₦airaland Forum

They truth was said by sanusi. Please Seun get this on the front page. This man has been misquited for a long time

Jarus does not waste his saliva when he sees the truth. He does not talk for talking sake. That makes him stand out.

Weldone guys I'm on the move. I heard my hotel has a gym facility.

They have been using the title to campaign and in all these misquoting SLS.

read for yourself ooo

Sagamite:
That is fair enough.

You were perfectly strawmanned. 

Yea that is what one gets for opposing a dictator

Sagamite:
I hope you were misquoted or strawmanned.

There is a difference between giving heavier weighting to counter scholarly views over Sanusi's and saying I "know more about the Nigerian economy than Sanusi".

No I never said I know more about Nigerian economy than SLS or let the person say so or show.
However, I cannot accept whatever he said, because he is the CBN governor.

I asked a question, who is he that I should not challenge what he said. By then I just scanned through and the only thing that was shouting for attention was the title- I will vote Buhari. I didn't care to go in details.

If you are a Buhari supporter and you read this piece and post it here for all to see . . . . I wonder oooo

He will vote for Buhari just to feel good not that he is a democrat.

SANUSI does not support Buhari for presidency for many reasons amongst which are

1. He cannot operate in a democratic environment
2. he should be a statesman
3. he should be training other Buhari's
4. he does not believe in recycling
5. he will be frustrated



Here are some more for you to learn from.

Why I will vote for Buhari (II) - Lamido Sanusi

By Sanusi Lamido Sanusi

The argument of Buharism, for which it was castigated by global capital and its domestic agents, was that these conditions did not exist clearly enough for Nigeria to take the gamble. First our major export, oil, was priced in dollars and the volume exported was determined ab initio by the quota set by OPEC, a cartel to which we belonged. Neither the price nor the volume of our exports would be affected by a devaluation of the naira. As for imports, indeed they would become dearer. However the manufacturing base depended on imported raw materials. Also many essential food items were imported. The demand for imports was therefore inelastic. We would end up spending more of our national income to import less, in the process fuelling inflation, creating excess capacity and unemployment, wiping out the production base of the real sector and causing hardship to the consumer through the erosion of real disposable incomes. Given the structural dislocations in income distribution in Nigeria the only groups who would benefit from devaluation were the rich parasites who had enough liquidity to continue with their conspicuous consumption, the large multi-national corporations with an unlimited access to loanable funds and the foreign "investor" who can now purchase our grossly cheapened and undervalued domestic assets.

In one stroke we would wipe out the middle class, destroy indigenous manufacturing, undervalue the national wealth and create inflation and unemployment. This is standard economic theory and it is exactly what happened to Nigeria after it went through the hands of our IMF economists under IBB. The decision not to devalue set Buharism on a collision course with those who wanted devaluation and would profit from it-namely global capitalism, the so-called "captains of industry" (an acronym for the errand boys of multinational corporations), the nouveaux-riches parasites who had naira and dollars waiting to be spent, the rump elements of feudalism and so on. Buharism therefore was a crisis in the dominant class, a fracturing of its members into a patriotic, nationalist group and a dependent, parasitic and corrupt one. It was not a struggle between classes but within the same class. A victory for Buharism would be a victory for the more progressive elements of the national bourgeoisie. Unfortunately the fifth columnists within the military establishment were allied to the backward and retrogressive elements and succeeded in defeating Buharism before it took firm root. But I digress.

Having decided not to devalue or to rush into privatization and liberalization Buharism still faced an economic crisis it must address. There was pressure on foreign reserves, mounting foreign debt and a Balance of Payments crisis. Clearly the demand for foreign exchange outstripped its supply. The government therefore adopted demand management measures. The basic principle was that we did not really need all that we imported and if we could ensure that our scarce foreign exchange was only allocated to what we really needed we would be able to pay our debts and lay the foundations for economic stability. But this line of action also has its drawbacks.

First, there are political costs to be borne in terms of opposition from those who feel unfairly excluded from the allocation process and who do not share the government’s sense of priorities. Muslims for example cursed Buhari’s government for restricting the number of pilgrims in order to conserve foreign exchange.

