biztip:
why won't it be last when a clueless man is d pilot of nigeria

Na em pilot your miserable life to failure?if that is the case be ready for hell till 2023.

Iamgrey5:
China suffered low growth rate in the 80s before its double digits growth rate of the 90s and early 20s

It was the hard work of Chairman Mao that Hu Jin Tau leveraged upon to transform China to the second largest economy in the world before handing power over to the next generation.

Nigerian economic growth has been very artificial because it's only led by steady increase in prices of our major export over the years which is crude oil.

Even as that, the growth wasn't transformed to economic development as majority of the infrastructural facilities were neglected by the previous administrations.


@ South Africa.

South Africa is one the few countries in Africa led by capitalist. The government of South Africa only refused to privatise utility companies becauset the economist in that country feared that it might become an avenue to shift capital out of the country.

They are not wrong tho because Nigeria is perfect example of a country affected by such scenerio.

China was an economic wreck when Deng Xiaoping took over from Chairman Mao and started by implementing economic reforms. The use of Special Economic Zones to encourage export led industrialisation was an idea he got from Singapore. Chairman Mao left China a wreck.

Deng Xiaoping took over from Chairman Mao and was there until is demise in 1995. Your history is wrong.

As for South Africa what you said is completely wrong. Do you just conjure things from the air.

Privatisation rather than lead to capital flight would do the reverse. The buyers will invest heavily into the companies they buy not only to turn them around but also to expand capacity.

The primary reason why privatisation was not implemented was that it would have further enriched the white South Africans who would be the major buyers. Black South Africans would never have accepted that. :

martineverest:
yes,they are but the op should make it look as if we arent progressing compare to the other countries growth rate...if u do the calculation,at that growth rate,about 10 billion dollars will be added to our economy,while highest growth rate country,Ivory cost will have about 3 billion dollars added to their economy

You have been mixing different things.

You have even invalidated your own argument with what you put up there.

Nigeria's underdeveloped status plus the size of the population means it should be doing more than Cote d'Ivoire.

As per your figures, if you divide $10b by 180m people you get far less than if you divide $3b by 24m. It means that an average Ivorian contributed more than an average Nigerian did to their respective economy. That is the story.

GDP measures the aggreagate of monetary value of contribution of all economic units in an economy. The growth rate is given in percentage for comparative purposes. You take the number and you compare with the size of the population on the one hand and then the rate of population growth on the other hand.

You may also make comparison with other jurisdictions as has been done in this context, to know how you have faired.

If you are looking at the absolute value the way you are saying, you would be patting yourself on the back for nothing.

