The Secret

Mar 2018
984
UK
Okay, a lot of misconceptions in a small post, I'll try to explain it clearly to you


PS- GDP is already a measure of gross product.
What do you mean "already"? That is literally all it is. Also note that it is not a measure of wealth, or even income. It's domestic product or, roughly, the total amount of monetary transactions across an area for a year.

Claiming 3% growth in GDP is already an average across the entire population.
GDP is not an average. It's a total.

Adding "per capita" is latin meaning BY HEAD.
Thank you for the translation, but I believe everyone else who is reading this already knew that. GDP per capita is the average GDP per person.

If My head and Your head saw ZERO growth- then claiming a per capita growth of 3% is a lie.
No, it means that the average went up. The mean, to be precise. Nobody here has claimed that a rise in the average means a rise for everyone, or even necessarily for most people. That is not how the mean work. Certainly nobody with the slightest passing of understanding of statistics thinks that a rise in the mean of a distribution implies a rise for every point in the distribution.

its a HUGE lie.
Your lack of understanding of basic economic and statistics terminology does not mean (put intended) that other people are lying to you.
 
Jan 2017
14
Fairfax, VA
Wait, originally you were claiming that success leads to over population, and over population is a problem. Now you've just said that over population leads to success. That is the exact opposite of the original thesis!

Also, I'd argue that those tribes you listed mostly expanded not as a consequence of prior success, but as a consequence of their failure against the Huns and other nomadic groups from further east.



Originally you were talking about expansion purely in a territorial way, as a cure for over population. Have you redefined expansion to be any growth of a state, be it territorial or otherwise? Because if so then I entirely agree that success and growth is the same thing, purely by definition at this point.



Not sure why you're bringing in group feeling now, what you mean by it, or how it is relevant to the original theory you put forward.


The conlusion simply doesn't follow from what you said before. You can't use a prediction about the future as evidence that your conclusion is correct. The way I see it you're playing fast and loose with definitions of your terms so it's hard to see what it is that you are actually saying. Would I be correct to paraphrase it as "A nation or other demos that is growing demographically/economically/technologically/etc... will carry on doing so for as long as it can, resorting to invading neighbours if necessary"?
You got me going there for a minute, I imagined some one else on the other end.
 

sculptingman

Ad Honorem
Oct 2009
3,693
San Diego
Okay, a lot of misconceptions in a small post, I'll try to explain it clearly to you

What do you mean "already"? That is literally all it is. Also note that it is not a measure of wealth, or even income. It's domestic product or, roughly, the total amount of monetary transactions across an area for a year.
I mean you think adding "per capita" means something it does not.

GDP is not an average. It's a total.
Well... peripherally... yes. But that is NOT the purpose of the measure. The measure is only pertinent in relation to the Population of a nation.

That is... there is an obvious reason why the GDP of Namibia is LOWER than that of the USA... right? Besides, GDP is rarely reported as a total. Its reported as a percentile Gain or Loss in GDP, isn't it?
Its a measure of relative productivity- the relation being population.



Thank you for the translation, but I believe everyone else who is reading this already knew that. GDP per capita is the average GDP per person.
Again- wrong. By Head means By person... Dividing the GDP by the population gives you ZERO information relative to GDP alone. And it gives you NO information about any individual's actual gain or loss. Therefore it is a worthless measure.

Let's see if you can comprehend a new analogy. Say a corporation has a CEO and 999 workers and posts that it has a payroll of $1,000,000 per week.
If per capita means what YOU have been conned into thinking it means, then the "per capita" salary is $1,000 per person.
In reality, the CEO takse $500,000 per week... and the rest of the employees get $500.
If you allow corporations to MIS-define what Per Capita means, then you accept a Lie that conceals the actual distribution of benefit.

GDP is ALREADY the average across the population. A 3% gain in GDP, is a 3% gain no matter how many people you divide it into. Adding 'per capita' is meaningless.
Worse than meaningless- its a CON trying to get you to believe things are getting better for everyone, when they very well may not be.

Most Americans think we have a GOOD economy- because of these kinds of lies. In Fact, the Buying power of the majority of Americans is declining.



No, it means that the average went up. The mean, to be precise. Nobody here has claimed that a rise in the average means a rise for everyone, or even necessarily for most people. That is not how the mean work. Certainly nobody with the slightest passing of understanding of statistics thinks that a rise in the mean of a distribution implies a rise for every point in the distribution.
Mean is NOT the average. Sheesh. did you never take logic? The Average is thrown off by statistical anomalies and extreme outliers.
a FEW billionaires dramatically throw off the average of "income". A MEAN measure compensates for extreme outliers to represent a more accurate image of the real distribution.

For example: Looked at on a GLOBAL level... Incomes are rising. This is because emerging markets like China and India still have massive levels of crushing poverty where industrialization is just beginning to result in greater economic activity. However, if you look at Britain and the US and France- the leading Mature economies of the world- the working classes, although better paid than the emerging markets, are making LESS in inflation adjusted income every year.

This is only revealed, however, if you THROW OUT the whopping huge gains enjoyed by less than 1% of the population. Throw the billionaires into the mix and you get a net positive GDP gain. So, ONE More TIME, GDP divided by the population is a CON being used to keep you complacent as to the re-distribution of wealth from the working class to the ownership class.
A true MEAN per capita would reveal that the vast majority of people in the US and Britain are losing ground. And it would explain the rise of right wing xenophobia because when people FEEL they have less, they become a lot more stingy about sharing with others.



Your lack of understanding of basic economic and statistics terminology does not mean (put intended) that other people are lying to you.
Said by a guy who just equated average with mean.

Sorry- economics is largely a "science" in service of wealth. Banks call debt "product". The leisure class who do no work are called "job creators"-
And just because YOU toe the party line as to how economics works ( trickle down much? ) does not mean you understand how you are being conned.

The Mark never sees the ruse.

You need to bone up on the actual history and reality of economic inequality... how it comes about and how the rich rig politics, taxation, and the market to transfer wealth to them.
Or- try taking a course in economic modeling, where EVERY computer model of pure capitalism results in ALL wealth, worldwide, in the hands of just a handful of families.

The rich are manipulating media ( Think Rupert Murdoch, and Zuckerberg, and Sinclair broadcasting ) to forward a worldview that distracts attention from and outright conceals the actual agenda of wealth to take everything for themselves.

Ownership has been rigged to be the new force of gravity- sucking all money into a black hole.

It was not always this way, and it does not have to continue to be this way. Government's correct role is to act as a governor on the engine of avarice.
The story being told to you by the ownership class is a Lie.

That there ARE self made billionaires is NO reason to believe the fantasy that anyone could climb to the top. That THEY are doing ever better is no reason to fail to notice that most are doing worse.
ALL pyramids come to a very sharp point.
 
Last edited:
Mar 2018
984
UK
Mean is NOT the average. Sheesh. did you never take logic? The Average is thrown off by statistical anomalies and extreme outliers.
I can't remember every course I've taken in my life, but I'm pretty sure I did a fair amount of both logic and statistics while getting my PhD in theoretical physics. There are so many blatant misunderstandings in that post, that is only the most egregious: you are denying the definition of the simplest quantity in statistics. Clearly, you have no interest in actually learning anything here, only in spreading your own political view point. That, and because I'm tired of being insulted, this thread is reported.