CSS Forums - Pakistan's problem number one?

CSS Forums (http://www.cssforum.com.pk/)

- Discussion (http://www.cssforum.com.pk/general/discussion/)

- - Pakistan's problem number one? (http://www.cssforum.com.pk/general/discussion/4158-pakistans-problem-number-one.html)

Pakistan's problem number one?

which one of the following is the most serious problem/challenge which pakistan is facing presently?

1. poverty
2. illiteracy
3. corruption
3. terrorism/secterianism
4. foreign debt
5. restoration/promotion of democracy
6. water crisis
7. lack of leadership
8. population explosion
9. pollution
10.provincial disharmony ??

Waitng for your frank comments.

God bless the land of pure...!!

Problem of PAkistan

Asslamo alaikum
following are the major Problems of PAkistan in desending order of importance

Economy
Education
Good Governance / Leadership

It's Lack of Leadership nothingelse !!

AoA

agreeing to makhdoomzada, leadership is the worst problem, all other problems can b made okay by good leadership

i think poverty is the main problem of the Pakistan. as people without food can never elect good & sincere leadership. people without money cant make effort to uplift their country. their main & first priority is always to get food to get money. for getting money they becomes corrupt. so i think poverty is the main problem of the pakistan. evry kind of leadership can easily control poor people & can use in any way.

well, i consider ILLITERACY to be the ultimate challange/problem facing Pakistan in the past, present & will be there in the future until there is something done about it. it is the root cause of all other major problems that Pakistan has to cope with.

[B]Lack of Leadership[/B] is the most challanging problem...Once provided by good leadership all other prblems will be handled with ease.

Totally agree Muskan, I'm also of the opinion that it's [B]Lack of Leadership[/B]. And if there's strong and strategic leadership, all other problems will vanish automatically.

In my opinion Pakistan is very gud but a few pakistanis are very bad.
Instead of strong institutions, we have strong persons.The only way pakistan can progress is my making its intitutions strong by converting it truely into welfare state.Strong institutions means end of corruption,rule of law all problems mentioned below are by product of weak institutions.While the progressing countries ve only one thing in common they all have strong institutions.They prefer merit instead of personal satisfaction which ultimately results in frustration among ppl.

1. poverty
2. illiteracy
3. corruption
3. terrorism/secterianism
4. foreign debt
5. restoration/promotion of democracy[SIZE="7"]}[/SIZE]Weak Institutions
6. water crisis
7. lack of leadership
8. population explosion
9. pollution
10.provincial disharmony ??

but.... I don't believe that it's 'lack of leadership'. I consider it as an 'escape' strategy using which we just shift all the responsibility over leadership. We passively think that some 'leader' shall come and all problems shall finish.

We should have a clear, positive and workable line of action (program) at our disposal, and then we should try to become leader with the view to implement our program. Rather than waiting for any leader who shall solve our problems.

[QUOTE=Aristotle]In my opinion Pakistan is very gud but a few pakistanis are very bad.
Instead of strong institutions, we have strong persons.The only way pakistan can progress is my making its intitutions strong by converting it truely into welfare state.Strong institutions means end of corruption,rule of law all problems mentioned below are by product of weak institutions.While the progressing countries ve only one thing in common they all have strong institutions.They prefer merit instead of personal satisfaction which ultimately results in frustration among ppl.

1. poverty
2. illiteracy
3. corruption
3. terrorism/secterianism
4. foreign debt
5. restoration/promotion of democracy[SIZE="7"]}[/SIZE]Weak Institutions
6. water crisis
7. lack of leadership
8. population explosion
9. pollution
10.provincial disharmony ??[/QUOTE]

Aristotle Bhai,

Your point regarding strong institutions instead of strong personalities is good in principle. But as I do not like to follow many principles, so let me dare to point out the case of new member (She has joined forum today:[URL="http://www.cssforum.com.pk/off-topic-discussions/introduction/4203-little-introduction.html#post18401"]http://www.cssforum.com.pk/off-topic-discussions/introduction/4203-little-introduction.html#post18401[/URL] ), has got 712+39 marks -- 39 in essay .... so could not qualify written exam-2005. Now if you talk of 'strong institutions' then FPSC must follow its strict procedure and declare her fail in written.

