IMF WEO Database (April 2017): China and US grow most

[Shotgunner51]

Read the original post. The content of the original post, citation, and chart all mention nominal GDP.

As a very resourceful writer, let us all stay open to argument. GDP, GNI, GNP, nominal, PPP are among many compiled statistics to gauge size of an economy, none is absolutely accurate anyway.

 

[Martian2]

Let's stay open to argument. GDP, GNI, GNP, nominal, PPP are among many compiled statistics to gauge size of an economy, none is absolutely accurate.

I don't have a problem if he wants to open his own thread and discuss fictitious PPP.

I do object when I informed him many times that the chart and comparison was based on nominal GDP and he kept trying to claim India was growing well in baloney PPP terms.

I also made it very clear that nominal GDP was used to defined REAL national GDP, defense budgets, and defense weapon procurement. I challenged him to name a single imported Indian weapon system (such as Su-30MKI) that was imported with the bullshit PPP dollars. He couldn't name a single one. He was wasting everyone's time.

 

[Shajida Khan]

@Martian2
When you claim in your topic that you want to talk about your point that According to IMF WEO Database (April 2017) China and US grew the most and only present nominal values as your figures, you do not have automatically restricted discussion to 'GDP Nominal'. It does not deny others to point out that choice of GDP measurement as Nominal may not reflect reality but your perception.

It is like saying that engine BHP is the only thing that matters in a car to make it more performant and I will not let you to point out that weight also limits the acceleration.

 

[Shotgunner51]

I don't have a problem if he wants to open his own thread and discuss fictitious PPP.

I do object when I informed him many times that the chart and comparison was based on nominal GDP and he kept trying to claim India was growing well in baloney PPP terms.

I understand your view. There are different schools of thought, none is absolutely accurate anyway. Currency is a complicated issue, and consumption basket (used in PPP) is hardly universal, so different stats may be used for different purposes.

 

[Martian2]

@shotgunner I believe personal attacks and pejorative comments should be restricted.

@Martian2
When you claim in your topic that you want to talk about your point that According to IMF WEO Database (April 2017) China and US grew the most and only present nominal values as your figures, you do not have automatically restricted discussion to 'GDP Nominal'. It does not deny others to point out that choice of GDP measurement as Nominal may not reflect reality but your perception.

It is like saying that engine BHP is the only thing that matters in a car to make it more performant and I will not let you to point out that weight also limits the acceleration.

Do you see that "post thread" button?

Create your own thread and stop trying to derail mine.

I said this thread is about nominal GDP about ten times. I told you I wasn't interested in discussing fictitious PPP that has NO BEARING on national economic strength, defense budgets, or defense procurement.

Threads should not be hijacked by trolls with their own pet theories. I made it very clear that I want to discuss REAL economic growth and its implications for REAL defense budgets and future REAL defense weapon purchases. This goal is completely inconsistent with fictitious PPP claims by the Indian troll.

 

[UKBengali]

I don't have a problem if he wants to open his own thread and discuss fictitious PPP.

I do object when I informed him many times that the chart and comparison was based on nominal GDP and he kept trying to claim India was growing well in baloney PPP terms.

I also made it very clear that nominal GDP was used to defined REAL national GDP, defense budgets, and defense weapon procurement. I challenged him to name a single imported Indian weapon system (such as Su-30MKI) that was imported with the bullshit PPP dollars. He couldn't name a single one. He was wasting everyone's time.

Actually Indian defence budget is far larger than the nominal GDP spend would suggest. Things like salaries, food etc would all be in local currency and so we maybe would need to multiply by 1.5-2 to get a true value of Indian defence spending.

In the case of China, the true value of the economy would actually be closer to the PPP rather the nominal since China pretty much produces everything itself in local currency.

 

[Shajida Khan]

I understand your view. There are different schools of thought, none is absolutely accurate anyway. Currency is a complicated issue, and consumption basket (used in PPP) is hardly universal, so different stats may be used for different purposes.

Which is exactly what I pointed out. His point that Nominal GDP is the only GDP in USD so that should only be used is also not valid. There exists GDP in Dollars adjusted to inflation called GDP in Constant Dollars and also at times as 'Real GDP in Dollars'. These are different measures of GDP which is essentially the size of economy, choice of measure depends on what economy we are talking about and in which context.

 

[Martian2]

Look guys. I'm tired of the idiotic Indian trolls derailing one of my two threads.

I'm leaving. You guys can enjoy the Indian trolls.

 

[Shajida Khan]

In the case of China, the true value of the economy would actually be closer to the PPP rather the nominal since China pretty much produces everything itself in local currency.

My thoughts exactly, but then if a person thinks that certain measures of economy is bellony --- never mind even IMF mentions that, there is very little I can help. I will certainly not like if such views should be held immune from any kind of challenge.

