Top 10 developing countries by GDP (nominal)


1. China: US$ 7,3 trillion > GDP per capita: US$ 5.971,50 > HDI: 0,687

2. Brazil: US$ 2,5 trillion > GDP per capita: US$ 13.636,00 > HDI: 0,720

3. Russia: US$ 1,8 trillion > GDP per capita: US$ 15.948,00 > HDI: 0,755

4. India: US$ 1,6 trillion > GDP per capita: US$ 2.780,00 > HDI: 0,547

5. Mexico: US$ 1,1 trillion > GDP per capita: US$ 11.530,00 > HDI: 0,770

6. Indonesia: US$ 845 billions > GDP per capita: US$ 3.980,00 > HDI: 0,617

7. Turkey: US$ 778 billions > GDP per capita: US$ 13.080,00 > HDI: 0,699

8. Saudi Arabia: US$ 577 billion > GDP per capita: US$ 23.815,00> HDI: 0,770

9. Iran: US$ 482 billion > GDP per capita: US$ 11.202,00 > HDI: 0,710

10. Argentina: US$ 447 billion > GDP per capita: US$ 14.400,00 > HDI: 0,797


Take guesses in accordance with current data. :)

1. Brazil, Russia and Mexico: 2025 to 2035
2. Argentina and South Africa: 2035 to 2040
3. Turkey and Saudi Arabia: 2040 to 2050
4. India and China: after 2050

Maybe so in the future!!!

Where are Malaysia and Chile?
There are no options for Malaysia and Chile here?

In my humble opinion, Malaysia and Chile are much coser to achieve developed status than any other countries above.

Two countries's economic size are not that big because of small poplulation.
But they are developing very well so far.

Large economy with huge population doesn't directly mean developed staus. For example, Finland's economic size is not that big but is one of the most developed countries in the world with high productivity.

To be developed country has to achieve that most people has to enjoy high standard of living, high quality of living such as life expectancy and education etc. Large economic size doean't really matter actually for indiviual citizens. :)

1. Brazil, Russia and Mexico: 2020 to 2030
2. Argentina and South Africa: 2025 to 2035
3. Turkey and Saudi Arabia: 2030 to 2040
4. India and China: 2030 to 2050

Maybe so in the future!!!

I agree on 1. 2. and 3. but not on India. I think India will be developed only well after 2060. Bear in mind that the GDP/capita figure that is needed to be developed raises constantly. In 2050 it will be 40,000$/capita, because the USA, Germany, Japan etc will be at 80,000$ in 2050.

There's no way Brazil and Mexico become developed between 8 to 18 years....I know Brazil very well and they need at least 30 years, so I'd say 2045....and in the case of Mexico they have to get rid of the drug warlords first, which doesn't seem it's gonna be very soon...so I'd say 2040 for Mexico...

For Chile and Uruguay 2025...for Argentina 2030..

Where are Malaysia and Chile?
There are no options for Malaysia and Chile here?

In my humble opinion, Malaysia and Chile are much coser to achieve developed status than any other countries above.

Two countries's economic size are not that big because of small poplulation.
But they are developing very well so far.

Large economy with huge population doesn't directly mean developed staus. For example, Finland's economic size is not that big but is one of the most developed countries in the world with high productivity.

To be developed country has to achieve that most people has to enjoy high standard of living, high quality of living such as life expectancy and education etc. Large economic size doean't really matter actually for indiviual citizens. :)

Coz both Malaysia and Chile are out of top 10 developing countries by GDP.

Being developed is relatively and usually easier to be achieved by countries with smaller population.
But once a country with huge population achieves the developed status, that country will also get enough power to influence other countries and the world's economy significantly (e.g. USA, Japan, some European countries).

Coz both Malaysia and Chile are out of top 10 developing countries by GDP.

Being developed is relatively and usually easier to be achieved by countries with smaller population.
But once a country with huge population achieves the developed status, that country will also get enough power to influence other countries and the world's economy significantly (e.g. USA, Japan, some European countries).

I know that options above are for only top 10 by GDP.
My question was why options above are for top 10, not for top 15, 20 or more countries.(why we ignore small size economic countries?, Reading between the lines, the economic size seems like everything. I mean, why only 10 countries are specially selected here when we talk about a developed county? Sorry if I got wrong. :))

Also, the countries that has a economic power to influence other countries don't always mean developed status directly. Maybe those countries have a significance to world's economy but it doesn't mean a developed country right away. That was my point.

For example, China is already the economic power as a second largest economy in the world and influces the other countries signicantly today. But it doesn't make directly that China is a developed country. On the contrary, Denmark doesn't have a sigficance to world economy but is a developed country for sure.
Therefore,the economic size can be a factor but is not directly linked.

If you don't agree, that's fine.You can ignore. This is my personal opinion.:)

OK, the subject was only for specially selected 10 countries by GDP.(I am really sorry if I am talking off topic here. This is my last reply here.)
Even top 10 countries have a diffrent population, which means a quite diffrently situation. I mean each countries is standing a diffrent starting point in the running race.
So is it fair to ask who will be a developed contries in 2020 or 2025? Only comparing GDP to differnt countries AT THE SAME TIME?

What has a meaning to became NO.1 in GDP chart If the people doesn't enjoy the high standard of living RIGHT NOW? :)

My current data (IMF, 2010):
1) China - 5878 - 4382
2) Brazil - 2090 - 10 816
3) India - 1632 - 1371
4) Russia - 1480 - 10356
5) Mexico - 1034 - 9522
6) Turkey - 735 - 10309
7) Indonesia - 707 - 2974
8) Poland (sic!) - 469 - 12323
9) Saudi Arabia - 448 - 16267
10) Iran - 407 - 5449
11) Argentina - 370 - 9131
12) South Africa - 350 - 7274
13) Thailand - 319 -4992
14) United Arab Emirates - 302 - 57884
15) Venezuela - 293 - 10049
16) Colombia - 289 - 6360
17) Malaysia - 238 - 8423

So, which of these countries is closer to achieving developed country status - Poland, or United Arab Emirates?

Don't we have this exact same thread topic in this very subforum created by Vectroalenzis on the first page? :bash:
You did it again, FAAN!

Brazil is far away from becoming developed.

Considering history and culture it is possible that many of these countries never become developed. Argentina was developed in the past but it stagnated and lost it's developed status.

And of course, Chile is the developing country that will reach developed status sonner. Perhaps Thailand and Malasia will reach Chile but since they are very poor it will take long.

China, Russia and Argentina.

Wheres Uruguay?

Uruguay isn't one of the top 10 largest developing economies.

Those GDP per capita are actually kind of old.

Uruguay as a small state is obviously somewhere down the list, along with Chile:
18) Egypt - 218 - 2808
19) Chile - 203,3 - 11827
20) Nigeria - 202,6 - 1298
21) Philippines - 199,6 - 2123
22) Pakistan -176,9 - 1030
23) Romania - 161,6 - 7542
24) Algeria - 157,8 - 4366
25) Peru - 153,8 - 5205
26) Kazakhstan - 148,0 - 9009
27) Ukraine - 137,9 - 3013
28) Kuwait - 132,6 - 37009
29) Hungary - 130,4 - 13024
30) Qatar - 127,3 - 74901
31) Bangladesh - 105,6 - 642
32) Vietnam - 103,6 - 1174
33) Morocco - 91,1 - 2861
34) Angola - 82,5 - 4329
35) Iraq - 81,1 - 2531
36) Libya - 71,3 - 10873
37) Croatia - 60,8 - 13776
38) Syria - 59,3 - 2823
39) Ecuador - 58,0 - 3921
40) Oman - 57,9 - 19405
41) Belarus - 54,7 - 5771
42) Azerbaijan - 54,4 -6008
43) Dominican Republic - 51,6 - 5227
44) Sri Lanka - 49,5 - 2428
45) Bulgaria - 47,7 - 6356
46) Burma - 45,4 - 742
47) Tunisia - 44,3 - 4199
48) Guatemala - 41,2 - 2867
49) Uruguay - 40,3 - 11998

Which shall become a developed country sooner - Hungary or Qatar?

Hungary.

Qatar

There's no way Brazil and Mexico become developed between 8 to 18 years....I know Brazil very well and they need at least 30 years, so I'd say 2045....and in the case of Mexico they have to get rid of the drug warlords first, which doesn't seem it's gonna be very soon...so I'd say 2040 for Mexico...

For Chile and Uruguay 2025...for Argentina 2030..

As for Brazil and Mexico (mainly Brazil), I took data from surveys here in Brazil, and they say that between 2021 and 2025.

Brazil is far away from becoming developed.

Considering history and culture it is possible that many of these countries never become developed. Argentina was developed in the past but it stagnated and lost it's developed status.

And of course, Chile is the developing country that will reach developed status sonner. Perhaps Thailand and Malasia will reach Chile but since they are very poor it will take long.

I believe it will not take long for Brazil to develop, even though Brazil has problems, may not be as severe as in countries like China, India, Philippines and Thailand. Maybe Brazil will become Argentina's first, because inflation in Brazil has 5%, as in Argentina more than 25%.

Colombia, baby :banana:

Growth: 6%
Inflation: 3%
Per. Capita: $10,300
HDI: .710 (high)


Developed by 2027 :yes:

Wheres Uruguay?

Do not put Uruguay, for although it is a good country with HDI, yet has a large GDP.

My current data (IMF, 2010):
1) China - 5878 - 4382
2) Brazil - 2090 - 10 816
3) India - 1632 - 1371
4) Russia - 1480 - 10356
5) Mexico - 1034 - 9522
6) Turkey - 735 - 10309
7) Indonesia - 707 - 2974
8) Poland (sic!) - 469 - 12323
9) Saudi Arabia - 448 - 16267
10) Iran - 407 - 5449
11) Argentina - 370 - 9131
12) South Africa - 350 - 7274
13) Thailand - 319 -4992
14) United Arab Emirates - 302 - 57884
15) Venezuela - 293 - 10049
16) Colombia - 289 - 6360
17) Malaysia - 238 - 8423

So, which of these countries is closer to achieving developed country status - Poland, or United Arab Emirates?

The two lists according to the HDI 2011, are already developed.
United Arab Emirates: 0,846
Poland: 0,813

Any country that has a +0.792 HDI is considered to be developed by this criteria. However, a huge group of countries, like Chile, Argentina, Hungary, Poland, Slovak Republic, etc, is still far from being really developed.

Any country that has a +0.792 HDI is considered to be developed by this criteria. However, a huge group of countries, like Chile, Argentina, Hungary, Poland, Slovak Republic, etc, is still far from being really developed.

Only if they have a stable economy, which is not the case in Argentina.

That has nothing to do with being or not developed.

Developed: HDI over 0.792 + GDP Percapita over 20.000 US$

Note: Poland is already developed.

Developed: HDI over 0.792 + GDP Percapita over 20.000 US$

Note: Poland is already developed.

Poland is NOT an advanced economy by IMF.

Unlike Czech Republic.

Neither of these has 20 000 US$ GDP.

Poland is ranked as a very high developed country (HDI).


Human Development Index (HDI) - 2011 Rankings

Very High Human Development

1.Norway
2.Australia
3.Netherlands
4.United States
5.New Zealand
6.Canada
7.Ireland
8.Liechtenstein
9.Germany
10.Sweden
11.Switzerland
12.Japan
13.Hong Kong, China (SAR)
14.Iceland
15.Korea (Republic of)
16.Denmark
17.Israel
18.Belgium
19.Austria
20.France
21.Slovenia
22.Finland
23.Spain
24.Italy
25.Luxembourg
26.Singapore
27.Czech Republic
28.United Kingdom
29.Greece
30.United Arab Emirates
31.Cyprus
32.Andorra
33.Brunei Darussalam
34.Estonia
35.Slovakia
36.Malta
37.Qatar
38.Hungary
39.Poland
40.Lithuania
41.Portugal
42.Bahrain
43.Latvia
44.Chile
45.Argentina
46.Croatia
47.Barbados

Interestingly, Portugal has lower HDI than Poland.

^^ nothing strange, level of education, wealth distribution, internet penetration is much higher in Poland, PKB per capita is also similar and growing in Poland unlike in Portugal.

Internet distribution is also higher in Argentina (70%). That doesn't make Poland nor Argentina - very similar countries - developed. I can consider this possibility for the C. Republic due to its similar standards to Slovenia, a developed country. None in Europe consider Poland, Hungary, Croatia, Slovak Republic and the Baltics as developed.

Cheers.

Poland is NOT an advanced economy by IMF.Unlike Czech Republic.
Neither of these has 20 000 US$ GDP.

actually yes PPP GDP of Slovenia, Czech republic,Slovakia and Poland are according to IMF, World Bank well above $ 20 000 and Hungary is very very close with $ 19 700

otherwise Slovakia is by IMF considered developed country since 2009


Internet distribution is also higher in Argentina (70%). That doesn't make Poland nor Argentina - very similar countries - developed. I can consider this possibility for the C. Republic due to its similar standards to Slovenia, a developed country. None in Europe consider Poland, Hungary, Croatia, Slovak Republic and the Baltics as developed.


its takes longer time to change mind set of people - I will not worry about that :-) its already happens and people are being aware of that

Interestingly, Portugal has lower HDI than Poland.

Yet Portugal is considered as developed for most of the world :crazy2:

Poland developed.


Again, where is Uruguay?

Uruguay has very good standards, but it doesn't have a large economy, likewise Chile. That's why they are not put here.

@Name user 1: So that means that when Argentina get the $20,000 GDP per capita, probably in 2014, it will be considered a developed country? I don't agree with this criteria. For me, a country is only developed when it reaches $30,000 GDP per capita, +0.840 HDI and good overall infrastructure.

when Argentina get the $20,000 GDP per capita, probably in 2014, it will be considered a developed country? I don't agree with this criteria. For me, a country is only developed when it reaches $30,000 GDP per capita, +0.840 HDI and good overall infrastructure.

I cant influence your criteria on what you or not agree. Only what I can do is raise your awareness

regarding your question I think you can find the answer alone

Uruguay has very good standards, but it doesn't have a large economy, likewise Chile. That's why they are not put here.

Didnt knew having a "small one" was such a problem lol. Not at least in a thread with the title: What Developing Countries closer to achiveving developed status.