For such instances, I am in favor of strong persons who should be able to apply their mind (remember that 'institution' cannot apply its mind bcoz it does not possess any mind), and should consider that her marks are good enough that defficiency of only one point can very easily be ignored.

Strong 'institutions' only can make our lives more mechanical. What 'institutions' do after all? They only ensure strict compliance to many written procedures. There may be many situations (like above-referred one) where application of mind of a strong person might be better that just following the blind procedures.

Institutions are important ..... but they are blind .... they do not possess mind of their own ...... they cannot take better decision in many particular cases. etc. etc.

Secondly, I do not think that our 'institutions' are weak.

Our institutions are very strong ... for example FPSC is very strong bcoz it possesses all the qualities of strong institution like .... it is blind ... it does not possess mind .... and so on....!!!!!

@ Khurram,

Very optimistic approach.....:D about leadership.
Would you like to suggest some good tips to become a leader?? Or going to keep them secret to become a leader yourself??
Anyways your approach about instititutions is realistic 1.

Regards,

AoA

i disagree with the statement of khurram that our institutions are strong, exceptions are there but as a whole our institutions are not strong enough to sustain pressure specifically of political giants

v may take the example of FPSC, its credibility went at lower ebbs during chairmanship of mumtaz gul, then general kayani sustained it nd now v have yet to see the efficacious contributions by general shahid

in fact our country is run by the personalities not by the institutions, v may tak example from many institutions, the IT/Higher Education COmmission; Railway; CBR; Foreign Affairs and list goes ....

A good leader with less resources can lead the masses to good destiny as compared to a foulish leader with great resources....

Allah hafiz

@ Muskan Ghuman,

About 'leadership' --- and 'institutions'....

We people do so much effort in understanding the affairs of our country and about its relationships with external world ... for what purpose ....???? Just to become sub-ordinates of our political leaders, most of whom are less educated than us.....????

And about Institutions:

We have such institutions as legislative assemblies, bureaucracy and Judiciary .... Who has made these institutions...???? We have not made .... We just have copied them from West. I can see no logic in this type of system of institutions.

There are no criteria as to the level of competency for the members of legislative assemblies. But there are very hard criteria as to the level of competency for the entry in Bureaucracy and Judiciary.

Role of legislative assemblies is to formulate the policies whereas role of bureaucracy and judiciary is just to implement those policies.

Logically, more competent persons should formulate the policies and less competent persons should implement those policies. More and more know-how and intellectual skill is actually required for making the policies. But what is going on practically? Policy makers do not possess any in depth knowledge about internal or external affairs of country. We people often see that some of our political leaders get their articles published in newspapers. First of all most of those articles lack any kind of solid analysis. Secondly I know some ‘professional’ columnists who actually write those columns for those political personalities and in this way newspapers then publish those columns in the names of those political personalities.

So this is the level of competency of our leaders. And we are trying hard to become sub-ordinates of this type of leaders.

Actually very high level competency test should be required for the entry in legislative assemblies so that members of these assemblies may be able to formulate realistic, calculated and more beneficial policies for the country.

Bureaucrats can be dug minded because their role is just to implement the policies. Bureaucrat must be able enough to just rightly understand whatever has been directed to him through the written policies. He is not to make any policy. So any person who cannot write analytical English essay should not be denied of entry in bureaucracy. But a bureaucrat must be able to rightly understand the policies written in English. So he must be good in ‘paragraph comprehension’. He may have to just convey the policies to his own sub-ordinates, so he must be able enough to write English précis.

So why to become just policy implementers and why not to become policy formulators? Therefore we should try to enter in legislative assemblies also because we can formulate better policies than our existing leaders.

And what should be the strategy????

