Our problem is not free market, or state owned capitalism which is allegedly a hurdle for economy, the red tapism, is actual root cause. If regulation on businesses and transaction could become people friendly, then scenarios could be changed. Rule of law within a state is also by in large biggest problems, in almost every aspect of government operations. Dr. sb you should make a video about if your party manage to make government in Pakistan then how will you cope up with following issues : 1-Rule of law 2- Establishment intervention and monopoly 3- capitalistic exploitative hold in Pakistan 4- Accountability of your own politicians and state officials. The rational arguments from your side will be highly appreciated.
Sir you only show government spending as percent of GDP but what about sources of these funds i-e Government Revenues, Majority of government revenues come from taxes, not from State-Owned Enterprises. So what will be your answer in the context of this video?
Ur wrong getting money from a crooked capitalist is alot harder than making all by Ur self. Most of the developed countries have their own ARAMCO TYPE companies in their hand. They make shit Tons of money for them to support their socialist programs.
I guess it's the problem of institutions efficiency than if they r outputting low revenue e.g;compare revenue generation of PIA past vs contemporary situation.
آپ نے تو میرے سارے ارادوں پہ پانی پھیر دیا۔ میں اس پنج سالے میں دس ارب پرافٹ بنانے کا سوچ رہا تھا۔ جب آخر کار سب کچھ سٹیٹ لے اڑے گی تو پھر اتنا خجل ہونے کی ضرورت نہیں۔
Dr sb you presented a thorough perspective. Thanks for enlightening students of economy like me. Pak certainly needs some regulation to exit the debt trap. The bitter pills which could help realize this can only be taken by welfare state not elite not the business class. I was amazed to observe stats that despite continuous shift from cotton (backbone of 70%exports) to sugarcane (water intensive, sugar an importable product, subsidies) , sugar lobby is continuing with its nefarious designs without check by govt. There are multiple areas like these which can be reformed by govt intervention. But the key question is the sincerety of govts.
The crux of the discussion is developed countries have high degree of state control over their economies e.g; Belgium 54% , USA 35% while the third world countries tend to have low control i.e; Pakistan 22%. Means state growth is proportional to heavy state control on the market.
Sir i agree completely but i think this trajectory of free-market -> state-capitalist -> socialist only makes sense if you accept that socialism requires world revolution (to change the full system, not just manage capitalism in russia or pakistan or china). Otherwise, you could develop the country to wealthy state capitalist, but the issue remains that the relations which you want to change to reach socialism are not within the limits of your borders (cant bring out potential of the new society from the old society if you cannot grasp the potential). Free-market -> state capitalist -> socialism makes sense internationally however. the world has been ripe for revolution since probably around 1848, but we need workers in places like u.s. china and japan to actually do it.
Extremely valuable and revolutionary content taimoor bhai.I am following you since 2019 and in last video you finally invite us to join your party I am ready to this I am living in chicago and take part in real revolution of pakistan not want become a part of the parties who have same manifesto but just changing there spelling. So please let me know how I can join...thanks
Very informative, but in ex-USSR was there a concept of private property as it is practised in modern China today. What I see China is following on the surface an Scandinavian economic model but with of course different policies.
Countries with high government public spending-to-gdp ratio are countries with high income tax. There seems to be a strong correlation between these two variables. Also I don't see how government public spending equates to state control?
Sir is that a thing that westren economies first do privatisation and then their government help these private sector by having stake in their companies
Sir, It was a great research and encourages the Socialists morals. I got just one question If you can Please answer somehow. How state get control of the private industries? For Instance, Elon Musk has a biggest wealth and How USA as a state could monopolize his wealth unless he gives shares to state in his businesses?
Respected Dr. Sb. Salamat rehain. Why does every political party in Pakistan is or seems to be rightist and always see through a capitalist lens? Right now it seems that PTI's tilt is a bit leftist BUT in my opinion, this title is also circumstantial (most probably not from a hardcore standpoint) and as soon as they will come into power or break a deal they will turn into a rightist bunch? Kiya hamaray pas koi nazriya ha he nahi? We are leading lives aimless for short-term profits but why? And what is the solution? Please make a video if you can. Thank you.
