Q4 2023 GDP, 50 States & DC

[Yuri]

Silly example to make easier to understand:

In 2011, Brazil GDP per capita was at R$ 22,259 or US$ 13,631;

2020, it was R$ 35,935 (US$ 7,345) and in 2021 R$ 42,247 (US$ 8,166).

I don't need to say Brazil is a much wealthier place in 2021 than it was in 2011, despite the crisis and sluggish economic growth. Poverty rates are much lower. Just a random example: there were 44 million registered cars in Brazil in 2011 and now it's 75 million (and cars are very expensive items in Brazil).

So no Crawford, 2011 Brazil is not twice as rich than 2021 Brazil only because it had a higher GDP per capita converted in USD. 2011 Brazil was much poorer place.

[pip]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The EU economy is now about 70% of the U.S. economy. The EU economy used to be larger.

The GDP per capita ratio is approaching 2:1.

I spent about 1/3 of my life in (West, then Western) Germany, 2/3 in U.S. The countries used to have pretty similar levels of household prosperity. Now it's an aching gap, where, returning home, you feel like the Beverly Hillbillies at an Appalachian reunion. I have cousins who are MDs in Germany, who would make much more working as garbage men in NYC. Hell, they'd make much more as garbage men in Cleveland.

The U.S. can't build anything, has the most f---ked up politics in the developed world, is a health calamity, and is the global mecca for weirdos and nuts, but still does a pretty good job of making people prosperous.

I got a chuckle out of that. And it's true too.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Germany is poorer than Appalachia. It also has higher unemployment than Appalachia. The only Appalachian state with similar income is West Virginia. Even Kentucky is richer.

It's definitely more egalitarian, but not by much anymore. Income inequality in Germany has been growing much faster than in the U.S. Income inequality is outrageous largely planet-wide, and Europe is a long way from the egalitarian postwar decades. Since the 1990's and Chancellor Schröder, inequality has skyrocketed.

And inequality is not important if medians are high. Who cares if there are a bunch of billionaires if the median family is making high incomes? Who cares if there are no billionaires if the median family is poor? Median incomes in the U.S. are well over 50% higher than in Germany.

It's ridiculous to consider GDP per capita (or median income) without PPP for the purpose of comparing standard of living. Sure, the US still comes out well but not by such a large margin (depending on who you ask, about equivalent to the Netherlands, which is one of the wealthiest EU countries but not by such a huge margin).

[Crawford]

We're generally comparing country-country, which makes more sense than PPP. The narrative isn't different under PPP, even by household.

I'll admit I have a strong bias against PPP, which ignores the fact that purchasing power is tailored to local market conditions. I'll never agree with the endless listicles that claim Detroit is cheaper than NYC bc an apples-apples house & car cost less. It's mindless plug n play, as if I should budget based on a McMansion and SUV in a place where neither are common.

Also the underlying data behind PPP is shit, while nominal is pretty good.

[jbermingham123]

Originally Posted by Yuri

Silly example to make easier to understand:

In 2011, Brazil GDP per capita was at R$ 22,259 or US$ 13,631;

2020, it was R$ 35,935 (US$ 7,345) and in 2021 R$ 42,247 (US$ 8,166).

I don't need to say Brazil is a much wealthier place in 2021 than it was in 2011, despite the crisis and sluggish economic growth. Poverty rates are much lower. Just a random example: there were 44 million registered cars in Brazil in 2011 and now it's 75 million (and cars are very expensive items in Brazil).

So no Crawford, 2011 Brazil is not twice as rich than 2021 Brazil only because it had a higher GDP per capita converted in USD. 2011 Brazil was much poorer place.

Again, you are forgetting that wealth is not based in absolutes anymore, but on share of the total pie.

Brazil has more total assets than it did in 2011. far more. But its share of the overall money supply has shrunk, because the US dollar decreased in value slower than the Real, and thus increased in value relative to it. And unfortunately, thats what matters, at least nowadays in the era of asset management.

In the last decade, but particularly in the last 5 years, high finance has largely moved on from investment banking, and is now all-in on private equity and asset acquisition and management. Goldman Sachs, for example, isnt Wall Street's top dog anymore, its Blackrock and to some extent JPMorganChase.

