Burma and North East India theater

[kalu_miah]

North East India Diary
http://www.ide.go.jp/English/Publish/Download/Jrp/pdf/133_3.pdf
http://www.ide.go.jp/English/Publish/Download/Jrp/pdf/133_6.pdf
http://www.defence.pk/forums/chinese-defence/190484-chinas-hand-indias-north-east-states.html

 

[LaBong]

What are you talking about??

I'm talking about economics.

There are two ways of counting GDP - Real and Nominal.

The Nominal Gross Domestic Product measures the value of all the goods and services produced expressed in current prices.

Real Gross Domestic Product measures the value of all the goods and services produced expressed in the prices of some base year.

Suppose in the year 2000, the economy of a country produced $100 billion worth of goods and services based on year 2000 prices. Since we're using 2000 as a basis year, the nominal and real GDP are the same. In the year 2001, the economy produced $110B worth of goods and services based on year 2001 prices. Those same goods and services are instead valued at $105B if year 2000 prices are used. Then:

Year 2000 Nominal GDP = $100B, Real GDP = $100B
Year 2001 Nominal GDP = $110B, Real GDP = $105B
Nominal GDP Growth Rate = 10%
Real GDP Growth Rate = 5%


Usually GDP growth rate is measured in real terms and GDP/capita is measured in nominal. For an example when we say India's gdp growth rate is 6.9 %, it's the Real GDP growth rate, so upgrading base year will have an effect on it.

However Nominal GDP is not adjusted and measured is current price so inflation base year is irrelevant.

You remain, as always, the dumbest Indian in this Forum. Don't you really know the difference betwwn GDP and GNI? Ignorant, go and learn in the Primary school.

Yeah you must be most cleverest Bangladeshi around, but sadly in Bangladeshi standard.

READ THE ARTICLE YOU BLIND FOOL! BANGLADESH PER CAPITA GDP IS GIVEN THERE.

 

[CaPtAiN_pLaNeT]

I'm talking about economics.

There are two ways of counting GDP - Real and Nominal.

The Nominal Gross Domestic Product measures the value of all the goods and services produced expressed in current prices.

Real Gross Domestic Product measures the value of all the goods and services produced expressed in the prices of some base year.

Suppose in the year 2000, the economy of a country produced $100 billion worth of goods and services based on year 2000 prices. Since we're using 2000 as a basis year, the nominal and real GDP are the same. In the year 2001, the economy produced $110B worth of goods and services based on year 2001 prices. Those same goods and services are instead valued at $105B if year 2000 prices are used. Then:

Year 2000 Nominal GDP = $100B, Real GDP = $100B
Year 2001 Nominal GDP = $110B, Real GDP = $105B
Nominal GDP Growth Rate = 10%
Real GDP Growth Rate = 5%


Usually GDP growth rate is measured in real terms and GDP/capita is measured in nominal. For an example when we say India's gdp growth rate is 6.9 %, it's the Real GDP growth rate, so upgrading base year will have an effect on it.

However Nominal GDP is not adjusted and measured is current price so inflation base year is irrelevant.



Yeah you must be most cleverest Bangladeshi around, but sadly in Bangladeshi standard.

Read the article you blind idiot, BD gdp/capita is given there.

Just copy pasting from website do you think you have understood everything and you are capable enough to teach here??? You have been debunked numerous time what ever you posted just to satisfy your ego.

Now come to real lesson and learn what Eastwatch and Iajdhani was trying to say....

This is the definition of nominal GDP...

Nominal GDP is the market value (money-value) of all final goods and services produced in a geographical region, usually a country.

Now the question is do Bangladesh count all these final goods when measuring GDP based on 1995 base year??? Answer is no. A bulk of the private sector industry is not considered in counting of the gdp as a final goods and services produced....

The following report may help you to see what are the industry is not counted so far in measuring GDP...

BBS sources said these 15 sectors are unchangeable. In a revised base year, Knitwear, woven, button and washing factory will be defined separately in the industry sectors.

Similarly, private universities, coaching centre and English medium schools were also included in the education sectors. More than 50 private universities were established in the country last decade that contribute to the GDP.

Economic institution service including bank, insurance and non banking sectors was considered as government institutions. But, the private bank, economic institution and insurance will be included to count their contribution as thousand of people are employed in those organisations.

Service sector has also received massive changes over the period. Mobile phones, courier service, private television and package programme are boosting in terms of business. Huge numbers of people are involved in those services. Whenever the GDP base year was formulated, those areas did not exist or existed in limited scale.