Second, in all attempts to manage demand through quotas and quantitative restrictions there is room for abuse because there is always the incentive of a premium to be earned through circumvention of due process. Import licenses become "hot cake" and the black market for foreign exchange highly lucrative. This policy can only succeed if backed by strong deterrent laws and strict and enforcible exchange rules. Again it is trite micro-economic theory that where price is fixed below equilibrium the market is only cleared through quotas and the potential exists for round tripping as there will be a minority willing and able to offer a very high price for the "artificially scarce" product. So again we see that the harsh exchange control and economic sabotage laws of Buharism were a necessary and logical fallout of its economic theory.

Conclusion

I have tried to show in this intervention what I consider to be the principal building blocks of the military government of Muhammadu Buhari and the logical connection between its ideology, its economic theory and the legal and political superstructure that characterized it. My objective is to raise the intellectual profile of discourse beyond its present focus on personalities by letting readers see the intricate links between disparate and seemingly unrelated aspects of that government, thus contextualizing the actions of Buharism in its specific historical and ideological milieu. I have tried to review its treatment of politicians as part of a general struggle against primitive accumulation and its harsh laws on exchange and economic crimes as a necessary fallout of economic policy options. Similarly its treatment of drug pushers reflected the patriotic zeal of a bourgeois nationalist establishment.

As happens in all such cases a number of innocent people become victims of draconian laws, such as a few honest leaders like Shehu Shagari and Balarabe Musa who were improperly detained. The reality however is that many of those claiming to be victims today were looters who deserved to go to jail but who would like to hide under the cover of a few glaring errors. The failure of key members of the Buhari administration to tender public and unreserved apology to those who may have been improperly detained has not helped matters in this regard.

This raises a question I have often been asked. Do I support Buhari’s decision to contest for the presidency of Nigeria? [size=20pt]My answer is no[/size]. And I will explain.

First, I believe Buhari played a creditable role in a particular historical epoch but like Tolstoy and Marx I do not believe he can re-enact that role at will. Men do not make history exactly as they please but, as Marx wrote in the 18th Brumaire, "in circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past." Muhammadu Buhari as a military general had more room for manoevre than he can ever hope for in Nigerian Politics.

Second, I am convinced that the situation of Nigeria and its elite today is worse than it was in 1983.Compared to the politicians who populate the PDP, ANPP and AD today, second republic politicians were angels. Buhari waged a battle against second republic politicians, but he is joining this generation. Anyone who rides a tiger ends up in its belly and one man cannot change the system from within. A number of those Buhari jailed for theft later became ministers and many of those who hold key offices in all tiers of government and the legislature were made by the very system he sought to destroy. My view is that Nigeria needs people like Buhari in politics but not to contest elections. Buhari should be in politics to develop Civil Society and strengthen the conscience of the nation. He should try to develop many Buharis who will continue to challenge the elements that have hijacked the nation.

Third, I do not think Nigerians today are ready for Buhari. Everywhere you turn you see thieves who have amassed wealth in the last four years, be they legislators, Local Government chairmen and councilors, or governors and ministers. But these are the heroes in their societies. They are the religious leaders and ethnic champions and Nigerians, especially northerners, will castigate and discredit anyone who challenges them. Unless we start by educating our people and changing their value system, people like Buhari will remain the victims of their own love for Nigeria.

Fourth, and on a lighter note, [b]I am opposed to recycled material. I[/b]n a nation of 120million people we can do better than restrict our leadership to a small group. I think Buhari, Babangida and yes Obasanjo should simply allow others try their hand instead of believing they have the monopoly of wisdom.

