₦airaland Forum

ziga:
i have learnt that when things go wrong, the easiest thing to do is to blame other people. But in truth everybody has a part to play.

nobody is innocent. we are all victims and we are all guilty.

ziga:
@Poster

i understand what u are trying to say.

Nigerians have a reputation of being arrogant. They always believe mine is better that yours, and i think that is why we complain about everything.

The annoying part is that we complain about the same things we are guilty of. Corruption, greed, bribery is in low places as well as in high places.

Put a Nigerian in a "perfect foreign society" and he will still complain about something even when the true habitants of that society are "relatively comfortable".

The poster is not saying we shouldn't complain about things that are not right, but complaining and folding your arms doesn't make anything better (just like a nagging wife).

When you complain, take action to remedy the situation.

okuya:
It's so sad that such a serious allegation could be made on the president and we just ignore it like that. I believe that it should be investigated to ascertain the truth. and for those who doubt, this story was carried by sahara reporters of 31st october 2009, making reference to desert herald of same day

SEFAGO:
Well if that is what you are trying to say- "That nigeria's economic activity is heavily dependent on oil, especially as conducted by foreign oil companies"

Yes, that is true. But nothing in your posts say that. I think, because you can't write well enough to present your point as succinctly as possible.

SEFAGO:
Beaf is at it again. These companies pay a significant part of their profits to the nigerian government. This is basic info- this doesnt factor into our GDP- the total profit of Shell/Chevron man.

Like how many times must this be hammered into your head- yes shell/chevron can do whatever they want to do with their profit but only after paying part of their profit.

His only response would be someone is misfiring while disseminating ignorant information online

paddyboi:
i will try this one last time with you, not because i really care about your ignorance, but because i dont want other nigerians on here to actually think that u are making an iota of sense, so here goes,

The United States economy GDP is valued at $14trillion dollars, of this amount 70% is accounted for by services, (google this and find more details, if in doubt, but any freshman economics student will tell u this),
Now 70% of 14trillion dollars is roughly $9.8trillion, (just keep this in mind for  a second)
The united states has no limits on capital flows, capital comes and goes freely, The united states has lots of multinationals operating in it, who are free to repartriate capital as they please, from toyota, to nokia, to venezuelan oil company CITGO,

now here is what mr ignorant(beaf), is arguing, that because the U.S has no limits on capital, and also has foriegn companys operating in it, that u should automatically, remove $9.8 trillion from U.S GDP, (because services dont count, ), and then while u are at it, remove whatever taxes any foriegn company pays, remove whateva productive capacity any foriegn company has, and so on, just because he is not satisfied, or does not believe it adds to US GDP,

This is a very ignorant way of thinking, economics is usually called a social science, social because it studies human nature and science because there are basic laid out macro, economic models used in the study of economics, these are like the laws of physics, u cannot wake up one day in 2009, and start arguing blindly, it belies your true motive,

Now back to the services component of the U.S economy, if u apply your reasoning a whole $9.8 trillion dollars would be cut from U.S GDP,
Remember services has nothing to do with manufacturing, or power, or production, or any of the things u argue that Shell, Agip, Chevron bring to the table,

In 2009 the world economy is basically global, capital will go to where capital is treated the best, i doubt that Israel, New Zealand and Singapore, have limits to capital in their countries, as a matter of fact i can tell u that they dont, and whateva foriegn companies investing in israel, (like INTEL, ), which announced it will build a brand new chip factory in northern israel, do take their profits home to the U.S, as a matter of fact their profits have nothing to do with the U.S or Israel as long as they pay their taxes, it belongs to the shareholders of INTEL, thats how it works in a global economy, and that is how my dear friend it works in Nigeria, have a good day.

Beaf:
GDP is of no use in describing Nigeria's economy because, it really is a measure of the economic activities of Shell, Agip, Chevron etc. Their operating capital is based abroad and they are all allowed to repatriate 100% of their profits.
The reverse is the case in the countries you thumbed down; Israel, New Zealand and Singapore, they all have productive local investments. We have none, we basically have no economy.

Ibime:
One or two islands of Cape Verde have some foilage, but most Islands are desert. . . . c'mon bruv, I was in Boavista in Cape Verde only 3 weeks ago.

paddyboi:
No frankly am not, Israel is a susidized nation, getting 3-4bln dollar a yr from the United states since 1970s and basically living on borrowed time on a desert, here in Nigeria u can fit 1000 israels into our land mass, ,we have a landscape of our own, from our garden of eden in calabar to huge landmass up in the north, only a fool would compare Nigeria to israel, as for new zealand its an agricultural based country, there is nothing special there, singapore on the other hand is pretty impressive, but again if it could own just 1qtr of nigerias landmass it would probably give up all its foriegn reserves of close to $200bln just to buy it,
my point is that in the future especially with global warming a lot of countries are going to be in trouble, espesially in europe and asia, countries like the U.K, might actually be washed away, Nigerians, and Africans in general will have a huge role to play in ressettlling those people, therefore our land mass is a huge asset,
we already have countries like south korea trying to buy farmland in africa just to feed its people

paddyboi:
ignorance seems to be a virtue with u, where am from they say opinions are like assholes cause everyone has one, u though seem intent on talking out of your a*ss,

Ibime:
If only 60% of Botswana live above the international poverty line of $1.25/day, they should hang their head in shame.