 

[randomradio]

PPP is very useful domestically, so they can set their poverty line at Rs 26/32 (rural/urban) per day instead of $1.25, and effectively reduce the poverty. The money saved can be used on more important things like imported guns, howitzers and fighters.

Ridiculous as usual. The poverty line is calculated on PPP basis.

26 INR is $1.6. 32 is $2.

Anyway, it is 32 and 47 right now. That's $2 and $3.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ages-Rs-47-in-cities/articleshow/37920441.cms

The new global poverty line is $1.9.

Poverty line is calculated in PPP.
http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/brief/global-poverty-line-faq
They examined national poverty lines from some of the poorest countries in the world, and converted the lines to a common currency by using purchasing power parity (PPP) exchange rates.

The average of these 15 lines was $1.25 per person per day (again in PPP terms), and this became the revised international poverty line.

And again this year, we used the poverty lines of those same 15 poorest countries from 2005 (holding steady the yardstick against which we measure) to determine the new global poverty line of $1.90 in 2011 PPP.

 

[ashok321]

Government of India's revenue is equal to Samsung = 188 billions.
What a pity!
Samsung spends $ 33 million everyday on R&D, that is more than India's R&D.

India is a paper tiger.

 

[randomradio]

Answer my questions.

Show me a PPP dollar. Where is it?

How much does does an Su-33 cost in PPP?

Have the Russians EVER exported a weapon system to India and accepted PPP dollar payment?
----------

The answer to all three questions is:

1. PPP doesn't exist.
2. Su-33 is only priced in REAL US dollars. PPP is fictitious and has never been used in a SINGLE transaction.
3. Russia has never accepted payment in PPP dollars.

PPP is total bullshit and belongs only in the Indian sub-forum. It has no place in my threads, which deals with the REAL WORLD.
----------

Every imported Indian Su-30 MKI costs $55 million REAL US Dollars.

Its cost in PPP dollars is INFINITE, because PPP cannot be used to buy an Su-30 MKI. PPP is fictitious and total nonsense. You can't buy a single thing in the REAL WORLD with PPP.

PPP won't come in the picture for trade.

PPP is for goods and services within the country.

It's called common sense.

Russia builds jet engines, nuclear submarines, icebreakers, AESA radars, missiles, destroyers, etc.

India has to beg Russia for the engines for the Brahmos "joint-venture" cruise missile. It is widely accepted that India is significantly behind Russia in technology at this point in time.

India imports a huge variety of advanced Russian military technology (e.g. Su-30MKI, cryogenic rocket engines, submarines and Klub missiles, etc.). It's pretty clear-cut that India is currently significantly behind technologically.

Japan have limited capability in those as well. So Japan is weaker economically than Russia?

 

[ashok321]

China has hard currency.
US has hard currency + Its safe haven currency.
India has none.

Taiwan spends 3% on its R&D
the US spends 2.7% on its R&D
India?
Meager 0.8%

 

[Nilgiri]

@Nilgiri

I guess you need teach these Chinese a bit about economics. His fixation about Nominal GDP is quite fascinating.


Well I am yet to see some reference telling us that GDP PPP is make believe. Care to show it? Certainly IMF disagrees with you. Do you mean IMF are not serious about economics?

I've had the conversation too many times now. No point resurrecting it again...its waste of time.

Probably my last serious engagement with the Chinese members on the subject (whole thread worth reading):

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/india-and-china-a-gdp-comparison.455611/page-4#post-8811612

Its funny when people think an entire GDP aggregate can be converted to a currency you do not print on the basis of extrapolating X% trade/GDP ratio......but a system which tries to reach measure of standardised direct physical volume consumption is suddenly a worse estimate.

 

[Shajida Khan]

I've had the conversation too many times now. No point resurrecting it again...its waste of time.

Probably my last serious engagement with the Chinese members on the subject (whole thread worth reading):

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/india-and-china-a-gdp-comparison.455611/page-4#post-8811612

Its funny when people think an entire GDP aggregate can be converted to a currency you do not print on the basis of extrapolating X% trade/GDP ratio......but a system which tries to reach measure of standardised direct physical volume consumption is suddenly a worse estimate.

Salute to you sir! It helped me understand macroeconomics quite a bit more. It is funny that entire concept of how PPP's goal to estimate physical consumption and nominal's goal of estimating consumption's nominal value in a common currency is lost on many folks. Heck the word nominal is a dead give away -- Nominal means face value or in name. A lot of folks are enamored by 'High Tech', traded/operationalized part of economy of a country and forget that in certain countries it is possible for 'Low Tech' non traded goods and services in interior of the country can be having much larger physical consumption. Irrespective wather dollar sells for 100 Rs or a million rupees.