Of course all of us gifted with a "Big One" are more relevant on the global scale, but lets give some credit to our smaller brothers lol.



@Name user 1: So that means that when Argentina get the $20,000 GDP per capita, probably in 2014, it will be considered a developed country? I don't agree with this criteria. For me, a country is only developed when it reaches $30,000 GDP per capita, +0.840 HDI and good overall infrastructure.


Send an inquiry to the World Bank, the FMI and the UN.

You can start with something like: Dear Mrs Lagard, please stop talking crap and delist Portugal, Poland and the Czeck Republic from your developed countries list.

Cheers.

Can somebody close this thread as it's the same topic as this one:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1453816&page=26

Didnt knew having a "small one" was such a problem lol. Not at least in a thread with the title: What Developing Countries closer to achiveving developed status.

Of course all of us gifted with a "Big One" are more relevant on the global scale, but lets give some credit to our smaller brothers lol.

It's not a problem, but the host of this thread decided to consider only the big developing economies. And Argentina, although has a bigger economy because it's much more populated, is as relevant as Chile.


Send an inquiry to the World Bank, the FMI and the UN.

You can start with something like: Dear Mrs Lagard, please stop talking crap and delist Portugal, Poland and the Czeck Republic from your developed countries list.

Cheers.

Don't be such pathetic. If they want to consider Argentina, Chile, Hungary, Croatia, Russia... as developed in two years, it's not my problem, but I think it's lacking criteria.

LOL this thread.

Poland is NOT an advanced economy by IMF.

Unlike Czech Republic.

Neither of these has 20 000 US$ GDP.

Look at this updated list by wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

Russia is pretty close these days.

Russia is pretty close these days.

There are closer ones.

The poorest advanced economies outside the eurozone are Czech Republic (2010 nominal GDP per capita 18 277 US$) and Taiwan (18 558).

Russia (10 356) is still slightly behind Poland (12 323), Hungary (13 024) and Horvatia (13 776).

You can start with something like: Dear Mrs Lagard, please stop talking crap and delist Portugal, Poland and the Czeck Republic from your developed countries list.

Cheers.

And New Zealand, their GDP per capita is also less than $30,000

But New Zealand and Israel are another case. They don't have very big GDP per capita, but are stupidly rich and developed countries on the contrary to Portugal or Greece. The last ones are developed, but nothing like the others. If you say they are developed, you should also consider a huge whole from Eastern Europe.

Actually the GDP per capita is not very recommended. It's better to verify the average disposable income.

And please let's consider the PPP for per capita. :)

wow.....
the leaders of the world should start reading SSC.....such well informed, intelligent, all-knowing participants over here.......

And please let's consider the PPP for per capita. :)

And why should you do that? Because it's the only way Argentina looks good in the picture?


In nominal per capita, Argentina's 10,640$ are really close to Portugal's 22,700$ ou Greece's 27,800% :lol:

If an Argentinian wants to buy a Mercedes, their PPP "money" will really be helpful :nuts:

And New Zealand, their GDP per capita is also less than $30,000

Lol true, for some reason I thought New Zealand had a GDP PC above USD$30,000.

And why should you do that? Because it's the only way Argentina looks good in the picture?


In nominal per capita, Argentina's 10,640$ are really close to Portugal's 22,700$ ou Greece's 27,800% :lol:

If an Argentinian wants to buy a Mercedes, their PPP "money" will really be helpful :nuts:

lol I thought PPP is actually helpful to determine how much somebody can purchase at their own country.....including....Mercedes.

^^

Sure, you buy your imports with that fantasy money :lol:

Do you even know what PPP is?

argentina still is a another 3th world country.
with inflation over 23 %, poverty rising again, and a government prohibiting everybody and everything whose trying to publish these numbers,(for example by owning every company that makes paper for newspapers) argentina still is that pathetic country trying to be european.
development is more than just money, it's about civilization, something you can't buy.

That's not true. Poverty is not rising again (it's climbing DOWN and Argentina among Chile and Uruguay are the countries with less poverty in Latin America; yes, there are more slums in Buenos Aires than before, but the country is not being poorer again) and yes they have a pathetic government. That doesn't mean that the country is pathetic, because it isn't.

And why should you do that? Because it's the only way Argentina looks good in the picture?


In nominal per capita, Argentina's 10,640$ are really close to Portugal's 22,700$ ou Greece's 27,800% :lol:

If an Argentinian wants to buy a Mercedes, their PPP "money" will really be helpful :nuts:

I'm not from Argentina if you assumed that. ;) Moreover, it's not as developed as Portugal or Greece. I've never said that. Argentina is a 3rd world country, like all the others in Latin America and most in Eastern Europe.

That's the only way that Argentina looks good? :lol: I don't think a HDI of 0,797 is bad.

''Poverty is not rising again (it's climbing DOWN''

who says so? the government? that same government that prohibits any institution besides the oficial, governmental ones, to publish any numbers of the economy?
the same kind of government we have over here in brazil, where oficial numbers mention an unemployment number of 5,8 %, while an independent institution says it's at 10,2?
and sorry, most of eastern europe is miles, and centuries, ahead of us

I'm not from Argentina if you assumed that. ;)

Good for you, nor i have anything against Argentina. Already been there and loved the place.

But a person that went to Argentina and Portugal or Greece knows pretty well that Argentina still has some work to do.

Even so, i don't want to get into a country vs country fight. I just find amusing the bashing that some people (from countries that aren't considered developed yet) are doing to Portugal and Greece.

argentina still is a another 3th world country.
with inflation over 23 %, poverty rising again, and a government prohibiting everybody and everything whose trying to publish these numbers,(for example by owning every company that makes paper for newspapers) argentina still is that pathetic country trying to be european.
development is more than just money, it's about civilization, something you can't buy.

Be careful... you are closer to an banned

''you are closer to an banned''

sure. I suppose there must be a southamerican on the SSC board, (our history is full of it, isn't it?)

'' I just find amusing the bashing that some people (from countries that aren't considered developed yet) are doing to Portugal and Greece.''


that's just wishful thinking. we call it the ''mutt-complex''

''you are closer to an banned''

sure. I suppose there must be a southamerican on the SSC board

:doh: ...

Good for you, nor i have anything against Argentina. Already been there and loved the place.

But a person that went to Argentina and Portugal or Greece knows pretty well that Argentina still has some work to do.

Even so, i don't want to get into a country vs country fight. I just find amusing the bashing that some people (from countries that aren't considered developed yet) are doing to Portugal and Greece.

I've never said that Portugal and Greece aren't developed nor that Argentina is close to them. Those three countries are amazing. I'm not bashing down them. But it's true that neither Portugal nor Greece are in the same level of the other developed countries and in a similar level of development of Czech Republic or Slovenia.

And henrique42 (suppose that you're brazilian), please, stop behaving so childish.

''Poverty is not rising again (it's climbing DOWN''

who says so? the government? that same government that prohibits any institution besides the oficial, governmental ones, to publish any numbers of the economy?
the same kind of government we have over here in brazil, where oficial numbers mention an unemployment number of 5,8 %, while an independent institution says it's at 10,2?
and sorry, most of eastern europe is miles, and centuries, ahead of us

Not the government, the Universidad Catolica Argentina that made a research for the oppositors. And it stated that poverty in Argentina went down from 32% in 2006 to 25% in 2010.

And again, i'm not argentinean.

dear acosta, childish is all of this ''discussion'' over who will be developed.

and maybe you should read this article; where that same church is doubting the oficial poverty numbers....


http://www.zenit.org/article-18506?l=portuguese

Some countries, by 2010, nominal GDP per capita:

Italy - 34059
New Zealand - 32163
Hong Kong - 31514
Spain - 30639
Israel - 29264
South Cyprus - 28854
Greece - 27311
Slovenia - 23648
Portugal - 21542
South Korea - 20756
Malta - 19707
Taiwan - 18558
Czech Republic - 18277
Slovakia - 16104
Estonia - 14405
Croatia - 13776
Hungary - 13024
Poland - 12323
Uruguay - 11998
Chile - 11827
Lithuania - 11046
Brazil - 10816
Latvia - 10680
Russia - 10356
Turkey - 10309
Venezuela - 10049
Lebanon - 10041
Mexico - 9522
Argentina - 9131
Kazakhstan - 9009

Which of the above are developed, in your opinion?

and maybe you should read this article; where that same church is doubting the oficial poverty numbers....


http://www.zenit.org/article-18506?l=portuguese

Church? This university YES doubt the official poverty numbers. They say it's not 8.6%, but 25%. However, they state the reduce on poverty.

Of course they doubt the official poverty numbers. Everyone in Argentina or Somalia knows that the INDEC is not reliable. But the reduce on poverty is REAL.

Some countries, by 2010, nominal GDP per capita:

Italy - 34059
New Zealand - 32163
Hong Kong - 31514
Spain - 30639
Israel - 29264
South Cyprus - 28854
Greece - 27311
Slovenia - 23648
Portugal - 21542
South Korea - 20756
Malta - 19707
Taiwan - 18558
Czech Republic - 18277
Slovakia - 16104
Estonia - 14405
Croatia - 13776
Hungary - 13024
Poland - 12323
Uruguay - 11998
Chile - 11827
Lithuania - 11046
Brazil - 10816
Latvia - 10680
Russia - 10356
Turkey - 10309
Venezuela - 10049
Lebanon - 10041
Mexico - 9522
Argentina - 9131
Kazakhstan - 9009

Which of the above are developed, in your opinion?

I don't agree on using nominal GDP per capita. Do you really think that South Korea can be represented with $20.756??? Or Russia, Argentina and Kazakhstan also thus poor?

Developed there: Italy, New Zealand, HK, Spain, Israel, Greece, Slovenia, Portugal, South Korea, Taiwan and maybe Czech Republic. Slovakia is very near.

''Church? This university YES doubt the oficial poverty numbers''

universidad catolica...........and as you know, the catholic church is quite powerful over here

and maybe you should read this article; where that same church is doubting the oficial poverty numbers....


http://www.zenit.org/article-18506?l=portuguese

This article is from 2008.

''Church? This university YES doubt the oficial poverty numbers''

universidad catolica...........and as you know, the catholic church is quite powerful over here

In Brazil maybe. Not here, nowadays.

''This article is from 2008''


right
and you can imagine how it is nowadays, with an inflation of 23 %.....

They say it's not 8.6%, but 25%. However, they state the reduce on poverty.

Of course they doubt the official poverty numbers. Everyone in Argentina or Somalia knows that the INDEC is not reliable. But the reduce on poverty is REAL.

''This article is from 2008''


right
and you can imagine how it is nowadays, with an inflation of 23 %.....

Dear brasuca: Argentina is not a poverty hole. Face it.

They say it's not 8.6%, but 25%. However, they state the reduce on poverty.

Of course they doubt the official poverty numbers. Everyone in Argentina or Somalia knows that the INDEC is not reliable. But the reduce on poverty is REAL.

+1

''This article is from 2008''


right
and you can imagine how it is nowadays, with an inflation of 23 %.....

Now we're going to start the discussion about inflation. :crazy:

With inflation or not, Argentina has the biggest purchasing parity medium income in Latin America (I'm not talking about GDP per capita. Argentina has the biggest medium income in Latin America even when you face it with the inflation).

''They say it's not 8.6%, but 25%. However, they state the reduce on poverty.''
''Dear brasuca''

omg
the threats are starting......i'll rest my case, 'after all i know a bit of argentinian history, i don't want to disappear...
but still; argentina is just another 3th world country...with TWENTYFIVE % poverty, and inflation of 23 %....

just this;


http://discepolin.blogspot.com/2011/04/argentina-2011-sigue-progresando-la.html


THEY say it's 44 %....

just this;


http://discepolin.blogspot.com/2011/04/argentina-2011-sigue-progresando-la.html


THEY say it's 44 %....

:lol::lol:

A libertarian blog.

What a joke.

44%? :lol: That surely in Brazil.

''They say it's not 8.6%, but 25%. However, they state the reduce on poverty.''
''Dear brasuca''

omg
the threats are starting......i'll rest my case, 'after all i know a bit of argentinian history, i don't want to disappear...
but still; argentina is just another 3th world country...with TWENTYFIVE % poverty, and inflation of 23 %....

Nobody has denied that Argentina is another 3rd world country.
____
With inflation or not, Argentina has the biggest purchasing parity medium income in Latin America (I'm not talking about GDP per capita. Argentina has the biggest medium income in Latin America even when you face it with the inflation).

''They say it's not 8.6%, but 25%. However, they state the reduce on poverty.''
''Dear brasuca''

omg
the threats are starting......i'll rest my case, 'after all i know a bit of argentinian history, i don't want to disappear...
but still; argentina is just another 3th world country...with TWENTYFIVE % poverty, and inflation of 23 %....

Slavery end:

Argentina-1813

Brasiú-1888

Cope with that.

Now we have really disturbed the thread theme.

In Latin America, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay and Costa Rica are the most developed countries. That's it.

Some countries, by 2010, nominal GDP per capita:

Italy - 34059
New Zealand - 32163
Hong Kong - 31514
Spain - 30639
Israel - 29264
South Cyprus - 28854
Greece - 27311
Slovenia - 23648
Portugal - 21542
South Korea - 20756
Malta - 19707
Taiwan - 18558
Czech Republic - 18277
Slovakia - 16104
Estonia - 14405
Croatia - 13776
Hungary - 13024
Poland - 12323
Uruguay - 11998
Chile - 11827
Lithuania - 11046
Brazil - 10816
Latvia - 10680
Russia - 10356
Turkey - 10309
Venezuela - 10049
Lebanon - 10041
Mexico - 9522
Argentina - 9131
Kazakhstan - 9009

Which of the above are developed, in your opinion?

Czeck Republic and above developed. Below, Developing.


Now we have really disturbed the thread theme.

In Latin America, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay and Costa Rica are the most developed countries. That's it.

Costa Rica is no longer in the top 5 even. Panama and Mexico are above Costa Rica in almost every indicator, if only CR ranks better in security.


^^

Sure, you buy your imports with that fantasy money :lol:

Do you even know what PPP is?

So GDP Nominal is not fantasy money. lol lol.

PPP takes into account the cost of goods between 2 different currencies, so prices could be affected if the Peso is Overvalued or Undervalued vs US Dollar and thus, it would be a better proxy to determine and compare cost of living between countries.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/ppp.asp#axzz1jkXpnhcX

That's true, but Costa Rica has less poverty.