sankky:
Nothing bad here.
Its a sign that there is no more corruption.
In fact, those who compiled that rebellious RANKING are beneficiaries of corruption.

~~~APC govt

Expected response....from a government that cares less about public opinion

Rossikk:
THIS IS OLD NEWS AND THEREFORE, A LIE.

Here is is the LATEST news on our GDP growth, from Bloomberg.

''As Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari seeks re-election this week, economic growth is finally getting back to where it was when he took power four years ago.

Gross domestic product in Africa’s largest oil producer expanded 1.9 percent last year, the most since 2015, the Abuja-based National Bureau of Statistics said on its website on Tuesday. The economy grew 2.4 percent in the three months through December from a year earlier, the fastest since the third quarter of 2015.''

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-12/nigerian-economy-expands-1-93-in-2018-from-the-previous-year

Translation: Since the oil price crash of 2015, which caused the recession and economic slowdown, we are now BOUNCING BACK FAST, thanks to Buhari's policies and intolerance of corruption.

YOU PEOPLE NEED TO START USING YOUR BRAINS ONLINE, instead of acting like a herd of cows led by the nose by someone with an agenda..

The first thing to do when you see such stats as posted by the OP is to check the source, then check the date of the report to see if it reflects the current situation.

Don't just look at a report or graph and conclude without THINKING about the VERACITY of the information you're being shown.

You guys went to school/uni. START ACTING LIKE IT.

The fall in oil price did not cause the recession. Buhari's pegging of the Naira did. Ask Soludo, Sanusi and Utomi. Atedo Peterside called Buhari an economic illiterate before the 2015 elections and that is what he is.

Saying growth was 2.4% in the last quarter does not stand for much. The 1.9% economic growth is the total growth rate for the year when the growth rate of the 4 quarters are all computed.

Bloomberg predicted that the country's growth rate over the next 4 years will be 2.5% yearly. That's not even up to the population growth rate of 2.6%. That means the average Nigeyria will get poorer every year.

Yujin:

My friend, you don't know what you're talking about. The pervasive hunger and the spike in suicide tells more story than any economic statistics. Millions of people lost their jobs and NO new companies have come up. How do you expect the economy to grow? Thanks to diaspora remission else you'd have cried more. Nigeria is in coma. Stop defending the indefensible.

Do you know Intercontinental hotel is up for sale.

That one even small. Oriental hotel too maybe up for sale. Don't say I told you o!

Sales must have crashed hence the cashing out. Speaks volumes about the state of the economy

Iamgrey5:
Nigeria highest growth rate was 6% average even during when the the GDP was grossly underestimated before it was rebased.

Never mind that the majority of our GDP growth comes from one resource which is crude oil a primary resource which is highly volatile.

South Africa another country on the continent with better infrastructures and huge potential for growth only managed 2% average for the past decade.

Thus, What miracles were you expecting anyone to perform?

Even the likes of China struggled with low growth for a while despite its obvious attempts to industrialize.

You have a lot of reading to do for you to make meaningful contributions than you are making.

The rebasing exposed the sectors that were not previously captured in the calculations: services sector like the entertainment industry etc. These contributed in large measure to the increase in the GDP against your postulation of one product.

You also seems to be confusing the GDP with government revenue or export. They are not the same, okay? The percentage of oil and gas sector's contribution to the GDP is about 9%.

grandstar:


China was an economic wreck when Deng Xiaoping took over from Chairman Mao and started by implementing economic reforms. The use of Special Economic Zones to encourage export led industrialisation was an idea he got from Singapore. Chairman Mao left China a wreck.

Deng Xiaoping took over from Chairman Mao and was there until is demise in 1995. Your history is wrong.

As for South Africa what you said is completely wrong. Do you just conjure things from the air.

Privatisation rather than lead to capital flight would do the reverse. The buyers will invest heavily into the companies they buy not only to turn them around but also to expand capacity.

The primary reason why privatisation was not implemented was that it would have further enriched the white South Africans who would be the major buyers. Black South Africans would never have accepted that. :

It appears that there is poor or lack of understanding of basic macroeconomics by some of these guys.

They sometimes use false narrative to buttress their points.

rexwalters:
Na em pilot your miserable life to failure?if that is the case be ready for hell till 2023.

APC pays u to talk nonsense same way customers paid ur mother for sex DT brought a nitwit like u into this earth. anumpama

In Fela's voice:


I sorry sorry sorry for Nigeria

martineverest:
the headline shows op is poor mathematically.....our economy is larger than the entire west African countries,do u expect it to grow higher than smaller economics?

