What's new

Sri Lanka’s economy grew 9.1% in 2010, IMF report

who makes such a stupid rule,i can see great development potential on both South Africa , Sri lanka ,and lots of other developing countries with large population
Tht isnt a rule but the reason behind the formation of BRIC was to increase the co-operation between the developing countries who have above $1 trilliön gdp .
South Africa was added coz of the interest shown by Chinese and Indian companies in investing in Africa ; and SA could represent the whole Africa continent .

There are almost nil chances tht another south asian country will be added . Iran has more chances according to me .

U cant pick a country in BRICS by only seeing their growth rate
Afghanistan has 22% growth rate ,now by u r logic even they should be added in BRICS :D
 
. . . . . .
That was silent! Good to know you guys are near 10% growth figure.
Sri_Lanka.gif
 
.
Considering their population and the growth rate , it's another Singapore in the making .
Their gdp per capita could easily reach to the standards of developed countries if they sustain their growth rate to current lvl :cheers:

They have a very strategic location near the coast of India, as well as high growth rate and medium population. Investment back and forth between Sri Lanka and India, capital injections from China and other higher income developing countries as well as developed countries, strategic location near resource routes, all are in favor of Sri Lanka.
 
.
china have turned BRIC into a circus. The original concept of the BRIC was for the US $ 1 trillion economy which are developing at a very fast rate for a longer period of time.

But addition of South Africa destroyed its concept.

Who set this concept and whats actually this concept for?
 
.
:rofl:
In 2010 , India's growth rate was 10.4% . Even more than China .

Plz Chk the stats before commenting

did my research found this

On the face of it, China grew by 10.3% last year, comfortably outpacing India's estimate of 8.6%. But the IMF's latest World Economic Outlook released earlier this week says that India grew by 10.4% in 2010. How can that be? Here's how the acclaimed journal crunches the numbers to arrive at the same conclusion. India typically reports its GDP "at factor cost", meaning it adds up all the income earned in the course of producing the country's goods and services. Other countries, including China, typically report their GDP "by expenditure", i.e. by adding up all the spending (including taxes) on domestically produced goodies.
 
. . .
guys u cant add,any country u can into BRICS.... :lol:

Some one supporting IRAN into BRICS....:lol:
u want to make BRICS a JOKE or a propaganda?????
Forget any middle east in BRICS....
 
.
did my research found this

that growth figures were given by IMF...International monetary fund...k

So do u think IMF has calculate India's growth in "at factor cost", meaning it adds up all the income earned in the course of producing the country's goods and services.

and china's by expenditure", i.e. by adding up all the spending (including taxes) on domestically produced goodies.

u wanna say that IMF did not calculated countires GDP growth in uniform method???
or u have some inferiority complex????
Did we Bribe IMF also or there is some RAW agent in IMF????
plz explain
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom