Talk:List of countries by GDP (PPP)
From Academic Kids
| Contents |
Old data
Let me get this right? We've deleted the data from 2004 and replaced it with data from 2003? Why? to make the US look better? (EU is not mentioned now) --JFM 19:15, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I wonder this too.. /magnus 2004-12-14.
- who would agree to the data being reset to the previous 2004 data, but using the updated descriptions?--JFM 19:57, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- right i worked out the GDP for all 25 countries. this is only a rough number, since the 25 were not part of the EU in 2003, but we can call this pretty accurate until such a time as we get 2004 data (the number matches the one later in this thread)--JFM 18:47, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
What the hell is going on here? Why was the old information deleted in favor of the World Bank listing? This list is much more incomplete and omits certain countries. Please explain this. --Jiang 07:52, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- (from Talk:List of countries by GDP (nominal)) That data was not accurate. The information came from various unespecified sources and the values were not set to a base year price. Without a base year price, it makes no sense to have such a list spanning so many years. And if we ever have such a list here, it would defeat the purpose of this page, as the prices would not be current and as a consequence, not useful for the regular user coming here. —Cantus…☎ 09:44, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)
The ranking is misleading due to some major ommissions. I believe the old data came from the CIA. Maybe provide two data tables? --Jiang 10:43, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Maybe we can fill in the blanks using CIA values and indicate so with a foot note? —Cantus…☎ 13:12, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)
Sounds like a plan--Jiang 01:05, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Right Place?
Is this the right place for this page or should it be at List of countries by GDP? -- Graham :) 21:17, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I originally made it at "... by gdp", but spelled lower case. I couldnt change this (on moving: error: this page exists). Compared to lower case I preferred "... by gross domestic product". The original page still exists as a redirect.--RScheiber 16:24, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- One problem: there is already a list of the top 25 countries by gdp at Gross domestic product. I'm tempted to say keep this one but list all countries by gdp according to a recent list, what do you say? -- Graham :) 20:01, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- This list is based on exchange rates. That other list is based on purchasing power parity, which gives different results. Newer data than from 2001 would be appreciated, but is not fully available. Even for 2001 I didn't get precise data for some countries, mostly arabic ones. --RScheiber 16:08, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Revamping of article
Regarding duplicate entries: I lifted this info verbatim from the CIA World Factbook site. They had those countries listed three times as well, as you can see here (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html). I do not know if there is a reason for this, or a glitch in their software. See this page (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2001.html) as well, which has multiple GDPs for the same country. --Cantus 01:28, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I appreciate the discussion regarding exchange rates vs. ppp. But I doubt that it is necessary to remove the exchange-rate numbers. There is already an other page with a list of countries by ppp (Gross_domestic_product), even if this list is incomlete (25 countries). I prefer 2 lists: one with ppp, and one with exchange rates. Either in one page, or in two different. I think ppp would be more important, but exchange rates are of interest also. The two list solution would also be a good companion of the new discussion about ppp vs. exchange rates. --RScheiber 15:44, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I am interested to know why the CIA World Factbook data was chosen over the World Bank data (http://www.worldbank.org/data/quickreference/quickref.html)? The figures are fairly similar but the World Bank ones appear to be more accurate (ie. less rounding). There is also a footnote clarifying the Indian and Chinese figures which would answer most peoples first question when seeing the table. Any opinions on which data set to use? --Sekizaru 21:11, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Update and Expand
- It would be great to have the data from 2003 and perhaps a couple of years back like List of countries by GDP. - Jerryseinfeld 22:13, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I've began to update it. - Jerryseinfeld 22:05, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
GDP
The IMF database put the EU PPP GDP at 10.953 trillion for 2003, PPP (http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2004/02/data/dbcoutm.cfm?SD=2003&ED=2003&R1=1&R2=1&CS=3&SS=2&OS=C&DD=0&OUT=1&C=946-137-122-181-124-138-964-182-423-935-128-936-961-939-184-172-132-134-174-144-944-178-136-112-941&S=PPPWGT&CMP=0&x=63&y=17). That would put it behind the US for that year. - Jerryseinfeld 18:27, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Reverted clarification
I tried to clarify the explanation from:
Source: World Development Indicators database, World Bank, September 2004.