Dr sb yaha pa nizaam ulta hai yaha pr capitalist group of companies kholty Hain which are interconnected to each other and take over all means of production
sir i respect your knowledge a lot but sir your ideal country china is destroying pakistan economy by doing free trade agreement with them because our pakistani goods cant compete with chinese goods and we dont have acces too china market soo what is your opinion about thus
It wasn't socialism. It was state capitalism. Socialism means the surplus produced by workers is goven back to workers. In state capitalist, the surplus is looted by government officials instead of private capitalists. This was the case in ussr after 1956.
پاکستان میں اس کے الٹ ھوا ھے۔تیلوے، ڈاک، ٹیلی فون ،عسپڑا، پی آئی اے وغیرہ پہلے روز سے ھی قومی ملکیت میں تھے۔۔ان اداروں میں اندھا دھند بھرتیںکرتے گئیے اور یہ ادراے نافع میں جانے کی بجائے یہ ادارے اپنے ملازمین اور دوسرے اخراجات ھی پورے نہیں کر رھے ھیں۔ یہ ادارے خسارے میں چلے گئیے اور ریاست ان کابوجھ اٹھانے سے قاصر ھو گئی۔۔۔۔۔
Isnt this argument go against your whole philosphy that capatalist dont spend on people they just wana grab all the money Stats are showing they are spending on people🤷🏼
So if capitalism peak is supporting socialism,why to struggle against it..instead support it so that it achieved that peak as quickly as possible So whats logic and justifiction left for socialist..? You your self has just prove it
Uh, Capitalism is not "supporting" Socialism, class struggle doesn't dissapear, but is intensified. Capitalism gives rise to material conditions that in turn give rise to socialism. As Rosa Luxemburg put it, _"Bourgeois class domination is undoubtedly an historical necessity, but, so too, the rising of the working class against it. Capital is an historical necessity, but, so too, its grave digger, the socialist proletariat."_
Bro you are drowning wrong conclusion Adv. Nations spend more because they collect more tax. They are not own any company. Ind. Pak. Gov spent less because lots of we don't pay taxes. In our countries gov owned companies also loss making .
Not really, there is indirect taxing at place so even a begger is paying tax!! In India taxes are one of the highest in world i.e around 45-50% Even after such huge taxes we do not see any significant developments because the states priorities are not right, politicians are busy playing politics on lines of region, caste, language, religion... They are consistently evading accountability for their decisions by making scapegoats, and use other maneuvers to distract illiterate public!!
Capitalism and Socialism are both evolving systems, they are still adjusting their ideas and rulings; but at least Capitalism has more flexibility in their beliefs. They adopt a lot from Socialism even like public sector but Socialist are stubborn and very dogmatic in thinking. One thing the left will never agree because of their dogma, there is no perfect capitalism and obviously socialism. Infact every economy has some elements of capitalism and some of socialism, and the element which actually works is capitalism; Then when the government accumulates wealth from Capitalism and spends some on people the woke tankies shout "look capitalist spending money it's our system and it works".
Capitalism and Socialism don't evolve together, that's a wrong projection. Second Capitalism doesn't have so called "More flexibility" nobody might understand what do you even mean by that. Socialism isn't public sector, it never was. Public sector does exist in a capitalist society, in capitalist mode of production under the leadership of the bourgeoisie. Each and every nonsense arguement you've made so far didn't has no basis and shows how dogmatic your mind is, it's funny how you've made your own conclusion of some "Leftwing Dogma", But here you've made one point that there's no perfection, there can't be and that's what Hegel has pointed out in his logic. But you've again come up with some nonsense that you've made up by yourself, that "Capitalist elements work" it's obvious that you've no idea of what you're talking about. Historically the fastest developing ( both economically and sociallly ) countries were indeed socialists, first the Soviet Union and then Peoples' China. Tho with your dogmatic nonsense arguements i'm pretty sure that you've no knowledge of on Chinese economy and you might start arguement with "uH my GuD cHinA is cApiTaLiSt" , if by any chance you're going to do that, i'll repeat the same thing the person above has pointed ou, "Go Educate yourself" but also Grow up.
