Thought Behind Things · Aug 16, 2024 · 1:13:36
Pakistan will outgrow its government, not be saved by it
Farooq Tirmizi argues Pakistan's bull case does not depend on a perfect leader, foreign bailouts, or structural reform — the math is already in motion through demographics, literacy, and household savings. Muzamil pushes back on every link in the chain.
with Farooq Tirmizi
13 min read
The bull case the headlines miss
The episode opens with Muzamil framing the conversation as a follow-up to a four-part series Farooq Tirmizi wrote for Profit magazine — a sequence on Pakistan’s power sector, demographics, education, and a closing piece titled, plainly, the bull case for Pakistan. Muzamil’s praise for the series is specific. It is backed by data. It is not, in his words, “vibes and opinions, which you get a dime a dozen in Pakistan right now.”
Muzamil sets the question early. With that title, what is the bull case? What is Tirmizi seeing that most Pakistanis are missing?
Tirmizi’s answer reframes the entire conversation. “The government of Pakistan can make it better. It can’t make it worse,” he says. The bull case, in his telling, has two halves that need to be heard together. The first is that the indicators that typically drive a country’s long-run trajectory are pointed in the right direction in Pakistan. The second — and this is the part he keeps returning to — is that those indicators are not the kind the government can damage from here. “We don’t need somebody, some perfect leader, to come in with a massive reform agenda. We don’t need that. We can continue with the government of Pakistan being the way it is — as incompetent, as corrupt as it is — and it will still work.”
That framing matters. Tirmizi is not arguing the state is fine. He is arguing the state is roughly irrelevant to the next move.
Why the 2022 crash rhymes with 1997 Asia
Muzamil pushes on the comparison set. If the case is that Pakistan looks like other emerging economies that came through crises — Turkey, Indonesia — what should viewers take from how those countries crashed? He recalls Indonesia losing something close to ten to fifteen percent of GDP in the 1998 collapse.
Tirmizi’s response is the first sharp claim of the conversation. The 2022 Pakistan crisis, he argues, is structurally very similar to the 1997 Asian financial crisis. The same mechanism caused both. A country borrows heavily in foreign currency to stabilise an artificially-held exchange rate and to subsidise consumption of imports. “You can’t hold these things forever,” he says. The currency eventually breaks. The economy contracts.
He then adds a nuance Muzamil does not interrupt. The crisis countries of 1997 had at least built power plants and infrastructure with their borrowed money. “Not the right way to do it, but if you are going to borrow money and burn it, at least burn it on something you can use later — an asset, not consumption.” It is a quiet rebuke of how Pakistan deployed its own borrowing during the same window.
The power sector death spiral, and why it isn’t one
Muzamil voices what is probably the most common Pakistani objection to any optimistic case right now. Electricity is at sixty-five rupees a unit. In Dubai, where he is recording from, the same furnace-oil-derived power costs twenty-four. Industry cannot compete. Households cannot pay. Defaults are rising. Recovery is falling. The price keeps going up to cover the gap. “I am calling it a death spiral,” he says.
Tirmizi accepts the diagnosis and rejects the conclusion. The rate is high because of capacity payments — Pakistan built far too much capacity, and consumers are now paying for the idle plants. But, he points out, an economy does not sit in depression forever. “Slowly, slowly, people adjust. The economy adjusts, if you let it adjust.” When economic activity recovers even slightly, electricity consumption recovers, and the per-unit capacity charge falls. The nominal rupee price will not drop. The inflation-adjusted price, as a share of purchasing power, will.
Muzamil pushes for a more aggressive read. Could the government not absorb the capacity payments directly, shrink ministries, and pass the relief through to consumers — accelerating the cycle rather than waiting a decade? Tirmizi’s reply is one of the cleaner lines in the episode. “Mathematically, there are lots of solutions. But what is your expectation of the government of Pakistan?” The honest base case, he argues, is to assume the state does nothing useful and to model the recovery on that assumption. “If they end up doing better, that is an add-on. Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.”
The fertility number that changes everything
The conversation then turns to the part of Tirmizi’s thesis that is least intuitive to most viewers. The Pakistani horror story about population, he says, is twenty-five years out of date.
The mechanics he walks through are worth quoting at length. For centuries, the average woman in what is now Pakistan had six to seven children, and three of them died. Infant mortality was a fact of life. Maternal mortality was a fact of life. People had six children to ensure three survived. As medical technology globalised, infant mortality fell, and families gradually reduced fertility to match. Pakistan’s average is now 3.3 children per woman. “That is actually a great level,” Tirmizi says. “The ideal level frankly is somewhere between 2.1 and three. That is the sweet spot.”
The reason it matters is dependency. Muzamil presses on the standard narrative that population growth still outpaces GDP growth. Tirmizi’s correction is direct. Over the last two or three years, yes. Over ten, twenty, or thirty year averages, no — GDP per capita has grown, slowly but consistently. He cites the 2023 census, which came in lower than expected for population growth between 2017 and 2023 after coming in higher than expected in the previous inter-census window. The inflection point is happening now. He projects that the absolute number of children born each year in Pakistan will keep rising until somewhere between 2045 and 2050, then plateau.
Tirmizi then makes a point about what the rest of the world is losing. “We tease China and South Korea about old age. We are tearing up to look at a child. They will not have that — no children will be visible to them.” Pakistan, in his framing, has dodged both ends: it is not crashing into a demographic cliff like Japan, and it is no longer stuck on the runaway side either. “This is one of the biggest reasons for the bull case. It is something that changes over decades, and the government cannot damage it.”
Urban youth literacy is already past ninety percent
Education is the third leg of the series, and Tirmizi treats it as a downstream effect of the fertility shift. With three children instead of six, a household can actually fund school. “Earlier there were six children to feed and possibly two elderly parents. Now there are three.” Basic literacy reaches all of them.
The numbers he offers are sharper than the standard Pakistani literacy narrative. Overall national literacy sits around 60 percent. Urban literacy is 72. But the cohort that matters for the next twenty years — urban youth, specifically thirteen and fourteen year olds — is above 90 percent. “Pakistani schools are not good. It takes a long time for a child to get to basic literacy. The full effect shows up at age thirteen, fourteen. And it is there now.”
Muzamil checks the definition. He recalls hearing that Pakistani literacy was once defined as the ability to sign one’s name. Tirmizi corrects him. The standard now is being able to read a newspaper headline. “And honestly, for the initial phase of industrialisation, that is enough. If a sign on a factory machine says do not touch when hot, or operate this way, the worker can read it.” Muzamil extends the point by noting that smartphones and mobile internet are now doing a lot of the educating that schools are not, and Tirmizi agrees the data already reflects it. Everyone born after 1985 has literacy above 50 percent. Everyone born after 1999 is approaching 70.
Bank deposits, fiscal deficits, and the quiet mechanism nobody talks about
Somewhere around the halfway mark, Tirmizi walks Muzamil through the single economic mechanism that ties the whole thesis together. It is worth setting out carefully because it is the engine of the bull case.
Smaller families mean a household has a little more left over at the end of the month. Aggregate that across the population and bank deposits grow. The research, he says, shows the pattern clearly. As fertility crosses the three-children-per-woman threshold downward, bank deposits as a share of GDP go from 30 percent to 60. Pakistan is sitting right on that threshold.
The implication runs through the rest of the economy. Pakistan’s fiscal deficit averages around 6 percent of GDP over the course of a decade. With deposits at 30 percent of GDP, the banking sector can finance perhaps 2.5 to 3 percent of GDP in deficit through domestic borrowing. The rest the government has to get by printing money or borrowing abroad. Printing causes inflation. Borrowing abroad causes the currency crises Pakistan keeps experiencing.
Double the deposit base — which is what the demographic shift does, slowly, mechanically, without any policy change — and the banking sector can finance the entire 6 percent deficit domestically. The government does not need to print. The government does not need to borrow in dollars. “Inflation will not go down by a lot, but it will be much more stable,” Tirmizi says. The four-to-thirty percent range Pakistan currently swings through compresses to something more like four to seven or eight.
That stability, in turn, brings down interest rates. Lower interest rates make industrial projects pencil out. “Every big industrial group in Pakistan has plans on the books which don’t make sense at current interest rates but will make sense when interest rates come down.” When those plans get built, with literate workers and available electricity, the boom starts. Tirmizi’s estimate of when this point is hit is 2030 to 2033. From there, he expects something like thirty to forty years of mostly uninterrupted growth.
Muzamil notes that Goldman Sachs has independently projected Pakistan as roughly the tenth or eleventh largest economy in the world by 2075, with a GDP near twelve and a half trillion dollars. The sequencing is similar to Tirmizi’s. The first decade and a half is direction-setting. The growth comes after.
Devil’s advocate: what if the savings just feed the same machine?
Muzamil refuses to let the case stand without pressure. He puts the obvious objection on the table. If deposits grow but the banking sector keeps the easiest, risk-free trade — lending it all back to the government — then the private sector still does not get capital and the inefficiency just gets a bigger pool to feed on. The 2030 number becomes 2035, then 2040.
Tirmizi’s response is the line that, to him, distinguishes the thesis from a wish. “Sequencing matters. We are not fixing the problem. We are creating the capacity to deal with the problem.” The private-sector lending capacity, he argues, can only be built one of two ways — either the government reforms itself, which he treats as essentially zero probability, or the deposit base grows so much that even after the government takes its share, there is room left over for private credit. “We will not beat them. We will outgrow them.”
He extends the same logic to foreign debt. The path he describes is not dramatic repayment but slow refinancing. As domestic deposits grow, the government rolls foreign-currency obligations into rupee-denominated PIB issuance. By the late 2030s, in his model, most of the stock has converted. A fiscal crisis becomes possible. A foreign currency crisis becomes much less so. “If there are enough rupees to buy PIB bonds, the government does not need to go abroad. That is how this problem fixes itself.”