^^

Sorry dude, I only turst in OECD social statistics and since Costa Rica is not an OECD member, poverty indexes could be measured by more flexible methodoloies.

^^

Sorry dude, I only turst in OECD social statistics and since Costa Rica is not an OECD member, poverty indexes could be measured by more flexible methodoloies.

Poverty indices can only really be used to compare income distribution within a country, not material poverty levels between countries. 60% of median income in Switzerland might be a very different living standard to 60% of median income in Cambodia for example.

In an attempt to equalise measures of poverty Eurostat also measures 'material deprivation' among EU countries, I wonder if similar figures exist elsewhere. :dunno:

Material deprivation rate in EU countries.
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/images/8/82/Material_deprivation_rate_in_the_EU%28%25%29%2C_2007.PNG

Material deprivation refers to a state of economic strain and durables strain, defined as the enforced inability (rather than the choice not to do so) to pay unexpected expenses, afford a one-week annual holiday away from home, a meal involving meat, chicken or fish every second day, the adequate heating of a dwelling, durable goods like a washing machine, colour television, telephone or car, being confronted with payment arrears (mortgage or rent, utility bills, hire purchase instalments or other loan payments).

The material deprivation rate is an indicator in EU-SILC that expresses the inability to afford some items considered by most people to be desirable oreven necessary to lead an adequate life. The indicator distinguishes between individuals who cannot afford a certain good or service, and those who do not have this good or service for another reason, e.g. because they do not want or do not need it.

The indicator adopted by the Social protection committee measures the percentage of the population that cannot afford at least three of the following nine items:

1. to pay their rent, mortgage or utility bills;
2. to keep their home adequately warm;
3. to face unexpected expenses;
4. to eat meat or proteins regularly;
5. to go on holiday;
6. a television set;
7. a refrigerator;
8. a car;
9. a telephone.

Severe material deprivation rate is defined as the enforced inability to pay for at least four of the above-mentioned items.

Edited Lol.

There's no way Brazil and Mexico become developed between 8 to 18 years....I know Brazil very well and they need at least 30 years, so I'd say 2045....and in the case of Mexico they have to get rid of the drug warlords first, which doesn't seem it's gonna be very soon...so I'd say 2040 for Mexico...

For Chile and Uruguay 2025...for Argentina 2030..

thats not true,i am happy with narcos

Wow! Spain always surprises me. Less material deprivation than France.

I've done my calculations, and I'm 100 % sure that Argentina will be first world developed european, on 23 of april 2024, at 15.17 to be precise

South Korea is very close to the developed status, with about 24000 USD of GDP/capita (2011) and very high level of HDI (15th in the world or so).

But the country is still heavily relying on manufacturing industry thus needs to develop service industry further. The productivity in serivce sector of Korea is still very low. And the country has poor social welfare system and also needs to be more creative and challenging in R&D.

If the 3 problems above-mentioned are resolved, South Korea will be a fully-developed country.

South Korea is very close to the developed status, with about 24000 USD of GDP/capita (2011) and very high level of HDI (15th in the world or so).

But the country is still heavily relying on manufacturing industry thus needs to develop service industry further. The productivity in serivce sector of Korea is still very low. And the country has poor social welfare system and also needs to be more creative and challenging in R&D.

If the 3 problems above-mentioned are resolved, South Korea will be a fully-developed country.

South Korea has been developed for over 10 years...
:weird:

It has higher HDI than Denmark, France, Belgium, Austria, Finland, Spain, Italy, UK.

South Korea's GDP per capita in PPP is 31 753, just below Japan.

South Korea has been developed for over 10 years...
:weird:

It has higher HDI than Denmark, France, Belgium, Austria, Finland, Spain, Italy, UK.

South Korea's GDP per capita in PPP is 31 753, just below Japan.

Yes, that's true. South Korea exceeds in all statistical parameters for developed countries. Not only is South Korea a developed country, it is a highly-developed country, if I may say so legitimately, based on the numbers.

The following is a list of the 42 developed countries in the world today, based on very high GDP(PPP)-per-capita-income (greater than US$ 20000), very low income inequality and very high human development (inequality-adjusted HDI greater than 0.8) in 2011.

Approximately 15% of the world's population lives in these developed countries.
That translates to approximately 1.03614 billion people live in developed countries out of a total 6.9076 billion people (the world's population when the UN and IMF reports were published).

Here's how I calculated this list:

(1) Ranked by inequality-adjusted HDI using the 2011 UN Development Report.

Human Development Index (HDI): A composite index measuring average achievement in three basic dimensions of human development- a long and healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living for every citizen in a country.

Inequality-adjusted / GINI coefficient: The Gini coefficient measures the inequality among values of a frequency distribution (for example, levels of income in this case).
This is also necessary because, for example, a country cannot be developed when 25% of its residents are extremely wealthy (wealthier than most of the developed world) and 75% of its residents live in extreme poverty (income less than the UN threshold of US$ 2 per capita per day). I was amazed there are quite a few such countries in our world; talk about people and governance being apathetic and selfish!


(2) Then categorized by GNI / GDP(PPP)-per-capita using both the UN report and 2011 IMF publications per country.


Since tertiary indices like livability factor, economic freedom, economic diversity, ability of a citizen to live anywhere in his / her country, and gross national happiness haven't been considered while creating this list, please feel free to sensibly comment and provide your educated inputs.
Please don't troll as I've spent several hours compiling this list; thank you.


Sources:

International Monetary Fund (www.imf.org)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...PP)_per_capita)

UN Development report 2011: http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_2011_EN_Tables.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ncome_equality

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/...elopment_Index


This list ranks the developed countries based on the factors discussed earlier.

In parentheses (GINI-coefficient-adjusted HDI, GDP(PPP)-per-capita in US$)


1 Monaco (0.946, 186,175)

2 San Marino (0.944 in 2007 UN report, 41,900 in 2007)

3 Norway (0.943, 53,376)

4 Australia (0.929, 40,836)

5 United States (0.910, 48,147)

6 Netherlands (0.910, 42,330)

7 Canada (0.908, 40,457)

8 Ireland (0.908, 39,507)

9 New Zealand (0.908, 27,966)

10 Liechtenstein (0.905, 95,249)

11 Germany (0.905, 37,935)

12 Sweden (0.904, 40,613)

13 Switzerland (0.903, 43,508)

14 Japan (0.901, 34,362)

15 Hong Kong, China - SAR (0.898, 49,342)

16 Iceland (0.898, 38,079)

17 South Korea (0.897, 31,753)

18 Denmark (0.895, 37,741)

19 Israel (0.888, 31,004)

20 Belgium (0.886, 37,677)

21 Austria (0.885, 41,805)

22 France (0.884, 35,048)

23 Slovenia (0.884, 29,179)

24 Finland (0.882, 36,723)

25 Spain (0.878, 30,622)

26 Italy (0.874, 30,165)

27 Luxembourg (0.867, 84,829)

28 Singapore (0.866, 59,936)

29 Czech Republic (0.865, 25,933)

30 United Kingdom (0.863, 35,974)

31 Greece (0.861, 27,624)

32 United Arab Emirates (0.846, 48,597)

33 Cyprus (0.840, 29,100)

34 Brunei Darussalam (0.838, 49,517)

35 Andorra (0.838, 44,900)

36 Estonia (0.835, 20,182)

37 Slovakia (0.834, 23,384)

38 Malta (0.832, 25,782)

39 Qatar (0.831, 102,891)

40 Poland (0.813, 20,136)

41 Portugal (0.809, 23,204)

42 Bahrain (0.806, 27,368)


Next, I'll ennumerate the developing countries in four categories (high, upper-middle, middle, lower-middle).

And finally, I'll ennumerate the under-developed countries.

Down of Chinas´s booming will turn down latin american and african growing, so I dont know the future for Colombia and Peru

Brazil with Pre Salt Petroleum + Comoditties + its Huge Industry can make it developed by 2025

Chile By 2018

Argentina and Uruguai are linked by Brazilian economy so they must be developed by 2020

The following is a list of the 41 high-level developing countries in the world today, based on high GDP(PPP)-per-capita-income (greater than US$ 10000), low income inequality and high human development (inequality-adjusted HDI greater than 0.7) in 2011.

Hungary, Lithuania, Chile, and Latvia are nearly developed countries because
their GINI-coefficient-adjusted HDI have already exceeded 0.8, and their
GDP(PPP)-per-capita are near US$ 20,000.

Argentina and Croatia are also close to becoming developed countries.

The remaining countries in this list are all emerging developed countries.

This list ranks the high-level developing countries based on the calculations and references discussed earlier.


43. [1] Hungary (0.816, 19,647)

44. [2] Lithuania (0.810, 18,769)

45. [3] Chile (0.805, 16,171)

46. [4] Latvia (0.805, 15,448)

47. [5] Argentina (0.797, 17,376)

48. [6] Croatia (0.796, 18,338)

49. [7] Barbados (0.793, 23,624)

50. [8] Uruguay (0.783, 15,469)

51. [9] Romania (0.781, 12,357)

52. [10] Seychelles (0.773, 24,724)

53. [11] Bahamas (0.771, 30,961)

54. [12] Bulgaria (0.771, 13,562)

55. [13] Montenegro (0.771, 11,228)

56. [14] Saudi Arabia (0.770, 24,056)

57. [15] Mexico (0.770, 15,121)

58. [16] Panama (0.768, 13,595)

59. [17] Serbia (0.766, 10,661)

60. [18] Antigua and Barbuda (0.764, 22,119)

61. [19] Malaysia (0.761, 15,578)

62. [20] Kuwait (0.760, 40,740)

63. [21] Trinidad and Tobago (0.760, 20,301)

64. [22] Libya (0.760, 16,837)

65. [23] Belarus (0.756, 14,948)

66. [24] Russia (0.755, 16,687)

67. [25] Grenada (0.748, 13,353)

68. [26] Kazakhstan (0.745, 13,059)

69. [27] Costa Rica (0.744, 11,562)

70. [28] Lebanon (0.739, 15,596)

71. [29] Saint Kitts and Nevis (0.735, 16,457)

72. [30] Venezuela (0.735, 12,407)

73. [31] Mauritius (0.728, 15,015)

74. [32] Macedonia (0.728, 10,369)

75. [33] Peru (0.725, 10,000)

76. [34] Dominica (0.724, 13,664)

77. [35] Saint Lucia (0.723, 12,954)

78. [36] Brazil (0.718, 11,845)

79. [37] Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (0.717, 11,731)

80. [38] Colombia (0.710, 10,155)

81. [39] Iran (0.707, 12,258)

82. [40] Oman (0.705, 26,272)

83. [41] Azerbaijan (0.700, 10,216)

Next, I'll ennumerate the upper-middle, middle, and lower-middle developing
countries.

And finally, I'll ennumerate the under-developed countries.

Next, I'll ennumerate the developing countries in four categories (high, upper-middle, middle, lower-middle).

And finally, I'll ennumerate the under-developed countries.

Again, GCC nations data ( including HDI ) is inclusive of foreign residents, who mostly earn far below native's average.

Which adult ( 15-65 years ) Emirati or Omani or Qatari cannot read & write ? :dunno:

If only considering natives, their HDI & GDP per-capita must be really higher than these stats

Yes, but you can't just exclude non-natives imo, they are living there and are an integral part of the country and society, those countries could not function without them....

Any country's stats would look better if you excluded all the poorest and least educated people! :)

They are living but they are not citizens. U can always take the poorest segment of citizens when calculating GDP, literacy, HDI, life expectancy etc, but to count non-citizens is not fair IMO, especially when % of non-citizens exceed citizens ( as in UAE, Qatar , Bahrain )

Even GDP data for Malaysia also take into account 8.3% foreigners who reside here, and earning far below citizen's average.
I found that all GDP per-capita data for Malaysia is derived after dividing total GDP by 28.3 million people in 2010, and this figure is inclusive of foreign residents.

GCC and Malaysia are the biggest importers of unskilled labours in Asia.

Yes, but my point is that they are still a part of that country, if we exclude them from the population should we exclude the value of all the skyscrapers they build or the oil they extract from the GDP figures? Citizens or not they are a part of that society and economy, the country could not function with citizens alone.

Yes, but my point is that they are still a part of that country, if we exclude them from the population should we exclude the value of all the skyscrapers they build or the oil they extract from the GDP figures? Citizens or not they are a part of that society and economy, the country could not function with citizens alone.

I can see ur point clearly, but actually now I believe there is no " Black or White" answer to this, but rather Grey. Yea they are part of nation-building, but in the same time they are somewhat product of their country of origin, with low salary base and much lower social indicators . And they keep moving in and out of host country. And.. it is believed that up to 20% GDP of Indian state of Kerala is "Gulf money" - which is counted into state GDP !!

I just feel there should be a better method/mechanism to calculate data for GCC states.

In terms of education yes, their host countries can't do much about it when they move there as adults. In terms of health then this can be improved by the host country by ensuring that migrants have access to good healthcare facilities and sufficient salaries to live healthily.

Poverty indices can only really be used to compare income distribution within a country, not material poverty levels between countries. 60% of median income in Switzerland might be a very different living standard to 60% of median income in Cambodia for example.

In an attempt to equalise measures of poverty Eurostat also measures 'material deprivation' among EU countries, I wonder if similar figures exist elsewhere. :dunno:

Material deprivation rate in EU countries.
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/images/8/82/Material_deprivation_rate_in_the_EU%28%25%29%2C_2007.PNG
I like the "material deprivation" statistics than other measures. I think the US beats most European countries when it comes to this.

I'm surprised by Germany, I thought they would have been higher.

Material deprivation rate in EU countries.
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/images/8/82/Material_deprivation_rate_in_the_EU%28%25%29%2C_2007.PNG

Looks like Bulgaria is missing from the graph.

^^You can add them just after Romania (RO) .:lol::jk:

Probably true though..

Looks like Bulgaria is missing from the graph.


This graph is about how strong is your currency against Euro or Usd. Thats why Poland and Hungary looks bad. Zloty and Forint were weak last couple months. Euro/zloty was around 4,40-4,60 , today 4,20 but still to high. The same Euro/forint situation. For example August 2008 - Euro/zloty 3,00.