Cape Verde, a group of desert islands where they even have to import water has only 20% of people living below $1.25 a day.

Despite these obstacles, Botswana’s leadership has made the development of its people a priority. Since the 1990s, hunger has declined from 14 percent to 6.5 percent and maternal mortality has been cut in half, from 300 deaths per 100,000 live births to 150.16 Moreover, the government has worked hard to ensure that the gains from the diamond trade are used to fund basic infrastructure needs, such as roads, water, and electricity, as well as services such as hospitals and schools. In a recent analysis of governance indicators, including measures of voice and accountability, political stability, government effectiveness, regulatory quality, rule of law, and control of corruption, Botswana consistently ranked among the top of Africa’s most prosperous countries.17 Botswana’s example shows what is possible when governments invest in people.

blackspade:
If anything, I would want Nigeria to be the exact opposite of Botswana. Do you know that over a quarter of Botswana's population is malnourished, even though it is supposedly a success story? http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/2009102125756/african-perspectives/half-a-million-batswana-are-hungry-fao-report.html

Their economy's dependence on minerals is far worse than Nigeria's dependence on oil. Their economy is expected to shrink by 20% this year. HIV/AIDS is also rampant here. You need to re-think this thread.

Btw, Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source.

The Republic of Botswana (Tswana: Lefatshe la Botswana) is a landlocked country in Southern Africa. Citizens of Botswana are called "Batswana" (singular: Motswana), regardless of ethnicity. Formerly a British protectorate of Bechuanaland, Botswana adopted its new name after becoming independent within the Commonwealth on 30 September 1966. It is bordered by South Africa to the south and southeast, Namibia to the west and north, and Zimbabwe to the northeast. It meets Zambia at a single point.

Geographically the country is flat and up to 70% of Botswana is covered by the Kalahari Desert. Botswana was one of the most impoverished countries in Africa when it became independent in 1966. Today, it is home to a relatively stable political system and a rapidly developing market economy. Being closely tied with the economy of South Africa, the country's economy is one of the most successful in Africa and is dominated by the fast-growing service sector, world-renowned diamond industry, tourism, and manufacturing.

About 60% of the population live above the international poverty line of US$1.25 a day.[3] Botswana's economic growth rate has outpaced the economic growth of even the Asian Tigers, and the World Bank cites Botswana as one of the world's great development success stories.[4]

Since independence, Botswana has had the highest average economic growth rate in the world, averaging about 9% per year from 1966 to 1999. Growth in private sector employment has averaged about 10% per annum over the first 30 years of independence. The relatively high quality of the country's statistics means that these figures are likely to be quite accurate. The government has consistently maintained budget surpluses and has extensive foreign exchange reserves.

1980s 2 pula noteBotswana's impressive economic record has been built on a foundation of diamond mining, prudent fiscal policies, international financial and technical assistance, and a cautious foreign policy. It is rated the least corrupt country in Africa, according to an international corruption watchdog, Transparency International. By one estimate, it has the fourth highest gross national income at purchasing power parity in Africa, giving it a standard of living around that of Mexico and Turkey[1].

Trade unions represent a minority of workers in the Botswana economy. In general they are loosely organized "in-house" unions, although the Botswana Federation of Trade Unions (BFTU) is consolidating its role as the sole national trade union centre in the country.[2][3]

In the case of Botswana, the government makes specific provision in its budget to ensure that mineral revenues are invested rather than consumed through government expenditures. It also maintains a large mineral revenue fund which can both finance future investments and buffer the government budget from swings in diamond prices. This sound combination of macroeconomic and natural resource management has permitted Botswana to avoid the ‘resource curse’ that has afflicted many oil producers.

chic2pimp:
Omo abi nah? Shey u no want make I chop up? . The money those 'Jale Jale' thief nah also mine ooo

chic2pimp:
@ SEFAGO

How you take know all dis high profile peeps nah? Abeg make you hook up me jare make I jeun soke

SEFAGO:
I read everything i need to read. you dont know jack shit

The whole profit made by chevron should go into GNP (gross national product) of the United States of America (not sure though I admit).

SEFAGO:
I cant make any points again- because you wouldn't understand them. i need to make points to people who can comprehend them first. you are arguing about GDP. Does chevron's profits or Shell's profit ever go into our GDP. Of course not. But the royalties that they pay to the Nigerian government and NNPC for conducting business on Nigerian soil is what goes into our GDP (gross domestic product). The whole profit made by chevron should go into GNP (gross national product) of the United States of America (not sure though I admit).

you didn't even notice that and you want me to waste my time on you