Top 10 countries by National Wealth

[Chinese-Dragon]

National wealth = Total monetary Assets minus Total Liabilities for a given nation.

It refers to the total value of wealth possessed by the citizens of a nation at a set point in time.

This figure is an important indicator of a nation's ability to take on debt and sustain spending.

The rankings for 2014 (in billions of USD):

National wealth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The data shows that our position is correct, China is still a developing country, considering our population size our per capita national wealth is still fairly low.

We still need at least 10-20 more years of above 7%+ economic growth before we reach an acceptable level.

 

[Dubious]

National wealth = Total Assets minus Total Liabilities for a given nation.





The rankings for 2014 (in billions of USD):

National wealth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

View attachment 175502

The data shows that our position is correct, China is still a developing country, considering our population size our per capita national wealth is still fairly low.

We still need at least 10-20 more years of above 7%+ economic growth before we reach an acceptable level.

Italy and Spain? Really?

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Italy and Spain? Really?

They have been developed economies for a long time now, so yes.

These two countries did have very important histories as well, the Roman Empire essentially Latinized all of Europe and thus the West, and Spanish is one of the most widely spoken languages in the world.

There is no doubt these are wealthy countries, compared to most of the world, for example developing countries like China which are still in the process of building up our national wealth.

Whereas countries like Italy and Spain built theirs up a long time ago already.

 

[Dubious]

They have been developed economies for a long time now, so yes.

These two countries did have very important histories as well, the Roman Empire essentially Latinized all of Europe and thus the West, and Spanish is one of the most widely spoken languages in the world.

There is no doubt these are wealthy countries, compared to most of the world, for example developing countries like China which are still in the process of building up our national wealth.

Whereas countries like Italy and Spain built theirs up a long time ago already.

You do know when Euro was formed Italian Lira dropped like trash...And it effected their economy by making everything bloody expensive same goes for Spain....

and total national wealth is the total sum value of monetary assets minus liabilities of a given nation... It refers to the total value of wealth possessed by the citizens of a nation at a set point in time


Well one needs to probably recalculate how or where that money is when it comes to alot of things...Well I think the results are a little skewed as most Italians are convinced most of the wealth is only harbored by 1 man

 

[American_Millenium]

National wealth = Total Assets minus Total Liabilities for a given nation.





The rankings for 2014 (in billions of USD):

National wealth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

View attachment 175502

The data shows that our position is correct, China is still a developing country, considering our population size our per capita national wealth is still fairly low.

We still need at least 10-20 more years of above 7%+ economic growth before we reach an acceptable level.

Lol you saw this from me

 

[Dubious]

The table even shows Brazil as no.15

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Lol you saw this from me

You are right sir.

I should give you credit for the link, @American_Millenium.

 

[atatwolf]

Looking at this way doesn't make sense. You have to look per capita.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Looking at this way doesn't make sense. You have to look per capita.

That's what I said in the OP of this thread, didn't you read it?

Anyway, Turkey's National wealth is about the same as my small city of Hong Kong (which only has 7 million people).

 

[Jit]

meaningless exercise on several accounts:

* If anyone believes the total networth of the USA has doubled between 2000 and 2014 clearly needs a dose of reality. It has not.
* this is not a number that can be used to compare wealth of one state to another, let alone countries! A 10 room mansion in Houston is priced a lot less than a 2BR condo in Manhattan. Since the total networth is arrived at by adding up individual networths, every body in HOuston will show up less worthy in $ terms though in reality it is the other way around - the poor saps in Manhattan had to sink so much money for a bathroom
* extend that a bit - for a $ I can eat a full meal in most parts of Asia - I can get a coke OR a pretzel may be in the US
* If HK and Shanghai are taken out then see what happens to China wealth; similarly Mumbai real estate, Tokyo etc
* Italy and Spain! they can barely service their debts!

 

[atatwolf]

That's what I said in the OP of this thread, didn't you read it?

Anyway, Turkey's National wealth is about the same as my small city of Hong Kong (which only has 7 million people).

You really don't make sense. You compare Japan to China for example. They are 120 million while you are 1,5 billion. If you look at per head statistics you are a third world country. The real statistic is probably worse since China manipulates data.