Lt looks good becouse they have "frozen" stock exchange rate of Euro/Lt at low levels becouse they want Euro currency. Thats why during the holidays a lot Lithuanians and Slovakian,Germans did purchase of foods in Poland . Compare to Lithuana food cheaper in Poland around 30%.

Compare Poland to Slovakia(developed country from 2009)

Netto salary in zloty.
Poland - 2400 , Slovakia -2020

Unemployment
Poland - 10% , Slovakia - 13,5%

How much you can buy Disel for salary netto?
Poland -414 l , Slovakia - 333 l.

source Eurostat, Wold bank.

but still is much to do. Infrastructure is still bad , today Poland is U/C, 900km of new fast roads this year , its crazy, a lot of new railways,stadiums,central station and airports. Users of internet 60% could be better becouse 80% its good level.

Inflaciontina :lol:

chile, malaysia, uruguay are already almost becoming a developed countries...
for a far bigger country like china, india, brazil, indonesia, russia (i think they are already developed) having 20000 gdp/ capita would be a very hard progress IMHO
but imagine if they are able to do that....all the countries above would be having at least 4000 billion USD on GDP and would become a very major player both on business and politics.....well even permanent UNSC has to be changed to acomodate those countries above

GDP per capita is not the decisive factor which describes if country is developed or underdeveloped country.
Compare Qatar and Norway for example, both are high-income countries, both have huge oil and gas reserves, but Qatar has no literature, no famous scientists,its HDI rating is much, much smaller.
To be developed country, one needs to have strong political and economic institutions, high quality of welfare (I don't mean social benefits from the state) and public services (like education), good and precise law, good justice system and other elements.

GDP per capita is not the decisive factor which describes if country is developed or underdeveloped country.
Compare Qatar and Norway for example, both are high-income countries, both have huge oil and gas reserves, but Qatar has no literature, no famous scientists,its HDI rating is much, much smaller.
To be developed country, one needs to have strong political and economic institutions, high quality of welfare (I don't mean social benefits from the state) and public services (like education), good and precise law, good justice system and other elements.

But Qatar has only less than 300,000 citizens, and was extremely poor 50-60 years ago, so you cannot compare the intensity of its literature, scientists per capita etc to that of Norway . Also, what really drags Qatar's HDI is its literacy rate , by which only the older generation are illiterate. You don't find illiterate young Qataris.

Qatar has great number and great diversity of restaurants ( Qataris and Gulf Arabs are generally obsessed about dining etc. ) , trendy shops , hypermodern malls etc, brand-new cities and suburbs using the latest design and technology , very huge house size per-capita its a "hyper-consumerist" nation which I didn't find in Europe.

What I like about Qatar and other Arabian Gulf countries like UAE is they embrace the World ! Putting aside nationalistic approach , they Invite the best of the World to contribute in their nation-building :cheers:

Down of Chinas´s booming will turn down latin american and african growing, so I dont know the future for Colombia and Peru

Brazil with Pre Salt Petroleum + Comoditties + its Huge Industry can make it developed by 2025

Chile By 2018

Argentina and Uruguai are linked by Brazilian economy so they must be developed by 2020


Both Colombia and Peru are expected to grow more than Brazil in the following years.. Morgan Stanley predicts 6,7% growth for Colombia in 2012, the government is expecting more than 5,5% :okay:.. no signs of "chinese decceleration" in sight.

Both Colombia and Peru are expected to grow more than Brazil in the following years.. Morgan Stanley predicts 6,7% growth for Colombia in 2012, the government is expecting more than 5,5% :okay:.. no signs of "chinese decceleration" in sight.

The Brazilian government was seeking to slow the economy grew 7.5% in 2010 so that inflation was controlled, but today there are stimuli for the economy heating and Brazil grow 5 to 7%.. :okay:

Let's see, but 4% for Brazil is more likely this year :okay:

Let's see, but 4% for Brazil is more likely this year :okay:

I believe in 5% :)

Chile, Uruguay, Latvia, Lithuania, Croatia are the next countries to become developed soon probably between 2015 - 2018 IMO

I don't know much about Malaysia so i won't have an opinion on this one.

barbados

IMO,a country without advanced tech ,science cant be called"developed "country.
Isral,south korea are developed country,but some gulf countries which is even richer are not developed country.

first quater china gdp rise 8.5%

India
Brazil
Egypt
Indonesia
Philippines

India
Brazil
Egypt
Indonesia
Philippines

I guess you forgot to mention China first.

It's quite surprising for me to see Indonesia is in the top 10. Perhaps the smaller gap in the state development between Jakarta and other Indonesian cities that contribute to this factor?
Thanks to the advancement of Information technology and transportation (airline ticket becoming increasingly accessible for lower middle class people), it is possible for those who live far away from Jakarta to achieve same income as those in Jakarta.

I would by 2050 or 2070 every single nation will reach that level ?

Balkan countries for example, Croatia, Serbia, Romania, Hungary.

There is no way to say it. Development cannot be calculated. Its cultural.

I found that the country that have fewer political freedom have a better chance for improving their economy.
The good example are:
-Singapore
-Malaysia
-People Republic of China
-South Korea (in 1960s and 1970s).
-Taiwan (the same period as South Korea).

Those are all asian tho.. Us westerners value democracy above all. :yes:

What developing countries closer to achieving developed country status?

I think it become a non-growth country.
The increase in middle classes
The more middle classes increase in number, the more a growth rate stops.

:sly:

Those are all asian tho.. Us westerners value democracy above all. :yes:

But back in the old days, Western countries used to refrain from excessive political freedom. Only after their economy became established, then they opened up for more freedoms in politic.

That is analogous with this: when you have no money you can't afford to have fun or playing around. So, in order to have money, you must be disciplined and stay focus. Only when you have enough money you could have fun and freedom.

The same goes with a country.

You can read that in history books or articles.

If the 3 problems above-mentioned are resolved, South Korea will be a fully-developed country.You certainly are very demanding. :) What we often forget is that the benchmark of what is considered to be "developed" is rising steadfastly. People's expectations about life are getting higher and higher. Many of the early industrialized European countries probably wouldn't have qualified as "fully developed" back in the 1960s (or even in the 1970s), had we applied today's usual criteria.

Anyways, South Korea and Taiwan developed exceptionally fast.
THE Tokyo Sky Tree, a broadcasting and observation tower that will officially open on May 22nd, is 634 metres high (2,080 feet), making it the tallest building in Asia. Is this Japan’s last bid to stay on top? For years, Japan was Asia’s richest and most powerful economy. It was the first Asian economy to industrialise, and the emerging Asian tigers—Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and later China—merely followed in its tracks. Now, however, Japan is steadily being overtaken.

China’s economy is now bigger than Japan’s, but less noticed is the fact that Asia’s so-called newly industrialised economies (NIEs) are, one by one, becoming richer than Japan. Most economists reckon that the best way to compare living standards is to take GDP per person measured at purchasing-power parity (PPP), which adjusts for differences in the cost of living in each country. On this gauge, Japan was overtaken by Singapore in 1993, by Hong Kong in 1997 and by Taiwan in 2010. But the most humbling re-ranking will be when South Korea becomes richer than Japan. The latest forecasts from the IMF suggest that this could happen within five years (see chart). That would be a remarkable turnabout. In 1980 South Korea’s GDP per person was barely a quarter the level of Japan’s.

Calculated at market exchange rates, Japan’s per-head income is still higher than all the NIEs except Singapore. Yet Japan’s high prices, especially for housing and food, bring down the country’s true standard of living. PPPs are tricky to calculate and economists come up with different numbers, so the IMF’s figures are contentious. Some other yardsticks, such as car-ownership rates, still suggest that Japan has a comfortable lead over South Korea. But the trend is clear: the tigers are outpacing their teacher.

http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/290-width/images/print-edition/20120428_ASC081.png
http://www.economist.com/node/21553498

^^
HK and Singapore were already rich in 80's

You certainly are very demanding. :) What we often forget is that the benchmark of what is considered to be "developed" is rising steadfastly. People's expectations about life are getting higher and higher. Many of the early industrialized European countries probably wouldn't have qualified as "fully developed" back in the 1960s (or even in the 1970s), had we applied today's usual criteria.


With nowadays standars we can say that USA and Australia were dictatorial countries until the 60s because they practiced the racial segregation, that became unacceptable in Europe already after WWII with the defection of the nationalsocialismus. However, in the 30s, USA and Australia were regarded as democracies, in contrapposition of the totalitarian Germany, Italy and Soviet Union.
Now, most rich countries are also democratic, with the notable exception of Singapore and some Gulf countries. On the other hand, there's plenty of poor countries with democratic goverments.

Guys... Forget about that concept that Development = Much Money and Good Indicators... You're all focusing at the results and not the causes.

Argentina,Chile and Uruguay.

In South America

Chile

Uruguay

Brazil
Peru
Colombia

Venezuela
Ecuador

Paraguay
Bolivia



With Argentina you never know. I would never bet for it or against it.

What about Suriname, Guyana, and French Guiana? Will they stay firmly in the 'developing' category?

Unite countries in groups like Developed or Developing is not correct. We could not say that US is in the same standard of Canada, Switzerland or Sweden. And we cannot say that Portugal or Spain are in the same standard of development of US.

In the same way, we cannot say that Brazil is in the same standard of development of Chile or Portugal but we cannot say that Brazil is in the same standard of development of China or India either.

The point is there aren't developed or developing countries. Just because all the countries are still developing and there is no a limit for development. So we cannot say that US and UK got developed. All the countries are developing... What change are the level of advance of the several sectors of those countries economies and societies.

Forget about the concept of Developed and Developing Countries. Its just politics.

If a country is not developing then it is doing something wrong and it should probably change its direction.

What about Suriname, Guyana, and French Guiana? Will they stay firmly in the 'developing' category?

I get the impression that these are 'the forgotten lands' by other South Americans!

I think Suriname and Guyana will struggle to advance as quickly as the bigger countries in the region but French Guiana at least has a spaceport! And of course subsidies from France and the EU which will help achieve a decent standard of living that wouldn't be the case standing alone. I recall that forumer Brisavoine posted some pics of how road surfaces change at the FG/Brazil border :D

Unite countries in groups like Developed or Developing is not correct. We could not say that US is in the same standard of Canada, Switzerland or Sweden. And we cannot say that Portugal or Spain are in the same standard of development of US.

In the same way, we cannot say that Brazil is in the same standard of development of Chile or Portugal but we cannot say that Brazil is in the same standard of development of China or India either.

The point is there aren't developed or developing countries. Just because all the countries are still developing and there is no a limit for development. So we cannot say that US and UK got developed. All the countries are developing... What change are the level of advance of the several sectors of those countries economies and societies.

Forget about the concept of Developed and Developing Countries. Its just politics.

These 3 countries are probably just as developed as the US. Although if a Canadian wants to drive across their country on a freeway they still have to do it in the US.

These 3 countries are probably just as developed as the US. Although if a Canadian wants to drive across their country on a freeway they still have to do it in the US.


Why?

What about Suriname, Guyana, and French Guiana? Will they stay firmly in the 'developing' category?

Suriname e Guyana are two poors countries and French Guyana is like nothing to south america.

These 3 countries are probably just as developed as the US. Although if a Canadian wants to drive across their country on a freeway they still have to do it in the US.

It has nothing to do with the conception of developed and developing countries. And no, everyone knows that US is far from being "same standard of living" of Sweden or Switzerland or even Canada. Just because the UN Guys decided to move those methodologies to HDI and improved themselves the US numbers, it doesn't mean that HDI really show us the whole reality. Actually its just like Life: There is always more into the bottom.

As i said, there is no DEVELOPED country because it brings the wrong perception that there is a limit for development and that those countries have solved everything in what concerns of general development and WE know that is not the truth.

USA is a very advanced country in several matters but not all of them. And of course much less areas than Sweden for example. Just as Brazil is more advanced in several areas than China but it still is not more advanced than Chile, for example.

And all of those countries are been put together as Developed and Developing... This is a misconception. Indeed development is not only nice GDP percapta and good highways. Its so much more than that and people tends to enclose those conceptions to a whole... In what way really get it simple...

But here it is: Human Societies are NOT simple. They're all complex and need too much more attention than they've got. Just numbers are incapable to shows us up the truth about the level of development of a society.

So please just don't come up with that fallacy that X country has better roads and more cars because that is just one more between million of misconceptions that had made humanity so superficial that we can be silly enough to deny the truth even if it strikes us on the face!

I get the impression that these are 'the forgotten lands' by other South Americans!


We know nothing about them! Sometimes someone does a thread of them in Latinscrapers. Theres no much to say about them either. Guyana is almost the same size than the United Kingdom, but is has less than 800k people living there. I know Venezuela has a land reclamation over half of Guyana.
This countries are basically rainforest, so they are isolated from the rest of the continent. And since their coast is a river delta, they dont have nice beaches either to promote tourism. I know theres a lot of Asian descendant population in this countries.

South America's ghost nations...

The only contact we seem to have with Guyana is once every four years when the England cricket team goes to play a match there while touring the Caribbean and a few hundred adventurous fans make the trip from the beaches of Trinidad or Barbados or St Lucia to follow the team.

French Guiana is best known in Europe for the Ariane rockets and spaceport while Suriname is probably only known by Dutch people...

..

In South America

Chile

Uruguay

Brazil
Peru
Colombia

Venezuela
Ecuador

Paraguay
Bolivia



With Argentina you never know. I would never bet for it or against it.


With the exception that I agree that Chile has a higher level of development that Bolivia, I disagree with (the order of) most of this list

Balkan countries for example, Croatia, Serbia, Romania, Hungary.

I would say Hungary and Croatia are already developed. Certainly Czech Republic and Slovenia are.

Estonia should probably be considered as highly developed too.

With the exception that I agree that Chile has a higher level of development that Bolivia, I disagree with most of this list

make your own list.
in my opinion chile and argentina are almost developed nations right now.

I think there are some clarification issues that keep arising. I disagree with Baleares in as much as there is definately a difference in the "development" status of say, the C.A.R with the U.S. There has to be a term to describe this....and right now "developed" vs. "developing" is the way the world quantifies this.

Whether or not it is an appropriate or accurate way to describe this phenomenon is a different debate.

