Pakistan put all its energy eggs in China’s basket, and now its people can’t afford to keep the lights on

One of the best ways to create an environment in which an economy can thrive is to have abundant, reliable, reasonably priced energy; a sure way to destroy an economy is to make it so only the rich can afford the utilities.

Here, Pakistan accepted China’s help, just like many poor countries around the world, and became energy dependent on China. Now, the Pakistani people can’t afford the energy bill, and Pakistan is in massive debt to China.

Pakistan’s Reliance on Chinese-Built Power Plants Is Strangling Its Economy
Pakistan turned to Beijing to solve a crippling energy shortage. Now, crushed under debt and sky-high energy prices, its economy is diving.
When Muhammad Imtiaz received an electricity bill of over $120 last summer, he panicked. The bill, for June and July, was all he earns in a month of ferrying passengers on his motorbike in the scrappy suburbs outside Pakistan’s capital Islamabad.
In his two-room home, where he lives with his wife and four children, he only has a fridge and lights. He runs two fans in the summer months when heat can exceed 110 degrees Fahrenheit.
‘Should I give my rent, pay the electricity bill, or buy food for my children?’ said Imtiaz, who has racked up $3,000 in debt. His family has one meal a day: watered-down lentils with flatbread.
A decade ago, Pakistan, cripplingly short of power, turned to Beijing to build more than a dozen coal, solar and hydroelectric power plants as part of China’s huge infrastructure push in the country.
Now a series of policy mistakes by Islamabad means that Pakistan has enough electricity and more—but, due to the huge debt owed to China, few can afford it.

China cares about power and control. They could care less about the people.

Around 20 years ago, the city spent $600 million to upgrade the power plant. It met all environmental specifications at the time but because of new EPA rules, it (and other reasonably priced and reliable coal plants) will have to be decommissioned before their useful life is up to pretend the government can control the climate. Biden and other green pushers care as much about the poor and middle class as they do about taxpayers.

Congress has abdicated its oversight on regulatory agencies like the EPA. As a result, it issues new regulations to ensure its own continuance to police those new regs, and they could care less about their impact on people. Do we really need 16,204 EPA employees? Hint: No.

The answer is energy from nuclear fission plants - and yet, due to environmental climate hysteria, no nation truly embraces it.

I agree with the last part, which is why I respectfully disagree with the first part. The answer isn't energy from nuclear fission plants. The answer is to tell the left they can kiss off with all of their energy control-freak ways. We're free American citizens and we're going to have dependable energy whether they like it or not.

So if we use nuclear fission, fine. If we use coal, fine. If we use hydro, fine. Same for natural gas, whatever. We must never believe again that we can just switch energy source for our power plants, thinking we can appease the left. They are intentionally fickle in what it takes to please them.

Exhibit A: In the Obama years they pushed us to switch to using more "clean burning natural gas" to save the environment. Now they punish people by jacking up prices we have to pay for natural gas, while also trying to ban natural gas appliances.

Were it not for the Russians the Ukraine would still be part of the Ottoman Empire as dhimis under Muslim rule.

Were it not for the Europeans, America would not be America and would still be ruled by the natives who inhabited the land before those Europeans decided to 'invade'.

Were it not because people are constantly on the move, we would still be living in the stone age.

Were it not because there are always hostile people's and hostile countries, the world would be relatively at peace.

Were it not for this, that wouldn't have happened.

We can go through hypotheticals forever, and we would end up with hypothetical rulers and hypothetical countries and hypothetical empires and hypothetical worlds.

Where it all stops, nobody knows. But, let's go back to the very first day of humans on Earth, and call it even.

Were it not for the Russians the Ukraine would still be part of the Ottoman Empire as dhimis under Muslim rule.

You try to dismiss my point but the Russians to the Ukraine from the evil Ottoman Empire a mere 250 years ago in the Russo-Turkish War (1768–1774).

You try to dismiss history like it doesn’t matter but it matters to people of the Old World. 250 years ago in Europe is yesterday. Also, if you can dismiss history then you can easily dismiss the reality of the present which you certainly are doing.

You try to dismiss my point but the Russians to the Ukraine from the evil Ottoman Empire a mere 250 years ago in the Russo-Turkish War (1768–1774).

Yet, you try to dismiss fairly current events and not too long ago conditions, where the Ukrainians were content with the way things were going without the Russians. Yeah, corruption existed in the country, but, the regular folks in the country were not involved. The Russians had no right to invade, no matter how long ago they had control of any part of Ukraine. Ancient history should not enter into how people feel about events now, or who gets involved in a country's affairs now.

Ukraine was not calling for things to go back to how things were under Russian control.

BTW, do try to go back to the subject at hand; Ukraine vs Russia was not the topic.

I remember the public promises not to expand NATO eastwards so just what am I ignoring?

Every country has the right to make its own decision, and joining NATO is one of them, and making that decision should not depend on what Russia wants. After the Ukraine invasion, 2 more countries joined NATO, because they felt threatened by what Russia did in Ukraine. So, the expansion that Russia 'feared' got bigger because of the stupidity of Putin and the Kremlin. NATO expands for defensive purposes, and there is no country that has ever threatened Russia with invasion of expanding INTO Russia.

Russia's perception of NATO expansion is just an excuse to invade Ukraine. The expansion that has occurred in Europe has been by Russia, and to stop that, NATO expansion has been the response. Yet, no country and not NATO as a whole, has expanded into Russia (Ukraine going into Kursk is a defensive measure).

I remember that until 30 years ago the Ukraine was an integral part of Russia for over 250 years. What else am I forgetting?

You forgot that the Soviet Union broke up and that Ukraine was one of those republics that became free and independent. Putin has said that the biggest mistake of the 20th century was the break-up of the Soviet Union. So now, he's trying to reconstitute the empire he loved so much.

Russian President Vladimir Putin told the nation Monday that the collapse of the Soviet empire “was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.”

But,do try to get back to the subject at hand. Save the Ukraine/Russia comments for an appropriate thread, of which there are many to come.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.