Muzamil adds a data point of his own. Topline Securities had published that morning that Pakistan’s debt-to-GDP ratio is at its lowest in six years, and that the net foreign debt position is roughly 70 percent — not great, but not unusual by international standards. The United States, he notes, is at 35 trillion dollars of debt. Japan’s recent carry-trade unwind has exposed its own structural problems. “In a long enough timeline, we are not actually that bad,” he says. Tirmizi agrees, with the qualifier that the next short-term squeeze is the part that has to be survived.
Emigration is exposure, not exit
Toward the end of the conversation, Muzamil raises the migration number. In 2023, Pakistan ranked first globally for net emigration — roughly 1.2 to 1.3 million people leaving, ahead of India’s 750,000. The political reading at home is brain drain.
Tirmizi takes the term apart historically. “Brain drain” was first used for British engineers leaving Oxford and Cambridge for the United States after the Second World War. India experienced it. Pakistan is experiencing it now. But there are three things, he argues, that change the conclusion.
First, the Gulf is structurally close to Pakistan. People who go to Saudi Arabia and the UAE keep a connection home that workers from other countries do not. Second — and this is the line that ties back to the demographics argument — Pakistan is now the largest country in the world with an above-replacement fertility rate. It is the only country left at scale that has the demographic capacity to send people abroad in these numbers. “Including India, China, and Bangladesh. They cannot do this.” Third, Pakistanis are largely going to countries that do not give citizenship. They come back. Post-COVID, many are simply working remotely from Pakistan and earning in dollars. Tirmizi notes, briefly, that this is literally the customer base of his own firm.
Muzamil reframes it cleanly. “It is exposure. Connections. Capital. Those things combined will eventually become available to Pakistan.”
What Europe and Japan are showing us about the alternative
The conversation closes on the inverse case — what happens to countries that fall below replacement. Japan, Tirmizi says, is the furthest along the bad path. A rich country whose economy has not grown for thirty years. Adult diapers in some markets already outsell baby diapers. The mental image of Tokyo as small expensive apartments is out of date. “You can rent a luxury apartment in Central Tokyo for two thousand dollars because Japan is no longer as rich as it used to be relative to the rest of the world.”
Europe, in his reading, at least understood the math and tried to fix it through immigration. The cultural friction Muzamil raises — the rise of right-wing nationalism in the UK and elsewhere, the conflict between aging native populations and culturally distinct replacements — Tirmizi treats as the cost of having seen the problem at all. South Korea and Taiwan, he predicts, will show the world the worst-case version of demographic collapse within the next ten to fifteen years.
Muzamil offers one closing frame. The whole conversation, viewed at altitude, is about systems — which ones produce the next century and which ones decay. Tirmizi’s answer for Pakistan is not that the system is good. It is that the math has already moved beneath it. The government will not save the country. The country, slowly, will outgrow the government.
That is the bull case.
Full transcript
Welcome back to another episode of Thought Behind Things. आज हमारे साथ मौजूद है एक बहुत ही ख़ास मेहमान जो कि इससे पहले भी एक दमा show पर आ चुके हैं. He is the CEO of Elf and Stone which is a which is a company जो कि पाकिस्तानियों की पूरी दुनिया से और Pakistan से भी investments कराते हैं in The US stock market and then other investment vehicles. I'm not sure details क्या है वह आप website पर देख सकते हैं but आज ही conversation is not about that startup or that business. आज ही conversation is about this series that he did for profit magazine जिसके वह एक ज़माने में managing editor भी होते थे जिसमें it's a four part series. It starts off with talking about Pakistan's power sector, electricity problem जो कि जाहिर है आजकल हर किसी का एक major talking point है. Drawing news में यह discussion हो रही है, हालात ख़राब हुए में है. AC वाले लोग जो हैं वह पंखे में सो रहे हैं नहीं करते. And one of the things, great things about this series was that it's backed by data. It talks about data. It's not vibes and opinions जो कि Pakistan में आजकल आपको बहुत ज़्यादा मिलते हैं. There are dime and a dozen. But really, I mean, with with so much data available, it's fascinating के, you know, we don't utilize that enough. The third part of the series was education. Again, very interesting data that really reimagines how you look at the problem in Pakistan when it comes to education because कुछ ऐसे घिसे पेटे narratives हैं जो कि ना हम पिछले दस पंद्रह साल से बस वह repeat करते रहते हैं और वह निचोड़ते रहते हैं and then वह उसकी वजह से हमें लगता यह है even though हमारा शायद environment इतना बुरा ना भी हो and again मैं इस वक़्त micro की बात नहीं कर रहा I know that things are tough and a lot is happening in Pakistan. एक wider मैं conversation की बात कर रहा हूं कि, you know, we hear about narratives and then we make our minds more often than not respond back by data. And then जो उनकी last part था इस series का which was called a bull case for फारूक तेर्मीज़ी. Sir, thank you so much for inquiring the show.
Thank you for having me back.
मैं conversation को थोड़ा सा start करूंगा. Just trying to understand with that title, Pakistan का bull case, you know, what is that bull case? What are you seeing that a lot of us aren't?
Sir, the data and very specifically अगर आप Pakistan की कुछ ऐसे data points को देखें जिधर हम normally नहीं देखते हैं और हास तौर पर आप उनको उन मुमालिक से compare करें जो कि हमारे जैसे हालात से गुज़र चुके हैं. तो the picture that emerges is उसकी दो हंस रहते हैं. एक तो यह कि, there is room for optimism कि मतलब जो key indicators होते हैं एक मुल्की तरक्की के कि यार यह अगर indicators इस तरफ जाने लग जाएं तो यह मुल्क तरक्की करेगा. ठीक है? Guarantee तो खैर कोई नहीं दे सकता लेकिन एक इमकान बहुत अच्छे लग रहे हैं कि यह तो मुल्क तरक्की करेगा. वह और फिर आप साथ में यह भी देखें कि वह ऐसे indicators हैं जिनका हुकूमत कुछ नहीं बिगाड़ सकती, ठीक है? जिधर we don't need somebody to come and save us, ठीक है? Right. We don't need somebody, some, you know, perfect leader to come in और उसके पास यह इतना बड़ा ज़बरदस्त तगड़ा कि सिर्फ़ reform agenda हो और वह इसको implement करेगा तो तब जाकर तरक्की होगी. No, we don't need any of that. We can continue with the government of Pakistan being the way it is, as incompetent, as corrupt as it is, and it will still work,
एक ही So would you would you argue that it is an inevitability at this point in time? Obviously, with a high amount of confidence, not with a 100%, but still with a high confidence.
The government of Pakistan can make it better, it can't make it worse. Right, makes sense. ठीक है? तो वह अगर मतलब वह reform agenda implement कर देते हैं तो उससे यह होगा कि वह तरक्की जितनी होनी है उससे और ज़्यादा होगी. Accelerating. लेकिन एक baseline level जो है ना वह तो होनी ही होनी है. Right और दूसरा point आप कह लेते हैं. हां, दूसरा point यह है कि it also does not require कि यार अमरीका से इतने पैसे मिल जाएंगे और यार Saudi इतने पैसे डाल देंगे और China इतना पैसा डाल देगा तो शायद कुछ हो जाएगा. No, none of that. Pakistan की माशी तरक्की के लिए जो पैसा आएगा वह हमारी अपनी saving से आएगा और वह कैसे आएगा? That is the thing that where you when you look at the data you can see कि यार यहां से आएगा पैसा और बस
that's fine is my point कि कोई बात नहीं है अगर नहीं आता कोई. अगर आ जाएं तो सोने पर स्वाहगा लेकिन यह कि उसकी ज़रूरत नहीं पड़ेगी. Makes sense. अगर मैं आपसे कहूं just just trying to zoom in a bit, right? You said कि if we compare it to comparable economies, let's compare it to let's say Turkey or Indonesia or or some countries जो कि पिछले बीस तीस सालों के अंदर, we do know that उनके भी हालात ऐसे रहे हैं. We don't अगर मैं Indonesia, Turkey की दोनों की बात करूं तो उनका governance system भी बड़ा Pakistan style था. Rent seeking भी बड़ी rampant थी. Military control भी रहता था. You know, आपका corruption का भी बड़ा problem था. At least Indonesia के इसमें population बहुत बड़ी थी. Education, uneducated population थी. So, what happened when they crashed? And we know that they did crash like horribly, right? Indonesia एक case में almost I have my understanding is 1015%
GDP दे पाया था उनका जब उनका crash आया था 98 में. Exactly the same reason why why we crashed by the way just two years ago. Which is कि बहुत ज़्यादा foreign क़र्ज़े ले लिए थे in order to stabilize the currency and subsidize imports. ठीक है? तो अब आपकी import driven अगर consumption है और आपने currency को artificially hold किया हुआ है और फिर एकदम से जो है वह जब झटका लगता है पूरी मई शक में which is inevitable क्योंकि you can't hold these things forever. तो जब वह झटका लगेगा तो ज़ाहिर आपकी फिर economy गिरेगी और exactly उसी तरह से हमारी भी गिरी है, ठीक है? एक लिहाज से अगर आप देखें तो actually जो Pakistan का 2022 से अभी '23, '24 तक अभी हम निकले नहीं हैं but this crash is actually very similar to the ninety seven Asian financial crisis for very similar reasons, ठीक है? और actually उसका नतीजा पी जो है वह भी कुछ हद तक आप similar है क्योंकि आप यह देखें कि जो Asian financial crisis था उसमें जो उन्होंने कर्जे लिए हुए थे foreign कर्जे, ठीक है? मतलब वह power plant खड़ा तो है ना. जब ज़रूरत पड़ेगी बिजली की हम उसको turn मतलब on तो कर सकते हैं ना. बिजली हमें मिल तो सकती है. तो मतलब not the right way to do it but यार अगर आपने क़र्ज़े लेकर पैसा उड़ाना है तो कमज़ कम ऐसी चीज़ पर लगाएं कि जो कि आप इस्तेमाल कर सकेंगे बाद में बजाए इसके किसी असासे पर लगाए बजाए इसके असराफ
पर. Right. अगर मैं इसमें so इसी इसी thought को continue करके you mentioned electricity that was the first part of your thesis as well, right? या जो जो आपका series थी. Electricity का मुझे बताएं कि you know sir पैंसठ रुपए बिजली का bill जा रहा है per unit. It's unsustainable to grow. Actually, grow तो चले छोड़ दें. यह तो मुझे death spiral लग रहा है ना कि जिसके अंदर जब electricity इतनी expensive हो रही है, यहां पर Dubai में जहां पर furnace oil से बिजली बनती है. वहां पर चौबीस रुपए की मिल रही है और वहां पर आपको जो है वह Pakistan में you know पचहत्तर अस्सी रुपए की मिल रही है. तो अगर मैं industry की बात करूं तो industry competitive नहीं हो सकती. अगर मैं आम आदमी की बात करूं तो वह आम आदमी जो है वह basically you know again afford ही नहीं कर सकता. चूंकि वह afford नहीं कर सकता तो वह उसके ऊपर default कर रहा है. वह क्योंकि default कर रहा है तो, you know, eventually recovery कम हो रही है. तो वह recovery कम हो रही है तो वह eventually और expensive expensive हो ही जा रही है. इस context को बिल्कुल अगर मैं micro की आज की बात करूं, इसको मद्देनज़र रखते हुए. Mean, we've had a lot of conversation and debate on this in Pakistan mainstream. गौर इजाज़ साहब आजकल बड़े active हुए हैं. वह कहने की सब तबाह कर दो, सब cancel कर दो, कोई problem नहीं होगी. So हमें यह भी realize करना है कि यार इसका कोई simple solution नहीं है. You know, सब cancel करने का मतलब यह है कि भाई for good or for bad, the fact is कि sovereign guarantees दीमी हैं. The fact is कि, you know, फिर फिर वह आपका एक recodic part two start हो जाएगा या कोई और मसला आ जाएगा. तो उस सारे को देखते हुए मुझे तो almost यह लगता है कि we're going towards a lost decade where, you know, we're stuck in these मुहाहिदे और हमारे पर loan इतना ज़्यादा है और हम अब मुश्किल सिर्फ़ यही कर लें कि यार अपने debt को restructure कर लें थोड़ा सा और हम जो है ना थोड़ी सी breathing space ले लें लेकिन हम grow तो नहीं कर सकते और यह जो generation है यह इसी शायद उसमें बह जाएगी जब तक यह capacity payments, win off नहीं होना शुरू.
Sir, देखिए, मसला जो है जो आप describe कर रहे वह तो ज़ाहिर है. मतलब it it is a problem, उसकी बात नहीं है. लेकिन उसका हल क्या है? उसका हल आप इस तरह से देखें. अच्छा, rate इतना high क्यों है? Rate इतना high इसलिए है कि capacity payments हम दे रहे हैं. बहुत ज़्यादा overcapacity हमने बना दी और उसकी वजह से जो है वह bill ज़्यादा ऊपर चला गया है. तो इसका मतलब यह भी है कि जब थोड़ी सी क्योंकि अब देखिए मईशत जो है ना वह depression में रहती नहीं है, ठीक है? थोड़ा बहुत फिर जो है लोग ऐसा ऐसा adjust करते हैं, थोड़ा सा जो है इधर उधर the economy adjust अगर आप उसको adjust करने दें तो वह करती है. तो जब economic activity जब recover करनी शुरू होती है, थोड़ी सी भी recover करनी शुरू करती है. तो बिजली का खर्च शुरू होगा दोबारा, ठीक है? और जब वह खर्च होगा तो offline capacity जो है उसकी payment कम हो जाएगी. Meaning rate जो है वह कम होता चला जाएगा. अब देखिए rate रुपए की मुनास्बत से तो मतलब नीचे तो नहीं आऐंगे. लेकिन inflation will basically make sure कि as a percentage of purchasing power this is the maximum we will ever pay. ठीक है? इसके बाद नीचे ही जाएगी है? जिसकी वजह से फिर you'd rather be in that position than ten years from now अगर आप इस position में खड़े हो कि यार
ठीक है यह बिजली के bill तो कम रहे थे लेकिन फिर आप जो है वह economy grow ही नहीं कर सकती क्योंकि बिजली के supply नहीं है. इसका कोई कोई और arrangement नहीं हो सकता. For example हम कहें कि यार government radically अपना size reduce करे और जिस जिस चीज़ को वह basically customer पर transfer करती है capacity payment तो वह books है ना? I mean, technically जो capacity payments हैं वह क्या हैं? Capacity payments by and large and that's my understanding. Obviously, you can tell me otherwise. But my understanding is that the capacity payments are for ten years only in a twenty five या thirty year का मुआएगा. And वह ten years की इस वजह से होती हैं because वह आपकी loan agreement है जिसको वह capacity payment के नाम से भेज रहे हैं. Right? So, that case, can't the government say कि भाई भाई ठीक है, customer की जो बिजली की ख़रीद है वह मैं उसको उसके हिसाब से करता हूं और मैं जो capacity payment की price है वह मैं government absorb करती है through something else. Right? वह कहीं और पर वह उसका बनाते हैं, margin बनाते हैं. चाहे वह ministryयां कम करें, चाहे वह कई और cost घटाएं. लेकिन चूंकि वह customer की price जब कम होगी तो automatically customer के पास space आएगी कि वह फिर consumption बढ़ाए. क्योंकि again, like I said कि दस साल का cycle तो वह तो फिर वही वाली बात है ना कि it's a it's a generation lost. Can't they accelerate that by allowing for some relief in some areas ताकि automatically वहां पर growth spark हो सके?
Sir, देखिए mathematically तो there's lots of solutions, ठीक है? लेकिन आपकी क्या कुमत है Pakistan से क्या उम्मीद है? ठीक है? मैं that that's the point that I want to make कि यार Pakistan की तरफ़ नहीं कि अगर आपको उम्मीद रखनी है तो आपको यह assumption रखनी पड़ेगी कि हुकूमत है Pakistan कुछ नहीं करेगी मुल्क सामारने को. ठीक है? That is basically the government of Pakistan. ठीक है? तो solution बहुत हो सकते हैं. दस साल से ज़्यादा यह accelerate हो सकता है लेकिन यह नहीं होगा. Right? अब आपका base case नहीं वन रहा आप कह रहे हैं I am gonna expect the worst and then see where we go from there so that automatically
irrespective
if they do end up doing better तो वह तो फिर add on है but वह prepare for the worst hope for the best वाला situation चल रही है. हां, क्योंकि देखिए अगर उन्होंने fix कर दिया तो क्या ही बात है? मतलब फिर तो मतलब फ़ायदा है ना then you're great. फिर तो मतलब you don't need to prepare for money coming to you, right? You don't need to prepare for lower prices. Nobody ever needs to prepare for that. ठीक है?
You don't need to prepare कि यार मुझे दस साल तक यह बर्दाश्त करना पड़ेगा. Right. Prepare for that. Interesting. And in that case you you're you're you're fairly certain that जो इस वक़्त आपकी peak hit की है price की, वह अब इससे मज़द ऊपर नहीं जाएगी. वह ISI से taper off ही होगी. As a percentage of purchasing power, yes. मतलब उसकी जो है वह inflation basically कम होगी वन्सबत
overall economy की inflation के, ठीक है? तो उससे यह होगा कि आस्था आस्था purchasing power will catch up और यह electricity की price जो है वह थोड़ी सी तरह में कम लगने लगेगी. Makes sense. यह होगा. अगर मैं again इसके अंदर abate करता हूं population जो कि हमें बताया जाता है कि आज Pakistan की बहुत ज़्यादा rapidly growing population है.
Pakistan के way way too many mouths to feed and इसमें जो horror story है, वह horror story है कि जी we were an agrarian economy. You know, we were driven around the Indus River system And because of rapid urbanization as well as climate change as well as a lot of other things and and a very inefficient agriculture ecosystem and industry, हमारी जो basically at max capacity पहुंच चुकी है, जो हमारी production है in terms of our mouths to feet. Now, you know, looking at कि जी potentially आपके पास एक water crisis या water scarcity आ सकती है. Looking at कि आपकी population मज़ीद बढ़ी जा रही है. The horror story is कि we're now at the tipping point where more population will basically not have enough to eat based on what we produce locally and therefore now, you know, it's it's gonna go towards a horrible horrible space. आपने population को analyze किया उसके बारे में लिखा अभी. What are your thoughts?
यार, this picture of Pakistan's population is about twenty five years out of date. ठीक है? इसकी खास तौर पर जो है वह देखिए ecological consequences of overpopulation are frankly it's a, it's a bit of an ideological position that a lot of people take. मैं उस पर, उसे त्याख इसलिए नहीं करता क्योंकि देखिए Pakistan के मिसाल के तौर पर जो agricultural productivity is at least half to maybe one third of what other countries are. So we can use the same amount of resources and produce twice to maybe even three times more food. ठीक है? वह मसला नहीं है. पानी का as such जो है we are one of the largest river systems और मतलब कोई यह तो नहीं कह रहा ना कि यार यह सारे दरिया सूख जाएंगे, ठीक है? What we will what will happen is कि यार there will be more floods and more droughts, ठीक है? तो उसकी थोड़े management की ज़रूरत बेहतर management की ज़रूरत तो definitely है but it's not a case कि यार मतलब हम प्यास से मर जाएंगे. That's also not the situation, ठीक है? Some years will be bad, some years will be good but overall that's not the issue. Too many mouths to feed has not been true since for at least twenty years, ठीक है? And the pattern shifted in 1995. Ok. Which was the worst year in in Pakistan in terms of number of people earning relative to the number of mouths to feed, ठीक है? उस उस साल तकरीबन इतना था कि हर कमाने वाले के दो dependent थे, ठीक है? That was the worst that it has ever been for Pakistan. It has steadily since then उसके बाद से जय यह बेहतर होती गई यह situation और उसकी क्या वजह है? उसकी वजह यह है कि यार सदियों से Pakistan में जो जो जो आज Pakistan है उसमें लोगों के औसतन हर औरत के छह से सात बच्चे होते थे, ठीक है? और सदियों तक यह होता था कि छह सात बच्चे अगर हुए हैं तो उसमें से तीन मर जाते हैं. यह इस तरह से there's always that story, ठीक है? अच्छा तो that is so that that was the pattern. लोग यह कहते थे कि यार छह बच्चे छह छह सात बच्चे करो ताकि जो है दो तीन ज़िंदा रहें because that's just infant mortality was a fact of life, ठीक है? Maternal mortality was a fact of life. अच्छा, आयस्ता आयस्ता through technology जो है वह पूरी दुनिया में जो है वह infant mortality कम हुई है. लोगों की जो है वह बच्चे जो है वह ठीक है? अगर तीन बच्चे चाहेंगे तो सिर्फ़ तीन ही करो. So that's where we are. ठीक है? अब हम आ गए हैं हमारी average जो है वह आ गई है at 3.3 right now. 3.3 children per woman in Pakistan, per adult woman in Pakistan. ठीक है? That's actually a great level. ठीक है? You the ideal level frankly is somewhere between two point one and three. ठीक है? That's that's the sweet spot कि आपकी population बढ़ती रही है, it will not decline. ठीक है? लेकिन इतनी ज़्यादा नहीं है कि आपके dependents बहुत ज़्यादा हो गए. ठीक है? That is the sweet spot we are hitting और सबसे बड़ी बात the one of the biggest thing reasons for the bull case is this, ठीक है? यह एक ऐसी चीज़ है जो कि दिहाइयों में change होती है और इसका हुकूमत कुछ नहीं बिगाड़ सकती.
