortunately has brought lots of opportunists from abroad - the Europeans, Mughals, Persians, Arabs .... when there is scarcity of basic resources (or too many hands to cut a little pie), there will be cracks in the society (& in their morals), which has been brutally exploited by those invaders - result is today’s corruption, lack of planning and whatever else is mentioned here. The birth/growth rate of IND-PAK-BD is not a problem now only, it started from the time of emperor Ashok or may be even earlier; today it has just cumulatively busted. Had South Asia’s 90% land been mountains, ice lands & deserts without much rainfall and not much sources of fresh water, population could have been 200 million instead of 2 billion now and this region would have been among the strongest nations in earth with same corruption & other factors intact.

There is corruption everywhere in planet Earth. Its not like there was no corruption before the "invaders" came. And Unlike the Europeans all those "invaders" settled in the subcontinent, and made it there home. So unless you are 100% descendant from the first humans who came to the subcontinent from Africa, then you have "invader" blood as well.

This is one of the most ancient civilisations in history of mankind and most developed in medieval era as well. In 1644, Bengal had the highest per capita GDP (or among highest) in world - today 29 crore people lives in a place of the size of Michigan ..... beat that.

On one side you are blaming the "invaders" for corruption, yet under the "invaders" Bengal was one of the richest places in the world.

 

[Bigboii]

Slog, it doesn't matter if it is Pakistan, India or Bangladesh because each of these countries have more or less similar circumstances in the past. So problems will be common across the countries.

What irks me is, when talking about poverty, backwardness or any other negative aspects, the blame directly goes to the system of that country.

Upto an extent, you can blame but what happened to history of colonisation? When the rest of the world was going through industrial revolution and building the base from where they have come upto this point, these third world countries were fighting even for basic rights. Where was the mention of those lost time?

I understand it can be easily (ab)use by many people to hide away the corruption and lack of ability of the current system but still.... Does that not matter at all?we are talking about hundreds of years of struggle here.

Look how everyone slept on history of colonization
Lol
it sure looks like British Raj ran a very popular PR campaign cause most people associate British Raj with RRs and stuff not the massive damage they did

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Look how everyone slept on history of colonization
Lol ��
it sure looks like British Raj ran a very popular PR campaign cause most people associate British Raj with RRs and stuff not the massive damage they did

Most of the non European world was colonized, and dirt poor after World War 2 . Yet some counties like South Korea and Singapore, are really prosperous right now. Blaming everyone but the people who reside in those countries is not helping.

Germany was completely destroyed after World War 2, they had to pay Billions of reparations and today they are really prosperous.

 

[sweep_shot]

Most of the non European world was colonized, and dirt poor after World War 2 . Yet some counties like South Korea and Singapore, are really prosperous right now. Blaming everyone but the people who reside in those countries is not helping.

Germany was completely destroyed after World War 2, they had to pay Billions of reparations and today they are really prosperous.

I agree with this part.

Any nation can turn things around. Germany is a prime example.

 

[Bigboii]

Most of the non European world was colonized, and dirt poor after World War 2 . Yet some counties like South Korea and Singapore, are really prosperous right now. Blaming everyone but the people who reside in those countries is not helping.

Germany was completely destroyed after World War 2, they had to pay Billions of reparations and today they are really prosperous.

Yeah but they're also a reason it's not like they did anything good or something

But only one good and simple solution is a "complete" and true free market it'll turn everything around for the region (it's doing to India and Bangladesh)
and politcal stability

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Yeah but they're also a reason it's not like they did anything good or something

But only one good and simple solution is a "complete" and true free market it'll turn everything around for the region (it's doing to India and Bangladesh)
and politcal stability

Yes this is exactly what is needed.

 

[Kianig89]

Corruption and no concept of per hour wage jobs or weekly wages lot of ppl feel demotivated of monthly salary system plus our ego is like an elephant to take jobs like dishwasher car washer etc

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Yeah but they're also a reason it's not like they did anything good or something

But only one good and simple solution is a "complete" and true free market it'll turn everything around for the region (it's doing to India and Bangladesh)
and politcal stability

Will believe that when I see it. true and free markets in south Asia just leads to massive gap between rich and poor, there is usually very little thought for common advancement as a society.

Which is why I believe a sense of civic responsibility and town planning are more important. In this regard seems India and BD are still no better than Pakistan, or possibly even worse.

 

[Buffet]

Singapore has a higher population density than any of the subcontinent countries. No one says its overpopulated. Neither does Singapore have great natural resources. Yet its a one of the wealthiest places in the world.

City with few millions and they got lucky with best nation builder in history.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

City with few millions and they got lucky with best nation builder in history.

Is it luck that Singapore, S Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia, now China are prospering? or does it have something to do with their culture? There embrace of free markets? They were all dirt poor 70 years ago.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Will believe that when I see it. true and free markets in south Asia just leads to massive gap between rich and poor, there is usually very little thought for common advancement as a society.

Which is why I believe a sense of civic responsibility and town planning are more important. In this regard seems India and BD are still no better than Pakistan, or possibly even worse.