The heath-service sector has also flourished which includes private hospital, clinic and diagnostic centre and a huge number of doctors, nurses as well as non-medical people are employed in the sub-sector. Their contribution to the GDP will be counted in the new system.

Production of agricultural crops particularly vegetables and other minor crops recorded rapid growth while new crops were also developed.

Similarly increased the contribution of poultry, livestock, fisheries, fish fry helping to diversify sources of agricultural growth.

Construction industry is also booming following the massive urbanisation and commercialisation. Information and communication sector is also expanding is also expanding at a phenomenal rate.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangla...fy12-gdp-counting2005-06-a.html#ixzz1yyYXhpsb

UNBconnect... - Government mulling revising GDP base year to 2005-06

Updating the base year and the need to revise the GDP estimation has become essential for various reasons like newer economic activities, progressive expansion and downsizing of certain industries/economic sectors over the years. Changes in relative price of commodities also necessitate revision of GDP deflators to correctly monitor the real growth.
.......................................
However, the growth and structural changes that are occurring in the production process of the economy are not adequately reflected in the current GDP compilation.

Besides, some of the sub-sectors such as IT and communication, financial leasing, and various modern personal services are also not adequately represented in the existing GDP estimates.

More on this...

On the other hand, GNI of fiscal 11 had been $818 against $751 of the previous one, showing an increase by $67 on the year-on-year basis indicating a leap by about 9.0% in the face of an increasing size of the population.

Base year of BBS's calculations of GDP and GNI: We understand BBS still uses the production and price data of FY 1995-96 as the base. If the base year is updated and the emerging manufacturing, trading and services sectors as of to-day are dovetailed into the GDP package, we believe the present GDP size would be much higher. I do not have the ultimate answer and would like to leave it for the experts to extrapolate.

We have noted a recent view of Prof. Shamsul Alam, the Chief of the state-owned 'think-tank' called the General Economics Division in the Planning Commission, that if the economic activities generated in the rural areas which are quite vibrant on account of large inflow of remittances can be fully captured, the size of the GDP will be still larger. He was even confident that with the realised impressive growth rates of GDP/GNI, as in last fiscal, Bangladesh may emerge as a middle-income country even before 2021 as visualised by the government. We would not like to make any presumption on that account and would like the experts to debate and analyse the realities.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangla...-its-computation-computers.html#ixzz1yyglXm6f

Same thing has also been said by the finance minister....

GDP terribly underestimated: Muhith

Finance Minister AMA Muhith on Saturday said the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) is terribly underestimated despite having a better statistical system compared to many countries in the world.

“Our GDP is not simply underestimated, it’s terribly underestimated,” he told a function at the auditorium of Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS) in the city.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangla...orth-east-india-theater-17.html#ixzz1yycubLot

And what do you mean by Bangladeshi Standard??? What is your own standard??? Just studying in IT or Computer Science do you think you have won the whole world...??? Just want to say to you that all these IT jobs are considered as the lower tier profession in Bangladesh. Even in Canada or US their salary is much lower then other engineers...By your post standard we can also see your quality ... a typical cheap west Bengali who will post anything even if it is false just to satisfy his ego...

 

[LaBong]

Another idiot Bangladeshi poonting without any knowledge.

From the snippets your quoted.

Updating the base year and the need to revise the GDP estimation has become essential for various reasons like newer economic activities, progressive expansion and downsizing of certain industries/economic sectors over the years. Changes in relative price of commodities also necessitate revision of GDP deflators to correctly monitor the real growth.

Now understand what GDP deflector is and how GDP deflector is only relevant in calculating real gdp growth, not nominal.

Now the question is do Bangladesh count all these final goods when measuring GDP based on 1995 base year??? Answer is no. A bulk of the private sector industry is not considered in counting of the gdp as a final goods and services produced....

That doesn't even make any sense, just a brain poont. Nominal GDP is consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports) at the nominal price i.e. unadjusted for inflation. Get that into your head Bangladeshi.

And what do you mean by Bangladeshi Standard??? What is your own standard??? Just studying in IT or Computer Science do you think you have won the whole world...??? Just want to say to you that all these IT jobs are considered as the lower tier profession in Bangladesh. Even in Canada or US their salary is much lower then other engineers...By your post standard we can also see your quality ... a typical cheap west Bengali who will post anything even if it is false just to satisfy his ego...

P.U.N.C.T.U.A.T.I.O.N ???

