Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
flamming_python wrote:Kimppis wrote:max steel wrote: Wrong Kimmpis . None of the Baltic nation has gdp per capita close to 30,000 $ . Lithuania is at 25,000 $ and rest are below 20,000 $ .Nations having less population do usually have high gpd per capita . Look at qatar , norway and luxembourg . it ain't rocket science . But look at Hong kong , China with such a huge population they have high gdp per capita . That's true development . Look at Baltics except lithuania all lag behind Russia in gdp per capita , LT also lead merely by a 1000 $ not a big leap .
Leave russia aside , compare it with western Europe Baltic's lag much further .
Savaged by western loans the Baltic's lose their young nearly as fast as they are created. Austerity and wage cuts for a decade in order to feed payment schedules to western banks leave the Baltic's as sick nations, who will not recover economically as their natural markets lie to the East and South. Russia and Ukraine provide a 200 million person consumer market that is ripe for Baltic trade. But being slaves of Washington, the Baltic's sit and rot as minor weak economies sitting on the edge of the rich west, forbidden by Washington to trade with the east [/b]
Talking about HDI . The HDI is not a good indicator of national social policies' success or failure. It suffers from many problems including; having fewer indicators to monitor for the sake of simplicity; poorly chosen indicators; methodological problems; calculation flaws and trade-off issues between variables. However, this does not change the fact that the index is, at the moment, is one of the most trustworthy and cited indexes in the field of development and it is welcomed by many governments and institutions around the world. Having said that, there are still more
ways for us to develop more accurate and targeted, well grounded indexes to monitor the progress of countries in human
development.
As I mentioned, I was talking about purchasing power parity. Estonia is at 27K, Latvia 25K and Lithuania 28K. (And btw, Russia is at 24K, which is basically the same.)
Country's size has nothing to with the per capita income. Many smaller countries are poor, look at East Timor, for instance. I don't understand why are mentioning Hong Kong. It was separated from mainland China for over a century and it still has a special status. Hong Kong's per capita GDP is considerably higher than China's average. China is a middle income country as a whole, while many cities and coastal areas, Hong Kong amongst them, are highly developed and yes, that is a major development, you are right about that.
And btw, I didn't say that Baltic countries are "powerful" in any way or that they are important economies. Yes, I know that per capita GDP has nothing to with national power.
Comparing them with "western Europe" (whatever that is) isn't exactly fair, either. And it actually seems like they are roughly as developed as countries such as Spain and Portugal. And finally, I didn't say that HDI is perfect, but it tells you something. My point was that statistics show that Baltic countries are not any kind of economic disasters, actually far from it.
The problem is that they've done everything to ruin relations with Russia. Now numerous economical sectors of theirs are under threat.
Some 2.4% of Lithuania's GDP was based around agricultural exports to Russia. Similar figures for Latvia and Estonia.
Now that market is gone due to Russia's counter-sanctions and they've been forced to slash prices this year way below profitability due to all the surplus.
Russians compose the 1st or 2nd largest tourist group in the Baltic States.
Due to the devaluation of the rouble first and foremost - Russians have been turning away from foreign tourism, more towards domestic tourism for the past year.
I anticipate a significant decline in Baltic-bound tourism - although I may be wrong as the Baltics might grab a niche as a cheaper version of Finland - which has really become too expensive due to the devaluation for many Russians.
Baltic port traffic - down by an average of 30% over the past year across all the major ports there - Klaipeda, Riga, Tallin..
This is due firstly to the devaluation, and secondly and more importantly to the Ust-Luga port near St. Petersburg which has recently come online, and has been growing by leaps and bounds in terms of traffic for the past 3 years. AFAIK there are still terminals under construction; when they become operational the tempo will be further added to.
Goods transit via road - this is big business for Lithuania in particular; and it was Lithuania in particular who suffered Russia's retaliation after its president called Russia a terrorist state. Lines of trucks held up at the border. Don't know how it is now - whether its got better or worse - but the poltiical wrangling is for sure not good for business, when it comes to Lithuania's truckers.
Gotta say - I don't anticipate good economic results this year in the Baltic states. AFAIK preliminary figures showed that their growth dropped the most out of anyone's compared to 2014.
Good post. Btw, I just read that Russian tourists are returning to Finland as ruble has stabilized and numbers are expected to be the same as last year. http://yle.fi/uutiset/rupla_vahvistuu__venalaiset_tulevat_taas_ostoksille_suomeen/7885152
Also, can someone explain me why Russia's economic growth decreased to little over 1% few years back? Baltic countries and Poland kept on growing and oil prices were high.
higurashihougi