Having said all this let me conclude by saying that if Buhari gets a nomination he will have my vote (for what it is worth). I will vote for him not, like some have averred, because he is a northerner and a Muslim or because I think his candidacy is good for the north and Islam; I will vote for him not because I think he will make a good democrat or that he was not a dictator. I will vote for Buhari as a Nigerian for a leader who restored my pride and dignity and my belief in the motherland. I will vote for the man who made it undesirable for the "Andrews" to "check out" instead of staying to change Nigeria. I will vote for Buhari to say thank you for the world view of Buharism, a truly nationalist ideology for all Nigerians. I do not know if Buhari is still a nationalist or a closet bigot and fanatic, or if he was the spirit and not just the face of Buharism. My vote for him is not based on a divination of what he is or may be, but a celebration of what his government was and what it gave to the nation.           

http://www.triumphnewspapers.org/why18112010.html

And my advice is please, read the whole write up carefully. It is an interesting read so that you will stop using the name of this man inappropriately.



SANUSI does not support Buhari for presidency for many reasons amongst which are

1. He cannot operate in a democratic environment
2. he should be a statesman
3. he should be training other Buhari's
4. he does not believe in recycling
5. he will be frustrated

Sagamite:
Ah, you don't have to accept. But I would be surprised if you said you "know more about the Nigerian economy than Sanusi".

We are talking about the economy of Nigeria within a specified period. The economic indices documented from several sources in journals and bookS say that the economy did not perform well and that there was progressive deterioration. You want me to accept what a single individual who is liable to environmental motivation knows more than collective scholarly publication pointing towards the same direction?

If accepting THE LATTER instead of  Sanusi's proclamation  means being clueless and moronic, then I choose to be clueless and moronic

9ijaMan:
Here are some more for you to learn from.
[size=13pt]
Why I will vote for Buhari (II) - Lamido Sanusi[/size]

By Sanusi Lamido Sanusi

The argument of Buharism, for which it was castigated by global capital and its domestic agents, was that these conditions did not exist clearly enough for Nigeria to take the gamble. First our major export, oil, was priced in dollars and the volume exported was determined ab initio by the quota set by OPEC, a cartel to which we belonged. Neither the price nor the volume of our exports would be affected by a devaluation of the naira. As for imports, indeed they would become dearer. However the manufacturing base depended on imported raw materials. Also many essential food items were imported. The demand for imports was therefore inelastic. We would end up spending more of our national income to import less, in the process fuelling inflation, creating excess capacity and unemployment, wiping out the production base of the real sector and causing hardship to the consumer through the erosion of real disposable incomes. Given the structural dislocations in income distribution in Nigeria the only groups who would benefit from devaluation were the rich parasites who had enough liquidity to continue with their conspicuous consumption, the large multi-national corporations with an unlimited access to loanable funds and the foreign "investor" who can now purchase our grossly cheapened and undervalued domestic assets.

In one stroke we would wipe out the middle class, destroy indigenous manufacturing, undervalue the national wealth and create inflation and unemployment. This is standard economic theory and it is exactly what happened to Nigeria after it went through the hands of our IMF economists under IBB. The decision not to devalue set Buharism on a collision course with those who wanted devaluation and would profit from it-namely global capitalism, the so-called "captains of industry" (an acronym for the errand boys of multinational corporations), the nouveaux-riches parasites who had naira and dollars waiting to be spent, the rump elements of feudalism and so on. Buharism therefore was a crisis in the dominant class, a fracturing of its members into a patriotic, nationalist group and a dependent, parasitic and corrupt one. It was not a struggle between classes but within the same class. A victory for Buharism would be a victory for the more progressive elements of the national bourgeoisie. Unfortunately the fifth columnists within the military establishment were allied to the backward and retrogressive elements and succeeded in defeating Buharism before it took firm root. But I digress.

Having decided not to devalue or to rush into privatization and liberalization Buharism still faced an economic crisis it must address. There was pressure on foreign reserves, mounting foreign debt and a Balance of Payments crisis. Clearly the demand for foreign exchange outstripped its supply. The government therefore adopted demand management measures. The basic principle was that we did not really need all that we imported and if we could ensure that our scarce foreign exchange was only allocated to what we really needed we would be able to pay our debts and lay the foundations for economic stability. But this line of action also has its drawbacks.

First, there are political costs to be borne in terms of opposition from those who feel unfairly excluded from the allocation process and who do not share the government’s sense of priorities. Muslims for example cursed Buhari’s government for restricting the number of pilgrims in order to conserve foreign exchange.

