What's new

PwC world economy report: US to fall behind India and China by 2050

Kuwaiti Girl

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 8, 2016
Messages
2,287
Reaction score
0
Country
Kuwait
Location
Kuwait
PwC world economy report: US to fall behind India and China by 2050
http://www.businessinsider.com/pwc-...to-fall-behind-india-and-china-by-2050-2017-2

China has already surpassed the US as the most powerful economy in the world by purchasing power parity, but India will also overtake the US by 2050, according to a report by the professional-services giant PwC.

In a report titled "The long view: how will the global economic order change by 2050?" PwC ranked 32 countries by their projected global gross domestic product, measured by purchasing power parity.

Macroeconomists use PPP to determine the economic productivity and standards of living among countries.

As of 2016, India was in third place in PwC's table with a PPP of $8.721 trillion, but by 2050 it is projected to grow to a huge $44.128 trillion. If you look at the following table, you can see how the growth rate of some emerging-market economies are seen to leap past some of their developed-market counterparts:

"Emerging economies offer great opportunities for business — the numbers in our report make it clear that failure to engage with these markets means missing out on the bulk of economic growth we expect to see in the world economy between now and 2050," said John Hawksworth, the chief economist at PwC. "To succeed, businesses will need to adopt strategies with the right mix of flexibility and patience to ride out the short-term economic and political volatility that is a normal feature of emerging markets as they mature."

PwC predicts that another emerging-market economy, Indonesia, will move up the rankings and overtake Europe's powerhouse economy Germany and even Russia by 2050.

The world economy will double in size by 2042, PwC forecasts, "growing at an average annual rate of just over 2.5% between 2016 and 2050."

"Growth is expected to be driven largely by emerging market and developing countries, with the E7 economies of Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia and Turkey growing at an annual average rate of 3.5% over the next 34 years, compared to an average of just 1.6% for the advanced G7 nations of the US, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the UK and Japan," the firm added.

Hawksworth said, however: "The global economy faces a number of challenges to prosperous economic growth in the long-term. Ageing populations and climate change require forward-thinking policy which equips the workforce to continue to make societal contributions later on in life and promotes sustainable development.

"Falling global trade growth, rising inequality and increasing global uncertainties are intensifying the need to create diversified economies which offer opportunities for everyone in a broad variety of industries."

58990e51dd0895cb6e8b4946-2400
 
.
People can't even predict what's going to happen tmrw and some are predicting what it's going to be like in 30 years...
 
.
Is this what all forecast do? Just make an assumption of future year growth and add it to the existing economy level each year?
 
.
America likes to apply PPP to China because they think we are undervaluing our currency by around 2x, which means they think China's nominal GDP should be 2x larger and that we are hiding our true economic size.

And it's true that nominal GDP by market exchange rates is flawed, because it is so reliant on currency exchange rates.

However PPP is also equally flawed, more so perhaps because it does not account for the buying power of currencies. China's National Bureau of Statistics has officially rejected the use of PPP when calculating national GDP.
 
.
the way trump is going I wouldn't be surprised if the u.s. falls behind by 2025! :wacko:
 
.
America likes to apply PPP to China because they think we are undervaluing our currency by around 2x, which means they think China's nominal GDP should be 2x larger and that we are hiding our true economic size.

And it's true that nominal GDP by market exchange rates is flawed, because it is so reliant on currency exchange rates.

However PPP is also equally flawed, more so perhaps because it does not account for the buying power of currencies. China's National Bureau of Statistics has officially rejected the use of PPP when calculating national GDP.


PPP is good for measuring power of individuals. So PPP per capita is superior at measuring living standard than nominal GDP per capita. However to measure national power and strength, total GDP is far more relevant. Aggregate PPP GDP is far less useful on measuring national strength.
 
.
Old news.
And india should ignore such reports.
 
.
By 2050 there will another 50 wars and world will be far more worse place. US does not need to do any thing but simply keep countries occupied in wars to maintain status quo.
 
.
However PPP is also equally flawed, more so perhaps because it does not account for the buying power of currencies.

I would say its flawed (like any estimate is)...but less flawed overall actually. PPP simply tries to get closer to on the ground physical consumption of goods and services.

How those goods and services specifically relate ("quality" wise) to the base metric of goods and services in the US is another argument all together, but nominal measurements bypass this in huge order as well given the trade large economies conduct with each other represent very low amounts of their total economic activity.

A counter argument can be made for when there is a customs union like the EU, but the utility of PPP diminishes there to begin with (when comparing within the customs union).