Since currently we can do it by following the existing procedures of Elections etc. So right strategy would be to choose that political party whose ideology is most closely similar to that of yours. Then instead of wasting time in this stupid CSS exam, try to elaborate your political ideology and other politics related points of views in the form of a comprehensive thesis work. Then approach the leaders of your chosen political party and try to convince them about the usefulness of your political ideas. Also tell them how can you make your points of views popular among the people i.e. voters. In this way try to get party ticket for election and launch your election campaign in more systematic way. Make more public speeches than any other political leader. Present the usefulness of your proposed policies in such a manner in which general public may better understand. So this can be my tip to become a leader.

@ Tabbasum,

I agree with you. I said our institutions are ‘strong’ in just a ‘tanzia’ manner. But I am still in favour of positive (not negative – as under some pressure etc.) role of ‘personalities’.

Lack of Leadership

Lack of Leadership... is the main and foremost problem to be solved. It will settle everything and all the socio-economic problems of Pakistan.

lack of sincere leadership

In my humble openion,the biggest challenge which Pakistan is facing is lack of "sincere leadership". Friends, sincere leadership is required at all levels,it is not only the prime minister or president which must be a sincere leader,from a school teacher to chief secretary,from a councellor of a small union council to the president/prime minister,every where you need sincere people to lead the nation.

If the head of institution is corrupt,can you expect honesty from his sub ordinates...?? certainly not, on the other hand if the head of department is an honest person, then certainly he will ensure accountability in his department,if he fails to deliver,then he must resign..it means he is not competant enough to lead,therefore he has no right to rule.

Remember,Pakistan is not a poor country,its a poorly managed country...We have all the four seasons,very intelligent and dedicated human resources,enough natural resource,ideal geography....then what is missing...a sincere leadership at all levels...which can convert 140 million people into a nation with bright future...

May God bless us with a visionary leadership.

Regards...

[QUOTE=Khuram]
About 'leadership' --- and 'institutions'....

We people do so much effort in understanding the affairs of our country and about its relationships with external world ... for what purpose ....???? Just to become sub-ordinates of our political leaders, most of whom are less educated than us.....????.[/QUOTE]

What is my point by saying that Pakistan's main problem is the lack of leadership is same that replacement in these less educated leaders by educated 1 is the need of hour....

[QUOTE]
And about Institutions:.[/QUOTE]

I am agree with all your points given under this heading.

[QUOTE]
So this is the level of competency of our leaders. And we are trying hard to become sub-ordinates of this type of leaders
Actually very high level competency test should be required for the entry in legislative assemblies so that members of these assemblies may be able to formulate realistic, calculated and more beneficial policies for the country.[/QUOTE]

We are not trying to become subordinate of such leaders...& admitt that there is lack of competent leadership, once this defficency is resolved all others will be handeled easily.

[QUOTE]
Bureaucrats can be dug minded because their role is just to implement the policies. Bureaucrat must be able enough to just rightly understand whatever has been directed to him through the written policies. He is not to make any policy. So any person who cannot write analytical English essay should not be denied of entry in bureaucracy. But a bureaucrat must be able to rightly understand the policies written in English. So he must be good in ‘paragraph comprehension’. He may have to just convey the policies to his own sub-ordinates, so he must be able enough to write English précis.[/QUOTE]

Yes Essay paper is too difficult....it is not judicious that a bureaurate must be capable of essay writing.:oooo

[QUOTE]
So why to become just policy implementers and why not to become policy formulators? Therefore we should try to enter in legislative assemblies also because we can formulate better policies than our existing leaders..[/QUOTE]

No doubt about capabilities....but who is going to give this chance to educated & compitent people...the blind & deaf system & institutions???