The full force of Wall street is now directed toward vacuuming up as many assets as possible. Airports, power stations and substations, truck fleets, nursing homes, apartment buildings, houses, etc. And in that context, it REALLY MATTERS that the US dollar has grown in value relative to the Real. because those fuckers buy everything in dollars. And so far, theres no country i know of that is able to stop them (because of their ability to use shell corporations).

I wish it wasnt this way. this same process is running rampant in the US and destroying thousands of businesses and families. but more people need to be aware that they or their community/country can be getting more material assets while simultaneously getting monetarily poorer, and thus more vulnerable to parasitic investors, who then gradually strangle the community/country out of those assets.

This is what has been happening to Greece, without Greek citizens even realizing how dire of a situation they are in. On paper, they made it out of their rough years and are doing great recently, but they will wake up one day and realize that everything around them is owned by people in Frankfurt and London

[Velvet_Highground]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The EU economy is now about 70% of the U.S. economy. The EU economy used to be larger.

The GDP per capita ratio is approaching 2:1.

I spent about 1/3 of my life in (West, then Western) Germany, 2/3 in U.S. The countries used to have pretty similar levels of household prosperity. Now it's an aching gap, where, returning home, you feel like the Beverly Hillbillies at an Appalachian reunion. I have cousins who are MDs in Germany, who would make much more working as garbage men in NYC. Hell, they'd make much more as garbage men in Cleveland.

The U.S. can't build anything, has the most f---ked up politics in the developed world, is a health calamity, and is the global mecca for weirdos and nuts, but still does a pretty good job of making people prosperous.

That’s a bit of a scary statement sounds a boast from the late Roman Republic. I like money prosperity & success should be rewarded but in my view The Unites States of America is the successor of the Roman Republic and we need to not forget the lessons of history. Augustus was a good leader holding all military power while letting the democratic institutions govern non frontier provinces it was generally a peaceful & prosperous time after the civil wars. The 5 good emperors and Pax Romana was another good time but a lot of the post republican leaders were mediocre at best and s**tshows at worst and there was no recourse. The level of people thinking dictatorship might not in the be so bad in the US should be terrifying.

Mike Duncan wrote a great book centered from the rise and assassination of the Gracchi to the collapse of the republican army system. The republic was built on the citizen soldier/farmer but as wars dragged men further from their homes for longer periods if they didn’t sack and plunder they often came back to foreclosure.

The rise of Gaius Marius the breakdown traditional republican army was when a Gallic Tribe with Germanic allies went on a rampage along the northern Mediterranean coast and army after army of Romans was crushed. Enlistment was part of your civic duty but by this time the bar had been lowered to eliminating almost all property qualifications. Romans armed themselves traditionally though a military industrial complex grew up around the Punic Wars supplying the state with arms and armor to continue to fight Hannibal.

Gaius Marius won great acclaim after beating a client who kept bribing his way out of charges of bribery & the legions seemed to drag their feet catching him. Marius got his second in command Sulla after cornering but never catching Jagurtha to sit for peace talks with his cousin who killed Jagurtha for rule of modern day Algeria.

Anyways the Kimbry were defeating legion after legion and Marius who shared none of the fame of the victory with Sulla opened up recruitment to all men. Many the sons and grandsons of farmers who were forced to sell their lands and become impoverished in the cities. This professional army was trained and led to victory against an army who seemed invincible. He birthed the professional Roman Army loyal to its leader who brought it victory & riches rather than to the senate.

Marius went a little senile in his old age and started a war with his younger protege over who would lead the new eastern war Marius lost the appointment and killed a few enemies and declared Sulla an enemy of the state. Sulla after winning in modern Turkey came back to fight the old wily Marius but Marius died as plans to fight were being made many of his successors who survived Sullas sack of Rome and “prescriptions” you like that guys wife and his villa “Hey Sulla he’s a Marian supporter” it was nasty.

The final collapse of the Sullan constitution leads to gridlock and the Triumvirate along with the death of the republic.

