Burma and North East India theater

[alaungphaya]

There is nothing called real GDP against nominal GDP (total). There is the term called REAL GDP GROWTH RATE. Yes the newspaper quoted correctly when it was talking about GDP growth rate which is real GDP growth rate. Size of the GDP never adjusted against inflation and inflation is irrelevant.

Base year is used to find the representative sectors. Anything outside the representative sectors are not counted in GDP calculation neither in GDP growth rate... Its pretty simple.

I give up. You, sir, are an idiot. Don't worry though: the one Bangladeshi with the brain here might show up and explain it to you.

 

[manofwar]

You guys do know that if the base year is taken as 1995,then that means that the current GDP (nominal) estimated as $ 113 billion, is over valued???
Cause you have to offset less inflation in 1995, compared to 2011 also................
Eg. If we take Indian economy in 1995 base dollars, then it would be overvalued, because the country has seen a lot of inflation over the years since then................That is why India's GDP actually fell when compared in $ terms this year, as the rupee weakened against the dollar.
And I don't see how BD can use an over inflated GDP to maintain it's LDC status......
Not to mention the absurbidity of the idea, as getting out from the LDC status means increased investment, better credit rating meaning availability to get more loans, which results in greater general prosperity........
BD is forsacking all this , for a few free $. This looks good in the short term, but negates any GDP growth in the long term, as no company would invest despite growth, leading to eventual stagnation.......

 

[LaBong]

Yes the newspaper quoted correctly when it was talking about GDP growth rate which is real GDP growth rate. Size of the GDP never adjusted against inflation and inflation is irrelevant.

Why are you reiterating what me and alaungphaya have been saying for the last few pages?

 

[Roybot]

I give up. You, sir, are an idiot. Don't worry though: the one Bangladeshi with the brain here might show up and explain it to you.

Who would that be?

 

[TopCat]

So now we have a whole new definition for base year.



So how does this work in Bangladesh, since Base year serves completely different purpose in all other countries? So you guys don't consider your Industrial products if the industry wasn't set up before 1995? What about agricultural products? Only those sabjis which were being produces before 1995 are considered while calculating GDP.

Man it's getting more and more interesting!

Well, lets say Industry- it has further sub sector. I dont know exact basket but using for example petrochemical sectors which were not present in 1995 then anything setup under petrochemical will not be counted in the subsequent GDP calculation.

In Agriculture - For instance we did not grow coffee in 1995 so GDP will not be counted against coffee in subsequent years. But in 2005-06 we found that coffee started growing then we will start counting coffee too.

That is the reason India change base year every five years to reflect exact size of the GDP.

I give up. You, sir, are an idiot. Don't worry though: the one Bangladeshi with the brain here might show up and explain it to you.

I was trying to help you not to be name called.. I can use the same word but i refrain knowing that you are a bamar.

You guys do know that if the base year is taken as 1995,then that means that the current GDP (nominal) estimated as $ 113 billion, is over valued???
Cause you have to offset less inflation in 1995, compared to 2011 also................
Eg. If we take Indian economy in 1995 base dollars, then it would be overvalued, because the country has seen a lot of inflation over the years since then................That is why India's GDP actually fell when compared in $ terms this year, as the rupee weakened against the dollar.
And I don't see how BD can use an over inflated GDP to maintain it's LDC status......
Not to mention the absurbidity of the idea, as getting out from the LDC status means increased investment, better credit rating meaning availability to get more loans, which results in greater general prosperity........
BD is forsacking all this , for a few free $. This looks good in the short term, but negates any GDP growth in the long term, as no company would invest despite growth, leading to eventual stagnation.......

Why it is so hard for you to understand that inflation is used to adjust GDP GROWTH RATE not the GDP size. GDP size is always nominal.

We are not dying to attract FDI as we are posting current account surplus years after year. Our growth is driven by domestic investment not foreign investment. You need all those ratings in India as you need to cover your current account deficit through FDI and foreign loan and bond.

 

[LaBong]

Well, lets say Industry- it has further sub sector. I dont know exact basket but using for example petrochemical sectors which were not present in 1995 then anything setup under petrochemical will not be counted in the subsequent GDP calculation.

In Agriculture - For instance we did not grow coffee in 1995 so GDP will not be counted against coffee in subsequent years. But in 2005-06 we found that coffee started growing then we will start counting coffee too.

That is the reason India change base year every five years to reflect exact size of the GDP.



I was trying to help you not to be name called.. I can use the same word but i refrain knowing that you are a bamar.

So how does this process being carried out? Bangladeshis go around the country and collect information about which industries being set up after 1995 and which sabjis being started to grown after 95?

Leave it Iajduni, you don't know what you are talking about.

India change base rate for real gdp growth rate to look better.

 

[TopCat]

So how does this process being carried out? Bangladeshis go around the country and collect information about which industries being set up after 1995 and which sabjis being started to grown after 95?

Leave it Iajduni, you don't know what you are talking about.

India change base rate for real gdp growth rate to look better.

Exactly right. That is how it is done.

India does the right thing.. its not to look better but to show the economy better. Change base year does not guarantee you a better growth rate, it could be even worse. It depends.

 

[Roybot]

FWIW Myanmar hasn't rebased its economy since 2000 as well! So if both the countries were to rebase their economy chances are Bangladesh will still be poorer than Myanmar.