I DO however agree with a point I think Baleares is trying to make, which is that "development" is relative, especially if we fail to agree on a set of quantifiable objectives. Which is exactly what we have done!

Is this measured in HDI? Internet penetration rates? Rate of "happiness"? It's easy to see why the last thread like this got locked.

Anyway, this thread seems to be very Latin-American focused.....

make your own list.
in my opinion chile and argentina are almost developed nations right now.

its the order of the list i didnt like

i do agree that chile and argentina are both developed, especially chile

It has nothing to do with the conception of developed and developing countries. And no, everyone knows that US is far from being "same standard of living" of Sweden or Switzerland or even Canada. Just because the UN Guys decided to move those methodologies to HDI and improved themselves the US numbers, it doesn't mean that HDI really show us the whole reality. Actually its just like Life: There is always more into the bottom.

You are making a preempting declaration to support your claim.

Standards of living is a tricky thing because they take into account medians or averages, and they reveal different facts.

US has more income disparity, but it also has much lower taxes which means increased consumption power for those on the upper third of the income distribution.

It is much better to be upper-middle class in US than in these other countries in terms of purchasing power and access to goods and services (even if they cost more like health care). However, it sucks to be poor in US and live is much, much harsher for the -say - bottom 20% of income distribution in US than anywhere else in the developed World.

But that doesn't mean US standards of living are necessarily lower. To assume the standards of the poorest count more is in itself a political assumption. And then you have all the American European-wannabes who bash their own country for things like "not having public transportation" ignoring the marginal cost effect of "world class transportation" in European taxation base is higher than the reduced costs of car mobility there - just to keep a limited example.

You are making a preempting declaration to support your claim.

Standards of living is a tricky thing because they take into account medians or averages, and they reveal different facts.

US has more income disparity, but it also has much lower taxes which means increased consumption power for those on the upper third of the income distribution.

It is much better to be upper-middle class in US than in these other countries in terms of purchasing power and access to goods and services (even if they cost more like health care). However, it sucks to be poor in US and live is much, much harsher for the -say - bottom 20% of income distribution in US than anywhere else in the developed World.

But that doesn't mean US standards of living are necessarily lower. To assume the standards of the poorest count more is in itself a political assumption. And then you have all the American European-wannabes who bash their own country for things like "not having public transportation" ignoring the marginal cost effect of "world class transportation" in European taxation base is higher than the reduced costs of car mobility there - just to keep a limited example.


I think this is very true. The US does relatively better on the high end, but relatively worse on average as compared to Europe. This makes it complicated to measure development comparatively.

its the order of the list i didnt like

i do agree that chile and argentina are both developed, especially chile

ok, is just that the other forumer made a very ideologized list. i mean he overrate the political factor.

With the exception that I agree that Chile has a higher level of development that Bolivia, I disagree with (the order of) most of this list

Its not the current situation. Is what I think the order of arrival to development will occur. Right now, no South American nation is developed. I know the economic policies as well as the opportunities, threats, strenghts and weakness of all the South American economies very well. And, unless something strange happens, that would be the order of development status achievement in the region. The only country I cant manage to unravel is Argentina. Anyhting could happen there, and Im not talking about a 10 year prediction, Im saying I dont know what can be the situation there by the end of this year.

But anyway my list is by no means the only opionion. You are invited to do your own. What I say or you say is not gonna change anything.

Croatia is very close to be developed country, same Hungary, it will sure be in next 10 yrs, Slovenia can consider as developed, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria, Montenegro maybe for 20 yrs.
Bosnia, Macedonia, even more yrs nedded than Bulgaria, Serbia...
Greece is already developed, but question is how long will it stay like that? :D

You are making a preempting declaration to support your claim.

Standards of living is a tricky thing because they take into account medians or averages, and they reveal different facts.

US has more income disparity, but it also has much lower taxes which means increased consumption power for those on the upper third of the income distribution.

It is much better to be upper-middle class in US than in these other countries in terms of purchasing power and access to goods and services (even if they cost more like health care). However, it sucks to be poor in US and live is much, much harsher for the -say - bottom 20% of income distribution in US than anywhere else in the developed World.

But that doesn't mean US standards of living are necessarily lower. To assume the standards of the poorest count more is in itself a political assumption. And then you have all the American European-wannabes who bash their own country for things like "not having public transportation" ignoring the marginal cost effect of "world class transportation" in European taxation base is higher than the reduced costs of car mobility there - just to keep a limited example.

I was not talking about Europe but Sweden or Switzerland and USA. Sorry but for me and i believe, for most people, Standard of living in USA is far from being as good as Swedish.

Doesn't matter if the rich in USA live better. Upper class is the minority in all the countries of the World and in USA its not different. We could make a lot of comparison here to prove it but that is not my point.

The point is that call a country "developed" is the same to assume that it country has achieved satisfactory development standards in all it's ways; And its not true because all the countries have something to improve. Some have not much, like Sweden or Luxembourg, some have a lot like USA and some have much more than a lot like Brazil, Mexico or Argentina.

My conclusion is that all countries are developing countries. What changes is it's level of advance in each sector of it's societies and economies. Its my opinion of course.

The very poor are also a small minority in developed countries. It is no more meaningful to judge the living standards of a country overall by looking only at the bottom 10% than by looking only at the top 10%.

The US is a huge country anyway, the way people live in rural West Virginia or Texas border towns or Flint, Michigan is very different to the way people live in Manhattan or downtown Seattle or Orange County or a wealthy New England small town or suburb of Atlanta.

I dont think saying country x is more developed than country y has much meaning unless you specify who in those countries you are talking about and how you are measuring 'development'

Sorry but i'm not talking about way of life. I'm talking about standard of life. And in that matter, USA has a lot more to improve than the countries i've mentioned.

BUT... As i said, that is not the point of my discussion here. The point of my opinion is that the concept of Development NEEDS to be reviewed.

First because the measurement "Developed" is in fact wrong. All the countries of the World are still "Developing". Some have got more advances and others not... But the fact is that there is no Developed country in the World because, much less or much more, the majority of the countries in the World nowadays face the same social problems. But some of them got more advanced economies and societies, what gave them much less intensity and much more weapons to fight against those problems.

And second, we need more accurate terms to distinguish development because it's not just about have money and nice social indicators. In my opinion, it's completely possible a country with better social indicators and not be developed.

Of course, not being developed will limit the social indices of it's country. So development to me is much more than nice HDI index or number of nice roadways. To me it's mainly cultural and involves much more indicators than life expectation or years in school for example. And looking by that side, we can assume that there're only a few "near" developed countries in the World.

Of course that all are MY opinions. Being so i think it's very difficult to say what is next Developing country to be developed but i bet for Sweden, Norway, Finland or Switzerland. Latin American countries are very far from that standard and i think most of the Latin forumers here actually know that even if you take the conventional "Developed and Developing" countries definition by truth.

1. Brazil, Russia and Mexico: 2020 to 2030
2. Argentina and South Africa: 2025 to 2035
3. Turkey and Saudi Arabia: 2030 to 2040
4. India and China: 2030 to 2050

Maybe so in the future!!!

Argentina is definitely much closer than Brazil or Mexico and always has been.
It used to be a developed country, I'm not sure if it is now. In South America I think only Uruguay is more developed. And Chile is close. Brazil is making great progress though but so is Argentina, and Brazil still has a massive crime and poverty problem.

^^In Argentina for example has a hyperinflation, economic and political problems listed, making it a instable country. You are right in saying that the Argentine HDI is higher than the Brazilian. But Brazil has a more stable economy and politics relatively quiet. I just put Brazil among these years because they are actual statistics from the government, since the others were just guesses based on the world stage today.

Yeah but in addition to that Brazil has massive poverty and crime issues. Also the Argentinian economy is unstable but last count it was growing very fast. Faster than Brazil even (imf stats, not sure how reliable but they are no friends of Argentina so no reason to doubt I guess). Brazil also has bigger education issues than Argentina.

Don't get me wrong I think Brazil is making great strides, I just don't think they are at the level of Argentina yet and Argentina is not really losing any momentum compared to Brazil at the moment. But it's all very hard to predict.

according to united nations standard chile and argentina are developed nations right now.

42 Bahrain 0.806 0.001
43 Latvia 0.805 0.003
44 Chile 0.805 0.003
45 (1) Argentina 0.797 0.003
46 (1) Croatia 0.796 0.002
47 Barbados 0.793 0.002


argentina number 45 brazil 85. no more words.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index

^^At no time said that Argentina and Chile were less socially developed than Brazil. Argentina is the second developed the HDI is not just Chile.

Yeah but in addition to that Brazil has massive poverty and crime issues. Also the Argentinian economy is unstable but last count it was growing very fast. Faster than Brazil even (imf stats, not sure how reliable but they are no friends of Argentina so no reason to doubt I guess). Brazil also has bigger education issues than Argentina.

Don't get me wrong I think Brazil is making great strides, I just don't think they are at the level of Argentina yet and Argentina is not really losing any momentum compared to Brazil at the moment. But it's all very hard to predict.

In five years 30 million Brazilians have become high middle class and low. I agree that Argentina is more developed socially, but I think in a few years, Brazil will achieve it or even surpass it. :okay:

according to united nations standard chile and argentina are developed nations right now.

42 Bahrain 0.806 0.001
43 Latvia 0.805 0.003
44 Chile 0.805 0.003
45 (1) Argentina 0.797 0.003
46 (1) Croatia 0.796 0.002
47 Barbados 0.793 0.002


argentina number 45 brazil 85. no more words.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index

I dont see what in that list say "Developed" Countries. It's just Humand Development Index AND it's greatly imperfect. You are super estimating Argentina and Underestimating Brazil. What FAAN wrote is not ONLY possible but even PROBABLE.

Let's just look in the past. In 1950 Argentina was far more developed than Brazil. Today they are at same level (If you dont count ONLY HDI to measure development) and Brazil has surpass Argentina in many fields, like science, military, industry, political stability, poverty alleviation, infrastructure, economic stability and sustainable growth.

Although Argentina still remains visibly more advanced than Brazil in urbanization, healthcare, insurance and social infrastructure (sanitation, police coverage and health coverage). But not even in Education Argentina is more advanced than Brazil. Of course, it depends on what way you look. Argentina has better literacy rates than Brazil (2,6% illiteracy and Brazil 9,6%) and their students spend more time in schools. But other indicators like the PISA and the Graduation Level Penetration of Brazil are better than Argentina's.

So if we put all that in the balance, we can say that Argentina and Brazil has almost the same development standards nowadays. One is more advanced in some points and the other in others points. Its perfectly feasible that Brazil surpass Argentina development in the near future.

Of course you'll ever see more slums in Brazil than in Argentina, first because Brazil is much more big and second because brazilian inequality, although in great decreasing, is much more higher than Argentina's inequality AND of course, because Brazilian cities always has grown disorganized. Beyond that, historically Brazil has been much more poor than Argentina, so the remains of the old Brazil will take much time to be erased.

Finally what we can say is that development goes long beyond of what HDI or QLI can say.

Dont cry for me Argentina.

BRIC - Brazil, Russia, India and China

However, there are always in queue and that is TIP (Turkey, Indonesia and Philippines).

Turkey is way ahead Indonesia and Phillipines.
Turkey is Latin American level.

In South East Asia the thing would be

Singapore (already developed)

Malaysia (almost there)

Thailand (the new tiger)

Phillipines (fast progress)

Indonesia (still to poor and many social problems)

^^
Latin American level like Chile or Nicaragua?:D

Indonesia (still to poor and many social problems)

Really?

I just returned from Indonesia and it's definitely not a poor country by any means..

It's a Lower Middle Income country but already feels like a Higher Middle-income nation.

Where in Indonesia? I would think Jakarta is rather different to a small town in Sulawesi or villages in Aceh.

^^ Have been to Indonesia 4 times, went to Jakarta, Bandung and toured Sumatra.

Both urban and rural development in Indonesia is quite impressive considering its per-capita GDP level, I never expected such sights ! My first visit was to Padang ( Sumatra ) and all along the airport to city centre ( 30 km ) almost all houses seem to be in good fancy shape, many households own car , streets are clean, people drive relatively nicely

Indonesians have this culture of investing a lot into housing thus its hard to find houses in poor shape outside Jakarta slums, buildings are nicely painted and it's a highly consumer-driven society meaning awesome density of trendy shops, cafes , malls, boutiques etc ( again, considering its income level )

It's incredible on how Indonesia transformed from a "hopeless" country during 1998 riot into this level.

BRIC - Brazil, Russia, India and China

However, there are always in queue and that is TIP (Turkey, Indonesia and Philippines).

The problem AND advantage of the BRIC countries: Size.

The more advanced BRIC countries (Brazil and Russia) are way too far from being developed nations in the conventional means. China and India probably won't be developed in this century either.

^^+1 Billion people each, it's just staggering.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_cO0IpLClLOQ/TG3R2nv5aJI/AAAAAAAABw0/Gx4twEFTsao/s1600/Facepalm.jpg

oh crap... 20 countries in the list of development and all the time is what about Argentina!!!????... ¿Why dont put Argentina in the other side and speak about other countries?. Whatever i see all the time in all skycrapers forum, Argentina, Argentina, Argentina, Argentina, like if Argentina is the bad girlfriend. Argentina is one more and it is all...

In South America

Chile

Uruguay

Brazil
Peru
Colombia

Venezuela
Ecuador

Paraguay
Bolivia



With Argentina you never know. I would never bet for it or against it.

+1 :D

I fully agree.

Turkey is way ahead Indonesia and Phillipines.
Turkey is Latin American level.

In South East Asia the thing would be

Singapore (already developed)

Malaysia (almost there)

Thailand (the new tiger)

Phillipines (fast progress)

Indonesia (still to poor and many social problems)

I don't agree that Indonesia is poor....in fact, it is more progressive than Philippines.. Try to visit the country especially Jakarta, Bandung, Surabaya...