@@tankseverywhere1492 @Tanks Everywhere What I tried to say that every economy in this era except your lovely DPRK (which I know you people will disown) has a mixture of Socialism and Capitalism, which are both important to have. Neither full flesh system can work alone. Just like China that you people celebrate and take credit, it has a regulated economy with a big private enterprises. While Communism exists in books, Twitter and comment sections. Radical Socialism (Soviet) no matter how much you cheer it was an intolerable and no one protests or wants it to reestablish. I can also bring Japan and Germany to the counter but it is a time waste to debate something irrelevant and already defeated.
Sir, you are reading from a book written 160 years ago. This is not a philosophical book, this claims to be a scientific solution to society's problems. Meanwhile we have state run economies which have failed and even in Cuba/North Korea they are still failing. Even China couldn't pull itself out of poverty with just the power of socialism, they had to introduce some level of market reforms and free market economy. I feel sad that there are still intellectuals who propose full blown communism as a solution to all ills when it's quite clear that this system has great capacity to devolve into autocracy and repressive regimes and it has failed to deliver in 1/3 of the globe. Please stop reading Marx like Jamaatia's read Maududi.
Eye opening lecture for me..... Thank you so much sir....
بہترین۔۔ کامریڈ سرخ سلام
Eye opening information for me! All I have learned in my adult life was wrong...
Our problem is not free market, or state owned capitalism which is allegedly a hurdle for economy, the red tapism, is actual root cause.
If regulation on businesses and transaction could become people friendly, then scenarios could be changed.
Rule of law within a state is also by in large biggest problems, in almost every aspect of government operations.
Dr. sb you should make a video about if your party manage to make government in Pakistan then how will you cope up with following issues :
1-Rule of law
2- Establishment intervention and monopoly
3- capitalistic exploitative hold in Pakistan
4- Accountability of your own politicians and state officials.
The rational arguments from your side will be highly appreciated.
Agreed... Interesting comment...
شکریہ تیمور ۔۔۔ آپ نے اپنا سماجی حق ادا کر دیا ۔ آفرین
VERY GOOD ANALYSIS...PL.GO ON
Sir you only show government spending as percent of GDP but what about sources of these funds i-e Government Revenues, Majority of government revenues come from taxes, not from State-Owned Enterprises. So what will be your answer in the context of this video?
Ur wrong getting money from a crooked capitalist is alot harder than making all by Ur self. Most of the developed countries have their own ARAMCO TYPE companies in their hand. They make shit Tons of money for them to support their socialist programs.
I guess it's the problem of institutions efficiency than if they r outputting low revenue e.g;compare revenue generation of PIA past vs contemporary situation.
🎯 excellent
آپ نے تو میرے سارے ارادوں پہ پانی پھیر دیا۔ میں اس پنج سالے میں دس ارب پرافٹ بنانے کا سوچ رہا تھا۔ جب آخر کار سب کچھ سٹیٹ لے اڑے گی تو پھر اتنا خجل ہونے کی ضرورت نہیں۔
کام کی ضرورت کوئی نہیں اپنے آپ بن جاےگا مہنگائی کی وجہ سے 🙃
Dr sb you presented a thorough perspective. Thanks for enlightening students of economy like me.
Pak certainly needs some regulation to exit the debt trap. The bitter pills which could help realize this can only be taken by welfare state not elite not the business class.
I was amazed to observe stats that despite continuous shift from cotton (backbone of 70%exports) to sugarcane (water intensive, sugar an importable product, subsidies) , sugar lobby is continuing with its nefarious designs without check by govt.
There are multiple areas like these which can be reformed by govt intervention. But the key question is the sincerety of govts.
The crux of the discussion is developed countries have high degree of state control over their economies e.g; Belgium 54% , USA 35% while the third world countries tend to have low control i.e; Pakistan 22%.
Means state growth is proportional to heavy state control on the market.
Sir i agree completely but i think this trajectory of free-market -> state-capitalist -> socialist only makes sense if you accept that socialism requires world revolution (to change the full system, not just manage capitalism in russia or pakistan or china).
Otherwise, you could develop the country to wealthy state capitalist, but the issue remains that the relations which you want to change to reach socialism are not within the limits of your borders (cant bring out potential of the new society from the old society if you cannot grasp the potential).
Free-market -> state capitalist -> socialism makes sense internationally however. the world has been ripe for revolution since probably around 1848, but we need workers in places like u.s. china and japan to actually do it.
Kindly share your thought and research on negative effects of capitalism on the humanitarian and related stuff as a regular series thank you very much
Thanks
Pessimism of the Intellect, Optimism of the Will
Please share sources in the description
Excellent analytical.