analogically,the growth rate of Switzerland,singapore,Korea etc economics is expected to be higher than those of USA, Germany,Japan,china and india

if u do the mathematical calculations,the growth in dollars of Nigeria economy could be larger than the entire growth of those west African economics

can you imagine your analogy?
wasn't Nigeria having a growth rate of 6% in the past?

porka:


It appears that there is poor or lack of understanding of basic macroeconomics by some of these guys.

They sometimes use false narrative to buttress their points.

You're a 110% correct

martineverest:
the headline shows op is poor mathematically.....our economy is larger than the entire west African countries,do u expect it to grow higher than smaller economics?

analogically,the growth rate of Switzerland,singapore,Korea etc economics is expected to be higher than those of USA, Germany,Japan,china and india

if u do the mathematical calculations,the growth in dollars of Nigeria economy could be larger than the entire growth of those west African economics

but I heard we use to be first on that list even with our population. what has change between now and then?

porka:


You have a lot of reading to do for you to make meaningful contributions than you are making.

The rebasing exposed the sectors that were not previously captured in the calculations: services sector like the entertainment industry etc. These contributed in large measure to the increase in the GDP against your postulation of one product.

You also seems to be confusing the GDP with government revenue or export. They are not the same, okay? The percentage of oil and gas sector's contribution to the GDP is about 9%.

Petroleum not only contributes upto 30% of Nigerian GDP, it contributes over 90% of government revenue.

Government is the major spender in Nigeria not private sector.

Hence, the slightest increase or decrease In prices of petroleum products will increase or decrease the total money in circulation, which will inturn affect the sales of goods and services produced

At least you know the definition of GDP Mr Economics teacher of micro economics

olobe

grandstar:


China was an economic wreck when Deng Xiaoping took over from Chairman Mao and started by implementing economic reforms. The use of Special Economic Zones to encourage export led industrialisation was an idea he got from Singapore. Chairman Mao left China a wreck.

Deng Xiaoping took over from Chairman Mao and was there until is demise in 1995. Your history is wrong.

As for South Africa what you said is completely wrong. Do you just conjure things from the air.

Privatisation rather than lead to capital flight would do the reverse. The buyers will invest heavily into the companies they buy not only to turn them around but also to expand capacity.

The primary reason why privatisation was not implemented was that it would have further enriched the white South Africans who would be the major buyers. Black South Africans would never have accepted that. :

First of all, Chairman Mao supervised the rebuilding of China after the war 2; he supervised the rebuilding of trains, power stations, establishment of an agricultural plan of which are many of those plans are cherished in modern China till date.

Xiopein didn't take over from Mao, he took over from Zhoi Len who already had a program for modernisation of China.

Premeir Zhoi was the one who started reform before been interrupted by the Gang of four.

Secondly, it goes back to my earlier point that Nigerian past administrations failed to transform the growth led by higher crude oil prices into economic development by constructing enviable infrastructural facilities.


Thirdly, on South Africa

Are you kidding me right now

Why will the government fail to privatise some utility companies because it doesn't want to sell to South Africa whites, who are South Africans anyway?!.

Government of South Africa doesn't want to sell untily companies like Eskom because

1) it fears that selling it will over expose the country to capital flight which is something similar to what MTN and Airtel is currently doing in Nigeria.


2) it fears that the sales will traslate to higher utility prices for the consumer. South Africa prides itself as a country able to provide some of the cheapest electricity charges in the world.

The South African Government even made sure South Africans (white or black) are major shareholders of the utility companies it managed to privatise.

Hence, it seems you are the one writing something out of your imagination here

Iamgrey5:
First of all, Chairman Mao supervised the rebuilding of China after the war 2; he supervised the rebuilding of trains, power stations, establishment of an agricultural plan of which are many of those plans are cherished in modern China till date.

Xiopein did take over from Mao, he took over from Zhoi Len who already had a program for modernisation of China.

Premeir Zhoi was the one who started reform before been interrupted by the Gang of four.

Secondly, it goes back to my earlier point that Nigeria past administrations fail to transform the growth led by higher crude oil prices into economic development by constructing enviable infrastructural facilities.


Thirdly, on South Africa

Are you kidding me right now

The government failed to privatise some utility companies because it doesn't want to sell to south Africa whites, who are South Africans anyway.