PPP is good for measuring power of individuals. So PPP per capita is superior at measuring living standard than nominal GDP per capita. However to measure national power and strength, total GDP is far more relevant. Aggregate PPP GDP is far less useful on measuring national strength.

Depends how you define "national power/strength". That itself is a very vague term.

The USSR would conceptually had a smaller nominal economy than Nazi Germany, but its PPP total would have been equivalent or even bigger....and we know how their test of national strength worked out.

If you are making the case for pure raw economic based power projection...the point holds for nominal given the US dollar domination in world trade and commercial exchange.

PPP like I said simply wants to get at the actual numbers of quality A cars + quality B cars + quality C cars.....+quality A wheat + quality B wheat +quality C wheat....

basically an index of Σ QiGj....where Q is a quality segregation identifier coefficient, G is a good/service consumed...and j ideally tends to infinity depending on the data availability....and i is reflective of how much resolution you have on the quality component within each good/service type. i is still low to make PPP a genuinely strong measure, but it offers more resolution than computing everything simply by applying US price levels and exchange rates.
 
.
I would say its flawed (like any estimate is)...but less flawed overall actually. PPP simply tries to get closer to on the ground physical consumption of goods and services.

How those goods and services specifically relate ("quality" wise) to the base metric of goods and services in the US is another argument all together, but nominal measurements bypass this in huge order as well given the trade large economies conduct with each other represent very low amounts of their total economic activity.

A counter argument can be made for when there is a customs union like the EU, but the utility of PPP diminishes there to begin with (when comparing within the customs union).



Depends how you define "national power/strength". That itself is a very vague term.

The USSR would conceptually had a smaller nominal economy than Nazi Germany, but its PPP total would have been equivalent or even bigger....and we know how their test of national strength worked out.

If you are making the case for pure raw economic based power projection...the point holds for nominal given the US dollar domination in world trade and commercial exchange.

PPP like I said simply wants to get at the actual numbers of quality A cars + quality B cars + quality C cars.....+quality A wheat + quality B wheat +quality C wheat....

basically an index of Σ QiGj....where Q is a quality segregation identifier coefficient, G is a good/service consumed...and j ideally tends to infinity depending on the data availability....and i is reflective of how much resolution you have on the quality component within each good/service type. i is still low to make PPP a genuinely strong measure, but it offers more resolution than computing everything simply by applying US price levels and exchange rates.


If you are making the case for pure raw economic based power projection...the point holds for nominal given the US dollar domination in world trade and commercial exchange.

That is what I mean. As US dollar dominate international trade, nominal US dollar shows the economic power of a country. Where as nominal US dollar per capita does not truely show the living standard of its people. PPP per capita is more suitable.
 
. .
Remember how in early 1960s, IMF (or World Bank) predicted the Phillipines, Myanmar and South Vietnam would be the most developed countries in Asia after Japan, thank to:
- Speaking good English
- Legal system in compliance with Western ones.
- Other similarities with West.

I guess this time, the liberal economists in PwC still use the same shitty arguments to make this prediction.
 
.
Remember how in early 1960s, IMF (or World Bank) predicted the Phillipines, Myanmar and South Vietnam would be the most developed countries in Asia after Japan, thank to:
- Speaking good English
- Legal system in compliance with Western ones.
- Other similarities with West.

I guess this time, the liberal economists in PwC still use the same shitty arguments to make this prediction.

The financial industry is good at projecting linear growth trends and assuming different cases (worst case, best case) but terrible at detecting inflections. This is why financial projections are quite useless beyond a 10 year time horizon. Once you get into the 10+ year time horizon you are talking about more than half a generation. In this time frame cultures shift, boom and bust cycles, credit cycles, wars end/start, governments change, macro environment changes. In the long term the projections will need more qualitative aspects such as culture. Ultimately the economy is a manifestation of the culture in a specific environment. In my honest opinion I don't see the Philippines and especially Myanmar going beyond the middle income level (at best) by 2050 and even beyond. Having better connectivity with the west (developed markets) in language does help trade a lot, it enables that culture to manifest itself closer to its potential. Their economies will grow but it will be largely be dependent on and lagging the core markets, the potential is just not there. Vietnam is one of the countries in East Asia that has a chance if it plays its cards right largely due to good fundamentals in work ethic, strong government, and functional family structure. Stronger trade/faster growth will entail stronger integration with all major East Asian economies, especially with China.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom