Inflation in Pakistan
Inflation in Pakistan is more than a buzzword; it is a grave reality for most Pakistanis.
Inflation in Pakistan is more than a buzzword; it is a grave reality for most Pakistanis. The rising costs are becoming a daily struggle, a kitchen table crisis, and a constant threat to the country’s fragile economy. Increasing fuel and transport costs, skyrocketing costs of basic grocery, and the constant squeeze of energy bills has now made life very difficult and complex for the average countryman.
Inflation in Pakistan – An Alarming Situation
When we consider the current inflation in Pakistan, the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics puts it as 21.9% (year on year) as of March 2025. While the current figure is better than the 38% from May 2023, the repercussions from the spike still continue. The dollar to PKR rate went from PKR 178 = USD 1 in 2022 to PKR 296 = USD 1 in 2024. The consequences for the masses have been unbearable. The prices of everyday commodities have gone up massively, making even the basics unattainable for the common man.
Inflation in Pakistan is not just a figure to be quoted – it is the indicator of a crisis. As per figures from the World Bank, more than 39% of the country’s population lives below the poverty line. This means that millions of people are now scrimping on meals, pulling children out of educational institutes, and making impossible choices between accessing healthcare or housing.
Causes of Inflation in Pakistan
While there are external factors that have also impacted the inflation in Pakistan (such as the Russia-Ukraine crisis), the internal factors far outweigh them. The causes of inflation in Pakistan basically boil down to the mismanagement of the country’s people and resources – something that has been going on for decades. Political instability, corruption, and short-term decision making has caused the country to exist in a downward spiral for years.
For instance, in 2023, the government suddenly increased the petrol price to PKR 282/litre – not because of some log term proactive reforms, but to meet the IMF’s demand to get another bailout package. As part of the same set of conditions, electricity prices and taxes were also increased. A general indicator of the country’s progress is the GDP, and to no surprise, Pakistan’s GDP grew by only 1.5% in FY2024.
Effects of Inflation in Pakistan
To curb inflation, The State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) increased the interest rates to a record 22%. However, that only made sense on paper. In reality, it stalled growth and made it increasingly difficult for small businesses to register and operate – crushing the backbone of the country’s economy.
Moreover, because of the inflation all input and transport costs skyrocketed and purchasing power shrank. Many small and medium businesses could not stay afloat and had to shut down – which caused increasing unemployment and lawlessness. The hardest hit were the informal sector workers who make up the majority of the Pakistani labour force. Urban unemployment reached a high of almost 12% - with the youth unemployment being even higher. As of June 2024, Pakistanis between the ages of 15-24 had the highest unemployment rate of 11.1%, followed by 7.3% among 25-34 bracket.
Current Government Strategy to Fight Inflation in Pakistan
The government does not have a cohesive strategy to deal with inflation. Instead of working on tax reforms, growing exports, local manufacturing, or creating a conducive environment for businesses, the government is still looking to borrow money from financial institutions and other countries, banning imports and increasing duties, and expanding unsustainable subsidy programs which focus on handouts for the less fortunate (instead of building their capacities to earn themselves).
Practical Solutions to Fight Inflation in Pakistan
The government must focus on creating a smooth and safe political and security situation in the country and curb the current lawlessness. This will create a conducive environment for businesses to grow and thrive. Moreover, the government must introduce reforms and laws that will create a more profitable environment for local food producers and manufactures so that the local economy booms. Additionally, a progressive tax system and targeted social spending would help stabilize the economy overall.
Conclusion
Pakistan does not lack potential, manpower, and resources. It only lacks sincere people in the right positions, planning, consistency, and a focus on safety and security. Reactive policy making is not the solution – the country needs comprehensive and well thought out short-, medium-, and long-term plans that focus on sustainable growth.
About the author:
Aleena Imran has an MBA from NUST and has worked as an HR professional at companies like MPCL, Coke, Jazz, and LMKT. In her spare time, she runs her home-based baking business. Apart from being an avid reader, she enjoys writing, photography, and art.
About the Creator
Keep reading
More stories from Bella Clum and writers in The Swamp and other communities.
Can You Still Trust the News?
In today's modern day and age of a million different ideas, articles, and news sources, it can seem impossible to know what sources are accurate. Rest assured, you are not alone in these worries, as struggling to determine the validity of news media is a widespread problem these days, especially with media bias. While no journalistic media outlet is 100% perfect in factual accuracy or completely free from bias, there are various ways to determine the reliability of news articles and outlets.
