Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Europe's incomes outpaced the rest of the west in 1990-2002

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 7
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 template Next
  • #31
    Originally posted by el freako


    I have posted facts proving otherwise (although France and Germany certainly have not performed as well as the EU15)

    Why should I ignore the facts just based on your opinon?

    If you have any data that proves your point feel free to do so and I will comment on that.
    You keep BAMing over and over again. It isn't my fault.

    saras, you get a clue.

    And who the **** is fez? do you people drink acid?
    For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)

    Comment

    • #32
      Fez is quality entertainment
      Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?

      It's no good (from an evolutionary point of view) to have the physique of Tarzan if you have the sex drive of a philosopher. -- Michael Ruse
      The Nedaverse I can accept, but not the Berzaverse. There can only be so many alternate realities. -- Elok

      Comment

      • #33
        Originally posted by Giancarlo

        You keep BAMing over and over again. It isn't my fault.
        Actually it's the data which is providing the same results again and again Giancarlo, how can I help but report on it?

        I note that you refuse to provide any data to back up your points.

        You have also shown yourself in the past to be unwilling to risk anything for your beliefs - again, you care for a little wager?
        19th Century Liberal, 21st Century European

        Comment

        • #34
          Originally posted by el freako


          Well I note that you refuse to provide any data to back up your points.

          You have also shown yourself in the past to be unwilling to risk anything for your beliefs - again, you care for a little wager?
          BAM!
          For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)

          Comment

          • #35
            Originally posted by Giancarlo

            BAM!
            Please excuse this oldster but what do you mean by BAM!?
            19th Century Liberal, 21st Century European

            Comment

            • #36
              Originally posted by el freako


              Please excuse this oldster but what do you mean by BAM!?
              you are a bald assertion man.
              For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)

              Comment

              • #37
                * Ironymeter goes off-scale ...
                Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?

                It's no good (from an evolutionary point of view) to have the physique of Tarzan if you have the sex drive of a philosopher. -- Michael Ruse
                The Nedaverse I can accept, but not the Berzaverse. There can only be so many alternate realities. -- Elok

                Comment

                • #38
                  Giancarlo, please be quiet.

                  El freako, I still have no idea what do those figures mean. Income growth during a single year? If so, the US is still growing much faster than either EU15 or EU25, only it's growth has slowed a bit. I don't see how that is supporting the thread title.

                  And why use randomly picked years to prove your points, anyway? You can easily manipulate the image by picking years which were recession years in some countries -- why not use 5 (or 10) -year period averages?

                  Comment

                  • #39
                    el freako has already pointed out at least twice that the numbers are adjusted for the economic cycle.
                    Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?

                    It's no good (from an evolutionary point of view) to have the physique of Tarzan if you have the sex drive of a philosopher. -- Michael Ruse
                    The Nedaverse I can accept, but not the Berzaverse. There can only be so many alternate realities. -- Elok

                    Comment

                    • #40
                      Originally posted by VJ
                      El freako, I still have no idea what do those figures mean. Income growth during a single year? If so, the US is still growing much faster than either EU15 or EU25, only it's growth has slowed a bit. I don't see how that is supporting the thread title.
                      The figures are the level of income relative to the EU15 average - I can't use the EU25 as there is no data for the accession countries for output gap, EKS PPPs or net property income for 1990.
                      So if a country like Canada shows as +8% (+17%) that means that it had an income 8% above the EU15 average in 2002 but it was 17% higher in 1990 - meaning that it grew slower.


                      Originally posted by VJ
                      And why use randomly picked years to prove your points, anyway? You can easily manipulate the image by picking years which were recession years in some countries -- why not use 5 (or 10) -year period averages?
                      Well 1990 and 2002 are the earliest and latest years that EKS PPPs where are available for (they are calculated trienually), I could use GK PPPs but that would mean less comparability.