 

[CaPtAiN_pLaNeT]

Another idiot Bangladeshi poonting without any knowledge.

From the snippets your quoted.



Now understand what GDP deflector is and how GDP deflector is only relevant in calculating real gdp growth, not nominal.



That doesn't even make any sense, just a brain poont. Nominal GDP is consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports) at the nominal price i.e. unadjusted for inflation. Get that into your head Bangladeshi.



P.U.N.C.T.U.A.T.I.O.N ???

You idiot ... did you even read the whole post....

On the other hand, GNI of fiscal 11 had been $818 against $751 of the previous one, showing an increase by $67 on the year-on-year basis indicating a leap by about 9.0% in the face of an increasing size of the population.

Base year of BBS's calculations of GDP and GNI: We understand BBS still uses the production and price data of FY 1995-96 as the base. If the base year is updated and the emerging manufacturing, trading and services sectors as of to-day are dovetailed into the GDP package, we believe the present GDP size would be much higher. I do not have the ultimate answer and would like to leave it for the experts to extrapolate.

We have noted a recent view of Prof. Shamsul Alam, the Chief of the state-owned 'think-tank' called the General Economics Division in the Planning Commission, that if the economic activities generated in the rural areas which are quite vibrant on account of large inflow of remittances can be fully captured, the size of the GDP will be still larger. He was even confident that with the realised impressive growth rates of GDP/GNI, as in last fiscal, Bangladesh may emerge as a middle-income country even before 2021 as visualised by the government. We would not like to make any presumption on that account and would like the experts to debate and analyse the realities.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangla...-its-computation-computers.html#ixzz1yyglXm6f

Apart from that to teach another stupid illiterate west Bengali... Your so called word "poont" that was used by your same type actor ... means inserting (his d**K) not farting... that remain in the mind of the Indians due to their nature of open d******n.


N finally what ever you see as the GDP of Bangladesh in terms of nominal in fact is the real GDP... including inflation Bangladesh gets growth rate of 13% or more but only the real growth is counted to measure the updated GDP...

 

[LaBong]

You idiot ... did you even read the whole post....

I did actually and found out gems like this.

on account of large inflow of remittances can be fully captured, the size of the GDP will be still larger

Surely it's written by another poonting Bangladeshi! If the inflow of remittance is larger then Gross Domestic Product will be even smaller, idiot.

Anyway the article is too vague and too speculative and written by a layman and deserves no importance, it's not even clear if they are talking about Nominal or Real.

Apart from that to teach another stupid illiterate west Bengali... Your so called word "poont" that was used by your same type actor ... means inserting (his d**K) not farting... that remain in the mind of the Indians due to their nature of open d******n.

It must have taken a brain storm to come up with this white lie. Well done Bangladeshi!

N finally what ever you see as the GDP of Bangladesh in terms of nominal in fact is the real GDP... including inflation Bangladesh gets growth rate of 13% or more but only the real growth is counted to measure the updated GDP...

So now you agree that base year is irrelevant in calculating Nominal GDP and trying to wiggle your way through by claiming that IMF lists real GDP of Bangladesh in Nominal category. Bangladeshi logic at it's best!

Sorry but IMF is not run by a poonting Bangladeshi!

 

[CaPtAiN_pLaNeT]

I did actually and found out gems like this.



Surely it's written by another poonting Bangladeshi!

Anyway the article is too vague and too speculative and written by a layman and deserves no importance, it's not even clear if they are talking about Nominal or Real.



It must have taken a brain storm to come up with this white lie. Well done Bangladeshi!



So now you agree that base year is irrelevant in calculating Nominal GDP and trying to wiggle your way through by claiming that IMF lists real GDP of Bangladesh in Nominal category. Bangladeshi logic at it's best!

Sorry but IMF is not run by a poonting Bangladeshi!

What ever this or that... the bottom line is GDP of Bangladesh is hugely underestimated. It needs to be updated by updating the base year to 2005 and then to 2010.

2009-2010 GDP was 106 billion usd... and in 2010-2011 gdp has been risen to 113 billion usd due to 6.7% real gdp growth but has been put as nominal gdp.

N regarding village activity... yes a huge amount of economic activity happens there but not counted properly. Not only that another 5-10 billion usd remittance comes as hundi that also not counted. Thats what he was trying to imply in the article.

Dnt worry I wont poont in your dirty *** hole.

 

[LaBong]

Dnt worry I wont poont in your dirty *** hole.

Someone seems to be going open about his fetish! lawl!