 

[Lure]

National wealth = Total Assets minus Total Liabilities for a given nation.





The rankings for 2014 (in billions of USD):

National wealth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

View attachment 175502

The data shows that our position is correct, China is still a developing country, considering our population size our per capita national wealth is still fairly low.

We still need at least 10-20 more years of above 7%+ economic growth before we reach an acceptable level.

Recently Chinese stock markets are extremely bullish. You will most probably see a great deal of increase in the wealth -possibly will put China to No. 2 spot- in 2015 rankings. I've asked about the logic of this national wealth calculation to @LeveragedBuyout before. He explained in details that it's very related to market capitalization.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

meaningless exercise on several accounts:

* If anyone believes the total networth of the USA has doubled between 2000 and 2014 clearly needs a dose of reality. It has not.
* this is not a number that can be used to compare wealth of one state to another, let alone countries! A 10 room mansion in Houston is priced a lot less than a 2BR condo in Manhattan. Since the total networth is arrived at by adding up individual networths, every body in HOuston will show up less worthy in $ terms though in reality it is the other way around - the poor saps in Manhattan had to sink so much money for a bathroom
* extend that a bit - for a $ I can eat a full meal in most parts of Asia - I can get a coke OR a pretzel may be in the US
* If HK and Shanghai are taken out then see what happens to China wealth; similarly Mumbai real estate, Tokyo etc
* Italy and Spain! they can barely service their debts!

My city Hong Kong is not included in any rankings for China, we are counted separately due to the One country two systems policy.

Even alone Hong Kong has a huge amount of national wealth, and more foreign exchange reserves than India, for example.

Personally I do not agree with the separate ranking, Hong Kong is a part of China and everyone recognizes that. I think we should be included in the Chinese GDP ranking.

 

[ShahidT]

@Chinese-Dragon there was another thread on the exact same thing, exact same link, a while ago. perhaps u missed it

but i'll repeat my comment..

the list/metric is complete garbage.

for 2000, it insinuates that taiwan, switzerland, belgium, hong kong, denmark, austria, singapore.. all have more "national wealth" than RUSSIA. with taiwan, particularly, almost 6 times more.

ok, it was the end of the yeltsin era, russia was ravaged.. fine. but taiwan, belgium, switzerland and 2 PIIGS nations remained well above it throughout and even into this decade, when its public debt is amongst the lowest in the world.

is someone with an iq greater than a chimp able to explain how a booger sized coutry ranks higher than a former superpower, military, technological and resource powerhouse, that is arguably more comprehensively industrialised than mainland china, in `gross national wealth`.

Lure, above, is correct. market capitalization, money printing (aka QE ) and other bogus measures of the fiat, paper wealth, old guard, are the basis of this article. which is why nobody, not even the sustainers and upholders of this old order, take such a fundamentals-lacking measure seriously.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

@Chinese-Dragon there was another thread on the exact same thing, exact same link, a while ago. perhaps u missed it

but i'll repeat my comment..

the list/metric is complete garbage.

for 2000, it insinuates that taiwan, switzerland, belgium, hong kong, denmark, austria, singapore.. all have more "national wealth" than RUSSIA. with taiwan, particularly, almost 6 times more.

ok, it was the end of the yeltsin era, russia was ravaged.. fine. but taiwan, belgium, switzerland and 2 PIIGS nations remained well above it throughout and even into this decade, when its public debt is amongst the lowest in the world.

is someone with an iq greater than a chimp able to explain how a booger sized coutry ranks higher than a former superpower, military, technological and resource powerhouse, that is arguably more comprehensively industrialised than mainland china, in `gross national wealth`.

Lure, above, is correct. market capitalization, money printing (aka QE ) and other bogus measures of the fiat, paper wealth, old guard, are the basis of this article. which is why nobody, not even the sustainers and upholders of this old order, take such a fundamentals-lacking measure seriously.

Sure it's a flawed measure, but all measures are flawed.

National wealth is simply total monetary assets minus total liabilities for any given country.

As the link in the OP said: "This figure is an important indicator of a nation's ability to take on debt and sustain spending."