Second, in all attempts to manage demand through quotas and quantitative restrictions there is room for abuse because there is always the incentive of a premium to be earned through circumvention of due process. Import licenses become "hot cake" and the black market for foreign exchange highly lucrative. This policy can only succeed if backed by strong deterrent laws and strict and enforcible exchange rules. Again it is trite micro-economic theory that where price is fixed below equilibrium the market is only cleared through quotas and the potential exists for round tripping as there will be a minority willing and able to offer a very high price for the "artificially scarce" product. So again we see that the harsh exchange control and economic sabotage laws of Buharism were a necessary and logical fallout of its economic theory.

Conclusion

I have tried to show in this intervention what I consider to be the principal building blocks of the military government of Muhammadu Buhari and the logical connection between its ideology, its economic theory and the legal and political superstructure that characterized it. My objective is to raise the intellectual profile of discourse beyond its present focus on personalities by letting readers see the intricate links between disparate and seemingly unrelated aspects of that government, thus contextualizing the actions of Buharism in its specific historical and ideological milieu. I have tried to review its treatment of politicians as part of a general struggle against primitive accumulation and its harsh laws on exchange and economic crimes as a necessary fallout of economic policy options. Similarly its treatment of drug pushers reflected the patriotic zeal of a bourgeois nationalist establishment.

As happens in all such cases a number of innocent people become victims of draconian laws, such as a few honest leaders like Shehu Shagari and Balarabe Musa who were improperly detained. The reality however is that many of those claiming to be victims today were looters who deserved to go to jail but who would like to hide under the cover of a few glaring errors. The failure of key members of the Buhari administration to tender public and unreserved apology to those who may have been improperly detained has not helped matters in this regard.

This raises a question I have often been asked. Do I support Buhari’s decision to contest for the presidency of Nigeria? My answer is no. And I will explain.

[b]First, I believe Buhari played a creditable role in a particular historical epoch but like Tolstoy and Marx I do not believe he can re-enact that role at will. Men do not make history exactly as they please but, as Marx wrote in the 18th Brumaire, "in circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past." Muhammadu Buhari as a military general had more room for manoevre than he can ever hope for in Nigerian Politics.

Second, I am convinced that the situation of Nigeria and its elite today is worse than it was in 1983.Compared to the politicians who populate the PDP, ANPP and AD today, second republic politicians were angels. Buhari waged a battle against second republic politicians, but he is joining this generation. Anyone who rides a tiger ends up in its belly and one man cannot change the system from within. A number of those Buhari jailed for theft later became ministers and many of those who hold key offices in all tiers of government and the legislature were made by the very system he sought to destroy. My view is that Nigeria needs people like Buhari in politics but not to contest elections. Buhari should be in politics to develop Civil Society and strengthen the conscience of the nation. He should try to develop many Buharis who will continue to challenge the elements that have hijacked the nation.

Third, I do not think Nigerians today are ready for Buhari. Everywhere you turn you see thieves who have amassed wealth in the last four years, be they legislators, Local Government chairmen and councilors, or governors and ministers. But these are the heroes in their societies. They are the religious leaders and ethnic champions and Nigerians, especially northerners, will castigate and discredit anyone who challenges them. Unless we start by educating our people and changing their value system, people like Buhari will remain the victims of their own love for Nigeria.

Fourth, and on a lighter note, I am opposed to recycled material. In a nation of 120million people we can do better than restrict our leadership to a small group. I think Buhari, Babangida and yes Obasanjo should simply allow others try their hand instead of believing they have the monopoly of wisdom.