I’m not saying we’re Rome 50bc but that path is open to us if all that matters in America is money and the power to acquire more money. It’s a tough deal operating with a constant nation debt has become an avenue for gridlock while a national reinvestment is going to be more and more expensive the longer we wait. It’s above my pay grade but we can make things here we just make more outsourcing and the extra profits drive up stock prices which benefit ruthless decision making. The stagnation of the US middle class which hasn’t made any more money since the 80’s with the exception of 2022 adjusted for inflation is potentially libel to give the whole system the middle finger.

I’ll quote Mike Duncan from his Revolutions podcasts about the French Revolution & and advice to his home country. He says to the rich you can keep making a F**k ton of money in the future by giving up a little now. There are other reforms like our military spending and offshore tax loopholes that can help pay to rebuild infrastructure that will benefit commerce as a whole, though with the right leadership.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I've definitely made no such claims. Never claimed to be progressive, never claimed to be nationalist, never claimed U.S. is "best".

It's indisputable that the U.S. is (strictly materially) the richest society in the history of humanity. And even with the rise of the developing world, the U.S. share of global economy is the same in 2024 as it was 50-60 years ago, while almost all other developed nations have seen their shares drop.

For my entire life, I have constantly heard from both Republicans and Democrats that "America is on the wrong track!" while the place just keeps getting wealthier and wealthier. While people argue in public about stupid stuff, "the system" just keeps working in the background.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by Crawford

is a health calamity

It's amazing that the U.S. dominates economically when so many of its citizens are wildly unproductive.

[dimondpark]

Per Capita GDP Q4 2023
DC--$262,536
NY--$111,849
MA--$107,127
WA--$104,966
CA--$101,219
CT--$95,935
ND--$95,675
AK--$93,740
DE--$92,545
NE--$91,009
CO--$90,522
NJ--$87,944
IL--$87,815
WY--$87,688
TX--$86,417
MD--$84,304
MN--$83,667

--US--$83,472--

VA--$82,845
UT--$81,650
NH--$80,599
SD--$79,719
IA--$78,266
KS--$78,231
NV--$77,332
PA--$76,151
OR--$76,068
HI--$75,958
OH--$75,519
TN--$74,936
GA--$74,440
IN--$73,885
NC--$72,265
RI--$72,146
FL--$71,738
WI--$71,404
AZ--$70,116
MO--$69,399
LA--$68,882
VT--$68,013
MI--$66,753
ME--$66,660
OK--$63,903
MT--$63,636
NM--$62,913
KY--$62,527
ID--$62,118
SC--$61,418
AL--$59,906
AR--$58,037
WV--$57,062
MS--$50,357

[dimondpark]

By Census Region:

Midwest: $5,315,161($77,133 Per Capita)
IL--$1,102,071
OH--$890,207
MI--$670,690
IN--$507,424
MN--$480,190
MO--$430,369
WI--$422,896
IA--$251,481
KS--$230,727
NE--$180,930
ND--$74,914
SD--$73,262

Northeast: $5,422,156($95,153 Per Capita)
NY--$2,189,391
PA--$987,637
NJ--$817,354
MA--$750,435
CT--$347,560
NH--$113,589
ME--$93,145
RI--$79,040
VT--$44,005

South: $9,840,076($75,619 Per Capita)
TX--$2,636,423
FL--$1,622,626
GA--$821,989
NC--$783,202
VA--$722,502
TN--$534,217
MD--$521,159
SC--$330,779
LA--$315,827
AL--$306,820
KY--$283,273
OK--$259,544
AR--$178,238
DC--$178,136
MS--$148,242
WV--$101,685
DE--$95,414

West: $7,422,871($94,073 Per Capita)
CA--$3,944,376
WA--$820,074
CO--$532,489
AZ--$521,027
OR--$322,887
UT--$279,568
NV--$247,105
NM--$133,489
ID--$122,047
HI--$109,850
MT--$72,037
AK--$68,712
WY--$51,210

[dimondpark]

Page 21 from the same PDF

Per Capita Income, 2023:
1-MA--$87,812
2-CT--$87,447
3-NJ--$80,724
4-CA--$80,423
5-WA--$79,659

