You must log in or register to comment.

pokexchespin t1_j8hd6fh wrote

why is there no legend for countries that didn’t make it to 2020?


Meritania t1_j8heguc wrote

It’s worse for countries that didn’t start the list in 1980 and didn’t make it to 2020, as they have been eradicated from the timeline.


ismaelsow t1_j8hnhpa wrote

What does "average value" of GDP mean?


ferrel_hadley t1_j8i3578 wrote

They are taking the average GDP adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity over 5 years. The problem is I am not sure PPP works for total GDP, it is meant to reflect the differences in consumer income i.e. how far a consumers wages will go. So someone in the US on say $50 000 may only be able to buy the same amount of goods as someone in country x who is on $40 000 because consumer prices are lower.

But it relies on a basket of consumer goods, so I really don't think it works scaling to GDP as a large part of GDP calculations are not in a sample consumer basket and if you exclude things like property (which is insanely expensive in China) you can end up with wild distortions.


droolingdonkey t1_j8i4q2q wrote

Haha then this chart is even more false. My money as a scandinavian would go longer then the avarage Russian. Holy smokes what a shit measurement.


svn380 t1_j8w96p5 wrote

Are you sure they're using PPP?

I didn't see that info and was wondering....


[deleted] t1_j8hti19 wrote



khalcyon2011 t1_j8hya2m wrote

Yeah, USA's nominal GDP is about $7 trillion more than China's, and the per Capita GDP of the US is much higher. There's some serious shenanigans going on here to put China about the US.


ale_93113 t1_j8k2n7z wrote

Lmao, gdp ppp is what is used to calculate gdp growth figures you see all the time in the headlines

It's been the way to correct for currency fluctuations since the 1960s

How is it a manipulation to put china in top?


_Red_User_ t1_j8hdvho wrote

Do you know by chance who the two countries are that disappeared from the chart in 1990?


Meritania t1_j8heqzl wrote

There is also a country in tenth place in the 00s that disappears from the graph, I’m guessing South Korea


epolonsky t1_j8ie9l0 wrote

It's a little-known fact that for that decade there were only nine countries in the world.


Preds-poor_and_proud t1_j8i3dr7 wrote

I don't understand what is being measured here. I think it is showing GDP by Purchasing Power Parity, but I don't understand why it says "average values of GDP". I'm not familiar with that term.


droolingdonkey t1_j8i59nt wrote

It is a shitty measurement made to make russia and china seem better of then they are. Lets say 99% of the population eats potatoes and little money get you by but the problem very few has any money at all... then if 99% of the GDP is in corrupted oligarchs sitting in moscow then the measurement is off. Because the population wont buy potatoes and other goods for the 99% because they will never have much of the GDP.


svn380 t1_j8w9tyl wrote

  • that's not why Purchasing Power Parity exchange rates are used for international comparisons. Instead it tries to adjust for the fact that most spending is on "non-traded" goods and services.

  • it sounds like you're thinking of GDP per capita. Here "average" GDP seems to take a moving average to get nice smooth lines.


insufferablyaverage t1_j8k6m1g wrote

I have difficulty believing the USSR surpassed the US in the 1980s, it was a train wreck by then


sudden_aggression t1_j8i9pyh wrote

I like how it uses official soviet/ccp propaganda figures for GDP- this chart is pure fantasy.

For example, the soviet union GDP was smaller than California's GDP by the late 80s but no one realized it until the collapse. It never got close to the US GDP.

Also, China's GDP has been fake for years. All the recent growth is due to China maintaining the exchange rate while printing money like Zimbabwe. If China actually let their citizens freely trade the RMB, it would collapse to nothing overnight.

In any case, there is some sort of bizarre fakery going on with the numbers behind this chart. Maybe it's using PPP with adjustments or something.


bazillaa t1_j8j9z8b wrote

Questions about how meaningful the metric is aside...

  • Where are the labels for countries that drop out of the top 10 before 2020?
  • Where's the rest of the Italy line? (blank spots where it should be 1995-2010)
  • If Russia gets a new line when the USSR splits up, shouldn't Germany get a new line when East and West merged?

encelado748 t1_j8hffz1 wrote

why Italy disappear in 1990? Should be in 10th place until 2010 (there is a gap in the graph)


droolingdonkey t1_j8i4hor wrote

Russia has is at place 11 not nr 5 so this graph is either false or has some kind of weird measurement.