Having said all this let me conclude by saying that if Buhari gets a nomination he will have my vote (for what it is worth). I will vote for him not, like some have averred, because he is a northerner and a Muslim or because I think his candidacy is good for the north and Islam; I will vote for him not because I think he will make a good democrat or that he was not a dictator. I will vote for Buhari as a Nigerian for a leader who restored my pride and dignity and my belief in the motherland. I will vote for the man who made it undesirable for the "Andrews" to "check out" instead of staying to change Nigeria. I will vote for Buhari to say thank you for the world view of Buharism, a truly nationalist ideology for all Nigerians. I do not know if Buhari is still a nationalist or a closet bigot and fanatic, or if he was the spirit and not just the face of Buharism. My vote for him is not based on a divination of what he is or may be, but a celebration of what his government was and what it gave to the nation.
[/b]
http://www.triumphnewspapers.org/why18112010.html

@9ijaMan

Did you read what you posted here. I have to apologize for just scanning through the whole thing.
I have read through it and I can highlight somethings for you to see.

Did you see the reason why he said he would vote for him?

I doubt you did otherwise you would not post this here.
he said would not support his coming out for presidency. He gave his reasons one of which is that Buhari had much room to operate as a dictator and that he will not be able to operate in todays Nigeria politics. I have said this over and over again.

You hero SLS just said the same thing.

He will vote him just to satisfy himself not because he will is qualified for democracy.

By the way on the economy front, he accepted that Buhari view was not realistic. he tried very hard to defend buhari and buharism, gave reasons for the harsh laws and a good attempt at that but at the end of the day, he could not.
But he surprised me when he said Shehu Shagari was innocent


Finally, SLS did not discuss economic indices of Buhari reign.
What I posted for you were the indices of the time which proved that Buharism did not work in the prevailing economic condition.
He was theorizing but the result on ground showed the theory was wrong.

Even SLS knew the drawbacks in Buharism which he mentioned. Those were the things that swallowed up the initial gra gra because it the economic policies lacked basic economic principles.

SLS said, his finance minister had no business with economics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kelly Rowland

Sagamite:
Abeg pass me the details of the moooron that said he knew Nigerian economy more than Sanusi.

Please, I beg you.

Sagamite he was referring to me but I am not a mo ron.
Why must I accept what Sanusi said hook line and sinker? Any reasons?

Rihanna

I laugh in swahili when people call me beaf.

Do I write like Beaf? The only relationship between me and beaf is that we support one candidate.
Abeg oburu egwuruegwu ya kwusikwa.

EPOMA:
@ agaba123  or beaf

All this theory that you are writing, Babangida SAP,MAMSA, were all fraud.During this period we got the introduction of Tokunbo, tell me which local input did we turn to during those years, How come there is so much demand for forex now ifthose years set a pace for local input. The west will always applaud anyone that help them Bleep africa well like Babangida through IMF

When you see fact you call it theory. That's why you will see Agaba and call him Beaf. Read the link and you will see the sources

I think what they wrote there is ' to travel' instead of 'the travel'.
'The travel' kwesiri inwe / n'elu 'i' ma nwere \ n'elu 'e'.

Igbo bu igbo ekenekwa m

That should me Esimone and not Esinone. He is a genuis! He is a deeper life guy!

Closing remark

40 push ups

BTW anybody that read the snippets I posted in page 41 and still claims he did well economical is . . . . I can't say that

@10cirenoh
Thanks for the correction. I was going by the results you guys jubilantly posted on saturday

GenBuhari:
What is you point?

Buhari ruled for the 1.5 year 1984 - 1985.

He never rulled in 1980 or 81

stop trying to mislead people

Buhari paid off our debt in 1.5 years

Nigerians need to make the right  choice

He ruled for 20 months.
The information gave a progressive decadence that started from 1980 and continued till 1985.
Buhari was factored into 1984-85 part of the period under review. can't you understand general?

luluosas:
I can see that your mind is made up no matter the evidence that will stare at your face, to you, Buhari is nothing. You are very much entitle to your own opinion.

You fall my hand too hard this time, seeing you shamelessly quoting Sahara Reporters as the source of your evidence for Buhari's mismanagement of resources, when he was the Head of State. So, you people that have always castigated Sahara Reporters as bias, sponsored to attack Government, trash, etc whenever they say the obvious (TRUTH). So, you now see reasons to believed them for once, just because, they satisfied your curiosity. My friend, this should be enough evidence for you and your like to JUMP ship and come over to BB Train. It is not too late yet. You are most welcome on-board.
BB all the Way.

