I found the weighting of 1 year of data from a country with an economy the size of some English regions to be equal to the entire country of Britain for 19 years to be a tad weird too.
Because they're rating the % of growth, rather than an actual measurement of the GDP / delta.
It's sort of like if you're judging weight loss between a 400 pound man and a 250 pound man, if you look at it by poundage lost the 400 pound man is almost always going to win, but it you judge it by variance it's a fairer comparison.
Not saying it didn't make me go 'Hmmmmm...' but that's at least defensible. But 1 year vs 19 years? That's just kind of bullshit.
I was more troubled by the spread of years AND the selection of country weights.
The problem with weighting economic growth even by percentages is you can just as easily argue the reverse, when dealing with growth rates in large established economies versus smaller ones.
The Great Keynesian Satan has had further wonky insights into the piece, such as that link showing how the rankings are shown off by the performance of individual countries.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2013-04-16 05:43 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-04-16 05:47 pm (UTC)19 years of data for country #1 = +2.9%
1 year of data for country #1 = - 7.1%
Average data = -2.1%
The problems with that calculation are downright amazing.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-04-16 06:08 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-04-16 07:01 pm (UTC)Because they're rating the % of growth, rather than an actual measurement of the GDP / delta.
It's sort of like if you're judging weight loss between a 400 pound man and a 250 pound man, if you look at it by poundage lost the 400 pound man is almost always going to win, but it you judge it by variance it's a fairer comparison.
Not saying it didn't make me go 'Hmmmmm...' but that's at least defensible. But 1 year vs 19 years? That's just kind of bullshit.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-04-16 08:07 pm (UTC)The problem with weighting economic growth even by percentages is you can just as easily argue the reverse, when dealing with growth rates in large established economies versus smaller ones.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-04-16 09:43 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-04-17 04:23 am (UTC)Oh, wait. What reporters?
(no subject)
Date: 2013-04-19 07:20 pm (UTC)