Do you want a united Pashtunistan, Pukhtunistan, Loy Afghanistan?

[Admin Khan]

Sea access is an excuse to justify the failures of Afghanistan. Truth is, just by a single solid university Afghanistan can be out of its stone age. For example, in the USA,MIT, if it were to be a country on its own, would have the 11th largest economy in the world, as per the companies founded by its alums. That alone dwarfs the Pakistan economy.

Let's not be silly here, I agree with DSM.

Source for my claim:

http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2009/kauffman-study-0217

[MENTION=1772]BarakzaiAbdali[/MENTION]

[کیش]

Sea access is an excuse to justify the failures of Afghanistan. Truth is, just by a single solid university Afghanistan can be out of its stone age. For example, in the USA,MIT, if it were to be a country on its own, would have the 11th largest economy in the world, as per the companies founded by its alums. That alone dwarfs the Pakistan economy.

Let's not be silly here, I agree with DSM.

Source for my claim:
http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2009/kauffman-study-0217

@BarakzaiAbdali

MIT so-called having the 11th largest economy in the world can't be compared to a country.

MIT, where is it? it certainly is not a remote country, but it is in a state in the United States.

DSM has not even taken basic macro/micro economic course. he said "population does not affect the economy." that isn't very smart to say. the basic economic formula is supply and demand. who purchases the demand? the population does. who produces the supply? the working class within the population. come on now.

obviously sea-access is not the reason Afg is what it is. but if you wanna be a player in the world, all of them have sea access. none are landlocked.

[Admin Khan]

MIT so-called having the 11th largest economy in the world can't be compared to a country.

MIT, where is it? it certainly is not a remote country, but it is in a state in the United States.

DSM has not even taken basic macro/micro economic course. he said "population does not affect the economy." that isn't very smart to say. the basic economic formula is supply and demand. who purchases the demand? the population does. who produces the supply? the working class within the population. come on now.

obviously sea-access is not the reason Afg is what it is. but if you wanna be a player in the world, all of them have sea access. none are landlocked.

MIT can of course be compared to a country, especially since it does not depend on the sea and since its throughput is exactly that of a tax-paying company, which in effect contributes to nation building. I mean, look at the people it has employed, money it generates, growth that it motivates. Put all the companies in Afghanistan and Pakistan combined, and MIT still is much more powerful; where powerful is defined as the companies founded by its alums, research that is actually ported to industry, and tax-paying dollars contributed to a nations revenue as a direct consequence of the firms created by the university. On the contrary, Afghanistan, nor Pakistan, can never be a "international player" or "player in the world", even Russia is struggling at that role. So that was never my premise.

TL;DR:
At this point, all Afghanistan needs is peace.

Best,

[DSM0305]

do you know anything about Economics? access to the sea means you have shipping ports. when you have shipping ports you could export/import goods to and from any country(ies) in the world.

access to the sea also means the chance to develop a navy. When hasn't having a navy hurt a country in-development?

What do you think landlocked countries do today, shipping good to mountains or deserts? You can import/export through other countries ports like Afghanistan and any other landlocked country doing today

What will small countries do with a navy consisting of 2 boats... Back in the days a small country called Denmark had a huge navy, the British destroyed it... So simply. One day big navy, next day nothing.

As I told before ports are only important for superpowers

[DSM0305]

DSM has not even taken basic macro/micro economic course. he said "population does not affect the economy." that isn't very smart to say. the basic economic formula is supply and demand. who purchases the demand? the population does. who produces the supply? the working class within the population. come on now.

So you're an economist?

We saw your theory unfold in soviet union, one don't need to be historian to know what happen. Demand and supply, a population of starving wolves can hardly demand goods in the same scale as a fat American. One don't need to be an economist to know whose import/export is highest and whether a man with 40000$ have higher demands than one with 2$

[Bost Bastan News]

It would make sense to have access to sea if Afghanistan would be an exporteur otherwise its just a non-sense and a wet dream. And we shouldn´t be fascists to claim on Balochi lands. On the one hand we critizise Panjabis they are dominating us and on the otherside we want to be the Panjabis.

