3 ms·

*Real GDP, chart is nominal...

• dogma1138 3y ago
  ? I’m replying to your statement: > This swing is the main driver of this whole thing and means that yes, PPP is superior for looking at growth. It is technically incorrect on every level. As GDP PPP fundamentally is unsuitable for calculating growth. The GDP of Greece pre crash was $355B today it’s $219B, it’s GDP PPP pre-crash was $341B today it’s $389B if you think the Greek economy grew over that period or that today it’s a better place to live in with 11% unemployment and youth unemployment approaching 40% with the entire population having its wealth cut by nearly half than pre-2008 Greece then I have an island in the Aegean to sell you…
  • htfu 3y ago
    I'm saying given the choices of "US economy doubled! Eurozone completely stagnant" (nominal) and "both grew, US somewhat more" (PPP), PPP is by far a more accurate model of what has actually transpired. That is all. What it may or may not say about Greece is utterly irrelevant because that's not what I was talking about.
    • dogma1138 3y ago
      But the problem that it is not, you are using PPP for things that explicitly it shouldn’t be used for.
    • Dylan16807 3y ago
      If you're only saying it's better for this single ratio then that doesn't make it a more accurate model. Statistics can be closer on a single number by pure happenstance. If you want to say it's a more accurate model then you need to defend it more broadly.