Government of South Africa don't want to sell untily companies like Eskom because

1) it fears that selling it will over expose the country to capital flight, something similar to what MTN and Airtel is currently doing in Nigeria.


2) it fears that the sales will means higher utility prices for the consumers, South Africa prides itself as a country able to provide some of the cheapest electricity in the world.

The South African Government even made sure South Africans (white or black) are major shareholders of the utility companies it managed to privatise.

Hence, it seems you are the one writing something out of your imagination here

Chairman Mao did a very crappy job. You're the first person I've heard praising Mao.

Hong Kong was devastated by world war II and was flooded with refugees from china but by 1980, was a prosperous principality while China was desperately poor.

I do agree with you that the PDP administration should have done far more respecting infrastructure. It however does not justify Buhari's lamentable record.

You may have a point concerning South Africa's power company buts what the point having cheap electricity which is not constant.

grandstar:


Chairman Mao did a very crappy job. You're the first person I've heard praising Mao.

Hong Kong was devastated by world war II and was flooded with refugees from china but by 1980, was a prosperous principality while China was desperately poor.

I do agree with you that the PDP administration should have done far more respecting infrastructure. It however does not justify Buhari's lamentable record.

You may have a point concerning South Africa's power company buts what the point having cheap electricity which is not constant.

This is because you haven't spoken to a lot of Chinese. Chairman Mao is still respected amongst many Chinese till today.

I believe during an anniversary of the end of second world war in 2015, I got to know how Chinese people respects the legacies of chairman Mao. Although, it later failed because of his socialist tendencies, he is still widely respected till today for laying the blueprints of modern China.

None of such can be said of Nigerian past leaders as they only made themselves rich from our common wealth.

Hence, I can't hold Buhari solely responsible for our current economic situation.

I once worked for a Chinese restaurant in South Africa. Hence, my knowledge about both countries.

Never mind I got my degree in an economics related course in South Africa.

RTSC:
You shouldn't expect economic brilliance from a president that decided to give aid to another country but does not realise that the japanese vehicles and chinese kits he supplied to them could have been made in Nigeria and our money would have remained at home creating more jobs.\

Basic Governance 101.

Buhari is too dull for the 21st century.

China will even give you loan to build bridge and still build the bridge to make sure the money never left China.

We have been making terrible mistakes since 1960 but Buhari is a mistake that should have been avoided at all cost even at the pain of death.

And he has refused to surround himself with intelligent people the way OBJ and GEJ did.

martineverest:
the headline shows op is poor mathematically.....our economy is larger than the entire west African countries,do u expect it to grow higher than smaller economics?

analogically,the growth rate of Switzerland,singapore,Korea etc economics is expected to be higher than those of USA, Germany,Japan,china and india

if u do the mathematical calculations,the growth in dollars of Nigeria economy could be larger than the entire growth of those west African economics

this is a VERY IGNORANT statement to make.

very IGNORANT

China's economy grows at a fastee rate than most countries on earth

and they are the second biggest

America economy grows faster than most economies in the eurozone

and the American economy is a behemoth


NIGERIA is led by a useless fool as a president

and that is what is reflecting In the economy

it's all clear

grandstar:


It was not simply because the crude oil prices were high that Nigeria's economy was doibg much better than now. If the oil price today should touch $100, I doubt the growth rate will go beyond 4%.

What you have left out is that Buhari pegged the exchange rate upon assumption of office and this singular policy crippled the Economist and caused a very severe recession that lasted 6 quarters. Nigerian economists such as Soludo, Sanusi and Utomi put the blame on him.

Presently, the country operates a multiple exchange policy which screams quacks are handling the economy. All these are Buhari's doing.

Yes, some growth was due to the high oil price but not all of it. It was primarily due to the fact that the pre-Buhari governments implemented pro market policies.

You're right, the pegging of the exchange rate caused (and may still be causing) some problems, but No, I still stand by my previous statement that the growth we saw before now hitting between 6 & 7% was purely artificial and a function of 2 things; (1) high oil prices and (2) the typical profligacy that follows the easy oil money (i.e. govt sharing/looting money and wildly spending it will always reflect positively on the economy and that was the primary driver of the high gdp growth rates in the recent past)..