[QUOTE]
Since currently we can do it by following the existing procedures of Elections etc. So right strategy would be to choose that political party whose ideology is most closely similar to that of yours. Then instead of wasting time in this stupid CSS exam, try to elaborate your political ideology and other politics related points of views in the form of a comprehensive thesis work. Then approach the leaders of your chosen political party and try to convince them about the usefulness of your political ideas. Also tell them how can you make your points of views popular among the people i.e. voters. In this way try to get party ticket for election and launch your election campaign in more systematic way. Make more public speeches than any other political leader. Present the usefulness of your proposed policies in such a manner in which general public may better understand. So this can be my tip to become a leader.
.[/QUOTE]

Wow gud tipz...:D ...I am busy this time secondly you seem more desirous to become a leader...so, follow all these steps after observing your fate I will try these 1....but you should be the pioneer.....:waiting

Regards,

Strong Institution means Decision on merit,without any involvement from outside

@khurram bhai with all due respect, bro i quit after reading a few lines frm ur post, reason is simple becoz u analyze each and everything in a philosophical way thts not gud like the way u said "For such instances, I am in favor of strong persons who should be able to apply their mind (remember that 'institution' cannot apply its mind bcoz it does not possess any mind)",
so u think tht there is no need for strong institutions like courts,police.Strength doesnt mean anything else than Independent Decisions ,decisions on merit.If you are against decision on merits than u can say tht our country needs strong personalities above all rules,above all codes.
Secondly u thought abt the one who failed just becoz of 1 Number with out thinking abt the one who has passed becoz of tht 1 number.Thats how our strong personalities like u enforce their personal desires on institutions.

Just consider an example if u ve a very gud car 2006 model (institution) and an average driver one who can drive like u and me,and on the other hand if u ve very old car with so many faults in it , weak engine 1965 model with an expert driver(strong personality),what do u think who will win the race?now a philospher will favor the expert and a realistic one will favor the 2006 machine.
In simple words if u ve strong institutions then u can utilize your mind otherwise its useless.Thats the reason today javed hashmi ,yusaf raza gellani and many others r in jail.Becoz they cant fight for their rights under might is rite system.pakistan is full with such examples........where u cant apply ur philosophy.

"wesay philosopher log be ajeeb hotay hein enhein jab kaha jay suraj east say nikalta hay tu yeh kahein gay nahe west say
aor jab enhein kaha jay suray west say nikalta hay tu yeh khein gay nahe east say"

@ Aristotle

[quote]so u think tht there is no need for strong institutions like courts,police.Strength doesnt mean anything else than Independent Decisions ,decisions on merit.If you are against decision on merits than u can say tht our country needs strong personalities above all rules,above all codes.[/quote]

I really have enjoyed Aristotle's criticism on philosophers ... Aristotle was a strong critique of Plato, after all.:laughing

Well, I am not against the existence of institutions. But institutions should not be as big fools as to be not able to recognize what could be the real best option in various particular situations. I quoted the case of a candidate whose over-all 62% marks could not save her from being declared FAIL in written exam. May be you cannot realize the Stupidity of FPSC in this case. One can better realize it if one personally go through similar instances.

Secondly I am in need to clarify what meaning I take of 'strong' person and 'strong' institution.

In this connection, we denote 'strong person' generally as a person who does not care for rules and regulations for negative purposes or for personal selfish reasons. This is the popular meaning and it is negative meaning.

But I had not used 'strong person' with this negative meaning. For me, 'strong person' would be that one who does not care for rules and regulations for [B]good and positive reasons[/B].

Now about strong Institutions:

You say:

"Strength doesnt mean anything else than Independent Decisions ,decisions on merit."

Well, if you are talking of 'strong institutions' in that sense which you are favoring, then let me point out that under the system of 'strong institutions' which you favour, decisions are NOT independent and decisions are NOT on COMPETENCY (here I hav replaced ‘competency’ for ‘merit’).

Because in 'strong institutions', decisions DEPEND on rigid rules and policies .... whereas meaning of 'merit' is NOT level of competency but is just 'level of compliance to written rules and policies'.

I ask you a simple question. There are two students who are doing Masters in Physics. University has designed a pet syllabus for Physics. First student is research minded and he takes pain in trying to find new facts about Physics. For this purpose he has to spend time in his research activities.

Second student is good crammer of syllabus books. What shall happen in the University exam….????? Crammer of syllabus books shall come on MERIT. On the other hand, research minded student might fail in University exam because he had been full time busy in his research activities.