Secondly nothing to, yeah. जो आपने number दिया हुआ आपने कहा 3.3 children per woman. Yes. How does that reflect in the average annual population increase? Because again इसका horror story beyond the mouth to feel में वह यह आता है जी आपकी GDP growth x है, आपकी population growth y है, आप तो अपनी GDP growth को ही नहीं cover कर रहे हैं. हमें तो यह बताया जाता है कि net के ऊपर we are doing worse year on year. Again, notwithstanding the let's say current crisis or whatever but अगर मैं इसको average out करूं over ten years तो हमें तो यह बताया जा रहा है कि you know we are doing worse year on year because average GDP annualized जो growth हमारी पिछले दस साल में हुई है और जो average population growth है वह actually population growth ज़्यादा है.
That's not true. So, it is true over the last two or three years कि population growth is higher than GDP growth लेकिन उससे पहले अगर आप ten years का जो average लें, twenty years average लें, thirty year average लें, really any period other than the last two years अगर आप देखें तो GDP growth is higher than population growth. ठीक है? तो GDP per capita Pakistan का बढ़ता रहता है, ठीक है? Now it's too slow, ठीक है? बहुत slow growth है but it is growth, ठीक है? और देखें population growth lags a little bit मतलब population growth will slow down. It is actually already started slowing down. 2023 का जो census आया है उसमें you can actually see the slow down a little bit relative to जो ninety eight और 2017 के दरमियान का जो growth rate आई थी. It came in higher than expected. Between 2017 and 2023 it actually came in lower than expected. तो वह थोड़ा सा inflection point जो है वह हम hit कर रहे हैं. ठीक है? तो number of children bond per year will continue to increase, ठीक है? यह तकरीबन दो हज़ार पैंतालीस से दो हज़ार पचास तक जो है वह Pakistan में बच्चे तो हर साल जितने बच्चे पैदा होते हैं उसकी तादाद तो बढ़ती रहेगी.
Obviously उन बच्चों ने जो उस time के वह बच्चे थे उन्होंने बड़ा होना था और फिर बड़े होकर वही पूरा life cycle गुज़ारना है. But एक point आएगा जब वह basically they'll begin to pass हो गई and then replacement जो आ रही है वह even though let's say 2.5 या 2.7 है whatever but अगर वह वह वाली generation जो है वह 4% के हिसाब से आई थी और replacement जो है वह 3% के हिसाब से आई तो theoretically your population will then begin to taper off for a few decades. Will that happen in Pakistan's case या जो हमें projections हमेशा आज तक हम देखते आए हैं जिसमें यह होता है कि यार 450,000,000 by 2050 and then पता नहीं कि एक कजिलियन by 2100. So, what's the number looking like for for you when you looked at it? देखिए,
population increase तो रहेगी and look, I don't have the exact numbers on me right now. But what I can say is कि देखें, there's a difference between decline and slower growth. ठीक है? What what you want for population is slower growth. You absolutely don't want to hit decline. ठीक है? क्योंकि बेटा decline में जो अभी लोग जो China की missileएं देते हैं sir देखेंगे देखिए अगले तीस साल में China का क्या हाल होगा? सारे बुट्टे बैठे होंगे but जवान कोई एक नहीं होगा और sir मैं आपको एक बात बताऊं थोड़ी देर और यहां पर रुक जाओ. हम तरस जाते हैं बच्चे को देखने के लिए. उनको उनके पास उनको नसीब नहीं होता कि कोई छोटा बच्चा उनको कभी नज़र आए, ठीक है? तो एक जो एक जो the loneliness of old age जो है ना जो China में होगी और जो South Korea में आज हो रही है, वह Pakistan में इंशालाह नहीं होगी. And actually, have a fundamental implication है basically कि मुहाश्रे के अंदर जब आपके बच्चे कमर हो जाते हैं तो उससे मुहाश्रे का क्या असर होता है? नहीं और उसके अलावा मतलब technological भी यार यह है ना कि देखिए यार you need young people to continue to come up with new ideas. You need young people to be able to put in the hard work that comes in initial phases of the career. अगर सारे लोग mid or, you know, end career वाले होंगे तो Who's gonna work? Yeah, who's gonna do the grant work? Makes sense, makes sense.
And then the third was education, right? And so you you said कि ok, but now stabilizing in terms of population and that's a great sign Particularly educated circus के अंदर बड़ा है वह normal ताकई आ रही है तो जो है ना बस गरीब लोग जो हैं वह बस बच्चे करते रहते हैं और Pakistan का burden बढ़ता रहता है. But what you're saying is basically कि वह जो privileged take है that's not necessarily true and Pakistan by and large is now stabilizing its
birth rate and growth rate. हां और उसकी वजह से direct impact है on literacy. ठीक है? अब उससे हुआ क्या है? ठीक है? हुआ यह है कि पहले छह बच्चे होते थे बमुश के और साथ में शायद एक बूढ़े मां बाप भी हैं और Basic literacy तक तो पहुंच जाएंगे, ठीक है? यह हुआ है Pakistan में, ठीक है? Pakistan में literacy जो है वह overall जो है वह 60% है, urban जो है हमारी 72% है. लेकिन अगर आप youth literacy दे देखें खासतौर पर urban youth literacy is above 90%. ठीक है? It's it's closing in on nine. Yeah, it is is actually 90%. खासतौर पर if you look at children who are 13, 14, ठीक है? Pakistan में school जो हैं, they're not good. ठीक है? So, it takes a long time for a child to go to school and become literate.
तो full effect उसका age 13, 14 पर आता है. 13, 14 year olds are 90 plus percent literate in the urban areas in Pakistan. Do you, do would you consider that literacy to be literacy? वह कहते हैं कि Pakistan की literacy का definition है कि यार signature कर ले तो वह literate है.
That's no longer the definition. अब हमारी definition यह है कि यार वह अखबार की सुर्खी पढ़ सके. ठीक है? And that's enough actually. For the initial phase of industrialization, यार factory में अगर मैंने sign लगाया हुआ है कि यार इस machine को जो है ना हाथ नहीं लगाना यह गरम होती है या इसको इस तरह से आपने on करना या इसको इस तरह से operate करना है और मैंने छोड़ दिया.
That in the age of information where we're in and with Internet and all of that, basically, like, a lot of people see education only happening through organized schooling system. The way that I see it, to be very honest, is your your cell phone is educating you. Your interaction with any information platform is inherently educating you about so many things. And so ability to consume information, I think, is is a tipping point again
for that change. And especially क्योंकि mobile internet जब आ गया तो
Makes sense. So, you you actually expect the generation alpha from Pakistan to be much smarter than the preceding millennial चेनेलियन थे basically.
The data suggesting it is already क्योंकि Pakistan में if you look at who are the illiterate in Pakistan? It's all the older people. It's all the older people. Everyone born after 1950, 1985 literacy is above 50%. Everyone born after the year 1999, the illiteracy rate is is closer to seventy percent. तो every generation has been more literate than the last generation. तो
yeah, this is already happening. Mean, that makes sense and this is this is just this small activity जो मैं हमेशा करता हूं कि आप हर हमेशा आपके कोई ना कोई domestic staff होता है या you know, lower middle income के लोग होते हैं. मैं हमेशा उनसे पूछता हूं कि यार आप give or take depending on which district वह कुछ काम करना शुरू किए हुए हैं. So, यह तीन चीज़ें आपने मुझे बताई हैं. आपने कहा जी power is a is a ten year thing जिसका eventually outcome positive होना ही होना है. अब उसको accelerate या decelerate government policy कर सकती है. Population में we've actually come to a point where which is sustainable and we can be happy about it. Can we be happy about this? Because आजकल आप This समझ रहे is this is unmitigated a great story for Pakistan. It's मतलब
yeah.