Thailand, Philippines and Indonesian major cities - you will never thought you're in a third world country..you'll be surprised.. :)

sometimes, Albania and Kosovo looks poorer than Philippines and Indonesia, but they are higher in terms of per capita. :)

maybe in some places in some cities of filipinas, indonesia and thailand it feels like first world. but thats the case of every latinamerican country since the XIX century. we are talking about the full country looks like first world. in the case of chile, allways have been places who look l ike first world, even when we were a poor country, plus the higher classes here are very europhillic so many neighbours looked exactly like rich places in europe. but the thing is, the full country like first world. and there is the difficult. in the chilean case, we still have some shanty towns (not so much, but exist) we still have some kids having bad education, etc. when ALL the country can be considered decent enough i will say that my country is first world, not before. and i think chile needs at least 5 years to catch portugal and at least 6 to catch greece (if they have some help from europe, if not we can catch them the next year with an undervalue drachma).

just to be clear, filipinas have the same GDP per capita as Bolivia (the poorer southamerican country)

oh and the answer is clear.

latvia, lithuania, chile, argentina, croatia, bahrein, barbados.

I dont see what in that list say "Developed" Countries. It's just Humand Development Index AND it's greatly imperfect. You are super estimating Argentina and Underestimating Brazil. What FAAN wrote is not ONLY possible but even PROBABLE.

Let's just look in the past. In 1950 Argentina was far more developed than Brazil. Today they are at same level (If you dont count ONLY HDI to measure development) and Brazil has surpass Argentina in many fields, like science, military, industry, political stability, poverty alleviation, infrastructure, economic stability and sustainable growth.

Although Argentina still remains visibly more advanced than Brazil in urbanization, healthcare, insurance and social infrastructure (sanitation, police coverage and health coverage). But not even in Education Argentina is more advanced than Brazil. Of course, it depends on what way you look. Argentina has better literacy rates than Brazil (2,6% illiteracy and Brazil 9,6%) and their students spend more time in schools. But other indicators like the PISA and the Graduation Level Penetration of Brazil are better than Argentina's.

So if we put all that in the balance, we can say that Argentina and Brazil has almost the same development standards nowadays. One is more advanced in some points and the other in others points. Its perfectly feasible that Brazil surpass Argentina development in the near future.

Of course you'll ever see more slums in Brazil than in Argentina, first because Brazil is much more big and second because brazilian inequality, although in great decreasing, is much more higher than Argentina's inequality AND of course, because Brazilian cities always has grown disorganized. Beyond that, historically Brazil has been much more poor than Argentina, so the remains of the old Brazil will take much time to be erased.

Finally what we can say is that development goes long beyond of what HDI or QLI can say.

brazil boom is over. you have to be realistic now. brazil growth is slow to southamerican parameters. argentina still grows fast, plus they have a very educated population, and they have many sources of richness. some media loves to attack argentina cause political reasons, but they allways have been the richest and more developed latinamerican country. the only one country that can be developed before them is chile. no one else, not even uruguay.

The problem AND advantage of the BRIC countries: Size.

China and India probably won't be developed in this century either.
don't put china and india together, china is far ahead.

brazil boom is over. you have to be realistic now. brazil growth is slow to southamerican parameters. argentina still grows fast, plus they have a very educated population, and they have many sources of richness. some media loves to attack argentina cause political reasons, but they allways have been the richest and more developed latinamerican country. the only one country that can be developed before them is chile. no one else, not even uruguay.

Realistic? LOL

Let me put a bit of reality here.

Argentina is no more than a completely decadent, old fashioned banana republic going backwards. And thanks to Brazil, Argentina's situation is not even worse.

^^I agree with you, without alliances between Brazil and Argentina that have lasted a long time, maybe Argentina was now stagnant.

i dont care so im not argentine. but the fact is. higher developed nation= argentina. lower than peru= brazil. politicians and politics in argentina can be the worst in the world, but they are still a decent nation. not the case of other places with some of the highest murder rates who think they are better just because an overvaluated currency. super rich brazil= lula propaganda. real brazil= slow growth.

Say what you want about Brazil, but currently Brazil has much more competant politicians than Argentina, which has allowed Brazil to grow much faster economically speaking.

Christina Kirchner's move to nationalize YPF without offering Repsol adequate compensation will only scare more foreign investors away causing the economy in Argentina to stagnate or even decline.

brazil grow faster?haha just check out the numbers and stop to read propaganda (the economist, blablabla). numbers are available on imf, cia, world bank, etc.

argentina and peru have been the faster growing economies in latinamerica the last decade.

brazil grow faster?haha just check out the numbers and stop to read propaganda (the economist, blablabla). numbers are available on imf, cia, world bank, etc.

argentina and peru have been the faster growing economies in latinamerica the last decade.

I have relatives in Argentina so I know what I am talking about.

Argentina has some huge problems underway such as massive inflation which is causing alot of problems for consumers and businesses alike there.

Washington Post: Fight over Argentina’s inflation rate pits government against private economists (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/americas/a-quiet-battle-over-argentinas-inflation-rate/2011/10/29/gIQAEiUjYM_story.html)

NY Times: Inflation, an Old Scourge, Plagues Argentina Again (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/06/world/americas/06argentina.html?pagewanted=all)

Assiciated Press: Argentina Black market grows with currency (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h03nnWO1RfVc5NbvgOuYSu6KtO9g?docId=79e30664dee84d4fa901f37033d2bf92)

Buenos Aires Herald: IMF urges Argentina to address inflation index within six months (http://www.buenosairesherald.com/article/91574/imf-urges-argentina-to-address-inflation-index-within-six-months)

But if you want to bury your head in the sand, and ignore those problems I mentioned earlier then be my guest.

:lol:
What is it now?
Brazil vs Argentina?

Last 2011 real GDP growth, Argentina 8.8% vs Brazil 2.8%, what's your argument regarding this phenomenon?

:lol:
What is it now?
Brazil vs Argentina?

Last 2011 real GDP growth, Argentina 8.8% vs Brazil 2.8%, what's your argument regarding this phenomenon?

Actually Brazil's GDP Growth was 7.5% as of last year. :doh:

Anyways GDP growth is meaningless if there is high inflation since it affects the purchasing power of consumers.

How you like it if your salary stayed the same but the cost of the many household goods you buy regularly increased by 27.5%?

Latin Business Chronicle: Argentina Inflation: Nr. 2 in World? (http://www.latinbusinesschronicle.com/app/article.aspx?id=5144)

That is the dilema of what many Argentines are facing today.

I never quite understood why Maipo Valley speaks so well of Argentina.

IMO, although it's a country with historical higher standards in regard to the rest of the region, it's also a country with no defined path.. They seem lost in economic matters, their economy grows but their relevance shrinks. Their stock market is insignificant, their companies dont reflect the economic size, their inflation is top 3 of the world's highest (!!!). They make little investment in being more productive (16% only).

In short.. A great country in history, but it seems stuck in a vicious cycle of corruption, populism and antiquated economic policies. Boom and bust.

The rest of the region was also subject to this cycle until recently, but much of it (Peru, Colombia, Chile, etc) have managed to break free from it. Meanwhile, Argentina's superiority to the rest has only dwindled; it's increasingly falling to regional average.

:lol:
What is it now?
Brazil vs Argentina?

Last 2011 real GDP growth, Argentina 8.8% vs Brazil 2.8%, what's your argument regarding this phenomenon?

Exchange rate, have you ever heard about it. Inflation? Have you ever heard about? I guess not. Reliability of anything from argentinian government?

If argentina were ever to become a developed country, it would have happened decades ago... Not now they became a joke of a country.

Brazil vs Argentina??? Appart from football, Brazil does not "compete" with Argentina. Without the huge help of Brazil as an economic and political partner, Argentina would be much worse than it is now. On the other hand, a much more stable country with an economy more than five times the size of Argentina's economy really competes with them?

Sorry people, just wanted to put a bit of reality here...

People are easily seduced by sights of "impressive CBDs" or "nice districts" they see or visit in Third-World countries.

What one must do is to remember that most of those countries cited have an extremely wide distribution of income and poverty. Thus, by their sheer size alone (India, China, Brazil, South Africa, Philippines, Indonesia pre-Islamic terrorism, Mexico before the narco takeover etc), any of these countries will have some "critical mass" of very rich and high/upper middle class people to sustain visible signs of development that, incidentally, area also the likely hangout spots for foreigners or the likely source of SSC banners (lol).

At the same time, these countries will also have very large slums, and a majority of their population living in conditions far away from any "developed" status.

Still, for obvious reasons, SSC forumers are, on average, very impressionable and easy to fool with a "nice skyline". They will look at some buildings (even better if there are some 300m+ ones!), look at some photos of shopping districts, a handful of nice shinny infrastructure like airport or new highway, and they presume the rest of the population would live as if First World Western patterns were replicated there.

I'd frame the issue like this: the upper echelons of those societies are indeed progressing fast toward having signs of development accessible and incorporated into their lives, residences etc. However, the poor people in those countries live much worse than the average "poor folk" of the same purchasing power proportional equivalent in their countries.

Exchange rate, have you ever heard about it. Inflation? Have you ever heard about? I guess not. Reliability of anything from argentinian government?

If argentina were ever to become a developed country, it would have happened decades ago... Not now they became a joke of a country.

Brazil vs Argentina??? Appart from football, Brazil does not "compete" with Argentina.
Sorry people, just wanted to put a bit of reality here...
I am neutral here. :cheers:
Just curious why you guys keep comparing Argentina and Brazil.

Actually Brazil's GDP Growth was 7.5% as of last year. :doh:

Anyways GDP growth is meaningless if there is high inflation since it affects the purchasing power of consumers.

How you like it if your salary stayed the same but the cost of the many household goods you buy regularly increased by 27.5%?

Latin Business Chronicle: Argentina Inflation: Nr. 2 in World? (http://www.latinbusinesschronicle.com/app/article.aspx?id=5144)

That is the dilema of what many Argentines are facing today.

I just don't get it, from where you get that 7.5% growth figure (???)
If it was 2010's, yes I agree, it was 7.5%. But in 2011, it was 2.7% by CIA. (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/br.html)

FYI, Real GDP growth has already eliminated inflation factor (uses constant price) and is counted in your national currency, so under/overvalue doesn't exist yet as well.

Argentina: Super inflation, unstable economy, 8% growth in GDP (35 billion dollars more produced).

Brazil: controlled inflation, overheated economy, growth of 7.5% of GDP (240 billion more in GDP). Not to mention the international significance it has and that is winning a super improvement in social levels, large increase in consumption, good quality of life (and improving), great nature reserves (some of the largest land), major improvements in infrastructure, large cities are very rich, a great reduction in corruption, one of the most peaceful countries in the world, urbanization and urban renewal throughout the country, excellent educational network (big improvement), the enrichment of the population, 30 million people out of poverty were for the middle class in eight years. Headquarters of the World Cup in 2014 and Olympic Games in 2016.

It was the country that came later in the 2008 crisis, and what came out faster, and one year after, was one of the fastest growing countries in the world.

Some comparative data between the two countries:

Argentina:

Population: 41,281,631 (31st)
Area: 2,780,400 km ² (8th)
Nominal GDP: U.S. $ 447 billion (27th)
GDP per capita: 10.944,45 (62th)
HDI: 0.797

Brazil:

Population: 192,376,496 (5th)
Area: 8,514,876 km ² (5th)
Nominal GDP: U.S. $ 2.781 trillion (5th - between 2025 and 2045 will become the 4th and after 2050 will the 3th)
GDP per Capita: U.S. $ 12.492,91 (53rd)
HDI: 0.720 (research indicates that by 2021 is a developed country)

I mean I have nothing against Argentina and its people, on the contrary, I consider this a beautiful country with some of his people good and responsive. But with this post wanted to do a little comparison between the two countries, so as not to say that "Argentina is better than Brazil." I think rather than repel, these two countries should come together (as is already happening) and grow together to become two great powers, even that Argentina never overtake Brazil. :cheers::cheers::cheers:

Source of Data: Argentina (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentina) / Brazil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil)

Those nominal are tricky since the Real is overvalued. If we look the PPA Argentina is almost USD 16,000 and Brazil less than USD 12,000. Just a little bit higher than Colombia and Peru.

^^
Latin American level like Chile or Nicaragua?:D

Like the Average.

Actually Brazil's GDP Growth was 7.5% as of last year.

Nope. 7.5% was Brazilian growth in 2010 after a fall in 2009, last year they grew less than 3%, the lowest growth in South America. This year Mexico is probably doubling Brazilian growth, while the Pacific countries (Panama, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Chile) will continue to be the fastest growing ones. Argentina is slowing down, but still growing higher than Brazil, like it has been almost the last ten years. Venezuela is recovering thanks to big construction plannings, but is very unstable economy.

Those nominal are tricky since the Real is overvalued. If we look the PPA Argentina is almost USD 16,000 and Brazil less than USD 12,000. Just a little bit higher than Colombia and Peru.



Then look at the sources and you will see real GDP per capita according to the nominal GDP of both countries. Argentina (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentina) / Brazil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil)

Exchange rate, have you ever heard about it. Inflation? Have you ever heard about? I guess not. Reliability of anything from argentinian government?

If argentina were ever to become a developed country, it would have happened decades ago... Not now they became a joke of a country.

Brazil vs Argentina??? Appart from football, Brazil does not "compete" with Argentina. Without the huge help of Brazil as an economic and political partner, Argentina would be much worse than it is now. On the other hand, a much more stable country with an economy more than five times the size of Argentina's economy really competes with them?

Sorry people, just wanted to put a bit of reality here...

Do you understand what REAL GDP is? It takes account for inflation (supposedly) and exchange rate is irrelevant since that figure is reflected in the inflation figures to begin with. And I believe these figures are IMF thus not from the Argentinian government but independent. And we all know IMF and Argentina are not best buddies so I would not understand why they would deliberately make Argentina look good.

A falling exchange rate is actually GOOD for most developing countries because they spur investment (labour and goods are becoming cheaper in those countries from an international perspective, of course inflation balances this effect).

I agree that the government seems... irrational from an outside perspective. And I have little faith that if they keep that up stability will last. However the figures so far are simply good and better than Brazil's there's no disputing that.

Then look at the sources and you will see real GDP per capita according to the nominal GDP of both countries. Argentina (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentina) / Brazil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil)

Real GDP are the PPP figures you see in those links. So basically the numbers 12,000 for Brazil and 18,000 for Argentina are correct. The reason there is this difference in nominal and real figures to the detriment of Brazil is that Brazil is ridiculously expensive.