The measurement is even worse then i first thought. They use PPP against GDP... as if the poor babuscha living outside moscow on her 170 dollar pension. It doesnt matter if she can get by on little money because she or the avarage russian would never lay hand on any large part of the GDP.


svn380 t1_j8waxo9 wrote

So you're making the argument that an unequal income distribution distorts this international comparison?

And you object to how this boosts Russia's ranking?

Just wondering what you think this effect would have on the ranking of other big economies....(e.g. China, India, USA)?


droolingdonkey t1_j8wc6ve wrote

yes because if we make it to extremes, say 99% of GDP is in one mans pocket. The population has 1% to use between them. Rent will be in pennies and people would develop a trade system between each other and international currency seen as gold worth, lets say venezuela. If you than use this measurement and divide GDP equal over the population and give each say 100 dollars one would think they are well off by saying hey look 100 dollars equal 600 years of rent etc.

I dont know enough to compare individual countries but i know enough to understand that it is a flawed measurement. It would be better to measure the median salery and see how far you get by or pension for elders etc.

Edit. I know enough of russias system, pensions and median income and how the wealth is centered around oligarchy and moscow + st petersburg. A third of the population has no access to indoor plumbing or toilets.


svn380 t1_j8wekzm wrote

Murdered by words.....

>If you than use this measurement and divide GDP equal over the population....

Yes .... but that's not what they are doing in this graph. They are comparing GDP, not GDP per capita

>I dont know enough to compare individual countries

....but isn't that what the graphic is all about?


droolingdonkey t1_j8wfulk wrote

You cant use that measurement to compare individual countries if you measure it against GDP at all. You have to measure median salery and pensions and capital of the avarage citizen.

Edit. GDP per capita is just GDP divided by citizens and is not equal to the example of putting the money into the citizen to use as in the example.


svn380 t1_j8yurhh wrote

  1. Comparing living standards across countries is interesting.

  2. Comparing the size of different countries ' economies is also interesting.

The graph is trying to do (2). It is not trying to do (1).


droolingdonkey t1_j8z2t82 wrote

How i saw the graph was it showed how long money would go in said country. The size of economy would equal gdp only? or am i missing something.


InverstNoob t1_j8lscr0 wrote

The China GDP numbers are fake though. The CCP lies about absolutely everything.


sisiredd t1_j8jv7ux wrote

I don't get this. USSR disappears in '90, China passes Germany in around '95 (according to this graph). Shouldn't Germany then be in third place in the first half of the 90s?


Dragon-Ash t1_j8kyaoh wrote

This chart - or more specifically, the "data" (I use that term loosely) behind it - is garbage. Ignore.


Odd-Leather-7915 t1_j8hexs6 wrote

What the F is up with France? And UK and Brazil are in lockstep. Interesting.


mynameismy111 t1_j8hjrv6 wrote

French Automobile industry collapsed but the euro, tourism and real estate investment compensated


NathanielA t1_j8rd0nd wrote

It has its faults, but at least it's not one of those animations that show the little flags changing places. I would much rather see a traditional chart than another one of those.


ittybittycitykitty t1_j8x673m wrote

Seconded. Only quibble is the lines that drop out/in need labels. The details of what exactly is measured should go in footnotes.

Thank you, OP, for making this a line chart.


Boatster_McBoat t1_j8wrj9v wrote

This could have been so good. Condenses the info of one of those two minute videos into one image. But lacks a bit of polish


bullitt4796 t1_j8qi2ns wrote

China figured out how to take a capitalistic approach in a communistic government.


rareHarambe t1_j8t0pj7 wrote

Wasn't it recently discovered that China was lying about its GDP growth numbers for the past 10 years or so and that their economy is actually still far off from the US?


[deleted] t1_j93mjqv wrote

Terrible chart. Not beautiful if no one knows what the fuck it is.


highcharts OP t1_j8hd2h4 wrote

A simple line chart to display the top 10 largest economies by average values of GDP. I used Highcharts and data from Wikipedia. More information in this line chart article.


droolingdonkey t1_j8i4wkz wrote

The problem is that you cant measure it as "how long would 100 dollars get me" if 95% of the gdp is in the oligarchs in lets say russia and the avarage babuscha is living on 180 dollars per months.

To look at the avarage purchase power of the avarage citizen you have to use median income and then china and russia would be very far behind. place 20-40 somewhere.