And then education baby you're saying basically कि we are definitely on the right track. If we compare and education में particularly मैं हमेशा यह बात करता हूं कि you know if you're gonna compare yourself होनी होता है वह बचपन में parents कहते थे कि यार अगर वह अमीर बच्चे के साथ अपने आप वह compare करोगे ना तो रोते रहोगे पूरी ज़िंदगी तो अपने आप से अपने आप वह compare करो, अपने आप से compete करो and अगर हम उसमें देखें तो we have gotten better and that is gonna reflect over time. Now if I अगर अब मैं इसको लपेटूं और जो आपका आख़िरी था the bull case for Pakistan give me that summary of what you think, holistically Pakistan in thirty years could potentially look like. हां, तो अब इसमें देखें
and this is where the politics comes becomes important and जो मेरा जो case है, why I think it's going to happen is क्योंकि Pakistan will not prosper because the government fix the problems. Pakistan will prosper because the people of Pakistan will create the capacity to deal with the government's incompetence and corruption. ठीक है? अब यह कैसे होगा? पहले बच्चे छह होते थे, ठीक है? अब बच्चे हो रहे हैं तीन, ठीक है? थोड़ी सी आपके पास जो है वह आपने saving आई आपने उसको invest कर दिया बच्चों की तालीम में, ठीक है? तो वह बच्चे थोड़े से ज़्यादा पढ़ लिख गए, ठीक है? तो जो next generation आ रही है वह कमाई कमाएगी. थोड़े से ज़्यादा पैसे कमाएगी. ठीक है? Which mean and everyone is having smaller families तो हो यह रहा है कि at the end of the month every household has just a little bit more money left over. ठीक है? और यह economic research हमने देखा है. बाकी मुल्कों में भी यह होता है कि three children per woman is the tipping point which Pakistan is very close to, ठीक है? Three children is the tipping point. जब when you cross that from when you are just above that to when you are just below that, bank deposits as a percentage of GDP go from 30% to 60%. अब यह एक बहुत ज़रूरी चीज़ है. इसका क्या मतलब है? यह होता कैसे है? यह मैंने आपको mechanism बताया कि यार बच्चे काम हैं, थोड़ी सी कमाई आपकी ज़्यादा हो गई है जिसकी वजह से आपके पास थोड़ी सी saving ज़्यादा हो गई. Aggregate उसका effect यह होता है कि यार bank deposits as percentage जो GDP जो है वह बढ़ जाते हैं from 30% to 60%. That's a major difference. अच्छा, Pakistan की जो हम यह कहते बात करते रहते हैं यार structural reforms नहीं होते हैं, government corrupt है, government inefficient है, बहुत ज़्यादा departments हैं यह सब कुछ. यार इसको अगर आप इसका खुलासा आप दें तो एक number जो है which tracks it all is the fiscal deficit. ठीक है? Fiscal deficit थोड़ा सा कम होता है, थोड़ा सा ज़्यादा होता है but over the course of one decade average होती है 6% of GDP. ठीक है? अगर bank deposits आपके 30% है और fiscal deficit 6% है उसको finance करना with just 30 deposits is not possible. ठीक है? Banking sector की Pakistan में आजकल capacity हमने जो देखा जो कि banking sector can realistically do is about two and a half to 3%, ठीक है? Of GDP यानी कि basically जितने bank deposits हैं उसका 10% जो है वह fiscal deficit की financing में लगाया जा सकता है, ठीक है? तो अगर 30% है तो तो fiscal deficit को आप कुछ नहीं कर सकते जिसकी वजह से government पैसे print करती है और बाहर से borrow करती है. Print करती है तो महंगाई होती है. वही if inefficiencies रही कुछ नहीं उन्होंने तब्दील किया लेकिन आपने यह कर दिया 6% कर दिया. तो the banking sector can now finance that deficit with domestic borrowing. ठीक है? 6% आप उसको domestic bank loan से आप finance कर सकते फिर आपने क्या कर दिया? Government doesn't need to print money. Government doesn't need to borrow money from abroad. अब क्या हो गया? महंगाई कम हो जाएगी. थोड़ी सी stable हो जाएगी. Inflation will not go down by a lot but it will be much more stable. Pakistan में आजकल क्या होता कि यार किसी साल तक यह inflation को जो है पांच छह percent पर रोक लेते हैं और फिर जो है जब when they run out of money तो फिर जो है वह तीस फीसद तक चली जाती है, ठीक है? यह जब आप level hit करेंगे तो Pakistan की inflation जो average ten year average होता है 8% तक़रीबन. वह eight से शायद seven maybe six तक चला जाएगा, ठीक है? बहुत ज़्यादा नीचे नहीं जाएगा लेकिन वह जो four to 30% range है ना वह narrow हो जाएगी, ठीक है? वह four to शायद 789% हो जाएगी. तो थोड़ा सा stability आएगी जिसकी वजह से. ठीक है? तो domestic capital आएगा, ठीक है? Cost of capital कम होगा जिसकी वजह से बहुत हर Pakistan के बड़े industrial group के पास आज इस वक़्त जो है there are many plans on the books which don't make sense at current interest rates but will make sense when interest rates go down. ठीक है? तो वह plans जो है they they can be put into effect and then you have industrial growth जिसके लिए बिजली आपके पास है, literate workforce आपके पास है, financing at a reasonable cost आपके पास है and then you start seeing that boom that then जब मुल्कों के पास यह तीन factors जो हैं when when they all come together, when all four of these factors come together then you see a boom that last thirty, forty years. ठीक है? वह beach में थोड़े से छोटे मोटे recessions आते हैं but overall तीस चालीस साल की almost uninterrupted trajectory होती है ऊपर. That point Pakistan will hit around 2030 between 2030 and 2033.
हमारे estimates जो हैं वही है. We think it will be around then. That point से मुराध आपका basically यह है कि उससे पहले का जो सारा time है वह stability का है, वह वह basically अपनी उस direction setting का है और उस point के बाद आपकी rapid growth आप project कर रहे हैं. ऐसा ही है? Yes yes. And my understanding is this is a very similar argument that let's say वह Goldman Sachs की जो study आई थी कि जी twenty seventy five में Pakistan में tenth or eleventh or I don't know what sized economy with $12,500,000,000,000 की GDP. So वह भी basically यही देख रहे हैं कि वह उन्होंने पहले दस पंद्रह सालों को उन्होंने यह realize किया कि अरशाब यहां पर the the nature is going to play itself out and then eventually once all of the variables are set that's when that growth is going to happen. हां हां. अब इसमें देखें यह यह जो ingredients हैं growth के यह हुकूमत इसमें
एक किरदार अदाक कर सकती थी, ठीक है? मिसाल के तौर पर बिजली का जो है वह अगर यह situation आवाम ख़ुद कर रही है, ठीक है? Fertility rate is something that frankly हुकूमत कुछ कर सकती है लेकिन यह कि usually people have to make the choice, ठीक है? तो वह ख़ुद अपनी तरफ़ से हो रहा है. ये सारी चीज़ें हुकूमत बेहतर कर सकती थी, ठीक है? लेकिन बेगाड़ नहीं सकती अब, ठीक है? जितना बेगाड़ सकती थी बेगाड़ लिया.
Right. इसके बाद this is rock bottom is what I'm saying. अगर मैं आपसे पूछूंगी risks क्या हैं? Right? इसमें भी I wanna I wanna play the devil's advocate and and I because before some viewer business like कि यार भाई finally मुझे कोई अच्छी बात बोलना है तू क्यों आ रहा ना ध्रियान में? I am just trying to poke him to see potential क्या वह हो सकते हैं. But ज़ाहिर है कि आपने जब fiscal deficit की बात की तो उसके अंदर एक चीज़ जो नज़र आती है वही नज़र आती है कि हमारा जो you know savings rate, trash, investment rate, trash, banks जो पैसे जितने भी इकट्ठे करते हैं और risk free haircut ले तो banks एकदम से पीछे हट जाना हो गया यार government is is a is a is also not the ultimate you know क्या कहलाता है? Debtor कहलाता है. तो उसको उससे हटकर वह borrower, right? So उससे हटकर वह जो है वह private sector को देना शुरू करें या ऐसे लोगों को दे जो productive होंगे. But it's not necessarily very productive. Right? It's taking a lot of money and it's just dumping it left, right, and center in most inefficient ways. So मुझे जो problem आती है वही आती कि अगर banks के deposits बढ़ भी जाते हैं, savings होना शुरू हो भी जाती हैं और वह सारा जा सारा पैसा फिर से बस वह एक inefficient system में जाता रहता है तो फिर वह वही 202033 का number जो है वह twenty 35 पर चला जाता है, फिर वह twenty forty पर चला जाता है until and unless some sort of वही बात के nature plays itself out कि inefficiency कहीं ना कहीं creatively destroy हो ताकि जो stakeholders हैं वह वापस efficiency ढूंढना शुरू करें. इस वक़्त तो free for all चल रहा है ना कि the easiest way to make monopoly money in Pakistan is, you know, just gather a bunch of money and give it to the government and you're you're getting risk free money back.
देखिए, sequencing is what matters, ठीक है? आप जिस sequence की बात कर रहे हैं यह हो सकता है, ठीक है? और अगर इस तरह से हो तो बेहतर है कि इस तरह से हो, ठीक है? कि government जो है वह यह अपनी चीज़ें थोड़ी बेहतर करें. We are not fixing the problem. We are creating the capacity to deal with the problem. ठीक है? तो this is what मैं यह कह रहा हूं. ठीक है कि वह जो private sector की lending की जो capacity हम बनाएंगे अभी तो private sector को तो कुछ नहीं मिल सकता ना, है. ना वह capacity इस तरह से वन सकती है कि कुमत अपने जो है वह तौर तरीके sell कर ले जो कि नहीं होने वाला Pakistan में. तो अगर नहीं होने वाला Pakistan में फिर और कैसे हो सकता है? वह और इस तरह से हो सकता है कि यार we outgrow them. We outgrow their inefficiency. ठीक है? We are not going to beat them. We will outgrow them.
