Monaco? Brunei? Liechtenstein? Malta? Yet Bangladesh is there? I'm confused. (Not wondering about San Marino, since I'm not sure what they produce there.)
Some small countries like Monaco and Liechtenstein aren't included in the IMF list, but they rank in the 140s in other lists, alongside Malawi and South Sudan. High GDP per capita for a country with very few people doesn't translate to a high total GDP. Bangladesh has 160million people, Liechtenstein has 38,000.
Exactly Sifhraven - what ECon is saying that a country like Monaco with an extremely high GDP per capita can still have extremely small populations which mean they don't make a lot of money total, and so still score low on total GDP rankings.
it's because of PPP. Bangladesh is an extremely poor country, so local prices are greatly reduced both so that the impoverished people there can afford things and also because labor costs, rent, standards of living and building codes and quality of construction materials etc is extremely low .. so prices reflect this.
when you start trying to assume that all goods in all markets regardless of quality should cost the same thing, and then adjust economy sizes based on this assumption, then all of a sudden Bangladesh has a huge economy.
I bristle a bit at the term "extremely poor." It's not completely inaccurate, but still misleading. Bangladesh really isn't much poorer than India, and I wouldn't be surprised if it surpasses India in the near future. It has a booming economy and has made massive strides in poverty reduction, healthcare, women's rights, and other issues that typically plague developing countries. This article is a pretty good summary of all of the progress Bangladesh has made.
For sure there's plenty of work to be done, plus climate change is a looming threat, but for the most part things are looking pretty good for Bangladesh.
Not really the main reason at all, it's more because like all other micronations (except Singapore), the GDP is really small overall because the population is really small. These micronations are at the bottom in both the GDP and the Area country rankings, so the difference between the 2 rankings are smaller than for some other countries.
Liechtenstein
GDP ranking : 158th
GDP (PPP) ranking : 178th
Area ranking : 190th
Either way (PPP or not) Liechtenstein is quite far from making the list.
Countries on this list either are rich per capita, but have a very small area and population (such as Singapore, Monaco, San Marino), or are very poor per capita, but have a huge population (such as Bangladesh). 140 million people with an average income of $1,000 US or less a year adds up to a big economy; 4 million people with an average income of $100,000 US a year also adds up.
Just wondering what sources you are using for country size? For example I have Luxembourg 71st for GDP and 167th for size, which would lead to a rank difference of 96 instead of 66. I've checked some other countries and gotten different results too.
You're probably not using PPP. Wikipedia list has IMF 2019 estimates, Luxembourg ranks 70 in nominal GDP and 100 in PPP. Country size is less debatable, while for GDP you have quite a choice of methods.
Djilas is right. Most of the time these discrepancies have to do with which method is used to calculate GDP. I prefer Purchasing Power Parity (PPP). Others disagree.
That's extraordinarily disingenuous, and not at all the conclusion one would draw from PPP. With PPP the average Luxembourger's GDP share comes to 22 times that of the average Bangladeshi. It just so happens Bangladesh has 271 times Luxembourg's population and only 57 times its area, so the answers to this quiz are hardly surprising. For the record Luxembourg's GDP is 1.02x larger on PPP measurement, according to the IMF figures. Bangladesh's 2.7x larger. What I don't really understand is your objection to measuring a country's wealth by what it can actually buy, as opposed to some arbitrary setting of government policy. PPP to me seems like a much better way of capturing a country's true wealth than nominal GDP.
Wealth is not the right word to use since it is relative to the world and is only about how much money you have, not what you can buy with it. It's that people living in Bangladesh and Luxembourg can afford similar things for the amount of money they make even though people in Luxembourg have a lot more money.
Has there been any consideration for accepting "DR" as an acceptable answer for Dominican Republic? I have many friends from there and all of them commonly say, "I'm from D.R" or "Down in D.R...." and everybody knows exactly what they're talking about.
It seems so common to me, I'm always mildly surprised it's not accepted on here. And while I can type, I'm sure all of the hunt-and-peck JetPunk'ers would welcome the abbreviation.
Now I'm wondering how many quizzes (apart from countries of the world) would have both DR and DRC as answers.The UK/Ukraine one is annoying but not really anything that can be done about it!
It's the difference in rank between their land area and their position in terms of gross GDP (read the description). There are 196 countries recognised by Jetpunk. You don't need to be minuscule to have a big difference in your two ranks.
I had to click on the photo to see where it was taken. Never heard of the Supertrees in Singapore, but after reading about them part of me is amazed in a good way at all their functions and aesthetics, but another part of me is sad that they created artificial trees instead of having the real thing. They look pretty amazing, though.
Yet more proof, if it were needed, that Belgium is responsible for all the problems of the world. As long as we conveniently ignore all the countries above it, which everyone punches down on too much already.
I'm kind of surprised that Japan isn't on here. It's a fairly medium-sized country with 126 million people, and it has a high GDP per Capita and a high HDI.
I thought Lebanon would be off the list by now. There's not much of an economy going on there right now. Sri Lanka also seems like it's on the way out.
Also, although it says nothing in the notes, I'm taking a wild guess that Denmark's counted area doesn't include Greenland, unless its GDP includes icebergs.
The quiz says nothing about "per capita", otherwise Monaco, say, would be near the top instead of not anywhere on the list. Meanwhile, Lebanon has a disappearing numerator, while Denmark+Greenland has an immense denominator in the GDP per area equation.
I'm not sure Sri Lanka will stay on this list for long. Their economy is basically in free-fall right now. And the story behind it is very tragic--once the richest country in South Asia, but corruption, government incompetence, and an overdependence on foreign trade drove them into the ground. Here's to hoping things get better there soon.
Nice Quiz! Very surprised / impressed by Sri Lanka and Lebanon. Also surprised to not see Brunei on here. Pretty underrated actually: They have a higher GDP / capita than rich countries such as Belgium, Germany, Austria, Australia, Canada, etc.
when you start trying to assume that all goods in all markets regardless of quality should cost the same thing, and then adjust economy sizes based on this assumption, then all of a sudden Bangladesh has a huge economy.
For sure there's plenty of work to be done, plus climate change is a looming threat, but for the most part things are looking pretty good for Bangladesh.
Liechtenstein
GDP ranking : 158th
GDP (PPP) ranking : 178th
Area ranking : 190th
Either way (PPP or not) Liechtenstein is quite far from making the list.
https://www.jetpunk.com/info/countries-by-gdp-per-capita
Djilas is right. Most of the time these discrepancies have to do with which method is used to calculate GDP. I prefer Purchasing Power Parity (PPP). Others disagree.
It seems so common to me, I'm always mildly surprised it's not accepted on here. And while I can type, I'm sure all of the hunt-and-peck JetPunk'ers would welcome the abbreviation.