Great video sir
great 👍
Extremely valuable and revolutionary content taimoor bhai.I am following you since 2019 and in last video you finally invite us to join your party I am ready to this I am living in chicago and take part in real revolution of pakistan not want become a part of the parties who have same manifesto but just changing there spelling. So please let me know how I can join...thanks
Eye opening
Very informative, but in ex-USSR was there a concept of private property as it is practised in modern China today. What I see China is following on the surface an Scandinavian economic model but with of course different policies.
Countries with high government public spending-to-gdp ratio are countries with high income tax. There seems to be a strong correlation between these two variables. Also I don't see how government public spending equates to state control?
Sir capitalism socialism ki taraf ja rhi hai to mtlb phr koi aur system?
Sir kiya Pakistan ki mojoda sortihal behtr ho sakti hi
Good
Sir is that a thing that westren economies first do privatisation and then their government help these private sector by having stake in their companies
What about "the End of History" by Francis Fukuyama?
He himself discarded his own theory in 2014.
sir what is "market fundamentalism"?
Sir ❤️
Sir if u come in govt..u will also be under the pressure of establishment.. what would u do then???? Or u will bear the removal from the govt
Should we be bossed by bureaucrats instead of businessmen?
Totally agree👍
Sir, It was a great research and encourages the Socialists morals. I got just one question If you can Please answer somehow. How state get control of the private industries? For Instance, Elon Musk has a biggest wealth and How USA as a state could monopolize his wealth unless he gives shares to state in his businesses?
Then m, sir which thing is hurdle that does not let our country to move towards state monopoly capitalism. What are reasons behind it.
That means Bhutto was way ahead of its time .was he a genius or stupid . although my parents did benefit from his free education reforms.
Sir, What is the position of China in this regard?
Respected Dr. Sb. Salamat rehain. Why does every political party in Pakistan is or seems to be rightist and always see through a capitalist lens? Right now it seems that PTI's tilt is a bit leftist BUT in my opinion, this title is also circumstantial (most probably not from a hardcore standpoint) and as soon as they will come into power or break a deal they will turn into a rightist bunch?
Kiya hamaray pas koi nazriya ha he nahi? We are leading lives aimless for short-term profits but why? And what is the solution? Please make a video if you can. Thank you.
State should never become stronger or powerful. The more state is strong, society becomes immoral and inhuman.
It is applicable to everything, even religious authorities "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely"
Dr sb yaha pa nizaam ulta hai yaha pr capitalist group of companies kholty Hain which are interconnected to each other and take over all means of production
Waaaaoooo
Me IT ka student hu per ap ko sun krr munjha masters ka shok economics me ho raha hai
11:30 according to PIDE research, Pakistan state's pootprint in economy is 67%
sir i respect your knowledge a lot but sir your ideal country china is destroying pakistan economy by doing free trade agreement with them because our pakistani goods cant compete with chinese goods and we dont have acces too china market soo what is your opinion about thus
So you are saying we should be more like China. So that we progress like them?
amazing stats to support your orgument
Why bhutto's socialism approach failed?
It wasn't socialism. It was state capitalism. Socialism means the surplus produced by workers is goven back to workers. In state capitalist, the surplus is looted by government officials instead of private capitalists. This was the case in ussr after 1956.
پاکستان میں اس کے الٹ ھوا ھے۔تیلوے، ڈاک، ٹیلی فون ،عسپڑا، پی آئی اے وغیرہ پہلے روز سے ھی قومی ملکیت میں تھے۔۔ان اداروں میں اندھا دھند بھرتیںکرتے گئیے اور یہ ادراے نافع میں جانے کی بجائے یہ ادارے اپنے ملازمین اور دوسرے اخراجات ھی پورے نہیں کر رھے ھیں۔ یہ ادارے خسارے میں چلے گئیے اور ریاست ان کابوجھ اٹھانے سے قاصر ھو گئی۔۔۔۔۔
what is the name of Your band?
which color is related to socialists?
le taimoor rehman: ''Laaaal ay''.
why china is not in any list or graph. dont we have china's data ? where do china stand ?
They're socialist means state owned enterprises but with capitalistic model.