But that 18,000 are completely destroyed by a 25% per year inflation. The point is i don't think Argentina is more advanced than Brazil. One is in some areas and the other in other areas. But for the medium and long term, Brazil will probably be more advanced than Argentina in almost everything. Argentina is not an example of advance but retraction.

But i agree that Brazil is far from being fair to it's Potential. Its one if the main (if not the first) countries in the World by natural and mineral resources with large amount of sustainable energy, abundant oil reserves, people from all over the World, incredibly amazing landscapes, great touristic potential, incredibly nice climate and a great internal market with middle purchasing power in a huge mass of earth that takes half of South America and it not even got income above 30k. Its disappointing ... Yes. But just don't underestimate Brazil and overestimate Argentina.

Brazil is in the path of "development" and is a good example of how to make a giant country works well. I don't know if we can compare China and India or even Russia to Brazil. China has a 1.3 billion population and India, beyond the giant population has a small territory when compared to Brazil. Maybe we can compare Brazil to Russia and USA by their sizes of population, natural resources and territory. So we can see that Brazil is really disappointing.

So yes Brazil is disappointing because it has practically everything it takes to be an high end country and a great World Leader. We can even assume that Brazilians are not yet trained to turns it's natural wealth into humanized wealth and that is truth. Brazil is actually disappointing. But when you analyse a country you need to look at it's past. And Brazilian past was far worst than Argentinian. If we look them now, Brazil is almost as good as Argentina in most of it's social indicators and better in some of them. And even better in non social indicators.

So we're back to my point that you cannot say that a country is more developed just looking at it GDP Percapta or it's roads. There're much more behind it. You need analyse all indicators and mainly it's societies, laws, cultures and etc...

I was not just 'comparing' Brazil and Argentina. I was just using them to exemplify my point about "What is Development". About Brazil - Argentina relations well... It could be better but Brazil and Argentina are great partners and Argentina is clearly more connected to Brazil than any country in the World when it comes to economy or even other areas.

I dont see what in that list say "Developed" Countries. It's just Humand Development Index AND it's greatly imperfect. You are super estimating Argentina and Underestimating Brazil.The HDI is a very controversial measure of development, many consider it flawed (the inequality adjusted HDI [IHDI] may be a bit better). A good example is the case of Peru and Brazil, here the HDI ranking is highly counterintuitive - and it contradicts the UN's own Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) ranking. In spite of Peru's economic and social progress the country still has a large segment of the population living in severe poverty. In Brazil the problem has become much less serious.

http://hostinga.imagecross.com/image-hosting-16/8367H.jpg
Source: http://www.ophi.org.uk/policy/multidimensional-poverty-index/mapping-the-mpi/

The Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI for short) is an international measure of acute poverty covering 109 developing countries. The MPI complements income-based poverty measures by reflecting the multiple deprivations that people face at the same time. The MPI identifies deprivations across health, education and living standards, and shows the number of people who are multidimensionally poor and the deprivations that they face at the household level. It uses ten indicators across three dimensions, as the diagram below shows.

But that 18,000 are completely destroyed by a 25% per year inflation.

You don't seem to understand the figures, the 18,000 are in REAL terms, purchasing power parity. It measures how much an average individual can buy. Inflation is already inherent in the figure.

Which countries had the highest GDP growth rate in 2011?

^^ China, India, Indonesia, Laos, Cambodia...

Iraq(^0,007), Ghana(^0,006), Qatar (^0,005), Congo (^0,005)...

I don't care about any of those numbers. The first sign of "developed" country is a lot of naked local women on the beaches and that is a damn fact.

The HDI is a very controversial measure of development, many consider it flawed (the inequality adjusted HDI [IHDI] may be a bit better). A good example is the case of Peru and Brazil, here the HDI ranking is highly counterintuitive - and it contradicts the UN's own Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) ranking. In spite of Peru's economic and social progress the country still has a large segment of the population living in severe poverty. In Brazil the problem has become much less serious.

http://hostinga.imagecross.com/image-hosting-16/8367H.jpg
Source: http://www.ophi.org.uk/policy/multidimensional-poverty-index/mapping-the-mpi/

Yep, its widely recognized that MPI is much better than HDI, its far more complete and more importantly measures the ends not just the means that result in development. HDI is flawed because it only takes into account GDP per capita PPP, literacy rates, means years of schooling and average life expectancy. Problem with that is that you might be literate and have a decent amount of schooling but lack running water or a proper shelter. Not to mention GDP per capita doesn't even measure actual incomes and of course is distorted by inequalities.

Peru's example is highlights this paradox, but don't say this in the Latin American forum. Their is great anticipation of a weird scale the day the HDI figures are announced.

:lol:.. Truly HDI reigns in the Latin forums.

Iraq(^0,007), Ghana(^0,006), Qatar (^0,005), Congo (^0,005)...

thats something slightly different, HDI Index. But a quite good appropriate to measure development. 2011 report says:

Congo, Democratic Republic 0.013 (Rank: 187/187)
Ghana 0.008 (135/187)
Iraq 0.006 (132/187)
Mongolia 0.006 (110/187)
Qatar 0.006 (37/187)

There are a lot of 0.005ers though.

Congo is recovering from lowest level, Ghana is benefitting from its oil wealth and sound government politics, Iraq used to be quite developed before things went ugly in the 1980s, Mongolia has mineral resources and is the most underrated country on earth and Qatar is f"""ing in heaven

brazil boom is over. you have to be realistic now. brazil growth is slow to southamerican parameters. argentina still grows fast, plus they have a very educated population, and they have many sources of richness. some media loves to attack argentina cause political reasons, but they allways have been the richest and more developed latinamerican country. the only one country that can be developed before them is chile. no one else, not even uruguay.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Posting of hte year but please watch your spelling mistakes

^^ China, India, Indonesia, Laos, Cambodia...

hm...well thats nothing really new to me.

Just looked it up at wiki
and it shows a quite strong (maybe too strong?) correlation with HDI index:

1 Qatar 18.7

2 Ghana 13.5

3 Mongolia 11.5

4 Turkmenistan 9.9

5 Iraq 9.6

6 China 9.5

7 Papua New Guinea 9

8 Argentina 8.8

9 Turkey 8.5

10 Sri Lanka 8.3

Mexico is one of the Latin American countries more likely to be developed. It has an enviable geographical position and size of population that gives more weight on the international stage. If Mexico is able to control the violence of drug trafficking it will be in a good position in the future because they are industrializing the country at an accelerated pace. Of course, this is speaking from the economic point of view but there are many areas where there are still problems.

I don't care about any of those numbers. The first sign of "developed" country is a lot of naked local women on the beaches and that is a damn fact.

Ive seen a lot of these in Cuba and Cameroon but none in Sweden and Norway

hm...well thats nothing really new to me.

Just looked it up at wiki
and it shows a quite strong (maybe too strong?) correlation with HDI index:

1 Qatar 18.7

2 Ghana 13.5

3 Mongolia 11.5

4 Turkmenistan 9.9

5 Iraq 9.6

6 China 9.5

7 Papua New Guinea 9

8 Argentina 8.8

9 Turkey 8.5

10 Sri Lanka 8.3


with their gdp growth, Argentina IMO will be "developed" before 2020... in addition to that, I can also see Chile and Malaysia very close in achieving developed country status....

well, Mongolia's rapid growth has helped them surpass Philippines' and Indonesia's GDP Per Capita (ppp)...

People are easily seduced by sights of "impressive CBDs" or "nice districts" they see or visit in Third-World countries.

What one must do is to remember that most of those countries cited have an extremely wide distribution of income and poverty. Thus, by their sheer size alone (India, China, Brazil, South Africa, Philippines, Indonesia pre-Islamic terrorism, Mexico before the narco takeover etc), any of these countries will have some "critical mass" of very rich and high/upper middle class people to sustain visible signs of development that, incidentally, area also the likely hangout spots for foreigners or the likely source of SSC banners (lol).

At the same time, these countries will also have very large slums, and a majority of their population living in conditions far away from any "developed" status.

Still, for obvious reasons, SSC forumers are, on average, very impressionable and easy to fool with a "nice skyline". They will look at some buildings (even better if there are some 300m+ ones!), look at some photos of shopping districts, a handful of nice shinny infrastructure like airport or new highway, and they presume the rest of the population would live as if First World Western patterns were replicated there.

I'd frame the issue like this: the upper echelons of those societies are indeed progressing fast toward having signs of development accessible and incorporated into their lives, residences etc. However, the poor people in those countries live much worse than the average "poor folk" of the same purchasing power proportional equivalent in their countries.

Of course impressive skylines dont make a country developed, but I think you are understimating emerging economies.

Lets take a look to Bolivias main cities, South Americas poorest nation and with a population of only 9 millions, it manages to make this:

La Paz 1,552,000

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/788/0003354321scc5.jpg

Santa Cruz 1,725,000

http://i51.tinypic.com/2v1kc2d.jpg

Cochabamba 517,000

http://www.boliviabella.com/images/bolivia_facts_history_historia_cochabamba.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bphnYwm1QdY/TV6CikI_qgI/AAAAAAAAALI/NqEcUEDGzhc/s1600/Cochabamba%2Ba%2BCidade%2Bdos%2Bjardins.JPG

Sucre 372,000

http://www.loslugaresturisticos.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/sucre.jpg

Oruro 235,000 (ok this one does look poor)

http://www.photosshow.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/oruro1.jpg

The HDI is a very controversial measure of development, many consider it flawed (the inequality adjusted HDI [IHDI] may be a bit better). A good example is the case of Peru and Brazil, here the HDI ranking is highly counterintuitive - and it contradicts the UN's own Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) ranking. In spite of Peru's economic and social progress the country still has a large segment of the population living in severe poverty. In Brazil the problem has become much less serious.

http://hostinga.imagecross.com/image-hosting-16/8367H.jpg
Source: http://www.ophi.org.uk/policy/multidimensional-poverty-index/mapping-the-mpi/

This map is tricky. Why is Peru divided in regions and Brazil not? The biggest region in dark blue in north-east Peru only accounts for 750,000 people. While the small region in the central coast almost white accounts for 9.5 million people, or 30% of the population. If you divide Brazil in Regions, you will have dark coulours in the big northern regions that accounts for a small percantage of the total population while the small south east region will be lightblue, which is the most populated one.

HDI its what it is, a measurement of 4 representative variable. Peru has a higher life expectancy than Brazil, a higher school enrollment and very similar child mortality rate. While in GDP per capita PPP Peru is in USD 10,100 and Brazil in USD 11,800.

This map is tricky. Why is Peru divided in regions and Brazil not? The biggest region in dark blue in north-east Peru only accounts for 750,000 people. While the small region in the central coast almost white accounts for 9.5 million people, or 30% of the population. If you divide Brazil in Regions, you will have dark coulours in the big northern regions that accounts for a small percantage of the total population while the small south east region will be lightblue, which is the most populated one.

HDI its what it is, a measurement of 4 representative variable. Peru has a higher life expectancy than Brazil, a higher school enrollment and very similar child mortality rate. While in GDP per capita PPP Peru is in USD 10,100 and Brazil in USD 11,800.

Brazil has a lower MPI than Peru no matter which way you look at it.

But those variables in HDI don't in itself dictate standard of living, you might have education but it says little about the quality or opportunities offered. Peruvians are much more likely to have no portable water, basic sanitation and electricity compared to Brazilians. That dictates quality of living much more than knowing how to read. Not to mention that mean years of schooling and literacy rates has severe generational biases. Compare current primary school enrollment, university enrollment or literacy rate for those age 15-24 and its practically the same. You also forget to mention the difference in maternal mortality which also need to be taken into account and is a bigger problem throughout the developing world. GDP per capita is not the same thing as actual wages.

Actually when we talk about education, quality if far more important than quantity.

http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg41/scaled.php?server=41&filename=13151612.jpg&res=landing
http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg16/scaled.php?server=16&filename=92882817.jpg&res=landing
http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg812/scaled.php?server=812&filename=72065796.jpg&res=landing

Latin America results in the PISA tests have been disappointing so far. According to these results we have several years of schooling gap with the best performing countries. Of particular concern is the low diffusion of science and technology in the region. We have seen that South Korea or Japan developed by dedicating their efforts to improve in those areas.

Brazil has a lower MPI than Peru no matter which way you look at it.

But those variables in HDI don't in itself dictate standard of living, you might have education but it says little about the quality or opportunities offered. Peruvians are much more likely to have no portable water, basic sanitation and electricity compared to Brazilians. That dictates quality of living much more than knowing how to read. Not to mention that mean years of schooling and literacy rates has severe generational biases. Compare current primary school enrollment, university enrollment or literacy rate for those age 15-24 and its practically the same. You also forget to mention the difference in maternal mortality which also need to be taken into account and is a bigger problem throughout the developing world. GDP per capita is not the same thing as actual wages.

I think there are two fundamentals principles for development. Education and the adoption of a system of free markets. Housing and services can be given but if you don't educate people they continue to be poor. These days we have a tool that we hadn't before: the Internet. We should focus efforts on that. We have to give people the possibility to obtain information and analyze it to translate into concrete improvements in their quality of life. In that sense I think programs like Venezuela's Canaima initiative (http://www.canaimaeducativo.gob.ve/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=44&Itemid=92) giving laptops to children with educational content are important. So far venezuelan government has supplied more than a million and a half computers to children to be used in the classrooms. This is good because they get used to technology.

This map is tricky. Why is Peru divided in regions and Brazil not? The biggest region in dark blue in north-east Peru only accounts for 750,000 people. While the small region in the central coast almost white accounts for 9.5 million people, or 30% of the population. If you divide Brazil in Regions, you will have dark coulours in the big northern regions that accounts for a small percantage of the total population while the small south east region will be lightblue, which is the most populated one.

HDI its what it is, a measurement of 4 representative variable. Peru has a higher life expectancy than Brazil, a higher school enrollment and very similar child mortality rate. While in GDP per capita PPP Peru is in USD 10,100 and Brazil in USD 11,800.

Actually MPI is far more accurate than HDI... It doesn't mean that HDI is not accurate in what it concerns... But when trying to compare countries, we should use not only HDI... But HDI, MPI, PISA and other variants...