I quoted Sahara reporters to show you the size of foreign debt when IBB took over. I can give you another source. Aniago Onyekachi.

The reason for that was that someone falsely claimed that Buhari paid off Nigeria's debt in a year. What did he pay off

@Evilbrain
Sanusi is B.Sc econs and a former bank staff. In as much as I respect him as a CBN governor, he is an individual entitled to his opinion.  I do no have any apologies. he said does not mean it is right.
I have given you published books that say otherwise with facts and figures that has no sentiment colouration. May be you should go through those before commenting.


Buhari did not manage the economy well. he did not understand the magnitude of the problem so he thought the issue was transient.
he had no clues.

Go and read my snippets in page 40.

The observed worsening economic and financial conditions and alleged widespread
corruption led to a military coup at the end of 1983.  The new regime (under General Buhari)
reinforced the austerity measures while additional exchange and trade restrictions were
announced in 1984.  The fiscal and monetary measures announced were aimed drastically
reducing domestic demand pressures.  The government also implemented expenditure cuts
and substantial tax increases.  The expenditure cuts were particularly successful in the short
run and they reduce the overall federal government fiscal deficit to a significant percentage in
1985.  As a consequence, the governmentís recourse to bank credit was virtually eliminated
and inflationary pressures were significantly reduced.
However, the governmentís austerity measures did meat with some setback.  The emphasis
on short run stabilization measures reflected the governmentís belief that Nigeriaís economic
and financial problems were transient and would eventually disappear with a recovery in oil
export prices.  In the event, oil prices did not recover, and it became clear that the
stabilization policies had failed to address the underlying economic problems.  Thus,
crippling import shortages and growing social and political discontent set the stage for
another military coup (under General Babangida) who assumed power in October, 198.  After
considerable popular debate, the Babangida Government adopted in June 1986 a
comprehensive structural adjustment program (SAP) that signaled a radical departure from
previous adjustment efforts.  It emphasized reliance on market forces and deregulation.  The
objectives of the SAP were to restructure and diversify the productive base of the economy
so as to reduce dependency on the oil sector and imports; achieve fiscal and balance of
payments viability over the medium term; and promote non-inflationary economic growth.   10
The key policies designed to achieve these objectives were the tightening of financial
policies; the adoption of a market determined exchange rate; the Liberalization of the
external trade and payments system; the elimination of price controls and commodity boards;
the decontrol of interest rates; the rationalization and restructuring of public expenditure; the
rationalization of the tariff structure and the overall lowering of tariffs; and the privatization;
or commercialization of most federal public enterprises.
During this period, some of Nigeriaís earlier anti-export bias in manufacturing disappeared
with policy reforms, and producers switched from imported to local inputs.  Particularly in
agro-processing and textile manufacturing, there was greater use of locally produced
materials.  The assembly-based manufacturing, which had depended on imported inputs and
been shielded from competition and market signals, contracted.  But the industry as a whole
grew by 3.5 percent per year (1986-1990); similarly, production of traditional food crops and
cash crops increased and agricultural output grew at 4.7 percent per year on average.  
However, the gradual loss of macroeconomic control after 1990 eroded many of the positive
changes that took place in the preceding years and have begun impacting negatively real
economic indicators.  Although significant progress was made in the liberalization of the
economy, specifically through reform of the exchange and the trade system and the freeing of
prices, macroeconomic policy implementation remained erratic and failed to bring inflation
under control. Nwaobi

Roger this https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-620012.32.html
Look at what Buhari's policies did to the economy

Moser et al

You can read more.

Nobdoy should come here to tell us how he paid off debt in a year.

Everything got worse when he took over.

and . . .he did not not understand problem he was facing as he does not understand now. He was clueless as he is now.

And more

There was a sizable depletion of external reserve from 6months import in 1980 to just two months in 1985. Let somebody come and tell me how he did not touch external reserve and how GEJ depleted.
Buhari contributed in the depletion. Read people read

More for your info

Unemployement was on the increase till 1985.