My question to you is that who is more competent ……. ?????

If you say that research minded person is more competent …. Then you are in favour of strong personalities because in this case your decision has been INDEPENDENT OF RULES AND POLICIES OF UNIVERSITY.

If you say that person who is good crammer of syllabus books is more competent …….. then you are in favour of strong institutions because your decision has been BASED ON RULES AND POLICIES OF UNIVERSITY.

In my opinion, research minded person is REAL competent whereas crammer just have come on merit.

My another question to you is that: “Competency Vs Merit” …… What do you like……????

Competency can go anywhere – it can set its own direction also … Merit is just a blind chase of rigid rules and policies. Competency is the quality of leaders. Merit is the quality of followers. Leaders are those who show others some new direction. Remember that any new direction could not be contained in previously written rules and policies. Those who are just to follow the already written rules and policies, how can they go to any new direction….??? A person who does not go to any new direction, how can he show any new direction to others??? And a person who does not show the new direction to others ---- simply he is not leader. Perhaps he is such a ‘manager’ who cannot take many independent decisions …. Because his decisions would depend on written rules and policies.

Then you say:
[quote] If you are against decision on merits than u can say tht our country needs strong personalities above all rules,above all codes.[/quote]

Yes I am against decisions on merit …. But in above mentioned sense. And yes there should be strong personalities … above all rules, above all codes …… [b]but they must be allowed to go beyond all rules and all codes [u]only for good and positive reasons[/u].[/b]

[quote]Secondly u thought abt the one who failed just becoz of 1 Number with out thinking abt the one who has passed becoz of tht 1 number.Thats how our strong personalities like u enforce their personal desires on institutions.[/quote]

Here you have used ‘strong personalities’ for those people who break rules for personal selfish reasons…. I do not call these people as ‘strong personalities’. They are actually selfish personalities. I am extending my support only to strong personalities and not to selfish personalities.

[quote]Just consider an example if u ve a very gud car 2006 model (institution) and an average driver one who can drive like u and me,and on the other hand if u ve very old car with so many faults in it , weak engine 1965 model with an expert driver(strong personality),what do u think who will win the race?now a philospher will favor the expert and a realistic one will favor the 2006 machine.
In simple words if u ve strong institutions then u can utilize your mind otherwise its useless.Thats the reason today javed hashmi ,yusaf raza gellani and many others r in jail.Becoz they cant fight for their rights under might is rite system.pakistan is full with such examples........where u cant apply ur philosophy.[/quote]

Yes if we make our institutions ‘strong’ (within your meaning) then we would not be in need of competent persons. Just like an incompetent driver of a better car can win the race with competent driver, who drives an old car.

We already have shortage of competent persons …. Do you want to cover this shortage in this way….???? By eliminating the role of any human competency……????

But you have forgotten that the incompetent driver shall be able to win the race only when a competent person would already have invented a better car. I already had pointed out in my previous post that ‘strong institutions’ only make our lives more mechanical. Nothing would happen if you replace all the persons in your ‘strong institution’ with mechanical computer aid robots. So there would be no need of humans in your strong institutions. I again have given all the philosophical reasons in support of my views. I can give examples of ground realities also where so-called strength of institutions have given the results of miseries for general public and have opened the avenues for corruption in many government departments. Our official taxation laws, for instance, are so harsh that tax liabilities of small businessmen can reach to such amounts, which may be more than total capital employed. I know that now-a-days, personal property of a person is going to be seized. That person did business of making soda-water bottles on small scale and supplied them to small village shops. What could be his total capital …. 2 lack, 5 lacks or so…..

Since he did not get himself registered in tax department … so he has been found to be guilty of tax evasion plus penalties etc. amounting to more than 15 lacks.

Another business had to be closed just because that businessman made payments to his supplier in cash instead of through banking channel. Otherwise that businessman had been a regular tax payer and he had deposited all his due taxes. He committed only this procedural mistake i.e. of not making payments to supplier through banking channels. In this way he has attracted penalties amounting to more than the total capital of business.