Isnt this argument go against your whole philosphy that capatalist dont spend on people they just wana grab all the money
Stats are showing they are spending on people🤷🏼
Its thanks to the fact that Europe has had socialists in power.
So if capitalism peak is supporting socialism,why to struggle against it..instead support it so that it achieved that peak as quickly as possible
So whats logic and justifiction left for socialist..? You your self has just prove it
Uh, Capitalism is not "supporting" Socialism, class struggle doesn't dissapear, but is intensified. Capitalism gives rise to material conditions that in turn give rise to socialism. As Rosa Luxemburg put it,
_"Bourgeois class domination is undoubtedly an historical necessity, but, so too, the rising of the working class against it. Capital is an historical necessity, but, so too, its grave digger, the socialist proletariat."_
Bro you are drowning wrong conclusion
Adv. Nations spend more because they collect more tax. They are not own any company.
Ind. Pak. Gov spent less because lots of we don't pay taxes. In our countries gov owned companies also loss making .
Not really, there is indirect taxing at place so even a begger is paying tax!! In India taxes are one of the highest in world i.e around 45-50% Even after such huge taxes we do not see any significant developments because the states priorities are not right, politicians are busy playing politics on lines of region, caste, language, religion...
They are consistently evading accountability for their decisions by making scapegoats, and use other maneuvers to distract illiterate public!!
Capitalism and Socialism are both evolving systems, they are still adjusting their ideas and rulings; but at least Capitalism has more flexibility in their beliefs. They adopt a lot from Socialism even like public sector but Socialist are stubborn and very dogmatic in thinking.
One thing the left will never agree because of their dogma, there is no perfect capitalism and obviously socialism. Infact every economy has some elements of capitalism and some of socialism, and the element which actually works is capitalism; Then when the government accumulates wealth from Capitalism and spends some on people the woke tankies shout "look capitalist spending money it's our system and it works".
you are wrong, educate yourself.
@@aunthegeek5788 prove me Mr. Educated.
Capitalism and Socialism don't evolve together, that's a wrong projection. Second Capitalism doesn't have so called "More flexibility" nobody might understand what do you even mean by that. Socialism isn't public sector, it never was. Public sector does exist in a capitalist society, in capitalist mode of production under the leadership of the bourgeoisie. Each and every nonsense arguement you've made so far didn't has no basis and shows how dogmatic your mind is, it's funny how you've made your own conclusion of some "Leftwing Dogma", But here you've made one point that there's no perfection, there can't be and that's what Hegel has pointed out in his logic. But you've again come up with some nonsense that you've made up by yourself, that "Capitalist elements work" it's obvious that you've no idea of what you're talking about. Historically the fastest developing ( both economically and sociallly ) countries were indeed socialists, first the Soviet Union and then Peoples' China. Tho with your dogmatic nonsense arguements i'm pretty sure that you've no knowledge of on Chinese economy and you might start arguement with "uH my GuD cHinA is cApiTaLiSt" , if by any chance you're going to do that, i'll repeat the same thing the person above has pointed ou, "Go Educate yourself" but also Grow up.
@@tankseverywhere1492 @Tanks Everywhere What I tried to say that every economy in this era except your lovely DPRK (which I know you people will disown) has a mixture of Socialism and Capitalism, which are both important to have. Neither full flesh system can work alone. Just like China that you people celebrate and take credit, it has a regulated economy with a big private enterprises.
While Communism exists in books, Twitter and comment sections. Radical Socialism (Soviet) no matter how much you cheer it was an intolerable and no one protests or wants it to reestablish. I can also bring Japan and Germany to the counter but it is a time waste to debate something irrelevant and already defeated.
Sir, you are reading from a book written 160 years ago. This is not a philosophical book, this claims to be a scientific solution to society's problems. Meanwhile we have state run economies which have failed and even in Cuba/North Korea they are still failing. Even China couldn't pull itself out of poverty with just the power of socialism, they had to introduce some level of market reforms and free market economy. I feel sad that there are still intellectuals who propose full blown communism as a solution to all ills when it's quite clear that this system has great capacity to devolve into autocracy and repressive regimes and it has failed to deliver in 1/3 of the globe. Please stop reading Marx like Jamaatia's read Maududi.
I think you have missed the latest data that was shown in this video.
American sanctions are what you are really upset about actually.