The European Union was founded by Western European countries while Eastern European countries were still occupied by the Soviet Union.
zdvb
I would argue that it is not. The major reason for this is that the sizes of domestic markets in the EU vary so widely that it is possible for a country to have a decent GDP per capita even if it is not particularly competitive internationally. For example, France's domestic market is much larger than that of the Eastern European countries that have joined the EU. This means that French companies have had an advantage over Eastern European ones as they have been able to grow without having to export. Right now, France has a higher GDP per capita, but the Eastern European countries are often more competitive internationally because of their low wages. So, I would argue that countries can become rich without being internationally competitive and poor countries can have advantages in international competition. GDP and other indicators, like consumer prices and exchange rates, are all only general indicators that provide only a rough approximation of competitiveness. Tracking indicators like GDP show only "changes in relative competiveness" (Mattine Durand and Claude Giorno). Therefore, GDP per capita is not a major indicator of international competitiveness among EU countries.
singapore
noboy knows
Snohomish County in western Washington state.
I assume you are talking about the price elasticity of demand. . . It depends on the country you are dealing with, in countries with high GDP per capita, and particularly in the northern European countries, milk is an inelastic good, however in poorer countries milk can sometimes be an elastic good, especially in rural areas.
Moldova has the smallest GDP per capita of any Eastern European nation.
china,India,Indonesia,japan,and Korea
nepal,phippines,bangladesh,east timor, bhutan
I would argue that it is not. The major reason for this is that the sizes of domestic markets in the EU vary so widely that it is possible for a country to have a decent GDP per capita even if it is not particularly competitive internationally. For example, France's domestic market is much larger than that of the Eastern European countries that have joined the EU. This means that French companies have had an advantage over Eastern European ones as they have been able to grow without having to export. Right now, France has a higher GDP per capita, but the Eastern European countries are often more competitive internationally because of their low wages. So, I would argue that countries can become rich without being internationally competitive and poor countries can have advantages in international competition. GDP and other indicators, like consumer prices and exchange rates, are all only general indicators that provide only a rough approximation of competitiveness. Tracking indicators like GDP show only "changes in relative competiveness" (Mattine Durand and Claude Giorno). Therefore, GDP per capita is not a major indicator of international competitiveness among EU countries.
The capital is Perth
bitte leise sein is the translation in German. It is translated from English to German. German is mostly spoken in the European countries.
Paris
"Per capita" means "per person" - so this is just the average per person. If the style of life is similar in two countries, you would expect the per capita income, and per capita expenses, to be similar in both countries, even if they have vastly different populations.
You should use GDP per capita when comparing countries GDPs
No brainer. Israel.
america
By GDP, the five poorest European countries are San Marino, Andorra, Montenegro, Monaco, and Liechtenstein. By GDP per capita, the five poorest European countries are Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, the Ukraine, and Albania. The five European countries with the most debt (total) are the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands. The five European countries with the most debt (ratio, compared to GDP) are Luxembourg, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Monaco.