यह हो गया. Makes sense. एक चीज़ मैं आपसे पूछना चाहूंगा. Foreign debt की बहुत बात होती है. इस इस बार भी सुनने में आया कि जी चौबीस हज़ार अब dollar वापस करने थे जिसमें से सोलह अरब rollover हो गया है. बाकी जो है वह IMF और वह सारा कर कराकर खिची ना खिची ना वही as always वह बस just in time एक खिच हमारी money की supply chain चल रही है. But इसके अंदर what a lot of people don't realize it. Either या तो वह यह बात भी नहीं realize करते हैं कि यार एक बहुत major आपकी आपने COVID के time के ऊपर इधर ब्यान में breaks लीनी थी. वह सारा hit पड़ रहा है तो उसकी वजह से एकदम से pressure बहुत ज़्यादा है और जो realize करते हैं फिर वह बहुत ज़्यादा depression में चले जाते हैं because वह कहते कि यार हालात बहुत ख़राब है. मैं आज ही पढ़ा था top line securities की वह IVT के Pakistan actually as of today has the lowest debt to GDP ratio over the last six years. हमारा जो foreign debt है अगर वह मैं net amount में निकालूं तो it's 70%. It's better than a lot of other countries in the world. Are a lot. United States Of America भी बहुत बुरे हालात में हैं. उनका पता नहीं वह 35,000,000,000,000 hit हो गया और सारा कुछ है. Japan का भी पिछले दिनों जो carry trade की वजह से everybody was looking at Japan. वहां पर बड़े बुरे हालात हैं. तो हमारे उस sense में in a long enough timeline it's not that bad. Yes, we are in a in a short squeeze and, you know, whatever solution pops up for that but fundamentals actually are, you know, very positive for Pakistan in the longer run. Would you agree? Not just this particular data point but overall जो आपने देखा?
हैं with domestic borrowing. यह government यार PIB issue करेगा और bank deposit bank के पास जितने deposit हैं कि वह उठा सके, ठीक है? अगर आपने यह कर दिया तो फिर at the end of the day एक आप ऐसे point पर आऐंगे कि the government will refinance its debt, foreign foreign debt with local debt. ठीक है? And then the foreign debt will start Explain going that. अच्छा. होगा यह कि देखें the government has the ability to keep मतलब there is a certain amount of money that keeps on coming into Pakistan, ठीक है? Current account जो Pakistan का deficit है, it's not a static deficit. कभी कभार थोड़ा सा surplus में भी जाता है, कभी कभार थोड़ा सा deficit में जाता है. If you leave the currency alone actually Pakistan का current account deficit इतना बुरा नहीं है, ठीक है? Meaning अगर आप currency exchange rate पर थोड़ा सा hit लें तो it is possible for the government to buy dollars off the market, ठीक है? Pay the foreign loan back and refinance the amount with rupees, ठीक है? Provided the rupees are available in the market. Sufficient quantity of rupees are available in the market, ठीक है? And provided the economy is moving enough कि यार वह dollar की supply भी आपको मिल जाए, ठीक है? यह यह situation आज नहीं है, ठीक है? लेकिन जो situation मैं आपको बता रहा हूं कि यार यह आज तक आज तक bank deposits बढ़ते चले जाएंगे तो आस्था आस्था government इस तरह से यह करेगी कि they will जो नए loans हैं वह foreign नहीं होंगे. वह सारे domestic होंगे. आस्था आस्था सारे जो हैं वह domestic होते चले जाएंगे. Eventually point यह आएगा कि वह जो foreign exchange से जो है जो last loan foreign loan repay repay करेंगे and maybe that won't be the last foreign loan but it will be such a slow amount कि बाकी सारे loans जो है वह फिर local ही रह जाएंगे. ठीक है? तो it's it's a game of आप आस्था आस्था उसको pay करते चले जाएंगे और उसको replace उसकी replacement जो आएगी वह local आएगी. Rupee denominated आएगी. तो that is what will happen. Now यह खेल जो है यह पंद्रह साल का है. ठीक है? This is not going to finish out until like the the late twenty thirties में यह fully play out होगा. But what will happen at the end of that is कि government की जो fiscal crisis है that will hopefully most likely not result in a foreign currency crisis. ठीक है? It will remain rupee denominated जिसकी वजह से it will just be easier to deal with for the government. ठीक है? तो अगर आप if there are if there are enough rupees to buy PIB bonds, the government doesn't need to go abroad. ठीक है? That that is how this problem fixes itself.
Makes sense. अगर मैं इसमें आपसे पूछूं कि आजकल बड़ा यह सुनने में आ रहा कि यार Pakistan में, in fact I was looking at a I don't know where my phone is but recently वह एक मैंने बाहर की एक वह देखी कि इस twenty twenty three के the net emigration e से उन्होंने किया बता but net emigration जैसे Pakistan में होता है. Pakistan ranked number one. It was higher than India, higher than China. Was very surprised to be very honest. Was around 1.2, 1,300,000. There were around seven seven, 750,000 Indians who'd left for other jobs or opportunities. ज़ाहिर है इसके ऊपर. एक political narrative भी बनता है कि यार brain drain हो रहा है और, you know, पाकिस्तानी जो हैं वह सब छोड़ चढ़कर जा रहे हैं और सारा कुछ है. अच्छा, इसके ऊपर मेरा personal जो viewpoint बदला, वह इस तरह से बदला कि when I came here तो Indian rupee पचास percent अपनी value जब खो बैठा तो obviously जो local opportunity थी वह disincentivize हुई और जो आपकी foreign opportunity थी वह suddenly बहुत ज़्यादा incentivize होना शुरू हुई. जिसकी वजह से joke the joke Indian पूरी दुनिया में गया वहां पर लोग emerge किए हैं. CEOs and soft power and, you know, governments can there अब now they're they're trying to get into, you know, elections and whatnot. तो that really changed my perspective कि, ok, so brain drain is seems like a bad thing. But then in a long enough time line, that they're also building a lot of soft power. They're also building the connectivity of people who will eventually be the first early adopters to invest in your country once the situation is better. They also bring, like, they connect you to the world. They go and get that experience and then funnel that experience back home, right, because they have that connectivity back home. And so what's your thought on on on कि जो अभी हालात ख़राब हुए उसकी certain repercussions हैं. वह repercussions क्या बुरे हैं necessarily?
देखिए, तीन चार चीज़ में चीज़ें इसमें हैं. By the way, brain drain जो है loves, it was first used for British engineers going to The US after World War two. मतलब पूरी खेप दर खेप जो है Oxford और Cambridge की engineering departments 100% would be employed by Americans and they were all moved to America. That is where the phrase brain drain comes from, ठीक है? India के साथ भी यह हुआ है, Pakistan के साथ भी यह हो रहा है. एक तो यह है कि Pakistan में the great thing is and I absolutely love the खलीजी Arabs for this कि वह आपको कभी भी जो है वह खलीज को तो वह एक connection जो है वह ज़िंदा रहता है Pakistan से. तो एक तो एक तो यह बात है. दूसरी बात यह कि sir कुछ और आप इस तरह से आप इस बात को देख सकते हैं कि यार Pakistan is now the largest country in the world that has an above replacement fertility rate. Meaning we are the only country that has a population that is still, you know, likely to continue growing because we are having enough children. बाकी दुनिया में बहुत बुरा हाल है, ठीक है? लोगों के बच्चे नहीं होते. ठीक है? वह जो बात करते हैं लोग Singapore की और South Korea की they went from third world to first in one generation. हां, उस generation के फिर पोते नवासे भी नहीं है. ठीक है? We are not that, ठीक है? This is happening because we have the capacity to have this, ठीक है? No no other countries larger than us has the capacity to do this, to send people out in the world in the numbers that we do. Including by the way India and China and Bangladesh like they just उनके यहां इस तरह से नहीं है. तो एक यह बात है. दूसरी बात यह है कि sir यह because they're going to countries जिधर उनको पता है कि यार यहां की citizenship कभी नहीं मिलनी तो वह वापस आऐंगे. I think you will start seeing people come back to Pakistan. उसके अलावा post COVID यह भी हुआ है बहुत सारे लोग इस तरह से कर रहे हैं कि यार you can go back go to a foreign country. आप वहां पर बैठे हैं, आपने connections बनाएं. Then you can just move back to Pakistan and continue working remotely and continue to earn in dollars. By the way, I'm sorry to plug my services, but that's literally one one of the things that we offer is कि, like, you know, पाकिस्तानी जो Pakistan में बैठे हुए और dollar में कमा रहे हैं, उनके they can continue to invest in in foreign markets. There's a reason why I have been able to build a company like that, right? क्योंकि यह Pakistan में अब इस तरह से काफ़ी सारे लोग यह कर रहे हैं. I'm not saying कि it it isn't a reflection of the fact कि यह Pakistan में आजकल हालात वाकई में ख़राब है. There's no denying that fact, ठीक है? लेकिन यह लोग ऐसी जगहों पर जा रहे हैं कि जब हालात बदलेंगे तो इनके वापस आने का इंकान ज़्यादा है और वह फिर जो उनकी उनका जाना और वापस आना हमारे लिए बेहतर होगा.
क्योंकि वह exposure है ना. At the end of the day if nothing else there there's a certain level of exposure that they're getting that they're going to bring back to their hospital. It's exposure connections capital.
Right. ठीक है. Makes sense. Of those things combined will will be something that will then eventually become available to पाक्षा. Because you've been studying demographics.