With Myanmar now opening up for foreign investment, low population and abundant resources will leave bangladesh in dust.

 

[TopCat]

FWIW Myanmar hasn't rebased its economy since 2000 as well! So if both the countries rebase their economy chances are Bangladesh will be poorer than Myanmar.

With Myanmar now opening up for foreign investment, low population and abundant resource will leave bangladesh in dust.

Myanmar is a great country with great potential.. But we dont see any reason for us to compare ourselves with Myanmar yet.

Either you troll or you participate. Dont stay in between like a girl.

 

[LaBong]

Exactly right. That is how it is done.

India does the right thing.. its not to look better but to show the economy better. Change base year does not guarantee you a better growth rate, it could be even worse. It depends.

You need to know what Base year is to begin with before indulging in further tomfoolery.

Although Bangladeshis might still believe in your stories, so keep it up!

 

[alaungphaya]

iadjani, please. Just stop. You don't know what you're talking about. Quit while you're behind.

Well, lets say Industry- it has further sub sector. I dont know exact basket but using for example petrochemical sectors which were not present in 1995 then anything setup under petrochemical will not be counted in the subsequent GDP calculation.

In Agriculture - For instance we did not grow coffee in 1995 so GDP will not be counted against coffee in subsequent years. But in 2005-06 we found that coffee started growing then we will start counting coffee too.

That's not what a base year is. A base year is the price level you start from. To find the price level, you have to choose a basket of things from which to measure. Now, in 1995 for example, this might include a basket of things that are not representative anymore. That's why countries update the base year. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT IS COUNTED IN GDP!!! Please read that carefully. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT IS COUNTED IN GDP. Understand?

Why it is so hard for you to understand that inflation is used to adjust GDP GROWTH RATE not the GDP size. GDP size is always nominal.

What the hell are you talking about? GDP is not always nominal otherwise it wouldn't be distinguished from other forms of GDP. When someone states 'GDP' then that conventionally refers to the nominal level. If what the IMF says is true then the those numbers I quoted are nominal and thus THE BASE YEAR IS IRRELEVANT. Let me say that again, THE BASE YEAR IS IRRELEVANT.

Now, if what you are saying is true about BD under reporting its GDP then that's a different issue. However, let me say again, THE BASE YEAR IS IRRELEVANT.

I stand by what I said. You are an idiot.

 

[TopCat]

You need to know what Base year is to begin with before indulging in further tomfoolery.

Although Bangladeshis might still believe in your stories, so keep it up!

Why not you enlighten us what base year all about...

 

[alaungphaya]

Why not you enlighten us what base year all about...

I've already explained what a base year is for your convenience.

 

[manofwar]

Well, lets say Industry- it has further sub sector. I dont know exact basket but using for example petrochemical sectors which were not present in 1995 then anything setup under petrochemical will not be counted in the subsequent GDP calculation.

In Agriculture - For instance we did not grow coffee in 1995 so GDP will not be counted against coffee in subsequent years. But in 2005-06 we found that coffee started growing then we will start counting coffee too.

That is the reason India change base year every five years to reflect exact size of the GDP.



I was trying to help you not to be name called.. I can use the same word but i refrain knowing that you are a bamar.



Why it is so hard for you to understand that inflation is used to adjust GDP GROWTH RATE not the GDP size. GDP size is always nominal.

We are not dying to attract FDI as we are posting current account surplus years after year. Our growth is driven by domestic investment not foreign investment. You need all those ratings in India as you need to cover your current account deficit through FDI and foreign loan and bond.

And doesn't growth have an effect on GDP?? Talk sense man!!
It doesn't matter if you aren't dying to attract FDI or not...............fact remains that BD is a low income country and to change it's position and uplift millions out of poverty it needs FDI!!!It cannot be dependant on Goernment funds for they cannot provide evrything, especially not in a socialist country like BD......

 

[TopCat]

iadjani, please. Just stop. You don't know what you're talking about. Quit while you're behind.



That's not what a base year is. A base year is the price level you start from. To find the price level, you have to choose a basket of things from which to measure. Now, in 1995 for example, this might include a basket of things that are not representative anymore. That's why countries update the base year. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT IS COUNTED IN GDP!!! Please read that carefully. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT IS COUNTED IN GDP. Understand?



What the hell are you talking about? GDP is not always nominal otherwise it wouldn't be distinguished from other forms of GDP. When someone states 'GDP' then that conventionally refers to the nominal level. If what the IMF says is true then the those numbers I quoted are nominal and thus THE BASE YEAR IS IRRELEVANT. Let me say that again, THE BASE YEAR IS IRRELEVANT.

Now, if what you are saying is true about BD under reporting its GDP then that's a different issue. However, let me say again, THE BASE YEAR IS IRRELEVANT.

I stand by what I said. You are an idiot.

Then you are a bone headed retard to start with...

You are reading too much from internet. and quoting from Economics: Nominal GDP, Real GDP, and Price Level this website which confused the hell out of you.

This definition is used to show inflation and price index and nothing to do with GDP base year. Here the base year is Inflation base year. Which is a complete different subject to start with.

GDP size is a different thing.. You need further reading.

I've already explained what a base year is for your convenience.

You quoted without understanding the A B C of the thing..