Talk:List of U.S. states by GDP per capita
|WikiProject United States||(Rated List-class)|
- 1 Request for update of map
- 2 2006 GSP per capita
- 3 United States as a Whole
- 4 2006 GDP per capita data
- 5 Contradiction
- 6 Merge
- 7 Are these Numbers way out?
- 8 District of Columbia numbers are way out
- 9 Update Data From bea.gov
- 10 Need equivalent of PPP for each state within the USA
- 11 We need to make a distinction between current and real GDP per capita
Request for update of map
Does anyone know where the 2005 map can be found? This one has no label, but appears to be from 2004. Thanks. Ufwuct 18:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- Presently (2009) outdated again, but this guy's request was addressed (updated to 2006 map).
2006 GSP per capita
Can anyone please provide data for the latest 2006 GSP per capita figues? It would be greatly appreciated, (220.127.116.11 01:17, 31 August 2007 (UTC))
- Fixed, then removed (possibly bad data? see below). 18.104.22.168 (talk) 02:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
United States as a Whole
Someone should put in the U.S. as a whole in the appropriate place in this list. 22.214.171.124 17:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
2006 GDP per capita data
- Yes, I've also given a link to BEA.gov's search engine so, for the time being, WP users can get the raw data, whether for 2006 or even 2008 (and 2009, it'll be available soon enough...). But I also suggested this should be merged with another article; I don't want to work in this page if it just gets deleted (even if I had the time/interest).126.96.36.199 (talk) 02:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Alright, not a contradiction per se, but the 2006 data are vastly different from the 2004 and 2005 numbers. 1. Some of the rankings do not line up year to year. 2. There is a precipitous drop from 2005 to 2006, even in states where the economy is booming. For instance, in the same press release cited for this 2006 data, the GSP of Texas is noted as $867,918,000,000 in 2006, whereas the List of U.S. states by GDP (nominal) article shows $1,065,891,000,000 for 2006.
- Interesting, I haven't verified it myself though. I assume that's why the 2006 data was deleted, but anyone interested should check: Which Wikipedia page's data was entered wrong, this one or the one you just linked to? Or is it the BEA itself, not a Wikipedian, who messed up?188.8.131.52 (talk)
It is 18.6% too low!!! So, it's not just the GSP per capita data that is incorrect, but their total GSP data seems wrong. Does the 2006 data use 2000 dollars?
- Shouldn't be, this is GDP (nominal), so is the other page's data. Should be as simple as dividing by population, but the 2010 numbers should be more accurate (when 2010 census completed).184.108.40.206 (talk) 02:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Was the methodology changed? Were 2006 population estimates used for the 2006 data, but population estimates from 2000 used for 2004 and 2005 data? Details should be noted. Ufwuct (talk) 14:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Or better yet, is there a source besides BEA that measures this? e.g. The list in List of Countries by Public Debt lists several sources (though CIA is only there for _every_ nation, similar WP pages have better listings of several sources side-by-side).220.127.116.11 (talk) 02:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Could you please explain your edits (i.e., on the talk page)?
- "remove false tag". The article seemed to contradict itself. In fact, the core data of the article seemed to be in conflict, not some minor one sentence statement. So the tag seemed pretty relevant and the most relevant I could find for this type of situation.
- "add disimbig". In the disambig template, you said that this article is about per capita income. Actually, the article is about per capita GSP, a different concept. I do like the fact that you added a sort of "see also" link for List of U.S. states by GDP (nominal), which was missing, so I'll add that to the bottom.
This list makes no sense. The majority of people that live and work in D.C. work for the state. D.C. produces hardly anything. It should probably have a negative GDP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 21:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
- The onus would be on you to provide a credible source that challenges BEA's credibility, or prove Wikipedians are misusing BEA data.22.214.171.124 (talk) 03:09, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello, could you please fix the data for 2008 as it is wrong. You use Personal Income per capita which is NOT the same as GDP per capita. You must use the number from BEA, below and divide it by its population. It just did it with D.C., and got almost $200,000 and $31,000 for MS, showing how far away your data is. You must also not use the GDP per capita figure shown below because of the fact that all other data of all other countries is in current prices. Thus, use GDP in current dollars, find the population online for 2008 for each state, and divide.
I expected the Rankings in the main table to correspond with the 2015 column data and to match the Rankings in the bar graph at right "GSP Per Capita in 2015" (Cengelbart (talk) 19:08, 22 December 2016 (UTC)).
- I found the same table here https://www.statista.com/statistics/248063/per-capita-us-real-gross-domestic-product-gdp-by-state/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cengelbart (talk • contribs) 19:27, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
- I'd say the best opportunity to check the data for contradictions is when someone adds this data (including missing, 2006 and 2008, data) by merging it with the List of U.S. states by GDP (nominal). It's easier to check that Wikipedians and BEA.gov are both presenting the data faithfully when all the relevant data are next to each other, all on the same page... [[Using This section of census.gov to present "capita" ("population" per state) data on the same page could make it even more reader-friendly.