Europe is a is a weird case study for me because they're to me it seems like they're stuck in a in a weird situation where the the finance capitalist ने उनका ग़लत दबोच लिया है और वह उन्होंने एक system ऐसा create कर लिया जिसके अंदर, you know, आपने the way that people understand life, right? So, वह capitalist था but वह capitalist industrial capitalism नहीं था. वह finance capitalism था और finance capitalism की कोई nationality नहीं होती inherently. Right? So, उसने grow करना है और उसने multiply करना है और जब उसने multiply करना है उसने लोगों को भी यह सिखा दिया है कि यार जब तक multiply नहीं करोगे तो तुम खुश नहीं हो. तो Europe now is at a point where it is aging very very rapidly and because it's aging rapidly तो उसकी जो cost of sustenance है वह बहुत ज़्यादा बढ़ रही है. ज़ाहिर है because burden बहुत ज़्यादा है, productivity इतनी है नहीं. But while all of that is happening, the the replacement that you require for the productivity is going to be coming from countries that are culturally very different. यहां पर मैं पढ़ाना neutral हूं. Generally East के लोग जो हैं, वह कहते कि ऐसी कि तैसी हम जाएंगे whatever. But अगर आप humanize करें उन लोगों को तो यार उनका एक culture है. They just they want कि आपके culture को लगाकर respect करें. At the end of the day, people who are replacing that do not understand that culture. And for good or for bad reason, the conflict will then happen, which we're now beginning to see happening in England, in other countries. A lot of nationalism, a lot of right wing rise. But it's a double whammy. Right? Because they can have their right wing nationalists, and they can expel all the immigrants. But the fact is that there the economies are not gonna work, at least not in the current way that we understand how economies are supposed to function. And so what are your thoughts on when you look at Europe and वही कहता ना कि यार यह तो ना यहां के रहे ना वहां के रहे यह तो it's a it's a tough Yeah. Spot to
इसकी the the farthest gone country in this is Japan, ठीक है? Right. दुनिया ने Japan को देखा कि यार उन्होंने क्या किया है अपने साथ? कि काम करते रहे और उनकी औलादें नहीं हुईं और फिर जो है वह, ऐसा ऐसा जो है वह मतलब it's now कि पता नहीं कितने अरसे पहले यह हुआ था कि adult diapers in China for very old people outsell baby diapers. ठीक है? क्योंकि इतने बच्चे नहीं होते लेकिन यह क्या senior population इतनी है कि उसकी ज़रूरत है. तो अब Japan का यह हुआ है कि यार हम Japan को कहते हैं हां बड़ा अमीर मुल्क है, बहुत technology है, सब कुछ है वह है. You know, Japan की economy just hasn't grown for the last thirty years. It's gotten to the point कि यार एक ज़माने में होता था कहते थे कि यार Japan इसकी economy it is going to become larger than The US economy, ठीक है? मुझे नहीं पता आपका किराया कितना है Dubai में, ठीक है? जिस जिस apartment में अगर आप रह रहे हैं, let's suppose you are you're renting. आपका जो भी किराया Dubai में है. मैं आपको एक number दे देती हूं, right? So let's say $2,000. You can rent a luxury apartment in Central Tokyo for that much. Really? Because Japan is that cheap. Because Japan is no longer rich or at least as rich as it used to be relative to the rest of the world. To the rest of the world, right?
है. I mean Dubai तो sir, just people लेकिन moving, everybody is messed up right now. I I I think it's similar in The US as well. जो अभी मैं I was there a couple of weeks ago and people were just like, यह क्या बकवास चल रही है real estate market? But Dubai has a very similar problem. But I'm very surprised. I thought Tokyo would be, like, small छोटा सा bedroom आपको मिलेगा बहुत expensive उसमें because that was the the image that was always there. Yeah, वह मिलेगा but that's because people can only afford a $600 a month apartment,
ठीक है? दो हज़ार में आपको अच्छा ख़ासा you'll be have a nice three bedroom overlooking like a really nice part of the Tokyo skyline मिल जाएगा आपको. ठीक है? Because because what is an economy? It's people. ठीक है? लोग होते हैं जो काम करते हैं जिनकी जो है demands होती हैं and and basically you need to have every ठीक है? जब यह balance out हो जाता है between age groups, you get what you are getting in Europe and you are getting what you are getting in Japan and you are going to get the worst possible case of it in the world. In South Korea and Taiwan within the next ten fifteen years यह आपको बहुत बुरा नज़र आएगा उन मुल्कों में. तो Europe में कमस कम उन्होंने यह तो सोच किया कि यार लोग तो चाहिए ना, ठीक है? उनकी elite ने जो है वह यह कहा कि यार हमारे लोग जो है वह चीखेंगे और बहुत जो है वह protest करेंगे लेकिन frankly at the end of the day
towards the end of the conversation, I always like to wear my tinfoil hat and go in that territory. But what we're seeing now all over the world, including The US, there's a ton of polarization happening in your country also. Canada is experiencing something very similar and it's not just this time around it's not just मुस्लिमs versus let's say Christians. India को बहुत ज़्यादा एकदम से Canada में, Europe में शोर मचना शुरू हो गया है कि यार यह Indians are everywhere and whatnot. So एक time था जब, you know, migration was a very normal thing. Suddenly we're now seeing कि उसे again like I said conflict grow हो रहा है और इस किस्म के conflicts जब सौ साल पहले हुए थे तो हमने एक बहुत गंदी जंग देखी थी जिसमें you know, ethicalism and a lot of those things popped up. And all of that is interestingly coinciding. जो मैंने हमेशा कहना कि in a way एक systems की भी आपको जंग नज़र आ रही है जिसमें you know communism था, communism fail हो गया, capitalism आया but वह late late stage capitalism की बात कर रहे हैं. उसमें मैं आज ही एक बड़ा interesting एक वह देख रहा था, graph देख रहा था जिसमें उन्होंने compensation और productivity growth को basically map किया हुआ था और उन्होंने nineteen seventy one के बाद दिखाया कि वह compensation जो है वह basically more or less flat हो गई with very little jumps and then productivity really began to, you know, kept on growing. And ज़ाहिर है कि वह जो आपका delta था, वह delta ज़्यादातर जा रहा था towards the top 5% or two percent or 1%. जो कि इतने ज़्यादा financially literate थे that they were able to, you know, और again जो monopoly money की पूरी games हैं उसके अंदर they were able to place themselves at the right point कि they whether it's stock market, whether it's bonds, this, that, all of the, you know, the keywords and whatnot. उस पर they were able to extract more than comparable masses. And so masses kept on working. They thought, you know, हम करेंगे, हम American dream follow करेंगे, हम European dream follow करेंगे. But there is a certain level of now at this point in time like you said के वह elites हैं वह कह रहे कि यार ठीक है हम ले आऐंगे और हम इसको replace कर देंगे and whatever. But मुझे वहां पर एक बड़ा fear है कि we're now going towards a time where it's the end of an economic system वाला cycle where potentially वह conflict then could get much worse. And so all of our projections would would would would amount to nothing if we're now looking for a or or looking at a reset potentially. और उसमें धैर्य कि अगर मैं wider scope में जाऊं तो there are a lot of thoughts and headlines coming from bricks, coming from, you know, multipolar world order की बात हो रही है, नई currencies की बात हो रही है. Bitcoin जो है वह उसके पीछे पूरे जो फ़लसफा है वह इसी उस पर लेकर आते हैं कि यार यह जो current system of fiat है that doesn't work anymore. इस सारे को मद्देनज़र रखते हुए. I'm sure you've already followed a bunch of this and you've watched a bunch of this stuff on YouTube as well. What are your thoughts on what's happening, what's been happening over the last couple of years all over the world?
देखिए, everything you're describing is true. यह इस तरह की conflicts आ रही हैं. It's becoming, people are people are unhappy with the system as it is. That's true. लेकिन the reason why I don't think it's going to go towards that वह जो बड़ी conflict की तरफ़ मेरे ख़याल में नहीं जाएगा, उसके लिए, उसकी वजह यह है because in order for that to happen, we need a surplus of very angry young men, which none of these countries have. ठीक है? So, हज़ार और मसले होंगे, the politics of it is going to get nasty, it's going to gridlock होगा. बहुत सारे और मसले आ सकते हैं. But there are worse things than
Very interesting that you mentioned it because we're seeing that in in in Ukraine Russia conflict where they can arm them to to death but they're now missing fighters. They're missing young men who actually go out there and fight, and that has been the biggest problem in Ukraine more so than any sort of equipment, best जहाज. It's very interesting.
Yeah. 18 to 30, very surplus of 18 30 year old angry young men is that's what you need. ठीक है? More than anything else. And if you don't have that, कहते रहो यार जो भी मुस्ता होते रहो, लड़ेगा कौन? ठीक है, बुड्ढों की जंग होगी, on wheelchairs कर लो.
चलिए इसी को मैं flip करता हूं. अगर मैं कहता हूं कि in terms of raw power. Yeah. Based on what you said, अगर मैं nations की बात करूं, मैं nation के rich लोगों की बात नहीं कर रहा क्योंकि rich लोगों की nationality नहीं होती. They are easy, they they easily relocate and particularly world war के time में अगर आप देखें world war two के time में तो Europe से mass immigration होती है America की तरफ़. वह America जो कि अपना वह completely disconnect लगता है even League of Nations में. वह फिर global stage में emerge करता है. Right? Potentially then अगर मैं इस तरह से देख रहा हूं then do you do you see the nation states of the West, collective West then diminishing in their overall power, whether that is financial power, whether that is other otherwise, you know, either or?
There's two I would distinguish between the within the West. Europe is appear apparently not just declining but getting comfortable with decline. ठीक है? मतलब वह वहां पर de growth की बातें करते हैं. वह de growth की बातें कर रहे हैं और ठीक है कह रहे हैं कि यार हम decline कर रहे हैं and this is somehow morally a good thing कि मतलब यह ऐसा ही होना चाहिए और इसको जो है let's manage decline is what they want. मतलब you can actually do degrees in degrowth now कि यार
decline को कैसे manage करेंगे हम? मतलब वह one way or the other. A lot of the sustainability and the climate change, not saying climate change doesn't exist but a lot of that is also pumped to ensure that you consume less and you want less and you you're ok with the fact कि oh, you know, हालात उतने अच्छे नहीं हैं but that's because, you know, we're trying to be better for the world. Which which is why अगर आप उनको दिखा दें कि यार there is a way to grow economically without damaging impact on the environment तो वह नाराज़ हो जाते हैं. Right.
ठीक है? तो that that is the case. I would distinguish and maybe this a little bit me being biased towards America but I think America is different. Right. के अंदर अभी भी there is a hunger for growth. It is continuing to grow. अब वह उस growth की sustainability के बारे में लोग यहां पर सवाल उठाते हैं और बहुत सारी बातें करते हैं और हो सकता है इसमें कुछ अच्छा खासा झटका भी लगे अमरीका को. But I do think कि overall अमरीका के अंदर एक there is a desire to continue growing. There is a desire to continue evolving to to the next stage. What's next? ठीक है? और अमरीका में अभी भी जो है there is an ability to attract. हालांकि यह कम हो रही है but there is still an ability to attract the best talent from from outside the country. तो यह सारी चीज़ें जो रहेंगी अमरीका में and you can actually now see it in the gap, ठीक है? The average American is now twice as rich as the average European, ठीक है? In terms of income, ठीक है? और वह wealth में जो है it's three times richer than the average European. तो मतलब इस तरह से ऐसा ऐसा जो है वह gap जो है वह बढ़ता चला जा रहा जा रहा है. It's between the average American and the average Canadian भी हो रहा है इस तरह से, ठीक है? तो you will still I think the Americans will still have a little bit more of Staying staying Staying power. ठीक है? कि they they will continue to have a little bit of an influence. खास तौर पर relative to the rest of the world. मेरे ख़याल में this is the last decade where we will see China as a major threat. अगले दस साल हैं, पंद्रह साल हैं, after that China is going to start ऐसा ऐसा जो decline है, manage decline, वह आपको China में भी नज़र आएगा. The one power actually that I think is going to get interesting and और उसकी relationship with the rest of the world is going to be interesting is India. कि वह किस direction में जाना चाहते हैं? Because India has thirty, forty year growth story left.