Since our BLIND strong institutions cannot see the on ground facts and they only can follow the written rules and policies …. So as a result, that business is closed now. I myself have won the case (being the representative of department in the judicial proceedings) against that businessman at Departmental tribunal level. In my private meetings with the advocate of businessman, I admitted that no revenue loss was involved in that case because taxpayer had duly deposited all the payable taxes. Only fault was procedural in nature where no government revenue loss was involved. But the penalties involved for such procedural mistake would amount to more than the capital employed by the business. During the judicial proceedings before the Tribunal, I argued that taxpayer had violated such and such rules and sections of Law so he may be penalized for it. So I myself play the role of ‘strong institution’. In another case, taxpayer had made such mistake which had little effect on government revenue. But he was charged with heavy penalty for the procedural mistake. Case already had been decided in favour of tax payer by the lower adjudication forum. Adjudication officer might be some “strong person” within my meanings …. So he had taken the decision in favour of tax payer because amount of revenue loss was really just minor.

On the next forum i.e. before Appellate Tribunal, I represented the department before Tribunal. First hearing of case was on 25th may … i.e. just two days before the start of CSS-2006 exams. I won the case on first hearing in favour of department by arguing that tax payer had violated such and such rules and laws.. Again I played the role of ‘strong institution’ and ‘weak personality’….. And I promoted real injustice in this way because tax payer had committed just immaterial type of procedural mistake which would have just minor impact on government revenue. Now that person shall pay heavy fines.

I also knew and Judges also knew that there had been no significant loss to government treasury in that case. But my role and the role of judges had been just to blindly follow the written policies and procedures. And this is what we really did. So how can you say that strong institutions shall solve all the problems of nation….???? Strong institutions themselves are a big problem….. because they are blind …. Because they prevent the personalities from applying their minds for the betterment of country. Because institutions possess no working mind ….. because they possess just mechanical written policies which might not be in the best interest of country in all the situations.

[quote]"wesay philosopher log be ajeeb hotay hein enhein jab kaha jay suraj east say nikalta hay tu yeh kahein gay nahe west say
aor jab enhein kaha jay suray west say nikalta hay tu yeh khein gay nahe east say"[/QUOTE]

I shall entertain these remarks only when you give the example of any philosopher who said that sun rises in west … or crow is white …. Or similar blames which general public raise on philosophers.

@ Muskan Ghuman

Good Leaders are those who take initiate at their own i.e. do not first see the fate of others in any field.

Secondly I have not told in the thread that tip which I myself shall follow.....:pp

Thirdly yes I also say that competent leadership should replace the incompetent. In that my point of view is not different to yours.

Difference is that I am saying that instead of waiting for any competent leader who shall come and solve our problems, we ourselves first should find the workable solutions to our problems and then we should do struggle to become leader with the view to implement our own solutions...

Regards!

I think we can have neither strong institutions nor capable leadership unless we educate our masses.If our voters vote with their foot-prints,how can we have educated,charasmatic leadership who are in turn supposed to strengthen the institutions.
Take Islam for example which started with the word'Read'.And today it is the largest deen(religion)in the world.How wonderfully Rousseo and Voltaire revolutionized the French peasantry with pamphlets for which a lady-admirer of Voltaire had donated the money.At least those who followed them knew the ABCs and helped them bring about such memorable revolution.Now go and see the french leadership and institutions.
Look at India,the biggest demonized democracy with elected leadership.what about her decaying,corrupt and crooked institutions administered by laughing characters like Laalu and rabri devi,or fancy filmstars.Only bcoz India also remains as illiterate as we.I would say the problm with all third world is wide-spread illiteracy.Poverty vanishes with skilled,literate populace.Malthus' theory of natural population check is alwys in the play to control poverty in rising population only if society is literate enough to get skilled and elect leaders who build strong insttitions.
Maa salam

I rate these all the number 1 problem in Pakistan. But besides all these there is another problem which is Pakistan herself and we being Pakistani have not been able to find where Pakistan is?. The ultimate cause of the creation of Pakistan has gone as we failed to find out solution of these problems to by pass ourself from these socio-politico anomalies.Then Who is to blame, I think, it is Pakistan herself.