[Smarty]

@DSM035
How sea access is not important. I am not a economist, i know simple fact that fruits and vegetables are far cheaper in price than in peshawer....tell me what would happen if Pakistan seal its border with afghanistan?....pakistan blocked supply to NATO in 2011 and price of patroleum in afghanistan rose from 200 dollars to 5000 dollars per barrel.
Sea access means you are not on mercy of iran or pakistan...in 60s pakistan sealed its border with afghanistan and brought it to its knees.

[کیش]

So you're an economist?

We saw your theory unfold in soviet union, one don't need to be historian to know what happen. Demand and supply, a population of starving wolves can hardly demand goods in the same scale as a fat American. One don't need to be an economist to know whose import/export is highest and whether a man with 40000$ have higher demands than one with 2$

I have studied International Business in a top university in the US, so I am much more qualified than you are to talk about economics.

believe it or not but fat Americans are good the economy of the US. I will let you figure out why, if you can.

How will Afghanistan export their minerals if and when they are mined? you can't ship them via the air. you have to use cargo ships. and the only Afghanistan can do that is use the roads and ports of either Iran and Pakistan. And im sure those two countries will demand a large expense.

[DSM0305]

I have studied International Business in a top university in the US, so I am much more qualified than you are to talk about economics.

believe it or not but fat Americans are good the economy of the US. I will let you figure out why, if you can.

How will Afghanistan export their minerals if and when they are mined? you can't ship them via the air. you have to use cargo ships. and the only Afghanistan can do that is use the roads and ports of either Iran and Pakistan. And im sure those two countries will demand a large expense.

For somebody who studied International Business in a top university in the US, you know very little about economics and even debunked your own statement.
You just admitted that one fat American with pocket of $ does more good than hundreds of poor people. Which means my statement of population have zero significance in economic growth is verified.

Afghanistan will transport their minerals via Pakistan as they always have done. And no the countries wont demand large expense, I don't even know where you got that idea from.

[Tjanaparh]

First of all important is consolidation between the people. Having even access to all world sees won't bring anything as long as there is no consolidation, while this consolidation can bring a lot even without any access to sea.

My people have same way deams of the territories ceded to ther states or occupied by other bu historically ours.
This thinking is wrong. The land question won't solve nothing, as long as one does not respect the land he allready has and the people living on it.
It is from the other way round to start, not from territory but relation among people, but we se even here on the forum what happens instead.

[کیش]

For somebody who studied International Business in a top university in the US, you know very little about economics and even debunked your own statement.
You just admitted that one fat American with pocket of $ does more good than hundreds of poor people. Which means my statement of population have zero significance in economic growth is verified.

Afghanistan will transport their minerals via Pakistan as they always have done. And no the countries wont demand large expense, I don't even know where you got that idea from.

Again, your quick in trying to debunk me rather than understand what on earth I wrote. your are trying to hold on to your clueless opinion about this subject.

When did I even go remotely close to saying "one fat American with pocket of $ does more good than hundreds of poor people." I used the fat guy reference cause you have posted it first.

Again population make way to consumerism.

Pakistan could charge Afghanistan whatever they want too cause Afghanistan is completely dependent on their ports. so I don't know where you got this idea from, that Pakistan will start being buddy buddy with Afghanistan when there is a potential to make billions for only opening up their routes.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

For somebody who studied International Business in a top university in the US

This is Afghan speak for saying you went to DeVry lol

[کیش]

This is Afghan speak for saying you went to DeVry lol

Actually NYU.

but I don't really need to prove any further,

before that,

Stonybrook.

two top universities

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Actually NYU.

but I don't really need to prove any further,

before that,

Stonybrook.

two top universities

sorry I thought that was DSM's statement

[کیش]

sorry I thought that was DSM's statement

no big deal. just please don't ever mention Devry institute!