Take a look at the PISA research and these:

Multidimensional Poverty Index

% of People who are MPI poor

Brazil 2,7%
Argentina 3,0%
Mexico 4,0%
Peru 19,9%


Average Intensity of MPI Poverty

Argentina 37.7
Mexico 38.9
Brazil 39.3
Peru 43.2

Number of MPI Poor People

Argentina 1.160 million
Mexico 4,313 million
Brazil 5,075 million
Peru 5,421

Percentage of people who are Income Poor (Less than 2,00 USD perday)

Argentina 7,2%
Mexico 8,6%
Brazil 9,9%
Peru 14,7%

PISA Results (Measurement of Education)

General PISA

Mexico 425 points
Brazil 412 points
Argentina 398 points
Peru 370 points

Mathematics PISA

Mexico 419 points
Brazil 386 points
Argentina 388 points
Peru 365 points

Science PISA

Mexico 416
Brazil 405
Argentina 401
Peru 369

WHO Healthcare System Ranking

Mexico 61
Argentina 75
Brazil 125
Peru 129

WHO under five Mortality rate

Argentina 14
Mexico 17
Brazil 19
Peru 19

Total Health Expenditure Percapta according WHO

Argentina 734$
Brazil 734$
Mexico 625$
Peru 236$

Life expectancy according WHO

Mexico 76
Peru 76
Argentina 75
Brazil 73

Neonatal Mortality Rate

Argentina 7
Mexico 7
Peru 9
Brazil 12

Immunization Coverage

Argentina 99%
Brazil 99%
Mexico 95%
Peru 94%

Population using improved drinking-water sources

Brazil 98%
Argentina 96%
Mexico 96%
Peru 85%

Population using improved sanitation

Argentina 91%
Brazil 79%
Mexico 85%
Peru 71%

Underweight children (under five)

Brazil 2,2%
Argentina 2,3%
Mexico 3,4%
Peru 4,5%

Prevalence of Smoking (Tobacco) among Adolescents

Peru 19,5%
Argentina 41%
Mexico 42,5%
Brazil 44,5%

Physicians per 10k population

Mexico 19,6
Brazil 17,6
Peru 9,2
Argentina No data

Hospital Beds per 10k population

Argentina 45
Brazil 24
Mexico 16
Peru 15


All those data are available in WHO reports.

We can also compare wealth researches, macroeconomics policies, fiscal policies, investment, employment generation rates, income increasing, real monthly salaries and etc... And all of them will show us that actually not only Argentina is NOT an advanced Country nor Brazil is less advanced than Argentina because if we make an average of all those variants, both of them will be practically at the same level. The point is that just a few years ago, that situation would never be imagined. So we can presume that there're great probabilities that not only Brazil but also another Latin Americans countries surpass Argentinian advances.

Despite that, Latin America has a long long way till get close of countries like Sweden or Germany. By now, countries like Peru, Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Uruguay and Chile are likely to be in the "path of development". I mean in the right way... All we can do is wish good luck to them.

the real world: list of not yet developed nations by PPP per capita

51 Croacia 18.331
52 Argentina 18.319
53 Chile 17.974
54 Rusia 17.691
55 Gabón 17.053
56 Botsuana 16.579
57 Letonia 16.235
58 Malasia 16.186
59 Líbano 15.985
60 Uruguay 15.786
61 Bielorrusia 15.756
62 San Cristóbal y Nieves 15.617
63 Mauricio 15.595
64 México 15.178
65 Panamá 15.082
66 Turquía 14.853
67 Granada 14.238
68 Dominica 14.203
69 Bulgaria 14.021
70 Kazajistán 13.926
71 Irán 13.072
72 Venezuela 13.070
73 Santa Lucía 12.927
74 Rumania 12.843
75 Costa Rica 12.425
76 Brasil 12.181

brazil is poorer than romania. sorry guys the real world says, brazil is just an average latinamerican country. but argentina and chile are the head of latinamerica.

^^If you consider the GDP (nominal) Brazil is better than Argentina (for example). Only if the appearance PPP per capita (which means little). Because if you consider something like the power, international importance, educational development, better infrastructure, real social and economic growth, Brazil is the best.

International Monetary Fund (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary_Fund) (2010-11)

GDP (nominal) per capita:

Some of Latin America:

46 - Chile: $14,278
48 - Uruguay: $13,914
53 - Brazil: $12,789
57 - Argentina: $10,945
60 - Venezuela: $10,610
62 - Mexico: $10,153

In other rankings updated:

World Bank (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Bank) (1990–2010)

53 - Chile
55 - Uruguay
59 - Brazil
64 - Mexico
66 - Argentina

CIA World Factbook (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_Factbook) (2000–2011)

48 - Uruguay
50 - Chile
57 - Brazil
59 - Venezuela
62 - Mexico
63 - Argentina[/URL]

Source: List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita#cite_note-5)
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita#cite_note-3"]

We should use the newest data, the GDP rank by wiki in 2011.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

Only misinformed people use GDP PERCAPTA do measure QUALITY OF LIFE AND DEVELOPMENT.

According to you guys countries like Gabon, Botswana and Iran are better to live than Brazil, Uruguay and Mexico. And actually, if you compare ALL the social and economics variants of those countries... We can prove that it is not TRUTH.

So i think some people here need to take aside it's crazy nationalism and start looking at objective data with rationalism, not passion. I dont need to say anything more... I posted some social data above and we can see that i'm true about development. There is no ranking or data that can prove which country is better than the other.

Only with detailed survey of all variants that make up the social , economic and cultural indicators of a country is that we can measure their level of advancement. I'm sorry if its hard to understand and that takes too much to ask for nationalist people...

Excuse me while I peer into my crystal ball. ;)

Only misinformed people use GDP PERCAPTA do measure QUALITY OF LIFE AND DEVELOPMENT.

According to you guys countries like Gabon, Botswana and Iran are better to live than Brazil, Uruguay and Mexico. And actually, if you compare ALL the social and economics variants of those countries... We can prove that it is not TRUTH.

So i think some people here need to take aside it's crazy nationalism and start looking at objective data with rationalism, not passion. I dont need to say anything more... I posted some social data above and we can see that i'm true about development. There is no ranking or data that can prove which country is better than the other.

Only with detailed survey of all variants that make up the social , economic and cultural indicators of a country is that we can measure their level of advancement. I'm sorry if its hard to understand and that takes too much to ask for nationalist people...

What is wrong with Botswana? They have the HIV problem along with the rest of southern Africa but the government has taken great steps to combat the epidemic and the country is generally well managed and stable with a strong middle class.

The average Iranian is very well educated and has purchasing power slightly greater than the average Brazilian so I'm not sure why Iran is on that list either. Iran likely has a far better income equality than Brazil to boot.

http://www.ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/A.pdf?cda6c1 (http://www.ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/A.pdf?cda6c1)

Intensity of Poverty

The more advanced BRIC countries (Brazil and Russia) are way too far from being developed nations in the conventional means. China and India probably won't be developed in this century either.

China is much ahead of the other three. Second, third and fourth tier cities witness massive construction and economic boom. :)

lol because Iran has a bad press, certainly the USA has succeed for bashing Iran

International Monetary Fund (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary_Fund) (2010-11)

GDP (nominal) per capita:
Nominal GDP values are useless for international (and intertemporal) comparison purposes. That's why the concept of purchasing power parity has been invented.

China is much ahead of the other three. Second, third and fourth tier cities witness massive construction and economic boom. :)

Because it has a much bigger population.

That doesn't necessarily mean that the average citizen has a better standard of living and quality of life though.

What is wrong with Botswana? They have the HIV problem along with the rest of southern Africa but the government has taken great steps to combat the epidemic and the country is generally well managed and stable with a strong middle class.

Botswana along with Namibia are among the most unequal countries on the planet, most live under $2 a day.

The average Iranian is very well educated and has purchasing power slightly greater than the average Brazilian so I'm not sure why Iran is on that list either. Iran likely has a far better income equality than Brazil to boot.

I would honestly like to compare incomes between both countries. I doubt Iranians make more, GDP PPP is NOT a real measure for actual income gains. I don't doubt that they're better educated but I also think many are unemployed for lack of opportunities which is not the case in Brazil.

The average Iranian is very well educated and has purchasing power slightly greater than the average Brazilian so I'm not sure why Iran is on that list either. Iran likely has a far better income equality than Brazil to boot.

Latin American countries have a key advantage in the developing world. The debate over religion is marginal. I agree the main challenge is inequality. One of the key issues is how to insert uneducated people in a modern economy.

the real world: list of not yet developed nations by PPP per capita

51 Croacia 18.331
52 Argentina 18.319
53 Chile 17.974
54 Rusia 17.691
55 Gabón 17.053
56 Botsuana 16.579
57 Letonia 16.235
58 Malasia 16.186
59 Líbano 15.985
60 Uruguay 15.786
61 Bielorrusia 15.756
62 San Cristóbal y Nieves 15.617
63 Mauricio 15.595
64 México 15.178
65 Panamá 15.082
66 Turquía 14.853
67 Granada 14.238
68 Dominica 14.203
69 Bulgaria 14.021
70 Kazajistán 13.926
71 Irán 13.072
72 Venezuela 13.070
73 Santa Lucía 12.927
74 Rumania 12.843
75 Costa Rica 12.425
76 Brasil 12.181

brazil is poorer than romania. sorry guys the real world says, brazil is just an average latinamerican country. but argentina and chile are the head of latinamerica.

I don't understand the obsession of this several times banned Chilean troll with PPP numbers. They mean nothing, fairy tale GDP. US$ 1.00 worths US$ 1.00. That's why Brazilians are buying the whole Miami. Weak currencies mirror weak countries.

And Brazil poorer than Romania? Gives us a break. The average income of Brazilian workers is R$ 1,900.00, not much smaller than Portuguese's. Last year, 3,426,000 cars were sold in Brazil. In Romania, 82,000. Almost 5 times more in per capita terms.

Is this thread about the world or only Latin America? Keep nationalism out of the debate!

I don't understand the obsession of this several times banned Chilean troll with PPP numbers. They mean nothing, fairy tale GDP. US$ 1.00 worths US$ 1.00. That's why Brazilians are buying the whole Miami. Weak currencies mirror weak countries.

And Brazil poorer than Romania? Gives us a break. The average income of Brazilian workers is R$ 1,900.00, not much smaller than Portuguese's. Last year, 3,426,000 cars were sold in Brazil. In Romania, 82,000. Almost 5 times more in per capita terms.

Surely price levels must have some bearing on standard of living?

With a monthly income of $500 you might live a reasonable life in Vietnam but be homeless and hungry in Switzerland.

^^
OK, but GDP per capita is NOT income. So it's completely nonsensical to use PPP to talk about GDP, especially to imply one country is wealthier than other. In any case, things like oil might cost the same in both Switzerland and Vietnam.

Is this thread about the world or only Latin America? Keep nationalism out of the debate!

That's because most of the countries to reach developed status are in the region.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To me, as I said in the locked thread, for one country to reach the developed status, it might have simultaneously a GDP per capita over US$ 20,000.00 (nominal) and a HDI over 0.800.

Maybe average wages at PPP rates would be more useful....

Of course a 30% cheaper overall cost of living doesn't mean that everything is exactly 30% cheaper, it may be that ipads cost the same, cars are 15% less, apartments are 30% less, steaks are 45% less and maids are 60% less. The PPP rate attempts to find an average for a typical basket of goods and services.

China is much ahead of the other three. Second, third and fourth tier cities witness massive construction and economic boom. :)

We're talking about social development, so Russia and Brazil are far ahead of China and India. In the GDP, China (5.900) is ahead of three and Brazil (2.781) in the second place. :okay:

http://i951.photobucket.com/albums/ad358/johnbullxx/Developed.jpg
Dark Blue --- countries with GDP per capita over US$ 20,000.00 and HDI over 0.800
Light Blue --- countries with GDP per capita over US$ 20,000.00 or HDI over 0.800
Green --- countries with GDP per capita over US$ 10,000.00 and HDI over 0.700

GDP per capita 2011 (FMI) and HDI 2011 (UN)

^^
To me, the developed are the dark blue ones. The light blue, will be the next developed, followed by the green. Of course, things might change in the future.

GDP and HDI means nothing. Saudi Arabia will never be a developed country in my book.

OK, but GDP per capita is NOT income. So it's completely nonsensical to use PPP to talk about GDP, especially to imply one country is wealthier than other. In any case, things like oil might cost the same in both Switzerland and Vietnam.GDP per capita is not income per capita but correlates with it, it is the (theoretical) upper limit for average wages and income from self-employment before taxes and social contributions (if depreciation, investment and capital gains were zero). And of course it is not nonsensical to use PPP - it was precisely to make international comparisons possible that the concept was invented. People outside the US usually don't buy products with US dollars unless they are on holiday in another country or mail order something from another country. Except in very rare cases only the national prices are relevant to the consumer - and this does include oil derivated products (whose local prices usually are greatly affected by local circumstances, especially national taxes or, sometimes, subsidies). Hence it is absolutely necessary to consider local pricing to make correct comparisons.
You as a Brazilian should know better. Ten years ago the Brazilian real's external value in US dollars was less then half of what it is now. The doubling of the real's external value neither did imply the doubling of the purchasing power of a Brazilian nor the doubling of Brazil's internal value of production (i.e. GDP in Brazilian real).

Poland and Chile will be the next countries to achieve developed status.

GDP and HDI means nothing. Saudi Arabia will never be a developed country in my book.

It's more accurate to say that GDP and HDI are important barometers, but not the whole story. Social development is vital and I agree with you regarding Saudi Arabia. Likewise, I don't consider the UAE to be a developed country. They still have a very long way to go to advance civil liberties and human rights.

We're talking about social development, so Russia and Brazil are far ahead of China and India. In the GDP, China (5.900) is ahead of three and Brazil (2.781) in the second place. :okay:

How do you quantify social development? I mean, China and India are old cultures. You can say you personally identify or prefer more with the Russian form of social development (and I would tend to agree with you), but in what way is it more advanced than China? Do you mean in terms of health care, education, etc, and how much access the average person has to these services?

How do you quantify social development? I mean, China and India are old cultures. You can say you personally identify or prefer more with the Russian form of social development (and I would tend to agree with you), but in what way is it more advanced than China? Do you mean in terms of health care, education, etc, and how much access the average person has to these services?

There is nothing related to the different cultures of each country. I meant that Brazil and Russia are more advanced than China and India in terms such as education, health, sanitation, security and the like.