Yes the economic policies in the past were logically better, but the effects of those economic policies never really materialised because of the attendant profligacy (corruption) that accompanied leadership. If the 'sound' economic policies in the past were truly responsible for any the growth, how come the gdp rate nosedived instantly from mid-2014 when oil prices began crashing?

Something you're right about however is that even if oil prices hit $120 now, the gdp rate wouldn't automatically bounce up to the highs of 6-7% as was the case in the recent past. But the reason isn't because of "Buhari bad economic policy" as you claim, rather it's because the govt isn't sharing and spending money wildly. With oil prices up to $70 today, the only reason the rate hasnt reached at least 4% is cos the government isnt sharing money and spending indiscriminately like is the typical tradition for Nigerian governments.

Iamgrey5:
First of all, Chairman Mao supervised the rebuilding of China after the war 2; he supervised the rebuilding of trains, power stations, establishment of an agricultural plan of which are many of those plans are cherished in modern China till date.

Xiopein didn't take over from Mao, he took over from Zhoi Len who already had a program for modernisation of China.

Premeir Zhoi was the one who started reform before been interrupted by the Gang of four.

Secondly, it goes back to my earlier point that Nigerian past administrations failed to transform the growth led by higher crude oil prices into economic development by constructing enviable infrastructural facilities.


Thirdly, on South Africa

Are you kidding me right now

Why will the government fail to privatise some utility companies because it doesn't want to sell to South Africa whites, who are South Africans anyway?!.

Government of South Africa doesn't want to sell untily companies like Eskom because

1) it fears that selling it will over expose the country to capital flight which is something similar to what MTN and Airtel is currently doing in Nigeria.


2) it fears that the sales will traslate to higher utility prices for the consumer. South Africa prides itself as a country able to provide some of the cheapest electricity charges in the world.

The South African Government even made sure South Africans (white or black) are major shareholders of the utility companies it managed to privatise.

Hence, it seems you are the one writing something out of your imagination here

Mao policy led to the death of millions of Chinese via starvation

are you sure you got your fact right?

That goes to show that many here got their figures mixed up

Ugosample:



Mao policy led to the death of millions of Chinese via starvation

are you sure you got your fact right?

That goes to show that many here got their figures mixed up

Read my subsequent post

Mao policy of socialism lead to deaths as it became a problem in 1970s some thirty years after the world war.

Still, his drive to integrate Chinese interland with the major Chinese cities at the coast Via rail tracks and his Agricultural feats can never be written off China history.

You people just like jumping into one's mention without understanding the context of the argument Yourself

Mikhailkutusov:
that year when the price of crude was 100+ dollars.

and companies were springing up everyday in d country, foreign investors were eager to come do business here dat year... fast forward to now... many(millions) have lost their jobs, companies are folding up everyday... just this week our very own Dangote wanna sell his flour mill, last month Access bank is merging, my brother let's call a spade a spade this government is failing economically. remove sentiment and face reality.


talking about the crude price of 100+ dollars you talked about.. who is in charge of that petroleum/crude in this country?

obailala:
You're right, the pegging of the exchange rate caused (and may still be causing) some problems, but No, I still stand by my previous statement that the growth we saw before now hitting between 6 & 7% was purely artificial and a function of 2 things; (1) high oil prices and (2) the typical profligacy that follows the easy oil money (i.e. govt sharing/looting money and wildly spending it will always reflect positively on the economy and that was the primary driver of the high gdp growth rates in the recent past)..

Yes the economic policies in the past were logically better, but the effects of those economic policies never really materialised because of the attendant profligacy (corruption) that accompanied leadership. If the 'sound' economic policies in the past were truly responsible for any the growth, how come the gdp rate nosedived instantly from mid-2014 when oil prices began crashing?

Something you're right about however is that even if oil prices hit $120 now, the gdp rate wouldn't automatically bounce up to the highs of 6-7% as was the case in the recent past. But the reason isn't because of "Buhari bad economic policy" as you claim, rather it's because the govt isn't sharing and spending money wildly. With oil prices up to $70 today, the only reason the rate hasnt reached at least 4% is cos the government isnt sharing money and spending indiscriminately like is the typical tradition for Nigerian governments.

Yes, the PDP years may have been helped with a higher price but that does not account fully for it. Better economic policies were instrumental.

You need to remember that OBJ took over from the most corrupt government in the nation's history and had been fantastically corrupt prior to that for at least 14 years.

