Wouldn't it make more sense to make this quiz in real GDP instead of purchasing power parity? The latter is more a measure of the standard of living in a relevant country, not of its economic clout on the international stage (ie. how "big" it is).
I prefer PPP. If country A produces 10,000 widgets and country B produces 5,000, then country A has a bigger economy. ( Even if all the rich people in A are buying condos in B ).
Okay so what if country A produces 10,000 widgets, and country B produces 10,000 widgets, but the widgets in country B cost less to produce because country B has severely depressed wages, and much lower overhead because real estate in country B is cheaper (and lower quality) and there are fewer regulations and taxes etc, and in addition the widgets from country B are worth less because they're made of sub standard materials and therefore they sell on the international market for less, bringing in a much smaller amount of cash to country B which is one among many reasons why country B never catches up to country A in terms of HDI, but because PPP is very bad at assessing what exactly a widget is since they're not considering most of the above the two economies end up being valued at being the same size? Because that's closer to how PPP works.
You could argue that the exact same croissant is more pleasurable to eat in a Paris cafe then on a noise Beijing street. I'd agree. There are legitimate arguments in favor of using nominal GDP. But PPP is both less volatile year to year and more highly correlated with life expectancy.
As for correlation to life expectancy, that might have to do with goods and services including healthcare (and food) in countries being priced so that people can afford them.
Doesn't Monaco have a huge economy? I thought there were a ridiculous amount of casinos there. You would think that you bring in a lot of money, especially from tourists.
However, the asian part is richer: Based on 2008 data about 33% of the Russian economy has been generated in the asian part. With "West Siberian economic region" generating already 21%.
Interesting to note how all 10 of these aren't equal to number 1 on the Asia list. The top 2 combined don't even equal number 2 on the Asia list. How the times have changed.
Well, these are total GDP, so the population disparity alone makes a huge difference. No single country in Europe has anywhere near the population of China and India, so it makes sense they don't compare that way. Per capita though, a very different story.
I swear there's more comments making fun of people complaining that quizzes are too US centric than there are comments complaining that quizzes are too US centric.
With Russia post the collapse of the ruble being among the cheapest countries in Europe now, and the UK being among the most expensive, this might be an effect of using PPP, but I don't know.