- But I agree, with the 2007 data there now, even some of the most basic statements in the intro paragraphs, also, don't match the data presented (contradictions). It's ugly, so ugly I won't try to fix it. :-) ...but some things, like the explanation of nominal GDP vs PPP GDP (which it should link to, so curious people know something exists which _does_ account for "unadjusted for inflation or purchasing power disparities among the states"), the concept of value added (VAT tax), etc. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 02:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
2009 Merge Template
In addition to the issues above: As of August 2009, this page is suffering from a general lack of maintenance (not as much info as the page I've proposed it be merged with, less years being listed (not kept up-to-date), credibility of its info challenged, etc.), so maybe maintaining one page not two will result in better info-sharing and data-verification? Just add a "per capita" column to the other webpage? (maybe also a "population" column.) Discuss (or just do it if, in a few months, no one gives any reasons why this page shouldn't be merged)?
- STRONGLY AGREE! Just add a "per capita" column to List_of_U.S._states_by_GDP. These statistics are so intrinsically related, there's no reason to have a separate article. Readers want to compare those columns in the same table, not have to go search for a separate article. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 19:02, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Information is WRONG
Please change the data for 2008 as it is wrong. The user used Personal Income per capita, which is NOT the same as GDP per capita! Someone will have to take their time to do it, but below are the figures for GDP in current prices, for which one can get a population figure and get GDP per capita. Do not use the provided GDP per capita b/c it is in constant dollars, while all the other countries use current dollars.
Undid your revision. State GDP article doesn't have population or per-capita information. Please add it in if you want to do a redirect. It's inappropriate to redirect an article specifically about per-capita GDP to a page without that information. Deleting the page completely or including a link to a GSP per-capita (PPP) would make more sense, but that's a different discussion.Ahmchugh (talk) 23:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Are these Numbers way out?
Using the state GDP figures from the other article and dividing by the 2010 census populations, you get figures quite a bit different to those in this article. I don't know how these were calculated, but unless my method was incorrect, this is way off. I've just realised, the other figures are rounded to millions, so I can see there being a little difference, but this article states DCs per capita at 66,000 and when I divide 104,700,000,000 by 601,723 I get 174,000. That's a ridiculous difference. The others differ by less than 20,000, but that's still high, what's up here? I realise these are 2009 numbers and I used 2010 numbers, but there can't be such a difference. VanillaBear23 (talk) 08:49, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
District of Columbia numbers are way out
You have to wonder how the GDP of D.C. is estimated. According to this table, the average resident of D.C. is more than three times more productive than the average resident of the United States.
That of course cannot be true. If you've ever met an average resident of D.C., he or she did not strike you as a miraculous outlier of productivity.
Furthermore, many government workers in D.C. are involved with the creation and enforcement of counterproductive regulations that cripple economic activity nationwide. If that fact were taken into account, I wouldn't be surprised to see a negative GDP for Washington, D.C. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 19:25, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Have you ever met a resident of DC? I think not. Please do your agendaposting elsewhere.2601:140:8980:106F:ADB8:26EB:4F2A:675A (talk) 04:41, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
Update Data From bea.gov
Using the interactive tables at bea.gov. All the data going back to 1997, chained in 2009 dollar, not 2005 dollars.
Will someone be willing to format the data into the page? I am not to sure on how to go about changing a wikipedia page..
Need equivalent of PPP for each state within the USA
Since there are some differences in the cost of living between the different states, the comparison is not that interesting. To make a fair comparison, you need detailed data for the cost of living in each USA state, so you can actually calculate the equivalent of PPP for each state. Some data that could be used here : https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/rpp/rpp_newsrelease.htm Bohan (talk) Their methodology is detailed here : https://www.bea.gov/regional/pdf/RPP2016_methodology.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bohan (talk • contribs) 19:24, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
We need to make a distinction between current and real GDP per capita
This post is in response to the "GDP (PPP) Per capita $62,743 (9th)" on United States Climate Alliance. While that stat/comparison looks innocent enough, I suspect it is misleading. It pulls GDP per capita figures in constant/real dollars from this page and compares with GDP per capita figures in current dollars.
I think I understand the current vs constant/real dollars and nominal vs PPP dichotomies, with constant/real being an adjustment over time for inflation and PPP being an adjustment across countries for purchasing power. It gets more complicated, though, when we try to understand how these two ideas come together in the various lists we see here on Wikipedia. The PPP article does make some mention of adjusting for inflation, but I believe that the GDP (PPP) figures on most of the Wikipedia lists are not adjusted for inflation (i.e. use current dollars) for the reason given below:
The US's 2016 GDP on List of countries by GDP (PPP) is listed as $18,56 trillion, which is in line with the BEA's report of the US's 2016 GDP in current dollars. If we make a similar comparison for GDP per capita, we see that BEA has the US's GDP per capita at $50,577 (real dollars) in 2016, which differs significantly from the $57,000 figures listed on List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita. This indicates that the aforementioned country comparison of GDP (PPP) per capita also uses current dollars.
Currently, this page only lists GDP per capita in real dollars (with PPP being implied since US purchasing power is used as the base for PPP) and seems to imply by omission that all GDP per capita values are created equal. Certainly, in the context of comparing the wealth of states over time, using real dollars makes sense, but it seems the article should still discuss the discrepancy I've highlighted. I'd very interested to hear any thoughts or corrections.