Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

encelado748 t1_j8hffz1 wrote

why Italy disappear in 1990? Should be in 10th place until 2010 (there is a gap in the graph)

5

droolingdonkey t1_j8i4hor wrote

Russia has is at place 11 not nr 5 so this graph is either false or has some kind of weird measurement.

Source:

https://globalpeoservices.com/top-15-countries-by-gdp-in-2022/

The measurement is even worse then i first thought. They use PPP against GDP... as if the poor babuscha living outside moscow on her 170 dollar pension. It doesnt matter if she can get by on little money because she or the avarage russian would never lay hand on any large part of the GDP.

1

svn380 t1_j8waxo9 wrote

So you're making the argument that an unequal income distribution distorts this international comparison?

And you object to how this boosts Russia's ranking?

Just wondering what you think this effect would have on the ranking of other big economies....(e.g. China, India, USA)?

1

droolingdonkey t1_j8wc6ve wrote

yes because if we make it to extremes, say 99% of GDP is in one mans pocket. The population has 1% to use between them. Rent will be in pennies and people would develop a trade system between each other and international currency seen as gold worth, lets say venezuela. If you than use this measurement and divide GDP equal over the population and give each say 100 dollars one would think they are well off by saying hey look 100 dollars equal 600 years of rent etc.

I dont know enough to compare individual countries but i know enough to understand that it is a flawed measurement. It would be better to measure the median salery and see how far you get by or pension for elders etc.

Edit. I know enough of russias system, pensions and median income and how the wealth is centered around oligarchy and moscow + st petersburg. A third of the population has no access to indoor plumbing or toilets.

1

svn380 t1_j8wekzm wrote

Murdered by words.....

>If you than use this measurement and divide GDP equal over the population....

Yes .... but that's not what they are doing in this graph. They are comparing GDP, not GDP per capita

>I dont know enough to compare individual countries

....but isn't that what the graphic is all about?

1

droolingdonkey t1_j8wfulk wrote

You cant use that measurement to compare individual countries if you measure it against GDP at all. You have to measure median salery and pensions and capital of the avarage citizen.

Edit. GDP per capita is just GDP divided by citizens and is not equal to the example of putting the money into the citizen to use as in the example.

1

svn380 t1_j8yurhh wrote

  1. Comparing living standards across countries is interesting.

  2. Comparing the size of different countries ' economies is also interesting.

The graph is trying to do (2). It is not trying to do (1).

1

droolingdonkey t1_j8z2t82 wrote

How i saw the graph was it showed how long money would go in said country. The size of economy would equal gdp only? or am i missing something.

1