Free markets create the wealth. Once the wealth has been created through taxation you can use it to limit the gap between the poor and rich. For example in UK the poor man does not pay the same as the rich man towards NHS. Same thing with education, rich subsidize the poor.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Is it luck that Singapore, S Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia, now China are prospering? or does it have something to do with their culture? There embrace of free markets? They were all dirt poor 70 years ago.

They are also similar to western countries in that they embrace hygiene, organisation and good civil conduct in public areas. South Asian countries are a free for all.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Free markets create the wealth. Once the wealth has been created through taxation you can use it to limit the gap between the poor and rich. For example in UK the poor man does not pay the same as the rich man towards NHS. Same thing with education, rich subsidize the poor.

There is wealth in the subcontinent, but no one wants to pay taxes to subsidise the poor. In fact not many people would do it in the west either voluntarily, but they don't have a choice, and that comes down to the values I mentioned above re civic duty and legal enforcement.

 

[Loralai]

In Pakistan the biggest cause of poverty is the Pakistan Army which dominates our resources and prefers to keep people in the dark about our real problems.

 

[Bigboii]

There is wealth in the subcontinent, but no one wants to pay taxes to subsidise the poor. In fact not many people would do it in the west either voluntarily, but they don't have a choice, and that comes down to the values I mentioned above re civic duty and legal enforcement.

you build those departments along with wealth it'll happen with time but the first step is low tax and free market

There will be inequality but in the long run all state, poor and wealthy people will be better off

 

[Syed1]

Compare the fertility rates and population growth rates so that you do not sound ignorant. Thanks!

Here is some basic math for. Country A has population of 200 million and population growth of 2%. Therefore at the end of one year Country A's population will be 204 million. (Population growth always takes into accouny deaths and immigration).

Country B has a population of 1400 million and has a population growth of 1.5%. At the end of one year the population of Country B will be 1421 million.


So you be the judge of how is sitting on a bigger time bomb?


Unless India implements strict one child policy like China, no matter how much it's economy grows it won't be able to cater to the ever expanding population and shrinking national resources.

 

[King-Misbah]

There is poverty in Pakistan because there is no family planning and Pakistanis believe Allah will provide for every soul which comes to this world. Also, most Pakistanis have strong religious beliefs against family planning and contraceptives.

Pakistanis keep procreating despite not having any means for income.

Your full quote falls under lack of education (includes religious education).

 

[Itachi]

Is it luck that Singapore, S Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia, now China are prospering? or does it have something to do with their culture? There embrace of free markets? They were all dirt poor 70 years ago.

Except China, every other country is a small country. It is much easier to build a small nation than a bigger one. With different demography, it gets more and more complicated.

You are comparing apples and oranges.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Except China, every other country is a small country. It is much easier to build a small nation than a bigger one. With different demography, it gets more and more complicated.

You are comparing apples and oranges.

If that's the case then why are Latin American countries, with small populations poor or middle income? These countries are not densely populated, they gained independence long before Asian ones. The East and South east Asian ones have done something right.

 

[Itachi]

If that's the case then why are Latin American countries, with small populations poor or middle income? These countries are not densely populated, they gained independence long before Asian ones. The East and South east Asian ones have done something right.

Give examples. You are talking in vague terms here.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Give examples. You are talking in vague terms here.

The following countries have a similar population in size:

South Korea and Columbia.
Malaysia and Peru.
Taiwan and Chile.
Singapore and El Salvador.

Look at where the Asian ones are and where the Latin ones are.

in all the example the Latin countries got independence long before the Asian ones. They are not have a lot more land and natural resources than the Asian ones. Yet the Asian ones are all more prosperous.

So they must have done something right. Its either due to there culture, there economic system or some other reason.


Blaming colonization is not a reason for poverty. 70 years is a long time.

 

[Buffet]

Is it luck that Singapore, S Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia, now China are prospering? or does it have something to do with their culture? There embrace of free markets? They were all dirt poor 70 years ago.

In 70 years , Pakistan won't be poor as well and it won't be due to culture. China has long way to go even now. 400M populatin is very poor in China. Lee was mentor for China and they are doing the rigth thing.

70 years early or 70 years later is not just because of culture. Culture of South Korea was not bad 70 years ago when they were poor.

When things look bad then everything looks bad, but I am very optimistic that Pakistan will be doing far far better in coming decades.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

In 70 years , Pakistan won't be poor as well and it won't be due to culture. China has long way to go even now. 400M populatin is very poor in China. Lee was mentor for China and they are doing the rigth thing.

70 years early or 70 years later is not just because of culture. Culture of South Korea was not bad 70 years ago when they were poor.

When things look bad then everything looks bad, but I am very optimistic that Pakistan will be doing far far better in coming decades.

I said culture or free market system. And i believe its there embrace of free market system. Look at N. Korea and S. Korea. No difference in those two countries at all in terms of culture. Socialism does not work.

I think Pakistan will do better as well. But it will be through fully embracing capitalism. So no more government run Steel Mill, or govt run PIA.

