Atabey, you and i have gone back and forth on this little matter of GDP as a predictor of the economic health, and strength, of a state. i maintain that it is not, simply because of the fact that there is a little matter of the concept of UNECONOMIC GROWTH. you, on the other hand, have steadfastly contradicted my view, and , oftentimes have derisively remarked about giving me ¨pelas¨, or ¨handing me my head¨on this issue. so, in the interest of clarification, and, possibly, resolution, i am going to post this simple exercise that i thought up. it does not have many complicated components, which i could very easily have interpolated, and, therefore, should be a breeze for one as academically savvy on economic affairs, as yourself. so, dig in, and give us your analysis, and findings. give me a ¨pela¨. hand me my head. you talk the talk. now, i have given you the opportunity to walk the walk, for all of cyberspace to witness. knock yourself out

COUNTRY A YEAR 2009

C......40,000

I 80,000

NE -10,000

GE 35,000

TOTAL 145,000

INFLATION 1%

POP GROWTH 1%

COUNTRY A, YEAR 2010

C 80,000

I 20,000

NE -20,000

GE 70,000

TOTAL 150,000

INFLATION 2.2%

POP GROWTH 1.14%


COUNTRY B, 2009

C 40, 000

I 80,000

NE -10,000

GE 35,000

TOTAL 145,000

INFLATION .5%

POP GROWTH 1.1%


COUNTRY B, 2010


C 30,000

I 90,000


NE 5,000

GE 22,000

TOTAL 147,000

INFLATION .42%

POP GROWTH 1.06%

Knock yourself out.

BrodelDread, I guess Ata didn't "grab" the "hook"......

apparently not, Tupapaupa. i wonder why? any suggestions? i mean, i think i know why, but i hate to speculate.

Dread, unlike SOME here, I don''t like to get involved in other people's "battles"........unless I really "dislike" the other person.

You know what I think of you........

When I grow-up, I want to be like you. LOL.

I said it before and I'll say it again, you were the first and last person here that made me blink when we had our little battles...........

Therefore, whether Ata is a paisano or not, my 3 cheles are on you.

Nuff said.

I think that Atabey is wise not to reply ..I think we all know that GDP has defects in measuring the strength of the economy and even more defects when comparing it to previous years or other countries ,And you have introduced the two big problems, that of inflation and population.In some ways it is like comparing earnings per share in companies over a range of years and not allowing for inflation ...
GDP in real terms per capita would be a much more accurate assessment of the economy ..but you seldom see the figures ,but we occasionally see GDP per capita
I do not know which method of calculating GDP the various bodies use ,although the expenditure method and the income method are supposed to give the same result . All I know is that GDP , with all its defects , is what is used nearly all the time .and we have to make our own adjustments to get something nearer the truth .
Some people think the mean income of the population is a good indicator and use that but for all that , the main authorities use the simple GDP and they express sovereign debt as a percentage of GDP. private sector debt as a percentage of GDP and so on

so I really think that you are right to continually point out that GDP is a defective indicator of the economy .but it is what we are given

Rick,

El dready thinks he can set me up so easily.

retorts Atabey


Rick,

El dready thinks he can set me up so easily.

actually, the only reason why you are right not to respond, is because you cannot. the question is about the economy from a GDP standpoint. it is not a trick question. i have no problem with you not responding, because i did not expect you to, in the first place. the challenge was thrown out to remind you that no matter how many times you make idiotic remarks about handing me my head, regarding matters of development economics, i am still light years ahead of you, as far as knowledge of the subject matter goes.

Ricardolito states the following

I do not know which method of calculating GDP the various bodies use ,although the expenditure method and the income method are supposed to give the same result .

well, Ricardolito, since GDP is nothing more, nor less, than a tally of final sales, then the income method, and the expenditure method, must yield the same result.

As I said, I have given you enough evidence to support my stated aim that the DR has done better than your Jamaica for at least 30 years or so. In addition, I have used your own Jamaican sources to back up my position.

How about ECI

The Economic Complexity Index (ECI) is closely related with the concept of product space developed by Ricardo Hausmann, Cesar Hidalgo and their team at The Observatory of Economic Complexity of the Harvard Kennedy School and the MIT Media Lab.