                      The data is already corrected for the economic cycle so it makes no difference whether some countries were in recession or not (a problem you would still have with 10 or 5 year averages)



                      Originally posted by Giancarlo
                      You are a bald assertion man.
                      Let's see I have posted data, with links to the sources, whilst you have just baldy asserted that I am wrong.

                      I can see why Last Conformist's Irony meter has gone off the scale
                      Last edited by el freako; March 10, 2005, 08:57.
                      19th Century Liberal, 21st Century European

                      Comment

                      • #41
                        So if a country like Canada shows as +8% (+17%) that means that it had an income 8% above the EU15 average in 2002 but it was 17% higher in 1990 - meaning that it grew slower.
                        Thanks, it's all clear now.

                        Sorry for the confusion, would it be easier for everyone if I just posted the income figures with the US=100%?
                        Could be. I think it'd be easier if you'd add that Canada-example of yours to your opening post, the %'s sure do confuse someone who's economic knowledge is limited to memorising unadjusted GDP growth rates.

                        Comment

                        • #42
                          Re: Europe's incomes outpaced the rest of the west in 1990-2002

                          Originally posted by el freako
                          As you can see many poorer members of the EU15 caught up significantly with the average, whilst every non-european state saw a fall relative to that average.
                          Income harmonisation across Europe.
                          One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.

                          Comment

                          • #43
                            Originally posted by VJ
                            Could be. I think it'd be easier if you'd add that Canada-example of yours to your opening post, the %'s sure do confuse someone who's economic knowledge is limited to memorising unadjusted GDP growth rates.
                            Okay here is the data with the US=100%, for 2002 and 1990

                            Canada: 78% 76%
                            United States: 100% 100%

                            Australia: 75% 70%
                            Japan: 78% 74%
                            New Zealand: 57% 57%

                            Austria: 79% 70%
                            Belgium: 79% 71%
                            Denmark: 80% 72%
                            Finland: 75% 66%
                            France: 77% 74%
                            Germany: 72% 67%
                            Greece: 51% 41%
                            Ireland: 71% 45%
                            Italy: 71% 67%
                            Netherlands: 79% 69%
                            Norway: 99% 77%
                            Portugal: 50% 40%
                            Spain: 61% 49%
                            Sweden: 76% 72%
                            Switzerland: 92% 92%
                            United Kingdom: 79% 67%
                            European Union (15): 72% 65%

                            Total income for the EU15 went from 94.7% of the US level in 1990 to 95.2% in 2002 - within the EU there was a lot of variation with Germany falling from 21.3% to 20.5%, France from 16.8% to 16.0% and Italy from 15.2% to 14.1% whilst Britian rose from 15.3% to 16.3% and Spain from 7.6% to 8.7% (putting it ahead of Canada)
                            Japan fell from 36.6% to 34.6%


                            edit: got the 1990 and 2002 figures the wrong way around duh!, this has been corrected
                            furthur edit: added total income figures
                            Last edited by el freako; March 10, 2005, 09:31.
                            19th Century Liberal, 21st Century European

                            Comment

                            • #44
                              Europe went DOWN from 72% in 1990 to 65% in 2002?
                              Originally posted by Serb:Please, remind me, how exactly and when exactly, Russia bullied its neighbors?
                              Originally posted by Ted Striker:Go Serb !
                              Originally posted by Pekka:If it was possible to capture the essentials of Sepultura in a dildo, I'd attach it to a bicycle and ride it up your azzes.

                              Comment

                              • #45
                                OK, now I am confused. In the US=100%, is a lower figure better? 'Cos otherwise it looks like the gap is growing, not closing.

                                Edit: Makes sense now.
                                Last edited by Last Conformist; March 10, 2005, 09:33.
                                Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?

                                It's no good (from an evolutionary point of view) to have the physique of Tarzan if you have the sex drive of a philosopher. -- Michael Ruse
                                The Nedaverse I can accept, but not the Berzaverse. There can only be so many alternate realities. -- Elok

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 template Next
                                Working...
                                X