Not really, Buttos and Sharif built their economy actually. The problem with Pak is that it wasn't an functional economy for absolute. They took much longer than us in experimenting with and making constitution and had a stable constitution in 1973 before they could define a national policy. Initial two constitutions (one parliamentary, another Presidential system) were short lived and abolished by military.
In this all political instability, they might be backed by more US aid and more fertile land and resources. But even when their GDP per capita was way higher than India, higher living standards were only enjoyed by elites of Punjab. KPK, FATA, Balochistan and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) were worse than poorest countries on earth (they still are).
en.m.wikipedia.org
While Indian population was largely in agriculture, a large of Pakistani population was a part of proto-industry (like textiles and artefacts) which earned more than agriculture. They never really cared to do anything beyond that. Nor they ever had their own significant capital class (nearly all of non-primitive industry was of foreign companies).
Soon as India started to industrialise itself, we resorted for heavy industries, IT industry, electronics and strategic & aerospace (military/space) industry. Pakistani proto-industry obviously couldn't earn that much. Without doing any long term planning, Pakistan only invested in strategic manufacturing sector wherever possible and imported the rest. It only strained the economy without any earlier base or back up.
Pakistan's Afghanistan like unsafe image and terrorism played the rest of role of fending companies. In next thirty years, they will probably be only lower-middle income country in Asia besides Yemen and Afghanistan.
Pakistan is more of a lazy administration and not ruined state exactly. They didn't ever built anything significant to be ruined.
Name of the movie?
.