6-NY--$79,581
7-CO--$78,918
8-WY--$77,837
9-NH--$77,260
10-MD-$73,849

11-ND-$73,741
12-VA-$72,855
13-MN-$71,866
14-AK-$71,616
15-IL-$70,953

16-SD-$70,353
17-FL-$68,248
18-PA-$67,839
19-NE-$67,800
20-RI-$66,480

21-VT-$66,463
22-OR-$65,426
23-TX-$65,422
24-DE-$65,392
25-NV-$65,168

26-HI-$65,151
27-WI-$63,963
28-MT-$63,918
29-KS-$63,732
30-ME-$63,117

31-UT-$62,823
32-IA-$62,351
33-AZ-$61,652
34-MO-$61,302
35-TN-$61,049

36-NC-$60,484
37-OH-$60,402
38-IN-$60,038
39-MI-$59,714
40-ID-$59,035

41-GA-$58,581
42-OK-$58,499
43-LA-$57,100
44-SC-$56,123
45-NM-$54,428

46-AR-$54,347
47-KY-$54,326
48-AL-$53,175
49-WV-$52,585
50-MS-$48,110

[moorhosj1]

Originally Posted by jbermingham123

Roughly ⅓ of the population in both places is childless. In about two decades, unless they have mass immigration, that will catch up to them.

Germany has had massive immigration for the past decade. There is an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to it.

Today, Germany is one of the most popular destinations for immigrants in the world, with well over 1 million people moving there each year since 2013. As of 2019, around 13.7 million people living in Germany, or about 17% of the population, are first-generation immigrants.

In the US, about 14% of the population are foreign-born.

[moorhosj1]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I'll admit I have a strong bias against PPP, which ignores the fact that purchasing power is tailored to local market conditions.

PPP across state is different than using PPP across countries. Why wouldn't local market conditions of Italy impact their purchasing power differently than local market conditions in the US?

There is a reason that graduate and PHD-level economics classes use PPP, regardless of your admitted bias.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

PPP across state is different than using PPP across countries. Why wouldn't local market conditions of Italy impact their purchasing power differently than local market conditions in the US?

How is PPP different comparing states as opposed to comparing nations?

The underlying data used in PPP comparisons is largely crap, and the bucket of goods-type analysis is inherently faulty.

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

There is a reason that graduate and PHD-level economics classes use PPP, regardless of your admitted bias.

Not true. Nominal and PPP are both used. They aren't the same, with one measuring size and the other measuring purchasing power. Any graduate-level economics class will have a built-in awareness that price comparison sampling is less accurate than market-based calculation. Also the PPP rates are notoriously nontransparent and dependent on national reporting bodies.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

Germany has had massive immigration for the past decade. There is an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to it.

Germany has stagnant/declining population and a terrible population pyramid despite the fairly significant immigration of recent years. The key is more the population distribution, with the share of college-age and younger workers at record lows.

The good thing is that Germany is very desirable for immigrants, so they should be able to import a skilled workforce much easier than, say, Italy.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by jbermingham123

Again, you are forgetting that wealth is not based in absolutes anymore, but on share of the total pie.

Brazil has more total assets than it did in 2011. far more. But its share of the overall money supply has shrunk, because the US dollar decreased in value slower than the Real, and thus increased in value relative to it. And unfortunately, thats what matters, at least nowadays in the era of asset management.

In the last decade, but particularly in the last 5 years, high finance has largely moved on from investment banking, and is now all-in on private equity and asset acquisition and management. Goldman Sachs, for example, isnt Wall Street's top dog anymore, its Blackrock and to some extent JPMorganChase.

The full force of Wall street is now directed toward vacuuming up as many assets as possible. Airports, power stations and substations, truck fleets, nursing homes, apartment buildings, houses, etc. And in that context, it REALLY MATTERS that the US dollar has grown in value relative to the Real. because those fuckers buy everything in dollars. And so far, theres no country i know of that is able to stop them (because of their ability to use shell corporations).

I wish it wasnt this way. this same process is running rampant in the US and destroying thousands of businesses and families. but more people need to be aware that they or their community/country can be getting more material assets while simultaneously getting monetarily poorer, and thus more vulnerable to parasitic investors, who then gradually strangle the community/country out of those assets.

