Frightening GDP per capita?
I know that a lot of people use the Pipian website for calculating their GDP and what not. I personally don't like it because it limits a Frightening economy to a $35,000 GDP/capita.
Cav has had a frightening economy for about as long as I've had it (with an occasional drop to All Consuming or even Powerhouse :shock: )
I generally use $40,000 GDP/capita because my economy has been so good for so long, but I'm thinking of increasing it due to the fact that my nation has been around for almost a year at the same average production level per person.
My question is for those of you who don't use Pipian: what do you use for your Frightening (or otherwise) GDP/capita?
Hmm... this got moved out of Gameplay.
Oh well, bump.
It might depend on what they list ast your main industry (Automobile manufacturing, information technology, etc.). SOme of them might ential higher pay than others.
Nianacio
28-01-2004, 05:41
I'd say $45-50,000 is the absolute limit. I think $40-45,000 is a good number for nations with Frightening economies.
The industries for the nation with the highest GDP per capita in the real world:
banking, iron and steel, food processing, chemicals, metal products, engineering, tires, glass, aluminum
Beth Gellert
28-01-2004, 05:42
Beth Gellert's long-term frightening economy is creeping up on US$50,000 per capita annually. When one considers that Luxembourg's economy is stronger per capita than you claim Cav's to be it really ceases to be all that frightening ;)
I don't know where to stop, really, as BG's economy is one of the 0.4% or so fastest growing on earth (so much for the weakness of socialist economics).
Santa Barbara
28-01-2004, 07:45
I generally figure somewhere around these ranges, 40 thousand to 50 thousand. However, I have my military budget fixed and everything else really revolves around that, so it doesn't really matter to me after a certain point.
I don't know where to stop, really, as BG's economy is one of the 0.4% or so fastest growing on earth (so much for the weakness of socialist economics).
Fast rise, hard fall, slow and steady wins the race, and all that. :P
Iansisle
28-01-2004, 08:33
I don't know where to stop, really, as BG's economy is one of the 0.4% or so fastest growing on earth (so much for the weakness of socialist economics).
(Well, that may be true, but we're still more liberal! Ha! Silly conservative communists ;).
I love winning most of all when things aren't contests.)
Beth Gellert
28-01-2004, 08:38
Damn that brief Stalinist experiment. Erase all laws from the period and still they aren't forgotten.
I ask you this- what would become of a typical Beth Gellen communist in Iansisle? Would your people's liberalism extend to not-beating-him-up?
And anyway there's more of us!
..At the risk of sounding too competitive I think I'm winning this conversation.
Hehe *sigh*
Iansisle
28-01-2004, 08:47
Well, the government wouldn't beat you up...a roving corporate head-cracking squad in search of unionist agitators might.
Hmm, I suppose this UN report goes by a very 18th century definition of 'liberalism.'
OK then, so the general consensus is that if I use $47,500 per person, then I will not be creating any NS accounting scandals.
Thanks everyone!