Do you think Bangladesh would join Belt and Road Initiative without India?

[Shamsher1990]

The only real way for BD to join BRI is via Myanmar. That will be quite a round about path.

 

[Mage]

Actually it goes lot deeper than that.

If we are to believe that nearly all the GDP increase is hitting only the top 1% or 5% etc (i.e average/median households are bypassed to the level that their real income actually declined)....there is no correlating increase in say BD market cap to suggest so.....neither no massive swelling in investment to account for it....i.e the routes that hot spearhead money would go to (as it has in other EMs).

i.e when India was going through the much quoted "jobless growth" period (increasing inequality from spearhead pull but little base recharging etc) during the UPA I period (2004 - 2009ish), there was routine indication where the hot money (raw GDP nominal) was going with strong correlation to global EM's and their benchmarks....there was massive market cap increase + investment increase to account for it (and some asset inflation too, but that was not counted in nominal... given stringent SDDS accounting norms).

For example, Indian market cap increased from 2004 - 2010 from around 390 billion USD to 1.6 trillion....i.e about 4 times increase. Indian GFCF increased from a level of around 30% to 41% of GDP in this time period.

This is not being seen to that level in BD (and GDDS allows many holes in the floorboards), so I would like to know where it is going. BD market cap has increased from around 41 billion USD to 86 billion* USD (2010 to 2017)...i.e a double rather than much higher level (i.e one that correlates well with the claimed nominal GDP increase with no household income increase). GFCF increased in this time period from around 26% to 29%....again not really commensurate with the claimed nominal GDP increase if its all going to top spearhead tier only.

To me occam's razor is asset inflation and other inflation laundered by BBS into the nominal figure to the degree afforded by the lax standards and also internal propaganda needed.

Well, I can't say about increase per year, since it's hard to find datas for every year for BD.
GFCF for BD is not bad compared to others.
BD scores 30% whereas India scores 27%. Pakistan 24%, Vietnam 24%.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.GDI.FTOT.ZS

Capital Investment % of GDP as of 2016:
India 30.4%, BD 29.6%. Not much difference. India and BD's growth rate are close as well.

But for non-resource rich developing countries, SDDS really should be the goal...given doing things the hard (but long term beneficial) way is the only real option.

Pakistan, Myanmar, Vietnam are also in GDDS....So yes, countries that are is similar condition as BD or even slightly better than that are in GDDS category. Are you saying their data are fake as well?

No need to believe me on it though, just watch for yourself the re-basing exercise shenanigans, they are already in full flow like they were in Pakistans case some years back (they developed cold feet on it when they saw new industries were shrinking with newer base and cause a deflator effect on various esp debt/govt connected indices). BBS is in catch 22 situation now with its household income data....after pushing it as a main component of the rebasing effort when proposed years back. This is what I said way back when you cannot assume rebasing will suddenly bump up an economy by some % points....it really really depends on how much inflation you laundered (on purpose or by accident or both) in the interim for the GDP (and its components) number....the less you did that, the better your rebasing jump will be. The more laundering you did, the worse your rebasing effort will go, it can even be negative.

So, the impact is going to be on Base year shift? I.E. when base year is shifted, the GDP won't increase as much as was predicted? But that doesn't invalidate the current growth every year, does it?

total market cap of DSE

There are some problems with stock exchanges in Bangladesh. After the last crash, people as well as corporations lost their trust in it.

 

[Nilgiri]

Well, I can't say about increase per year, since it's hard to find datas for every year for BD.
GFCF for BD is not bad compared to others.
BD scores 30% whereas India scores 27%. Pakistan 24%, Vietnam 24%.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.GDI.FTOT.ZS

Capital Investment % of GDP as of 2016:
India 30.4%, BD 29.6%. Not much difference. India and BD's growth rate are close as well.