By Bella Clum6 months ago in The Swamp
Berlin Blackout Sparks Alarm After Left-Wing Group Claims Responsibility for Sabotage
Start wrBerlin is no stranger to political protest, but a recent citywide blackout has pushed Germany into uneasy territory. After tens of thousands of residents were left without power, a left-wing activist group came forward claiming responsibility, framing the incident as an act of political sabotage aimed at forcing attention on climate policy and technological governance. The claim has intensified public concern, not only about the blackout itself, but about the growing willingness of activist groups to target critical infrastructure. What began as a disruption has now become a national debate over the limits of protest, the definition of extremism, and how democracies should respond when political activism crosses into sabotage. The Blackout That Shook the Capital The outage affected multiple districts across Berlin, disrupting homes, businesses, and public transport systems. Traffic lights failed, trains were delayed, and residents reported hours without heating, internet access, or reliable communication. While hospitals and emergency facilities relied on backup generators, authorities acknowledged that the incident placed significant strain on public services. Initial reports described the blackout as a technical failure. That explanation changed dramatically when a left-wing group issued a statement online claiming responsibility, describing the outage as a deliberate act designed to expose what it called the “fragility of systems that sustain an unjust and destructive status quo.” The group framed the sabotage as non-violent, arguing that disruption — not harm — was the goal. The Group’s Message and Motivation In its statement, the group linked the blackout to broader grievances over climate change, artificial intelligence, and what it described as government inaction. According to the group, modern societies continue to rely on fossil fuels, centralized energy grids, and rapidly advancing technologies without sufficient democratic oversight. By targeting infrastructure, the activists said they hoped to demonstrate how vulnerable modern life is — and how urgently political priorities need to shift. This rhetoric reflects a growing strand within radical activism that views disruption of everyday life as a legitimate tool. Supporters argue that traditional protests no longer generate meaningful political change. Critics see a dangerous escalation that risks normalizing tactics once associated with extremist movements. Government and Security Response German authorities reacted swiftly. Interior Ministry officials condemned the sabotage, stressing that interference with critical infrastructure is a serious criminal offense regardless of political motivation. Investigators are now working to verify the group’s claim and determine how the outage was carried out. Security agencies have also launched a broader review of infrastructure protection, particularly energy systems that are increasingly decentralized and digitized. Officials warned that while the blackout did not result in fatalities, similar incidents could have far more serious consequences in the future. Several political leaders called for tougher penalties for those who sabotage essential services, arguing that democratic societies cannot tolerate actions that endanger public safety. Public Reaction: Sympathy Meets Anger Public opinion in Berlin and across Germany has been sharply divided. Some residents expressed sympathy with the underlying causes highlighted by the group, particularly concerns over climate change and unchecked technological power. However, frustration and anger dominated many responses. Small business owners reported financial losses. Families with elderly or medically vulnerable members described fear and anxiety during the outage. Commuters voiced outrage at being used, in their words, as “collateral damage” in a political statement. For many, the group’s justification rang hollow. While climate anxiety is widespread, the idea of sabotaging infrastructure crossed a line. Protest or Extremism? The central question now facing Germany is how to define actions like the Berlin blackout. Is this civil disobedience, or does it constitute political extremism? Legal experts point out that intent matters. Civil disobedience traditionally involves breaking laws openly and accepting consequences to highlight injustice. Sabotage, by contrast, is covert and risks unintended harm. The blackout’s scale and impact complicate claims that the action was harmless. German history adds another layer of sensitivity. The country remains acutely aware of how political extremism — from both the far right and far left — has threatened democratic stability in the past. As a result, there is little tolerance for actions that undermine public trust or safety. Infrastructure as a New Protest Target The Berlin blackout underscores a worrying trend: infrastructure has become a new battleground for political activism. Energy grids, transport networks, and data systems are increasingly seen as pressure points capable of generating maximum attention with minimal effort. Experts warn that this approach carries serious risks. Even well-intentioned activists cannot fully control the consequences of infrastructure disruption. Power outages can affect hospitals, emergency communications, and vulnerable populations in unpredictable ways. There is also concern that such tactics could inspire copycat actions — not only by activists, but by criminal or hostile actors exploiting similar vulnerabilities. Political Fallout and Policy Implications The incident is already shaping political discussions in Germany. Lawmakers are debating whether existing laws adequately address sabotage motivated by ideology. Some have proposed expanding surveillance powers or tightening restrictions on protest activities near critical infrastructure. Civil liberties groups caution against overreaction, warning that broad crackdowns could erode democratic freedoms and push activism further underground. They argue that the solution lies not only in security measures, but in addressing the grievances that fuel radicalization. The challenge for policymakers is finding a balance: protecting infrastructure without criminalizing dissent. A Warning for Europe Berlin’s blackout is being closely watched across Europe. As cities become smarter, greener, and more interconnected, they also become more vulnerable. Energy transitions, while essential for climate goals, introduce new complexities into grid management and security. The incident serves as a reminder that resilience is not just about technology, but governance. Transparent decision-making, public trust, and credible political pathways for change are crucial in preventing radical escalation. Conclusion: A Line Has Been Crossed The claim of responsibility by a left-wing group has transformed the Berlin blackout from a technical incident into a political reckoning. While the urgency of climate change and concerns about technology are widely shared, the method chosen has sparked fear rather than consensus. Democracies depend on protest, but they also depend on trust and safety. When activism turns to sabotage, it risks undermining the very values it claims to defend. Berlin’s blackout is more than a disruption of power — it is a warning about how fragile the line between protest and extremism can become in an age of crisis, urgency, and political frustration.iting...
By Muhammad Hassan6 days ago in The Swamp
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.