Talk:List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita

Map?

Can somebody please plot these data on a map like rich (above world average GDP per capita) and poor (below world average GDP per capita)?

Missing data

Where are the figures for Cuba, Macau, North Korea, Liberia, Iraq, West Bank, Gaza Strip and Somalia?

Does not reflect reality. Information from 2005, Q1 2006 is missing. (Canada's US$1.13 trillion economy = GDP per capita of US$35,060)

It does reflect reality, only as the first sentence says ...for the year 2004. Maybe we should make a list like this one List of countries by GDP (nominal)/update, or make a footnote out of it, like all the discussion going on about the updated figures of China in List of countries by GDP (nominal). --212.102.225.147 12:10, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, an updated GDP list should be made! Otherwise, what good is it to have an encyclopedia with old information? I will withdraw my continued dispute with regards to Canada's GDP per capita, so long as a new list is made.

A uniform source of data is needed for this sort of list, compiled by a single organization such as the World Bank, IMF, or CIA. FYI, GDP figures for 2005 are still being verified/processed, and Q1 2006 is merely estimated GDP. Please wait for IMF to release their data for 2005 (for all countries) in April. It is impractical to have a seperate list for the latest projected/estimated/still-in-processing figures as there is no single source for these figures - you have to get them from individual countries' reports. And that creates the problem of no having no standard basis with which to make meaningful comparisons. Frogular 04:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to the economist Canada's GDP per capita for the year 2005 was in the range of US$35,800. This is not PPP but rather quoted in nomimal figures. I agree that there needs to be a standard basis with which meaningful comparisons can be made. As mentioned before, it is vital that such information is kept up to date.

As up to date as the organizations that compile such data - IMF will release their updated figures soon (April). Frogular 06:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One source needs to be used, and some sources such as the IMF and Worldbank are very extensive, and all other countries that are not availabe in one of those sources should be marked with a star or some other marker.

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 22:15, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That isn't very easy. If you put data for several years, you have to use a fixed price for a given year, a base year that might be from a decade ago. Here we are trying to put the latest data at the current price. --Cantus…☎ 01:57, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)

I do not quite see why we should completely exclude available information about super rich countries like Brunei, Monaco, Liechtenstein, Andorra, and San Marino. The Vatican would be an interesting case, too. We can mark them to be estimations and provide the sources, but keeping it as it is means pretending the people in the top listed countries were the richest in the world, and this is not at all the case. Get-back-world-respect 20:05, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The GDPs for a number of countries are definitely not from 2003 - from which source are the GDPs taken?

List of cities/conurbations/metropolitan areas by GDP

Is there any list on the GDP per capita of cities, conurbations or metropolitan areas? — Insta ntnood 09:33 Mar 7 2005 (UTC)

Taiwan/ROC

160.39.195.88 changed "Republic of China (Taiwan)" to "Taiwan". — Insta ntnood 16:45, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

Romanian GPD

Look, the Romanian GPD is nto 3,200, right? Romania is not more poor that Bulgaria or others countries at the same level. Take a look at Romania and see what's its GPD. NorbertArthur 18 March 2006

This Article Is Seriously Misleading

This article needs to make it clear that: "GDP (nominal) per capita" is based on one thing and one thing only: the world currency markets. Say what you want to about the latter, but the value that markets assign to currency is the ONLY real-world value that currencies have. Thus GDP (nominal) per capita is the ONLY definitive way to compare national economies. The PPP method, which has increasingly gained favor in recent years, is highly flawed and is based on obscure methodology that (absurdly) ranks items like McDonald's "Big Mac" hamburgers (even though the latter is far more of a "staple" of daily living in a place like the U.S., than somewhere like Taiwan or Bolivia. Meanwhile, the basic staples of daily life in a place like, say, Japan, are not even factored into the PPP valuations. The U.S. media is very strongly misleading its readers when it relies solely on PPP numbers (and fails to inform its readership exactly what PPP is based on). There are some (flimsy) arguments for the use of PPP, but by and large it is a highly flawed methodology that really needs to be scrapped entirely. It's foolish to rely on anything other than the marketplace to determine the true value of a given currency. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.86.119.156 (talk • contribs) 03:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

forecast

why the page doesnt have a link to the forecast for the year 2006 or 2007, as most of the pages of this kind do.--Ifeldman84 01:23, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]