Again I am talking about the change rather than the level. BD GFCF has changed nowhere near the extent it should have IF all the GDP nominal gains are going to its top 1% spearhead as BBS has just said in its household income survey (showing stagnation/decline there for 99% base)....in the period 2010 - 2016.

China for example saw like 10%+, 20%+ spurt change, India saw 10%+ change during similar time periods (spearhead driven only/largely...i.e tier I supply side expansion). The East Asian Tigers/ASEAN similar thing.

BD saw only a marginal change of around 3%. Market cap only doubled too rather than quadrupled+ etc. Sorry something is clearly amiss if all the BD nominal growth is going to the top 1% elite of its population (unless they just hold it as low/zero interest cash stockpile in which case that is a serious serious problem for BD more than you can imagine).

Look if I have time later and care enough I can plot this all on a graph to show you just how out of whack BD is correlation wise to (esp) other large-population+low natural resource EM's historically (when the gini coeffecient expansion phase happened).

Pakistan, Myanmar, Vietnam are also in GDDS....So yes, countries that are is similar condition as BD or even slightly better than that are in GDDS category. Are you saying their data are fake as well?

Again there are tiers within the GDDS. The more check marks you tick in the dissemination standard profile, the better reliability you have. Bangladesh ticks very few, compared to say Vietnam. Haven't really looked into Pakistan, Myanmar.

It is lost cause to convince ppl here to go into the time/process it will take to list every single one of those standards and frequencies and show which ones BBS has accomplished and not....and log that over time (i.e to show whats stagnant and what isn't)....when simply if anyone thats interested can look up the GDDS vs SDDS papers themselves and do that on their own if they are interested.

Its lot easier for the laymen here to show the striking delineations that BD govt on purpose does not accept (and thus use as basis to reform and improve sustainably longer term), like DQAF and ESCAP assessments. With minimal effort, it is proven that BD is a severely corrupt, institutionally stagnant country (and likely for political reasons BD govt wants to stay that way) when it comes to critical standards. If you want more concrete large analysis on it, a larger and more open audience here is needed...not gonna do it for just 1 - 2 people....waste of time.

There is no such thing as totally fake vs totally true (in economics or anything really involving large churning of multi-stream data), its just a spectrum of reliability/credibility.

Again if BD can show progress in its GDDS reforms and get SDDS later, I am willing to revisit my impression then, but only then. Till then you all are free to believe whatever you want....just dont expect everyone else to do such when there is clear evidence pointing at real warning signs.

@bluesky @Tanveer666 @Skies

So, the impact is going to be on Base year shift? I.E. when base year is shifted, the GDP won't increase as much as was predicted? But that doesn't invalidate the current growth every year, does it?

It depends...it can be a combination of both depending on how lax the standards were, where the effects of that were most pronounced (say in consumption vs investment given their longer term accounting profiles, i.e cascade effect) and again what the re-basing profile even is in first place, i.e if BBS doesnt like the household survey results, it can elect to simply not include it as much as possible...there is no real GDDS rule that requires them to use it for better accuracy etc.

BD when the rebasing happens in whatever way it does can both correct its growth rates (and GDP levels) earlier and/or keep them where they are and just have the new level act as a reset (though IMF may correct their ramp somewhat on their end). Honestly there is little pressure on BD externally to choose what it does because BD economy is still small, pressure can only really come from within largely.

This is why PPP is really the only benchmark I use for BD now....at least there, there is more 3rd party analysis/calculation involved (by the ICP matrix of goods and services physical consumption survey). The low PPP multiplier of BD compared to region is in effect probably large part due to the nominal (denominator) being inflated.

There are some problems with stock exchanges in Bangladesh. After the last crash, people as well as corporations lost their trust in it.

OK, but the market cap is still enough of an indicator for me especially the longer term trends before the crash etc (when did that happen anway?).

 

[Mage]

OK, but the market cap is still enough of an indicator for me especially the longer term trends before the crash etc (when did that happen anway?).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Bangladesh_share_market_scam