Also, during OBJ's second term, he was able to pay down the country's debt , leave $20bn in excess crude account and $60bn in the reserves. It was perhaps the most fiscally prudent government the country ever had. It did not reckless spend and share the higher oil earnings which were at most during his at $65/barrel

It wasnt simply the higher oil prices that fuelled during OBJ''s term as he banked a good chunk of it.

The truly profligate government was the Jonathan government but even then, a good part wasn't oil based.

If the country simply followed Jonathan's policy till now, growth rate will be between 4%-4.5%by now.

The country needs some bew reforms to fuel growth but certainly not the lame duck policies that PMB is pursuing

I prefer to listen to what economists actually have to say about the current state of affairs and they blame Buhari's Statist and command policies. Sanusi was unrelenting in condemning Buhari's pegging of the Naira and the severe forex shortages which forced companies to close as they had no dollars to import stock. This led to massive layoffs and a severe recession followed.

It was not that Buhari ended the sharing of money that is the oroblem. No economist has ever given that as a reason. It sounds unacademic.

grandstar:


Yes, the PDP years may have been helped with a higher price but that does not account fully for it. Better economic policies were instrumental.

You need to remember that OBJ took over from the most corrupt government in the nation's history and had been fantastically corrupt prior to that for at least 14 years.

Also, during OBJ's second term, he was able to pay down the country's debt , leave $20bn in excess crude account and $60bn in the reserves. It was perhaps the most fiscally prudent government the country ever had. It did not reckless spend and share the higher oil earnings which were at most during his at $65/barrel

It wasnt simply the higher oil prices that fuelled during OBJ''s term as he banked a good chunk of it.

The truly profligate government was the Jonathan government but even then, a good part wasn't oil based.

If the country simply followed Jonathan's policy till now, growth rate will be between 4%-4.5%by now.

The country needs some bew reforms to fuel growth but certainly not the lame duck policies that PMB is pursuing

I prefer to listen to what economists actually have to say about the current state of affairs and they blame Buhari's Statist and command policies. Sanusi was unrelenting in condemning Buhari's pegging of the Naira and the severe forex shortages which forced companies to close as they had no dollars to import stock. This led to massive layoffs and a severe recession followed.

It was not that Buhari ended the sharing of money that is the oroblem. No economist has ever given that as a reason. It sounds unacademic.

Since you claim it wasnt largely a function of oil price, why was it that even with the good economic policies of GEJ, the gdp growth rate still rapidly dropped to 2% before GEJ handed over?... With the way the rate was dropping before GEJ bailed out, do you also think those 'good' economic policies would have prevented the recession despite the fact that oil prices continued to crash further?....

Regarding your last sentence, you say you havent heard economists literally saying "Buhari ended the sharing of money", but can you also claim you havent heard anyone lament the lack of money in circulation?... Money in circulation is one of the primary drivers of the high economic indices Nigeria enjoyed prior to 2015. The lack of money in circulation post 2014 (courtesy of oil price drop) is the reason our beautiful economic indices began to tumble from mid-2014. Currently, with oil prices hitting $70, if we go back to the typical government sharing/squandering which we had prior to 2015, I bet you, the GDP growth rate will hit the roof again.

obailala:
With the good economic policies of GEJ, why exactly did the gdp growth rate still rapidly drop to 2% before GEJ handed over despite the fact that the effects of the oil price crash had not yet even hit many sectors then?... With the way the rate was dropping before GEJ left, do you also think those 'good' economic policies would have prevented the recession?....

Regarding your last sentence, you say you havent heard economists literally saying "Buhari ended the sharing of money", but can you also claim you havent heard anyone lament the lack of money in circulation?... Money in circulation is one of the primary drivers of the high economic indices Nigeria enjoyed prior to 2015. The lack of money in circulation post 2014 (courtesy of oil price drop) is the reason our beautiful economic indices began to tumble from mid-2014. Currently, with oil prices hitting $70, if we go back to the typical government sharing/squandering which we had prior to 2015, I bet you, the GDP growth rate will hit the roof again.

I'm not keen on going any further.

obailala:
Since you claim it wasnt largely a function of oil price, why was it that even with the good economic policies of GEJ, the gdp growth rate still rapidly dropped to 2% before GEJ handed over?... With the way the rate was dropping before GEJ bailed out, do you also think those 'good' economic policies would have prevented the recession despite the fact that oil prices continued to crash further?....

