[lalffibra]

Exactly. gribbler said one word and it sent you into an incoherent rage.

****tard.

[SkapySisy]

A unique thing about China is the one child policy, and will be significantly effecting GDP growth and per capita growth. Surprised no-one's mentioned it yet.

[fluoxet]

It's hard to say, but China won't keep growing at the rate they are and I suspect that most people are overestimating the amount that they will grow in the future.

[gniewkoit]

Can't be arsed to check but the GDP numbers better be @ PPP or you are comparing apples and oranges...

[Paul Bunyan]

It says nominal GDP in the title, you ****wit.

[farmarrl]

We were discussing the question that is the title of the thread, but now we're probably going to start laughing about what a retard you are.

[carinsurancess]

We were discussing the question that is the title of the thread, but now we're probably going to start laughing about what a retard you are.

Oh what a snappy come back. You are such a big boy. Unfortunately value add is rather low if you never know what you are discussing about and when you can only exist by the grace of KH.

[bellson]

Oh and ****face Drake, GDP can be in nominal terms but adjusted for PPP.

No. Sorry. That's not right.

[Amomiamup]

No. Sorry. That's not right.

Dude, it is.

[adultcomicssitedessaa]

Never had a reason to use a nominal PPP adjusted GDP in my models, but you can when you calculate the PPP index extract the CPI (or whatever inflation index you want to use).

[Mymnnarry]

Oh and ****face Drake, GDP can be in nominal terms but adjusted for PPP. Nominal vs real indicates there has been a correction for inflation.

You ****ing moron, when you are talking about cross-country comparisons (when will China have higher GDP than the US) it indicates whether or not you've adjusted for purchasing power across countries (PPP). When you are talking about cross-time comparisons (when will the US have twice the GDP it does today) it indicates whether or not you've adjusted for purchasing power across times (CPI).

[Flieteewell]

1. dannubis is correct
2. dannubis wastes time talking to a brick wall

[tipokot]

Danubes, when you say something stupid just admit it...

[U2DnBGFE]

Now, if we were discussing the question "when will China have higher GDP than the US does today" we would have to be a little more careful. And because the baskets for calculating PPP and CPI are not guaranteed to generate consistent answers, it matters in which direction we close the FX triangle.

Duh? So? Where did I claim something different?

All I am saying is that PPP does not have to include CPI for the dollar.

And I am not taking about growth rates you daft person. In know that PPP has only marginal impact on growth rates. I am talking about determining the level at which China will start to slow down if they follow the same path as the Japanese or the Koreans did.

[Nurfzerne]

This economics smack-talk would probably be awesome if danny-boy had any clue what it all meant.

FTFY

[JediReturns84]

Again, I am not ****ing disagreeing with you on your calculation, you twit. I know how it is done. Thanks for kicking in an open door yet again.

Your line 2) gives you nominal GDP adjusted for PPP. It is the same as real GDP if you use USD in real terms for base year t.

Alpie said that from a GDP of about XX/cap he saw a slowdown for Japan some 20 years ago. China is close to this number so China should slow down.
In order to say something usefull on this you have to apply both PPP and CPI of the dollar to the XX. Not 100 % correct because of your 1a, I know, but good enough for practical use.

[arraxylap]

Exactly right. We are bobbling along at just under this planet's growth glass ceiling as it is. Also, once we achieve that glass ceiling, we'll find it will come crashing down - taking us with it.

Not long now...