All the problems mentioned in this thread are related to one another. once Mahatir Mohd visited Pakistan,whn he was askd dat,"how can we make pakistan progressive?",he replied,"educate the people."similarly Sir Syed Ahmed khan used to say...educate the people...cure the root and the tree will flourish....!!

Pakistan,s the biggest problem is that
[B]"We dont Know what is the problem"[/B]

[B][COLOR=darkred]Qamar[/COLOR][/B]
[B]__________[/B]
[B]Who knows and Knows that he knows: is a wise around[/B]
[B]And [/B]
[B]Who Doesn't know and Doesn't know that he doesn't know : is fool around.[/B]

problem is the one u dont mentioned?

one of the most important problem is our religious problem?
we have such a vague concept about our religion islam that we dont know how to lead our lives than how could we run a country. if only one of our leader just study once about LIFE HISTROY OF HAZRAT UMAR FAROOQ (AS)
he will surely cum to know how to run country with strong leadership.

the only problem of pak is inequality
if v solve this
then no buddy can stop us 4rom
our dreamed destination

Salam!

The biggest and most threatening problem of pakistan is the widespread illiteracy. Only an educated and literate Pakistan can face the future challenges and resolve the internal and external issues.

Educate the people...cure the root and the tree will flourish....!!

All the best,

Sajid.

The biggest problem of all is that no one is sincere.

United v stay
Divided v fall.
Main prob is lack ov unity.
REGARDS

I think the colossal setback with Pakistan is the lack of sincere and effective leadership, on the terms of MAHATIR MUHAMMAD, the only way to pull out thecountry from the other foremost but subsidiary problems.

[B]Lack of progressive approach

[QUOTE][I]All the problems mentioned in this thread are related to one another. once Mahatir Mohd visited Pakistan,whn he was askd dat,"how can we make pakistan progressive?",he replied,"educate the people."similarly Sir Syed Ahmed khan used to say...educate the people...cure the root and the tree will flourish....!!
[/I][/QUOTE]

@ Mahrukh

I m totally agreed with u. Really ........educate the masses..... save the Pakistan

[/B]

First of all pardon me because I haven't read all the above posts to express any educated comment.However,my view related to the problem number one of Pakistan is:

[B]A major portion of Pakistani civil society is not alive to the problems of Pakistan.It may have many causes but the ultimate effect ,according to my humble opinion,is this same unawareness of the the society of the problems and fatalistic attitude it nourishes that it can't change the rotten status quo.[/B]

[B]...Yasser [/B]

my first post may you find some mistake so pls point me out about that thank u.

All of u said are the prob in Pak earth since formation

i agree all of you but have confussion in my mind, humbly could you pls answer !

If one says the illitracy is the problem? so why the litrate persons dont have single voice.

If one says the poverty is the problem? so why the person who is not poor indulged himself in corruption.

If one says the lack of Leader is the problem? so why the person who get famous being a leader go back his on words.

If one thinks extremism is the problem? so why the so called modrate act same as extremists in order to implement thier own wishes defying all rules and regulations.

I know the problem...

we are not sincere to ourself and to ultimate the Allah...

well, i think [B]INJSUTICE[/B] is the biggest problem of Paksitan !

Bring [B]JUSTICE [/B]to nation and save our homeland.

Its law and order, according to Quaid e Azam's opinion if we only maintain rule of law properly it could remedy all the problems, in the light of no. 7 seems to me as the biggest problem, our leadership could never rise above self interest and other responsible areas availed their leverages, for example judiciary in first decade supported Military and Feudalism to flourish and grab all the institutions.

1. Poverty> widening class difference and corruption in the allocation of funds cause this, the super checks are themselves involved in this.

2. illiteracy> ineligible teachers, ghost employees, schools that are active only in records, multi curriculum, yet again no rule of law as the root cause of all the evils.