Regarding your last sentence, you say you havent heard economists literally saying "Buhari ended the sharing of money", but can you also claim you havent heard anyone lament the lack of money in circulation?... Money in circulation is one of the primary drivers of the high economic indices Nigeria enjoyed prior to 2015. The lack of money in circulation post 2014 (courtesy of oil price drop) is the reason our beautiful economic indices began to tumble from mid-2014. Currently, with oil prices hitting $70, if we go back to the typical government sharing/squandering which we had prior to 2015, I bet you, the GDP growth rate will hit the roof again.

The oil price was crashing and it was taken the economy with it but Buhari finished it off with his Naira pegging policy. Even if the country entered s recession, it would have been mild rather than a severe recession that lasted 6 quarters and led to the loss of 11m jobs.

Money in circulation and sharing money are 2 different things academically.

You can be 'sharing money' and there won't be money in circulation. And the term used if I'm correct is excess money in circulation.

The excess money in circulation usually occurs when the federal government shares the monthly allocation to the 3 tiers of government. This swells up the money supply and the CBN uses high yielding bonds to soak up the excess. If not soaked up, inflation will rise steeply

Iamgrey5:
our economy is larger than rest now

Almost 4 times self

We can't be expected to grow as fast as them

otherwise we would have been competing with the likes of the Uk

Stuppid and brainless excuses all the time,even when you and your people are descending more and more into deplorable poverty as the days go by

Shame on you people!

NkayStory:



Stuppid and brainless excuses all the time,even when you and your people are descending more and more into deplorable poverty as the days go by

Shame on you people!

My people are descending into poverty

Do you know my people from somewhere

Cause it seems you have lost the ability to argue logically or acumen needed to strike a decent conversation with a stranger.

martineverest:
Ur IQ is very low...the growth rate of Singapore( a highly developed country) is low cos the economy has gotten to its potential,same with United States.....while day of China is high cos it has higher potential and haven't gotten to its full potential yet.

Mr "high intellect"...so where do you place Nigeria in comparism to the Singapore and U.S you are ranting about to warrant our growth to be at paltry 1.9%?

If you are as sensible as you claim,you would have realised that an underdeveloped country like ours has no business growing at less than 7%!!!

But you are an APC supporter,expecting your kind to think logically is like expecting hell to freeze over..

Iamgrey5:
Petroleum not only contributes upto 30% of Nigerian GDP, it contributes over 90% of government revenue.

Government is the major spender in Nigeria not private sector.

Hence, the slightest increase or decrease In prices of petroleum products will increase or decrease the total money in circulation, which will inturn affect the sales of goods and services produced

At least you know the definition of GDP Mr Economics teacher of micro economics

olobe

What is under reference is macroeconomics not microeconomics. Hope you know they are not the same.

According to the National Bureau of Statistics, the share of oil sector contribution to the Nigeria's GDP in 2018 was 8.60%. Why you are insisting on your 30% is not clear. Do you have another source or you are referring to the past figures? If so, then you shouldn't use a continuous adjective "contributes". You ought to use "contributed" in so and so year. Okay? Even at your 30%, it negates your earlier assertion that the majority growth comes from only one source.

Also, it appears that you have mixed up crude oil revenue with petroleum products prices and total money in circulation. Crude oil revenue is the dollar amount received from sales of crude oil by Nigeria. Petroleum products prices on the other hand refer to prices of petroleum products like AGO, PMS and others. While a slight change in their prices affects the prices of goods and services which contributes to inflation in a significant way, it does not lead to increase in total money in circulation.

The total money in circulation is determined by the policies of the Central Bank of Nigeria. The CBN uses a monetary policy tool called Open Market Operation (OMO) to control it. It issues - buys or sells -Treasury Bills on behalf of the federal government depending on the targets.

Then, how did you arrive at government being the major spender in Nigeria? The entire budget of the federal government last year was about $30b; if you add the budgets of the 36 states to that you still don't get "the major spender" in an economy of about $391b.

If this is what you got from your "economics related course in SA" it is better you consider buying a JAMB form and re-enrol in a proper economics class in one of our schools here instead of being impervious to corrections and appearing to be unteachable.

In the mean time, before jumping from one issue to the other and throwing up figures as you like, try and read more on GDP, GDP per capita, government revenue, budget, foreign exchange earners or exports, population, GDP growth rates, employment, taxes etc., with special focus on Nigeria.

You will be alright in the end.