Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
 01 Mar 2007, 01:40
What was life like in all of the Eastern European socialist states? What was the GDP and the GDP per capita income? Which ones were the most strict? Someone with and answer please post and not some link to another site. Some detailed information if you could. Also which socialist country today is the most like the USSR was before 85?
01 Mar 2007, 03:21
Quote: Bad way for measuring wealth in a socialist country. Albania: GNP: $2.7-2.9 billion, per capita about $930 Bulgaria: GNP: $67.6 billion, per capita $7,540 Czechoslovakia: GNP: $158.2 billion, per capita $10,130 Germany (east): GNP: $207.2 billion, per capita $12,500 Hungary: GNP: $91.8 billion, per capita $8,670 Poland: GNP: $276.3 billion, per capita $7,280 Romania: GNP: $151.3 billion, per capita $6,570 USSR: GNP: $2,500 billion, per capita $8,700 Yugoslavia: GNP: $154.1 billion, per capita $6,540 Source, 1989. It only has it in GNP not GDP. Quote: Out of China, Laos, Cuba, Vietnam, and North Korea; Cuba.  "Don't hate on me bro" - Loz 01 Mar 2007, 03:23
What about Belarus? And also why did people make so little in Albania?
01 Mar 2007, 03:38
Quote: Part of the USSR. Quote: Gross National Product (GNP) is the total value of all final goods and services produced by a country's factors of production and sold on the market in a given time period. Small countries have a smaller GNP and GDP. Again, bad way to measure a socialist country. "Don't hate on me bro" - Loz 01 Mar 2007, 04:04
I mean Belarus currently
01 Mar 2007, 04:10
This is from 2006:
GDP $80.74 billion GDP per capita: $7,800 Keep in mind inflation and that it is not GNP. Check out The CIA! "Don't hate on me bro" - Loz 01 Mar 2007, 04:16
Link398, why exacty are you asking for this information?
GDP has nothing to do with standard of living if thats the reason you want it for. The American GDP for instance has doubles the last 20 years, but standard of living has not gotten any better. 
Soviet cogitations: 638
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 May 2006, 07:44 Resident Soviet 01 Mar 2007, 09:37
Quote: Sorry, but it does. If you stop increasing the product, you stop producing the goods which are required for the society. Then your economy falls back. The idea that GDP has "nothing to do with standard of living" is ridiculous. While GDP/capita may have reverse-relation with life level (Kerala effect), in most cases GDP/capita and life level are correlated positively.  Vile, pro-terrorist piece of neo-Marxist, left-wing propaganda filled with radical sexual politics and nasty attacks on religion and Christianity 01 Mar 2007, 09:57
Quote: Stanislav, I think what Lensovet was alluding to was the fact that GDP alone should not be the definitive standard on quality of life, although I definitely agree that it is an important one. Comparing simply GDP between say the US and the USSR would 'reveal' that American life levels were objectively 'better' than those in the USSR, and though this may have been true in the economic sense, other things, like culture, the social paradigm of comeraderie and cooperation, psychological health, and education levels should also be taken into account, something that GDP alone doesn't do. "The thing about capitalism is that it sounds awful on paper and is horrendous in practice. Communism sounds wonderful on paper and when it was put into practice it was done pretty well for what they had to work with." -MiG
Soviet cogitations: 638
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 May 2006, 07:44 Resident Soviet 01 Mar 2007, 12:58
Of course, re-distribution must be taken in account. In a society where essetinally GDP/capita is close to average wage, the worker feels the riches that his country is aquiring.
In a country where GDP/capita is 10 times the average wage... well, you get it. That's why things like the Kerala effect are possible, a lesser GDP/capita but more evenly distributed would be superior to a greater GDP/capita, but concentrated in the hands of several people. Vile, pro-terrorist piece of neo-Marxist, left-wing propaganda filled with radical sexual politics and nasty attacks on religion and Christianity 
Soviet cogitations: 2868
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Nov 2005, 17:55 Party Bureaucrat 01 Mar 2007, 15:22
QFT about the GDP per capita versus average wage.
Another thing I despise about economic statistics: they rarely include or publicize variance, which is a value that should always be quoted alongside an average. Socialist-minded statisticians should always be looking for variance.  "History is a set of lies agreed upon." --Napoleon Bonaparte
Soviet cogitations: 638
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 May 2006, 07:44 Resident Soviet 01 Mar 2007, 20:12
Quote: HDR is your friend, then: http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/1991 ... hnotes.pdf http://hdr.undp.org/statistics/data/ind ... 2_1_1.html Vile, pro-terrorist piece of neo-Marxist, left-wing propaganda filled with radical sexual politics and nasty attacks on religion and Christianity 01 Mar 2007, 23:12
Thats right, I didn't literally mean "it has nothing to do with standard of living". But its not a definitive measure of it, even while being important. Which is why I asked Links why he was asking about GDP.
Distribution has to also be looked it, a large GDP can mean 90% of the wealth is concentrated in the upper 5-10% of the population, while the remaining 90% share the remaining 10% of the wealth. |
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
|
||||||
[ Top ]
More Historical Forums: The History Forum. Political Forums: The Politics Forum, The UK Politics Forum.© 2000- Siberian Fox network. Privacy.