.. Not available. PPP is purchasing power parity; an international dollar has the same purchasing power over GDP as a U.S. dollar has in the United States.
Note: Rankings include only those economies with confirmed PPP GDP estimates. Figures in italics are for 2002 or 2001.
a. Estimate is based on a bilateral comparison between China and the United States (Ruoen and Kai, 1995).
b. Estimate is based on regression; other PPP figures are extrapolated from the latest International Comparison Programme benchmark estimates.
c. Data refer to mainland Tanzania only.
to
Source: World Development Indicators database, World Bank, September 2004.
.. Not available. PPP is purchasing power parity; the PPP of a U.S. dollar is the same as a "nominal" U.S. dollar, i.e. the PPP exchange rate of a U.D. dollar to a U.S. dollar is 1.0.
Note: Rankings include only those economies that count their GDP, and that have a confirmed PPP exchange rate of their currency to the U.S. dollar. Figures in italics are for 2002 or 2001.
a. Estimate is based on a bilateral comparison between China and the United States (Ruoen and Kai, 1995).
b. Estimate is based on regression; other PPP figures are extrapolated from the latest International Comparison Programme benchmark estimates.
c. Data refer to mainland Tanzania only.
but it was reverted. Now it'll be here for anyone to see. First of all there is no "international dollar", and it's not the "purchasing power over GDP as a U.S. dollar has in the United States", it's the PPP of a dollar anywhere in the world. And secondly, "only those economies with confirmed PPP GDP estimates", if no one counts the GDP, there wont be any GDP number, it doesn't fall from the sky, and the PPP of the local currency has nothing to do with GDP, it's the purchasing power of the currency to buy largely unprocessed commodities priced in the local currency. - Jerryseinfeld 19:42, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
EU?
On the page about the European Union, it is stated that the EU is the 1st by GDP, and the link leads here, but here the EU isn't mentioned in the table. The same for the List of countries by population. It looks odd that those links lead to pages where the EU is not even mentioned. We should either include the EU in the lists, like in the List of countries by area (where the EU, being the 7th largest, is listed after the 6th largest but is not numbered as 7th, so it doesn't mess up the order of actual countries), or we should delete the links leading here from the EU article, since the EU isn't included in the country lists either by population or GDP. I think the first idea is better, since Wiki should include as much info as it's possible. Opinions? Please answer at Talk:List of countries by population to keep the discussion in one place. Alensha 15:24, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- this page has the EU data again - it was removed by someone (bias?) - if the EU were a country it would have the highest GDP, so the other pages are right- this is just a stupid edit war damaging the other articles --JFM 15:17, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding the info again. I hope it won't get lost in the edit war... Alensha 13:39, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- The EU should be in its place, even CIA now recognizes. Only ppl that dont know it exclude it from the list. -Pedro 21:46, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- The EU should be in the table, but not given a rank. If it is given a rank, then probably member countries should be listed since they are counted in EU. Anyway, I think having EU listed, but not having a rank # like "World" is fine solution. --Berkut 06:25, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
- The EU should be in the table, and be ranked. The CIA World factbook does it. The question is if "World" should be there at all. It's an interesting fact, but should hardly be in an indexed ranked table. Having a sorted table with some elements indexed and others not is plain stupid.
Taiwan/ROC
160.39.195.88 changed (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29&oldid=12524654&diff=next) "Republic of China (Taiwan)" to "Taiwan". — Instantnood 16:49, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
Rankings
Can it be two-column - one for ranking of sovereign states, and the other for all countries listed? — Instantnood 12:45, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