 

[Giannis]

Overpopulation and insufficient natural resources

 

[Buffet]

I said culture or free market system. And i believe its there embrace of free market system. Look at N. Korea and S. Korea. No difference in those two countries at all in terms of culture. Socialism does not work.

I think Pakistan will do better as well. But it will be through fully embracing capitalism. So no more government run Steel Mill, or govt run PIA.

That will do the job. Success of all countries is due to system in place which allows unleashing human potential. Pakistan has that as well, but there is no system in place to unleash it. In fact, 1/4th of kids are out of school.

With time it will change for sure, but if rate of change is slow then it may take 50 years instead of 20 years. But in 70 years, I have no doubt that it will be doing drastically better.

 

[Giannis]

In Pakistan the biggest cause of poverty is the Pakistan Army which dominates our resources and prefers to keep people in the dark about our real problems.

 

[CricketCartoons]

There is strong correlation if you remove the outliers, which is half of the data points.

 

[Technics 1210]

Capitalism.

Consumer Credit and debt is still relativly a new thing in South Asia; once in full swing it will provide the illusion of prosperity, just as in the West.

 

[Bigboii]

Your data be hella faulty

 

[Giannis]

Your data be hella faulty

P value < 0.05%

 

[PetroDollars]

The only difference between the first world and the third world is debt.

That is central bank debt - when third world countries realise debt is just an illusion that doesnt exit, they will also expand and prosper.

 

[BreadPakoda]

P value < 0.05%

5% or 0.05*

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Except China, every other country is a small country. It is much easier to build a small nation than a bigger one. With different demography, it gets more and more complicated.

You are comparing apples and oranges.

Also much easier to exploit small satellite countries like Hong Kong and Scotland for example, as they are usually dependent on their geography.

 

[Napa]

I said culture or free market system. And i believe its there embrace of free market system. Look at N. Korea and S. Korea. No difference in those two countries at all in terms of culture. Socialism does not work.

I think Pakistan will do better as well. But it will be through fully embracing capitalism. So no more government run Steel Mill, or govt run PIA.

You are correct in most of what you write.

In the 21st century, the way to judge whether the economy of a poor country is getting better is simple. Are modern industries developing? Is the country receiving investment from multinationals? The first most of the time can happen only when the second happens.

 

[saeedhk]

Here is some basic math for. Country A has population of 200 million and population growth of 2%. Therefore at the end of one year Country A's population will be 204 million. (Population growth always takes into accouny deaths and immigration).

Country B has a population of 1400 million and has a population growth of 1.5%. At the end of one year the population of Country B will be 1421 million.


So you be the judge of how is sitting on a bigger time bomb?


Unless India implements strict one child policy like China, no matter how much it's economy grows it won't be able to cater to the ever expanding population and shrinking national resources.

The absolute number of new births annually in India is higher than Pakistan.

However, you need to look at how fast India has brought down the population growth rate while Pakistan has been unable to bring down its population growth rate as dramatically as India did.

The same goes for fertility rate of India.

 

[saeedhk]

Your full quote falls under lack of education (includes religious education).

Very insightful reply!

 

[MMHS]

Singapore has a higher population density than any of the subcontinent countries. No one says its overpopulated. Neither does Singapore have great natural resources. Yet its a one of the wealthiest places in the world.



There is corruption everywhere in planet Earth. Its not like there was no corruption before the "invaders" came. And Unlike the Europeans all those "invaders" settled in the subcontinent, and made it there home. So unless you are 100% descendant from the first humans who came to the subcontinent from Africa, then you have "invader" blood as well.



On one side you are blaming the "invaders" for corruption, yet under the "invaders" Bengal was one of the richest places in the world.

I knew the Singapore example will come. It's about manageability - you have to consider the unit level (density) and volume (total population) as well. For a small city based country, Singapore doesn't have the baggage to carry - managing 6/7 million population and 170mn+ population is different context.

Singapore has more natural resources than entire South Asia - think again. It's their geographic location - a small 750 sq Km piece of land is basically controlling the busiest sea route on Earth. The revenue that Singapore Port & Changi Airport generates, is more than what entire service out put of South Asia excluding India - even then, Singapore won't have been that rich if it was divided into 170 mn ......

You misunderstood my point. When few people rules a country, only way they can do that by over powering few people to suppress the mass. This creates social imbalance and injustice, which eventually will make people corrupt - those who in power to keep hold on to it, those who are suffering to have one extra bite on the tiny piece of bread.

Bengal indeed was one of the richest place on earth, when world's economic major factors were based on agriculture & small industries (handicrafts & textile) - it was the land of Bengal and the skills of it's inhabitants that made the land rich, which unfortunately was looted away, without reinvesting in the land it's producing.

 

[Itachi]

The only difference between the first world and the third world is debt.

That is central bank debt - when third world countries realise debt is just an illusion that doesnt exit, they will also expand and prosper.

I tried to study modern economics and understand the concept of debt. But seriously, it seems very confusing. For me, debt seems like a phantom entity which comes out of nowhere but affects all.