Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

forest444

(5,902 posts)
3. That would be in nominal GDP per capita terms.
Fri Dec 18, 2015, 10:32 PM
Dec 2015

Even so, GDP will likely slip 2 to 3% this year in real terms - the first decline since 2002.

There's been much heated debate among economists over the last 30-plus years about the virtues of using nominal GDP and GDP per capita figures, since they don't take into account over or undervaluation of different currencies. Nor does it, of course, take into account average living conditions and income distribution.

About 30 years ago, then, the use of what's referred to as 'Purchasing Power Parity' became widely used to take into account the differences in costs between one country and the other.

A family of three in Argentina, for example, earning 1,000 dollars a month at the new rate of 14 pesos lives a decent, middle class life. One earning 2,000 dollars saves an average of 500 dollars a month, according to banking data. This is especially true if they live outside Buenos Aires.

It goes without saying that a family of three in the U.S. earning 2,000 a month is poor; one earning 1,000 would be indigent outright, without public assistance. In countries like the U.K. and Japan, income needs in dollars terms are even higher.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Latin America»Macri's devaluation could...»Reply #3