Didn't even bother trying Venezuela once Argentina didn't work. I now see the World Bank doesn't list data for Argentina. According to the IMF and CIA World Factbook, Argentina's economy on a PPP basis is much larger than either Colombia or Venezuela. Although I am aware The Economist has frequently criticised the Argentine government for tampering with national statistics and I assume it's on this basis that the World Bank doesn't list them. That said, I seem to recall The Economist changing its stance now that the Kirchners have been booted from office, so perhaps it will be included in the next World Bank list.
Yes, quite a bit more. Canada's GDP is almost 50% larger than Mexico's. Per capita, obviously, it's even bigger. That's why you see Canada G8 summits. And yet another example of why it's silly and/or confusing to use PPP.
I agree. The PPP method tends to create false positives for countries with higher populations but lower average incomes. High rankings for countries like China and India expose its flaws.
When applied to total GDP, which was not what PPP was created for, it inflates numbers for countries with low cost of living and decreases numbers for more expensive countries. Those that like using it for GDP argue that currencies in these countries are unrealistically valued and that's why similar goods in each country can cost substantially different amounts. This isn't really a very good argument, though, as it ignores that while exchange rates do play a role in the cost of goods in different countries, it also has a lot to do with the cost of real estate; electricity; transportation; (importantly) labor costs; quality standards in goods, packaging, construction materials used in retail space, etc etc; and the fact that goods are priced to be competitive in the market they are sold in. A hamburger in Switzerland might seem similar to one in Cambodia, but if the Cambodian one is made of substandard materials, prepared by workers getting paid a slaves' wages,
sold at a kiosk that would not pass health or safety standards in Switzerland, with a 90% smaller profit margin because those selling the burger know that the people in Cambodia can afford less.... then it's not the same burger. Figuring the size of both economies based on the number of burgers sold is going to give you misleading information at best.
PPP is very useful when used as intended, to, for example, measure the differences in average wages for those living in poverty between country A and country B, or figuring out standards of living for people in a certain economic bracket in various countries.
Osiris - it actually *is* useful for looking at standards of living when you divide it per capita. That's because most of the world's population lives in poverty, and as I mentioned PPP is useful for looking at how many goods an impoverished person trying to meet their basic needs can acquire from place to place. Japan's PPP GDP per capita is nearly 6x that of India's. A better way of looking at it would be average wages measured in PPP, though, as GDP can be influenced by a lot of things that don't necessarily impact wages or standards of living.
Right- it can't give a proper comparison for standard of living. India's GDP is nearly double Japan's using the PPP method, but Indians on average spend nearly 30% of their income on food as compared to 13% in Japan. This frees up much more disposable income for residents of Japan to spend in other areas of the market. To me, there are far too many variables involved for purchasing power parity to give a clear picture of the true economic strength of a country. That said, there really isn't a perfect measure to cover all possible scenarios.
Yes! Got them all with 1:20 remaining at 11:07:42 AM on March 9, 2019! Chile was the last one that I guessed. The 5 points I earned from this quiz have put me at 1002 points-and Level 33!
Interesting quiz. 20/20, though I never thought, the difference between New Zealand and Papua New Guinea is so massive. I supposed both of them to be here for Oceania.
Why? The same three countries have about the same percentage for nearly every category in North America. Although the Caribbean nations do have better weather - if you don't count hurricanes.
I don't know about that. Both score in the "Very High" category on the Human Development Index. They're the success stories of Central America. If nothing else, just take a look at the skyline of Panama City.
Canada - highly developed
USA - both, moreso
every other country in North America - neither