As Haussman and Hidalgo formulate it, their concept of ECI (to see related definitions refer to complexity economics) tries to capture the notion of knowledge contained by every product that, according to them, is not fully explained by the traditional economic description based on capital and labor. As most of the measurements used in complexity science, the goal of this index is to explain the economic system of a country as a whole rather than the sum of its parts, based on the overall knowledge accumulated through production; Thus, the ECI is an attempt to synthesize the collective knowledge of a society. In its strict mathematical definition, the ECI shows the probability of certain products to be developed by certain countries, or said in other terms, how "exclusive" would be a determined product for a given country.

For example, Japan or Germany, with high ECI's, produce goods that are highly unlikely to be produced by several countries, while countries whith low ECI's, are more likely to have as a productive base products that many countries around the globe produce (such as most of the raw materials). The ECI index was built with data from countries exports, thus counting only goods and leaving aside services.

List of Countries by ECI, by the The Observatory of Economic Complexity(Hausmann, Hidalgo, et. al.)

[1] Rank Country ECI Income 2009 ECI Increase ('98-'08) Rank Increase ('98-'08)
1 JAPAN 2.316 39,738 increase 0.11 steady 0
2 GERMANY 1.985 40,670 decrease -0.20 steady 0
3 SWITZERLAND 1.935 63,629 decrease -0.14 steady 0
4 SWEDEN 1.859 43,654 decrease -0.17 steady 0
5 AUSTRIA 1.807 45,562 increase 0.01 increase 3
6 FINLAND 1.715 44,581 decrease -0.13 steady 0
7 SINGAPORE 1.639 36,537 increase 0.42 increase 12
8 CZECH REPUBLIC 1.628 18,139 increase 0.10 increase 6
9 UNITED KINGDOM 1.558 35,165 decrease -0.37 decrease -4
10 SLOVENIA 1.523 23,726 increase 0.09 increase 5
11 FRANCE 1.473 41,051 decrease -0.20 decrease -2
12 KOREA, REP. 1.469 17,078 increase 0.53 increase 13
13 UNITED STATES 1.447 45,989 decrease -0.36 decrease -6
14 HUNGARY 1.430 12,868 increase 0.42 increase 9
15 SLOVAK REPUBLIC 1.379 16,176 increase 0.05 increase 2
16 ITALY 1.308 35,084 decrease -0.23 decrease -3
17 DENMARK 1.267 55,992 decrease -0.27 decrease -5
18 IRELAND 1.231 51,049 decrease -0.34 decrease -7
19 ISRAEL 1.164 26,256 decrease -0.08 decrease -1
20 MEXICO 1.145 8,143 increase 0.35 increase 7
21 BELARUS 1.116 5,075 increase 0.59 increase 14
22 BELGIUM 1.085 43,671 decrease -0.52 decrease -12
23 NETHERLANDS 1.044 47,917 decrease -0.33 decrease -7
24 HONG KONG SAR, CHINA 1.023 30,065 increase 0.60 increase 18
25 POLAND 1.020 11,273 steady 0.00 decrease -3
26 CROATIA 0.989 14,222 increase 0.20 increase 2
27 ROMANIA 0.936 7,500 increase 0.29 increase 5
28 SPAIN 0.933 31,774 decrease -0.19 decrease -8
29 CHINA 0.894 3,744 increase 0.57 increase 18
30 PANAMA 0.831 7,155 increase 0.96 increase 36
31 THAILAND 0.814 3,893 increase 0.65 increase 26
32 ESTONIA 0.791 14,238 increase 0.24 increase 2
33 NORWAY 0.777 79,089 decrease -0.21 decrease -9
34 MALAYSIA 0.759 7,030 increase 0.28 increase 4
35 PORTUGAL 0.696 21,903 increase 0.13 decrease -2
36 LITHUANIA 0.683 11,141 increase 0.27 increase 7
37 SERBIA 0.644 5,872 - increase 91
38 BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA 0.597 4,525 increase 0.08 decrease -2
39 LATVIA 0.594 11,616 increase 0.37 increase 13
