JosBoy4Lif:

Nigerians need to understand that we are in the agricultural state of development. The day that we can adequately feed all Nigerians we will be able to move forward.

Sky Blue:

@4Play, i don't believe there is anywhere on this thread i was talking about shifting resources about. Wasn't the north producing some food for the country decades ago? So why can't they go back to agriculture? Why are we so quick to jump unto the whole splitting up thing? If Nigeria was well run would we be calling for a split? I hope we are not confusing our hate for the Nigerian leadership with our hate for Nigeria. Of course if you develop an area people will flock there, it is only natural. But if you spread the development, which can only happen simultaneously in our current disposition if states start working instead of waiting for oil revenue, then there will be development and growth in more areas. Hence population won't just flock to one area, but can flock to more areas, and even with that more people compared to now can carve out a career in their own regions instead of thinking they have to go to lagos or abujja to "make it". if we had competition between regions, this could drive economic development.

GDP - composition by sector:
agriculture: 17.6%
industry: 53.1%
services: 29.3% (2007 est.)

doyin13:

hmmm. . , 17.6 %

a bit too much to be honest

agriculture is as overated as Mode 9

In 2006, oil accounted for just over one fifth of GDP, 85% of government revenue and over 90% of export earnings. Agriculture accounted for around 40% of GDP, the services sector for just over 30% and manufacturing 5% of GDP.

Origins of gross domestic product 2005(a)
Agriculture (excl livestock) 38.6

Sky Blue:

@4 Play, regional competition might not be a panacea to our problems, however what it represents is what is most important. Every part of the country striving to move the country forward instead of the nonchalant attitude that has come to symbolise our current disposition. With a more serious approach towards nation building do you think there will be tolerance for corruption? It is about what it represents, people finally waking up from sleep to develop the nation and trying to change it in the areas they are or in the areas they can as opposed to getting cosy with poverty and corruption. When people are working towards a common goal do you think there will be as much tolerance for a few who want to spoil it? And you are still saying it is the worst thing ever that could happen?

Uche2nna:

your argument would be entirely right, if not for the fact that those people who are charged with the task of Nation building both at the local and federal level are very corrupt. Even the populace have taken corruption as a normal way of life. Public funds are meant to be squandered. It would take a whole lot to institute the culture of accountability into our politicians. Even the populace have to undergo series of re orientation to disabuse their minds from "biziness" as usual. That my friend is a daunting task. Not impossible but really daunting and would take a looong time.

I really believe that the region of the country that makes the bulk of the Nation's revenue should be the one benefitting most from the revenue. But simply giving more money to this region( a la their politicians ) would unfortunately not solve the problems of the Niger Deltans. It would not solve the youth problems in the ND, it would not build roads or schools in the villages. Nor would it bring constant electricity to the rural areas. It would just be another avenue for a bunch of politicians to get richer at the expense of those the money was actually meant for.

why should we punish one part of the federation for its natural endowment.

The situation is analogous to your low tax position onthe United States. You would not countenance
higher taxes for the rich to pay for social programs for the poor.

So also you should not distribute revenue that is generated from the Delta to other parts of the Federation in the name
of poverty alleviation.