Another

More for you EPOMA and those who do not know

Complex import control exacerbated the difficulties

EPOMA:
@ Seun.

Can't believe you said this Seun. With all your experience on Nairaland forum.Maybe you were not born when Buhari ruled, for you  not to know much about this man or probably you are like most Nigerians who pushes history aside so soon.

For Buhari, I know that he paid up  Nigerian debt in 1 year, made sure that all the essential commodities in the warehouses were brought out and sold to the public. Brought discipline and work ethics to government ministries, fought corruption by trying to bring back Umaru dikko, I can continue.

For Goodluck, stole money through the wife, Try to get Ibori freed in the UK and Dubai. Obasanjo Houseboy, had to report to Oga on election day at Ota farm. Allows his PDP governors to (Godswill Akpabio )behave as they like. He does not have a mind of his own.

I will not say much. I dont want my country to continue having the worst first lady ever as we do now. Buhari has said that he will scrap the office of the first lady, lots of good stuff coming from Buhari

You can continue because you have said nothing.
Please give me an evidence that he paid up Nigeria's debt in one year. It is only in nairaland that you will hear this.


Nigeria was suffering so much due to oil price depression and export was almost nonexistent due to Buhari's draconian and unfriendly foreign policies where did he get the money to pay off the debt?
He took foreign loans about 8 of them.

This devastating impact of the debt burden manifested in negative/marginal growth of
GDP, large scale unemployment, capacity under-utilisation, drastic reduction in consumption
and capital formation, growing interest payments on foreign debt, and a general fall in the living
standards. For instance, real GDP growth averaged -5.7 per cent between 1981 and 1985, it
averaged 2.2 per cent between 1991 and 1997 and moved to 3.3 per cent between 1998 and
2002(CBN, 2004). Fiscal deficit to GDP ratio increased from 4 per cent in 1985 through 10 per
cent in 1989 to 15.3 per cent in 1993 and fell to 5.1 in 2002. Inflation rose to over 50 per cent in
1993 and moved to 73 per cent in 1995 but fell to 12.9 per cent in 2002. The investment/GDP
ratio dropped from 26 per cent in 1981 through 16 per cent in 1985, to 5.2 per cent in 1996 and
was 7 per cent in 2002. The inherent weakness in the structure of the economy is reflected in the
over-dependence on imports for its productive base in the face of declining foreign exchange
earnings and volatile terms of trade. This is how macroeconomic indicators present a problem of
debt servicing like the declining growth rate, rising and persistently high imports and debt ratios
and the costs of policies that may have to be undertaken to generate foreign exchange for debt
servicing.

For instance, external debt during the early 1980s increased Nigeriaís
official debt from US$4.1 billion at end of 1980 to US$24.6 billion by the end of 1986

http://www.csae.ox.ac.uk/conferences/2007-EDiA-LaWBiDC/papers/431-Adam.pdf

You may help yourself with the information in the whole article and stop spreading flasehood

- The total foreign debt when IBB took office was US$19.0B
- The annual debt service fund at the time was US$4.0B
- The debt service fund was 33% of total export earnings (Just Imagine the consequence of allowing 33% of total revenue going into debt servicing alone)
- The total debt stock as a percentage of foreign exchange earnings was 154%
- The total debt stock as a percentage of GDP was 24%
- As recent as this year the DMO has confirmed that the country is still paying debts owed since independence
- The economy was virtually dead as creditors refused granting of import credit lines to the country due to very low foreign currency availability (The legendary Fela Anikulapo-Kuti was jailed by the previous regime on accusation of currency trafficking. the question here is, why was there foreign currency restriction before the emergence of IBB? The answer is obvious: There was no foreign currency in the system!!!)

http://www.saharareporters.com/report/ibb-never-again-campaign-call-prosecute-and-ban-general-ibrahim-badamosi-babangida-holding-pu?page=1

Sagamite:
And who do you know or have on record that will scrap rail projects?

Why that point?

Sweetie, get a good safety buffer. You will need it.

Say 4 years, not 2.

That thread is missing you. I delivered your affectionate message to all the Orobos