40 BULGARIA 0.587 6,423 decrease -0.06 decrease -9
41 CANADA 0.571 39,599 decrease -0.45 decrease -20
42 UKRAINE 0.559 2,468 decrease -0.33 decrease -16
43 TURKEY 0.444 8,215 increase 0.17 increase 6
44 LEBANON 0.403 8,175 increase 0.32 increase 17
45 JORDAN 0.325 4,216 decrease -0.11 decrease -4
46 RUSSIAN FEDERATION 0.324 8,684 decrease -0.36 decrease -17
47 TUNISIA 0.294 3,792 increase 0.31 increase 16
48 NEW ZEALAND 0.287 29,352 decrease -0.18 decrease -9
49 COSTA RICA 0.278 6,386 increase 0.81 increase 29
50 MOLDOVA 0.266 1,516 increase 0.15 increase 9
51 INDIA 0.247 1,192 increase 0.04 increase 3
52 BRAZIL 0.244 8,230 decrease -0.43 decrease -22
53 GREECE 0.214 29,240 decrease -0.04 decrease -3
54 COLOMBIA 0.200 5,126 decrease -0.08 decrease -6
55 SOUTH AFRICA 0.131 5,786 decrease -0.28 decrease -11
56 URUGUAY 0.109 9,420 decrease -0.33 decrease -16
57 ARGENTINA 0.106 7,626 decrease -0.28 decrease -12
58 ALBANIA 0.087 3,808 increase 0.46 increase 17
59 PHILIPPINES 0.032 1,752 increase 0.34 increase 14
60 EL SALVADOR 0.026 3,424 increase 1.05 increase 45
61 INDONESIA -0.007 2,349 increase 0.18 increase 7
62 MACEDONIA, FYR -0.018 4,515 decrease -0.02 steady 0
63 EGYPT, ARAB REP. -0.021 2,270 increase 0.28 increase 9
64 DOMINICAN REPUBLIC -0.064 4,637 increase 0.66 increase 26
65 GUATEMALA -0.099 2,661 increase 0.76 increase 33
66 UNITED ARAB EMIRATES -0.106 50,070 decrease -0.08 decrease -2
67 VIETNAM -0.181 1,113 increase 0.41 increase 16
68 SAUDI ARABIA -0.201 14,799 decrease -0.42 decrease -15
69 KYRGYZ REPUBLIC -0.240 860 decrease -0.33 decrease -9
70 GEORGIA -0.263 2,449 decrease -0.74 decrease -33
71 SRI LANKA -0.265 2,068 increase 0.37 increase 16
72 NAMIBIA -0.271 4,267 - increase 55
73 KENYA -0.276 738 increase 0.84 increase 36
74 SENEGAL -0.287 1,023 increase 0.68 increase 27
75 SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC -0.290 2,474 increase 0.69 increase 27
76 TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO -0.306 15,841 decrease -0.25 decrease -11
77 MAURITIUS -0.307 6,735 increase 0.32 increase 9
78 CHILE -0.312 9,644 decrease -0.44 decrease -20
79 AUSTRALIA -0.321 42,279 decrease -0.50 decrease -23
80 ZIMBABWE -0.327 449 increase 0.23 increase 2
81 JAMAICA -0.343 4,471 increase 0.44 increase 12
82 PAKISTAN -0.398 955 increase 0.33 increase 10
83 MOROCCO -0.400 2,811 increase 0.11 decrease -6
84 CUBA -0.426 5,596 increase 0.19 increase 1
85 QATAR -0.438 69,754 increase 0.35 increase 9
86 PARAGUAY -0.474 2,242 decrease -0.25 decrease -17
87 UGANDA -0.488 490 increase 0.65 increase 24
88 HONDURAS -0.518 1,918 increase 0.57 increase 20
89 PERU -0.576 4,469 decrease -0.32 decrease -18
90 MADAGASCAR -0.594 438 increase 0.54 increase 20
91 OMAN -0.604 16,207 decrease -0.27 decrease -17
92 KAZAKHSTAN -0.608 7,257 decrease -0.82 decrease -37
93 ECUADOR -0.619 4,202 increase 0.23 increase 4
94 BOTSWANA -0.620 6,064 - increase 32
95 TANZANIA -0.637 503 increase 0.61 increase 20
96 UZBEKISTAN -0.658 1,156 decrease -0.51 decrease -29
97 NICARAGUA -0.661 1,069 increase 0.66 increase 20
98 CAMBODIA -0.702 706 increase 0.48 increase 16
99 CÔTE D'IVOIRE -0.868 1,106 increase 0.56 increase 20

64 or 81 ..neither is anything to be proud of ..just on the subject of economics ,I doubt if many people care a fig about GDP ,,they are mainly interested in the rates of pay and the price of goods and little else .