 

[alaungphaya]

It's amazing how quickly you people stoop to calling LaBong and idiot when no Bangladeshi here actually knows what they're talking about. Here are some quotes from the article:

Going along with the BBS statistics, per capita GDP at constant prices last fiscal had been $758 against that of $687 in the previous fiscal.

Now I think there's some mistake in the article as the IMF states these figures as the nominal per capita GDP I was talking about. So they are at current prices rather than constant. Unless ofcourse the IMF have it wrong and the figure they quote are actually the inflation adjusted GDP in which case they use 1995 prices as the base.

What you idiots are screaming about is related to this bit:

If the base year is updated and the emerging manufacturing, trading and services sectors as of to-day are dovetailed into the GDP package, we believe the present GDP size would be much higher.

I think what they are saying is if the base year for calculating real GDP is updated AND if the representative sectors they use to calculate GDP are updated then the realGDP would be higher. However, the base rate everyone is talking about is the inflation base year that LaBong was talking about. However, if the IMF figures are correct and the figures of $687 for 2011 and $748 for 2012 are indeed nominal then changing the base year would not affect these figures as they are nominal.

Now there is a source for more confusion as when you calculating real GDP, you need to know the price levels in your base year. Therefore you need to choose from a basket of representative goods and services when calculating any price level or inflation rate. You need also to update this basket regularly to reflect the true price level.

I know this is all a bit confusing but try to keep up. The GDP base is the inflation base as La Bong was saying. The IMF is saying its figures are nominal and thus the deflator is irrelevent. Your newspaper article doesn't clarify if the GDP figures are real or nominal or even PPP adjusted. It just says "GDP" and implies it is real GDP by quoting "constant prices". In fairness, I think this confusion came about because that newspaper article isn't very clearly written. This might even be on purpose to make you people feel better.

 

[TopCat]

It's amazing how quickly you people stoop to calling LaBong and idiot when no Bangladeshi here actually knows what they're talking about. Here are some quotes from the article:



Now I think there's some mistake in the article as the IMF states these figures as the nominal per capita GDP I was talking about. So they are at current prices rather than constant. Unless ofcourse the IMF have it wrong and the figure they quote are actually the inflation adjusted GDP in which case they use 1995 prices as the base.

What you idiots are screaming about is related to this bit:



I think what they are saying is if the base year for calculating real GDP is updated AND if the representative sectors they use to calculate GDP are updated then the realGDP would be higher. However, the base rate everyone is talking about is the inflation base year that LaBong was talking about. However, if the IMF figures are correct and the figures of $687 for 2011 and $748 for 2012 are indeed nominal then changing the base year would not affect these figures as they are nominal.

Now there is a source for more confusion as when you calculating real GDP, you need to know the price levels in your base year. Therefore you need to choose from a basket of representative goods and services when calculating any price level or inflation rate. You need also to update this basket regularly to reflect the true price level.

I know this is all a bit confusing but try to keep up. The GDP base is the inflation base as La Bong was saying. The IMF is saying its figures are nominal and thus the deflator is irrelevent. Your newspaper article doesn't clarify if the GDP figures are real or nominal or even PPP adjusted. It just says "GDP" and implies it is real GDP by quoting "constant prices". In fairness, I think this confusion came about because that newspaper article isn't very clearly written. This might even be on purpose to make you people feel better.

Whats the fuzz about nominal and real GDP figure here? GDP size is always in nominal term. When growth rate is calculated then it is adjusted with inflation (real GDP growth rate) and a real picture of the growth is shown. I will stop here in this subject here as it probably will be too complicated for Labong.

Base year has nothing to do with growth. For instance we have a basket of goods and services eg. apple, orange, banana and we calculate growth then only the apple, orange and banana growth will be reflected and anything outside basket will not be counted. Now if we had grapes, cherry outside boxes then it will be omitted from total GDP as well as GDP growth rate. In 1995 we had only apple, orange and banana in our basket but in the next 10 years we started growing grapes and cherry with them which were not counted in total GDP neither in GDP growth rate.

I hope that will help

 

[alaungphaya]

No, it doesn't help because you don't know what you're talking about.

Whats the fuzz about nominal and real GDP figure here? GDP size is always in nominal term. When growth rate is calculated then it is adjusted with inflation (real GDP growth rate) and a real picture of the growth is shown. I will stop here in this subject here as it probably will be too complicated for Labong.