This is what has been happening to Greece, without Greek citizens even realizing how dire of a situation they are in. On paper, they made it out of their rough years and are doing great recently, but they will wake up one day and realize that everything around them is owned by people in Frankfurt and London

I completely agree with you. That's definitely an issue and even though there are pros on a devalued Brazilian Real, there are also cons you mentioned above. What I meant was we cannot say whether a society, a population is "poor" or "rich" based on the GDP of a given year and worse: picking up this GDP and converting it to US Dollars.

As I said: 2011 Brazil is not poorer than 2021 Brazil by any metric despite the GDP per capita numbers I posted. Brazilians are way more affluent today: they're healthier, have more years of schooling and a bigger purchase power.

That's why Crawford is completely misguided when think he can assess whereas a country is poor or rich based on GDP converted in USD. That's not the purpose of GDP.

Originally Posted by Crawford

How is PPP different comparing states as opposed to comparing nations?

The underlying data used in PPP comparisons is largely crap, and the bucket of goods-type analysis is inherently faulty.


Not true. Nominal and PPP are both used. They aren't the same, with one measuring size and the other measuring purchasing power. Any graduate-level economics class will have a built-in awareness that price comparison sampling is less accurate than market-based calculation. Also the PPP rates are notoriously nontransparent and dependent on national reporting bodies.

GDP itself is completely dependent on local statistical offices. IMF or World Bank don't collect such stats anywhere. They only compile them. And even though stats offices worldwide follow some general guidelines, each country has their own methods to measure it.

[moorhosj1]

Originally Posted by Crawford

How is PPP different comparing states as opposed to comparing nations?

PPP is a tool for normalizing currency exchange rates and states use the same currency. Without the exchange rate piece, it is basically just a cost-of-living comparison.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Yuri

GDP itself is completely dependent on local statistical offices.

Not true. Multinational orgs, including IMF and WB, collect national GDP data. In fact many private firms collect such data. Places like Goldman, MS, Blackstone, E&Y, have entire such divisions. Generally much more reliable than asking third world bureaucrat in Lesotho or Nicaragua.

Originally Posted by Yuri

And even though stats offices worldwide follow some general guidelines, each country has their own methods to measure it.

Correct. Which is a major reason cross-national PPP is crap. Even ignoring data quality, many nations only look at urban areas and legal transactions, which is, again, crap. Much of the world deals in cash, nontaxed economy, requiring imputations.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

PPP is a tool for normalizing currency exchange rates and states use the same currency. Without the exchange rate piece, it is basically just a cost-of-living comparison.

It's the same thing, measuring local buying power across jurisdictions, whether USD or kumquats.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Not true. Multinational orgs, including IMF and WB, collect national GDP data. In fact many private firms collect such data. Places like Goldman, MS, Blackstone, E&Y, have entire such divisions. Generally much more reliable than asking third world bureaucrat in Lesotho or Nicaragua.

No, they don't. Just look the * on their reports. It comes straight from the stats offices. It's an incredibly complex job to collect data from every single good produced, a service provided in a country.

Do you really think those houses have a team tracking transactions in a small village in Nicaragua just for the sake of it?

There are only special cases such as Cuba or North Korea that UN, IMF, WB come up with a number, but that's just symbolic. A massive guess.

Originally Posted by Crawford

Correct. Which is a major reason cross-national PPP is crap. Even ignoring data quality, many nations only look at urban areas and legal transactions, which is, again, crap. Much of the world deals in cash, nontaxed economy, requiring imputations.

But then it's not PPP the real problem. I'm not a fan of it either. It's your insistence in conflating GDP (and converted in USD) with "wealth", "money on the pockets" of private individuals and worse: thinking it's possible to have such comparison in completely different societies, with different levels of savings, with different consuming habits, different costs regarding housing or utilities. You cannot do it.

You'd be surprised on how cash-free many middle-income and even low income countries are. Brazil has "only" R$ 334 billion banknotes and coins in circulation. In comparison, the country's GDP is at R$ 10.9 trillion, its foreign reserves it's on US$ 380 billion. 500 million bank transfers are made every day.

By your posts, sometimes you have this idea that technology or money only exist inside the US. The rest of the world is the most absolute state of destitution.