When people have studied the Trump phenomena or everything that he represents to the the one thing that they've missed is necessarily saying everything that he says is great. I'm just trying to analyze where he's coming from. But I feel like, you know, a large part of his rise is that hunger for for for that growth जो आपने America की बोली जिसमें वह यह कहते हैं कि, you know what, we don't accept the idea कि बस ठीक है, degrow कर जाओ या वह कर जाओ. वह कह रहा कि यार I don't care fossil fuel हो this, that, whatever. We have to be number one. वह restrategize कर रहा है और वह यह कह रहा है कि, you know what? Instead of pumping money all over the world and investing in NATO, this and that, let's bring it back to The US and let's try try to, because we have everything. Right? We have the energy indigenous. We have the food indigenous. We have incredible landscapes and climate and and resources. Even if we sort of retreat for just a little bit, we can come back quite strong. And so उस context can that when you see a lot of other people supporting him and you see the Elon Musk and the the billionaires and the what nots जो कि again industrial capitalists हैं तो आपको एक potential नज़र आता है कि वह एक alternate चीज़ suggest कर रहे हैं. अच्छा, उस alternate चीज़ को जब मैंने जाकर थोड़ा सा study किया तो जहां पर यह demographic का problem आ रहा है तो वहां पर then जो hope है west के अंदर लोगों की वह यह है कि, you know, उस gap को हम potentially fill कर सकते हैं with two things, AI and robotics. Right? So, essentially, that boom in productivity that you require कि आप शायद for Europe, that may not reflect an absolute growth, but that would result in sustenance versus right now degrowth. Right? And उसमें वह यह basically कह रहे कि यार अगर हम, let's say, America अगर China से अपने produce करके माल मंगवाना है तो it is going to be cheaper. And if not China, then India. If not India, then Vietnam. You're always at the losing end of things. Alternatively, if I cut off the biggest cost, which is human capital, and I automate my factories, then it doesn't really matter कि माल China जाकर land करके वहां पर माल वन रहा है या America आकर माल बनता है. Irrespective, we'll be able to produce what we have to produce. And similarly, you know, जो AI की जो product productivity gain है, उस productivity gain को हम utilize करके we can then जो दिरमियान में हमारा old and young का जो deficit है वह हम potentially पूरा कर सकते हैं. And then the last point in that equation is obviously जो Tesla के जो अपने robots बना रहे हैं बैठा हुआ के जी. Basically, even if you want the the hands to work, the the robots can starting off with obviously industrial automation, but eventually that robot in the street is your worker. Right? What are your thoughts on that? Like, when you add AI... And I'm not I'm not trying to fuel the pump and dump that's happening similar to the dot bubble and the Cisco story. But even with the dot com bubble, eventually, Amazon and the Microsofts did emerge to be the largest companies in the world. Right? So so we do know that the direction for AI and the direction for robotics is the the direction to follow just with a grain of salt and some cautious optimism. Within that context, you you extrapolate that ten, twenty years. How do you see that playing out in the West?
These are great technologies that are going to transform the world. They are not a replacement for people. ठीक है? वह robot बना देगा, किसको बेचेगा? ठीक है? Consumer तो चाहिए ना. You need, वही मैं कह रहा हूं ना. You need that balance, ठीक है? वह पूरी life cycle का balance तो आपको चाहिए otherwise the economy doesn't exist. आप produce किसके लिए कर रहे हैं? ठीक है? You need that full spectrum of the people who are producing, consuming and like the वह ecosystem होता है. Robots and AI are enablers of the people. They are not replacements of the people. ठीक है? So that is that that is how I see it. मेरे ख़याल में यह this is not a replacement. America में actually there's another factor that I think is is is potentially like a a change which is कि sometimes if you just start talking about a problem you can fix it. मिसाल के तौर पर right now everyone in America is now aware कि यार actually we do have too few kids and maybe we should do something about that. So one of the things I've noticed is कि I have, right now, in my friend group at least, and this is anecdotal admittedly, there are friends who have no kids, and then there are friends who have three kids. And I all I I I really think that at some level at the back of people's minds is कि यार, I want to have three because I know that there are people who have zero. And and I think this is what or, by the way, if you look at American history, American fertility has dropped below replacement in the nineteen twenties and thirties and then it skyrocketed back above replacement and then came back down. तो these things can be fixed and I think Americans more than anything else have a desire to fix them in a way that Europeans जो है वह अपने आप को इस बात पर reconcile कर सके कि नहीं यार बस जितना हमने दुनिया में अपना भग गुज़ारना था हमने गुज़ार लिया that's it. There's no there's no more left.
And I think वह जो hopelessness है ना वह वह stick करके वहां पर कि, you know, like, we're net negative. Humanity is net negative for the world. Americans, I feel, like, don't feel like that. They're still they're they're still very much hopeful for the future. They're still shooting for the stars. They're still talking about type two civilization and type three civilization and, know, so वह वह framework बड़ा फ़र्क़ है and I do agree with you over there. In fact अभी जब मैं recently गया था तो मुझे जो feeling हुई वह यह हुआ कि यार आप सब बाकी चीज़ों पर उनको आप कह सकते हैं कि यार यह मसले हो रहे हैं और वह मसले हो रहे और politics बहुत बुरी है and you know x y z. But it is incredible the the framework for civilization that they've created where like you mentioned कि the ability to nurture ideas, the ability to make things happen. That is incredible. You know, ठीक है वह China बहुत speed में चला गया है. China, you know, electric cars बड़ी अच्छी बना रहे वह सारा कुछ कर रहा है. But the ecosystem is there for America as well. It's just that sure, वह right now थोड़ा सा up and down हुआ हुआ है. But उस ecosystem को ना वह civilization ही बनाती है. वह वह आप दस साल में नहीं बना सकते. It takes a while to to have everyone come together and be able to build that and I think that is definitely वह एक बड़ा positive वह add करता है for The US. I'm gonna wrap this up. फ़ारूक भाई, this was, I'm gonna say this digital पर मैंने अभी recently यह पांचवां season start हुआ है. चार तीन चार episodes हुई हैं. पिछले guests बहुत बहुत मज़े के थे और माशालाह बहुत well, you know, high achievers भी थे और अधीर मलिक साहब, Oxford, कमाल दिमाग, बाकी लोग भी. लेकिन this is the most fun I've had on a conversation. Thank you. Thank you so much for coming in, and this was, you know, this was just the flow was great. I had a lot of fun.
Thank you so much. Thank you for having me and hopefully we'll talk again soon.
100% and for all of you guys, thank you so much for watching. अगर आपको यह conversation पसंद आई हो तो नीचे comment section में मुझे आकर बताएं what are your thoughts on Pakistan, on Pakistan का bull case, Pakistan का positive long term outlook. थोड़ा सा मैं आपको request करूंगा कि जब आप इस conversation को sun भी रहे हैं और आप इसके ऊपर comment भी कर रहे हैं तो I do know that anecdotally जो आप feel कर रहे हैं उस पर आपको गुस्सा आ रहा है कि यह लोग क्यों में यह बातें कर रहे हैं? But I just want you to channel that, put that energy in a box, put it on a side for a bit and really see a holistic picture. And I hope that at least someone was able to get some hope back and some hope से ज़्यादा मैं कहूंगा थोड़ा सा patience back क्योंकि you know you just have to wait it out वाली बात है. For a lot of us within that transitionary time and you know expectation versus reality वह जो fifteen sixteen to twenty ten से twenty twenty तक हमने देखी थी ना कि I left my job and I became a billionaire. वह वाला time थोड़ा शायद ख़त्म हो गया और थोड़ा सा ठहराव की requirement है at least मेरी generation को बहुत ज़्यादा है. तो I hope that this conversation might encourage some ठहराव but I would love to hear your thoughts in the comment section below. What are your thoughts on Pakistan, on America, on the region, on depopulation and deep growth and all of the things that we spoke about? Would love to hear your comments. But, anyways, this was Sayed Muzamelas and Zedi. You are watching Thought Behind Things. Thank you so much for watching, and I'll see you in the next one.
More from Thought Behind Things
Jun 30, 2026
Simon Dixon: the US empire is being wound down by design
with Simon Dixon
Simon Dixon argues the American empire isn't collapsing — transnational capital is deliberately unwinding it, and Pakistan's military has become its leverage in the transition.
Listen →
52:45 Jun 9, 2026
How Asad Mehmood landed Mattermost from Pakistan before A levels
with Asad Mehmood
Asad Mehmood walked into Mattermost before he had A levels, crossed two million dollars on Upwork, and now runs a design agency from Pakistan. He sat with Muzamil to lay out the framework underneath it: become undeniably good, then become visible, then sell outcomes.
Listen →
59:04 Jun 5, 2026
A 22-year-old Pakistani's road map to space by 2050
with Hassan Mossin
Hassan Mossin, a 22-year-old Pakistani astrophysicist training with the International Institute for Astronautical Sciences, walks Muzamil through the next twenty-five years of space — commercial stations by 2030, a lunar base by 2032, and why the bottleneck isn't food or oxygen, it's energy.
Listen →Never miss what's next.
The dispatch - new writing and conversations, straight to your inbox.
First name, last name, email - in your inbox weekly. No spam.