3 ms·
> the Bank shifted the IPL from the original $1.02 (at 1985 PPP) to $1.08 (at 1993 PPP), which, given inflation, was lower in real terms. I don't understand th
by Isamu 11y ago
> the Bank shifted the IPL from the original $1.02 (at 1985 PPP) to $1.08 (at 1993 PPP), which, given inflation, was lower in real terms.
I don't understand this, and they don't explain. What is PPP, if not "real terms"? Plus I hate it when somebody makes a claim like this without actually showing the numbers, or creating a graph - it makes the claim less plausible than what they are complaining about.
Otherwise the article has valid points, mostly about watering down goals, and the lack of real progress in poverty reduction.
Note also that the OP is about the poverty rate, not about poverty being in decline, which is in fact increasing all too quickly.
- vidarh 11y agoI believe what he's saying is that 1.02 1985-dollars (PPP adjusted) is greater than 1.08 1993-dollars (PPP adjusted). Clicking the first two inflation calculators I found on Google and assuming their numbers are right (they both gave the same result), it does seem that if they had inflation adjusted the number using US rates, the original USD 1.02 should have been USD 1.37 by 1993. EDIT: It's of course important to keep in mind that inflation rates are different across the world, and presumably the world bank at least will insist that they accounted for real term price changes for the relevant goods, so I still don't know how relevant this point in the article actually is.