The newspaper article quoted 'constant' prices implying it was real GDP. Nominal GDP is adjusted for inflation when talking about growth rates so as not to distort it. This is where the inflation base year comes in. You were the one who wrongly said GDP base and inflation base are not the same thing.

Base year has nothing to do with growth. For instance we have a basket of goods and services eg. apple, orange, banana and we calculate growth then only the apple, orange and banana growth will be reflected and anything outside basket will not be counted. Now if we had grapes, cherry outside boxes then it will be omitted from total GDP as well as GDP growth rate. In 1995 we had only apple, orange and banana in our basket but in the next 10 years we started growing grapes and cherry with them which were not counted in total GDP neither in GDP growth rate.

I hope that will help

Now you just contradicted what you wrote in your first sentence. You yourself just said when measuring growth, GDP is adjusted for inflation so you need a base year of prices to start from. Your analogy of fruit is alluding to the fact that calculating base year price levels in 1995 would only include the prices of the basket of goods and services in 1995 which would not be reflective of the economy now. BUT this is the complicated part. Changing the base year does not mean changing what is counted. Only what price level is used for inflation adjustment. However, like I said before, GDP can't be counted precisely so statistics bureaus use a bunch of representative sectors to calculate the economy. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GDP/INFLATION BASE YEAR. GDP is a measure of ALL activity in the economy. So if the IMF gives a figure of nominal GDP, then that is all the economic activity in the economy. To use your analogy, it should include apples, bananas, oranges, grapes and cherries at whatever the dollar price fruit is selling at.

 

[LaBong]

Whats the fuzz about nominal and real GDP figure here? GDP size is always in nominal term. When growth rate is calculated then it is adjusted with inflation (real GDP growth rate) and a real picture of the growth is shown. I will stop here in this subject here as it probably will be too complicated for Labong.

Base year has nothing to do with growth. For instance we have a basket of goods and services eg. apple, orange, banana and we calculate growth then only the apple, orange and banana growth will be reflected and anything outside basket will not be counted. Now if we had grapes, cherry outside boxes then it will be omitted from total GDP as well as GDP growth rate. In 1995 we had only apple, orange and banana in our basket but in the next 10 years we started growing grapes and cherry with them which were not counted in total GDP neither in GDP growth rate.

I hope that will help

That's a nice snake oil you are trying to sell but it will only work for Bangladeshis.

 

[TopCat]

The newspaper article quoted 'constant' prices implying it was real GDP. Nominal GDP is adjusted for inflation when talking about growth rates so as not to distort it. This is where the inflation base year comes in. You were the one who wrongly said GDP base and inflation base are not the same thing.

There is nothing called real GDP against nominal GDP (total). There is the term called REAL GDP GROWTH RATE. Yes the newspaper quoted correctly when it was talking about GDP growth rate which is real GDP growth rate. Size of the GDP never adjusted against inflation and inflation is irrelevant.

Now you just contradicted what you wrote in your first sentence. You yourself just said when measuring growth, GDP is adjusted for inflation so you need a base year of prices to start from. Your analogy of fruit is alluding to the fact that calculating base year price levels in 1995 would only include the prices of the basket of goods and services in 1995 which would not be reflective of the economy now. BUT this is the complicated part. Changing the base year does not mean changing what is counted. Only what price level is used for inflation adjustment. However, like I said before, GDP can't be counted precisely so statistics bureaus use a bunch of representative sectors to calculate the economy. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GDP/INFLATION BASE YEAR. GDP is a measure of ALL activity in the economy. So if the IMF gives a figure of nominal GDP, then that is all the economic activity in the economy. To use your analogy, it should include apples, bananas, oranges, grapes and cherries at whatever the dollar price fruit is selling at.

Base year is used to find the representative sectors. Anything outside the representative sectors are not counted in GDP calculation neither in GDP growth rate... Its pretty simple.

 

[Roybot]

Nominal GDP growth= Real GDP growth - Inflation

Now lets focus on the Burma and North East theater. Apparently Kalu got shunned by the Chinese, and they don't want to entertain his shyte stirring

 

[LaBong]

So now we have a whole new definition for base year.

Base year is used to find the representative sectors. Anything outside the representative sectors are not counted in GDP calculation neither in GDP growth rate... Its pretty simple.

So how does this work in Bangladesh, since Base year serves completely different purpose in all other countries? So you guys don't consider your Industrial products if the industry wasn't set up before 1995? What about agricultural products? Only those sabjis which were being produces before 1995 are considered while calculating GDP.

Man it's getting more and more interesting!