3. Corruption> honest people are misfits as they hinder the smooth sailing of daily chores and are deemed as playing smart. A change is always threatened; those coming to rescue enjoy perks and create loopholes as if everyone is above law, NAB, Army Vigilance, the more powerful the more costly, again no rule of law.

3. terrorism/ sectarianism> there are many Islamic countries in the world but none have so many ethnic groups resolving their issues in "manazrahs", no research scholars or ulema committees are consulted rather Prado riding muftis and self proclaimed pir o murshids with armed guards discuss their own version and play in the hands of ruling government for sarkari fatwas, so why cant they be used as fanatics for political interests.

4. foreign debt> no proper devised system, none of the audits are shared with the public, where is all the money going, we received a hell lot amount after nuclear tests at Chaghi in order to face the embargoes, if we are so debt ridden then why BMW and Mercedes and palaces???

5. restoration/promotion of democracy>our little history of democracy is no better than any military regime. Manipulations of good ministries, why good or bad ministries, what’s their job, authorities and benefits. Why they are exempted, why we forgive such culprits.

6. Water crisis> Dams, alternatives, water wastage management, planning, usage measurement, nothing is seen, when the system is not present, how can we expect such issues which are of core importance for agriculture based economy.

7. lack of leadership> Our leaders from the very beginning mutilated the meaning of this word leader-ship, a leader's ship crushing the ocean of masses for their policies, for their rule, forgetting that this life is limited. Would that our leaders are sincere we could have formed a fool proof system, Nations like Norway and Sweden have made their country a heaven because of maintaining rule of law, their leaders are accountable, unlike ours who impose their own autocracy, of all the atrocities in the past our leaders receive natural punishment, no such law or institution is here to protect Pakistan

8. population explosion> Instead of tactics awareness is required, uneducated masses gave birth beyond their means, and that human capital could not be turned into a useful feedback instead become burden, our departments are responsible and should suffer the consequences.

9. pollution> no imposition could ever last more than a week, be it on plastic bags, LPG cylinders, rattling rickshaws, garbage burning, chemical disposition, industrial waste, everyone who is responsible for maintaining should be held so other could be held by him before hand.

10.provincial disharmony> yet again politics of power and monetary benefits, unequal distribution amongst the people and constituencies, so called leaders for their own seat create separatist groups. I believe this is always intentional and controllable.

I am not as good as you people are just trying to elaborate my view point.

After reading all these posts by honorable members, I have come to conclusion that “No. 1” Problem of us is that we not know the problem.

I know the solution of our problem which “Lack of Professionalism”.
Many of you will not agree with me, just imagine, every one of us (from street beggar to president) is sincere with his work.

We can see in Pakistan, Chief Justice seeking Justice and Chief of Army seeks Security, Lawyers are in jails and criminals are ruling, and so many other examples showing lack of professionalism.

Take a little survey around your surrounding you can find that 80% of workers (from Executives to Primary School Teachers) are un-happy with their jobs and you will find that Doctors are controlling the Districts or Police which they didn’t want to be and even them many lack interest, they are maintaining statuesque.

There are many problems and most are stated in above posts, all problems have solutions also, In my view “Human can not perform their best until they have no interest or proficiency” from grass root level to Top most level. And let the music play…

Please commit on my commit. Thanks

Dear Usman,
You are right in a sense, but in a way or other we are at least trying to realize the problems with different aspects. Masses are confused as no institution is working properly, consumer rights are not found anywhere, a tax paying decent and honest citizen is always threatened, we all are aware of the problems as we are facing them, living with them, probably closing our eyes posing ignorant of the surroundings.

from my point of view the biggest problem of Pakistan is the "education" illliteracy.
pakistani population is not educated and they don't know which rights r given them by law. they r playing in the hands of a few no of peoples.

[B]Lack of leadership[/B] is major problem, That pakistan is facing,, if our leadership is honest, then all other problem, like corruption, illetracy, food, health, peace will resolve automatically...