5 ms·

GDP per capita is less than 1/3.

Rinzler89 2y ago
Which itself is not a measurement of development/welfare per capita. Having a higher GDP/capita than another country doesn't automatically translate to more money in your pocket for you or a higher standard of living.
- retrac 2y ago
  True. But it is pretty darn closely correlated: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/human-development-index-vs-gdp-per-capita https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/human-development-index-v...
dyauspitr 2y ago
It’s not always a great metric to use. For instance in India the buying power of $1 is 3.5 times that of the United States because everyday goods and housing are so cheap. A lot of the lower middle class have 20-30 rupee lunches everyday which works out to about $0.25. These are relatively substantial meals with flatbread, a vegetable dish and an egg or two.
- pb7 2y ago
  >These are relatively substantial meals with flatbread, a vegetable dish and an egg or two. That is not substantial by developed country standards. I have seen these meals be served and among other factors that contribute to the low price, the hygiene standards (or lack thereof) are horrific.
  - FredPret 2y ago
    Travelling around the world, I have found this to be true: you get what you pay for. When currency differences makes something like a haircut or a lunch very cheap for a North American, there’s always a tradeoff involved. Of course the concept of PPP makes sense, but it’s still partly nonsense in assuming equal quality around the world.
  - dyauspitr 2y ago
    Why? That’s a nutritionally complete meal with 35g of protein (flatbread, beans and eggs) and is certainly more nutritious than a plate of mac and cheese or a salad with a light dressing. Irrespective of your perspective on it, these people can have 5-10 days of meals for what the average American pays for one meal. Having lived in India for a few years, I can remember getting food poisoning once that entire time. You can also pay 3 times that for food made very hygienically and it’s still a pittance.
  - lobocinza 2y ago
    The untold truth. Logistical advantages and lower cost of labor can explain some price asymmetries but often you get what you pay for.
- rgmerk 2y ago
  When using GDP as a gauge of living standards, people usually use PPP (purchasing power parity) measures, which adjusts for the cost of goods in different places. Any such adjustment isn’t going to be perfect, and there are other quirks (tax havens have artificially high GDP figures), but it’s a lot closer to what you want.
  - dyauspitr 2y ago
    I’m aware of PPP and that was my point that you can’t directly compare GDP per capita without adjustments.
wslh 2y ago
You can also check the size of Brazil vs. Italy, domestic market, and other factors that could gelp them grow. Brazil is showing its potential and realization and moving up in the rankings. I think the interesting aspect is that they have room to grow, doing business in Brazil is not easy for foreigners. While this is true for Latam at large Brazil is also much different from the business perspective than other countries in the region. I think this is connected that they have a larger population which brings a big domestic market.
- lobocinza 2y ago
  Doing business in Brazil also ain't easy for nationals. Too much regulation, too much corruption, too much risk. As the saying goes: "For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law." To invest in Brazil one needs to be politically connected or crazy.

Which itself is not a measurement of development/welfare per capita. Having a higher GDP/capita than another country doesn't automatically translate to more money in your pocket for you or a higher standard of living.

retrac 2y ago
True. But it is pretty darn closely correlated: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/human-development-index-vs-gdp-per-capita https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/human-development-index-v...

dyauspitr 2y ago

It’s not always a great metric to use. For instance in India the buying power of $1 is 3.5 times that of the United States because everyday goods and housing are so cheap. A lot of the lower middle class have 20-30 rupee lunches everyday which works out to about $0.25. These are relatively substantial meals with flatbread, a vegetable dish and an egg or two.

pb7 2y ago
>These are relatively substantial meals with flatbread, a vegetable dish and an egg or two. That is not substantial by developed country standards. I have seen these meals be served and among other factors that contribute to the low price, the hygiene standards (or lack thereof) are horrific.
- FredPret 2y ago
  Travelling around the world, I have found this to be true: you get what you pay for. When currency differences makes something like a haircut or a lunch very cheap for a North American, there’s always a tradeoff involved. Of course the concept of PPP makes sense, but it’s still partly nonsense in assuming equal quality around the world.
- dyauspitr 2y ago
  Why? That’s a nutritionally complete meal with 35g of protein (flatbread, beans and eggs) and is certainly more nutritious than a plate of mac and cheese or a salad with a light dressing. Irrespective of your perspective on it, these people can have 5-10 days of meals for what the average American pays for one meal. Having lived in India for a few years, I can remember getting food poisoning once that entire time. You can also pay 3 times that for food made very hygienically and it’s still a pittance.
- lobocinza 2y ago
  The untold truth. Logistical advantages and lower cost of labor can explain some price asymmetries but often you get what you pay for.
rgmerk 2y ago
When using GDP as a gauge of living standards, people usually use PPP (purchasing power parity) measures, which adjusts for the cost of goods in different places. Any such adjustment isn’t going to be perfect, and there are other quirks (tax havens have artificially high GDP figures), but it’s a lot closer to what you want.
- dyauspitr 2y ago
  I’m aware of PPP and that was my point that you can’t directly compare GDP per capita without adjustments.

wslh 2y ago

You can also check the size of Brazil vs. Italy, domestic market, and other factors that could gelp them grow. Brazil is showing its potential and realization and moving up in the rankings. I think the interesting aspect is that they have room to grow, doing business in Brazil is not easy for foreigners. While this is true for Latam at large Brazil is also much different from the business perspective than other countries in the region. I think this is connected that they have a larger population which brings a big domestic market.

lobocinza 2y ago
Doing business in Brazil also ain't easy for nationals. Too much regulation, too much corruption, too much risk. As the saying goes: "For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law." To invest in Brazil one needs to be politically connected or crazy.