Talk:Economy of Brazil
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I don't think this should be added to all the CIA World Factbook pages. There's a whole set for each country. They should be consistent, I think. It's just one extra click to navigate through the main Brazil page (linked in the page header and footer). --Pinkunicorn
If you change the world classification of economies from Brazil being at the 9th to the 11th, then you should also change the classification in the table at the right side and you should consistently explain why do you consider better this alternative ranking to the GDP PPC used before. --Poldavo
Contents |
[edit] Massive erases =
With all respect, Chico Venâncio, you said the information doesn't have refereces? All tables have references.
The tables contain information that is not easy to find in the internet, and it gives the reader a very good information about Brazil. Herbert Alves 06:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
All right, the tables don't hurt the article as bad as the rest. I still think they are not encyclopedic but lets leave them until we can find a better way to put some of the table data into the article. Since nothing was said about the other erases I am going to redo the them, we can talk about how to improve it from there ok? Chico 07:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
What's the purpose of this page? In your opinion. What should be coverd?
In my opinion, this page must not cover economic history of Brazil. It should provide numbers and forecasts about key economic statistics. Information about industrial output and location is too complex to be kept here.
The tables come in handy, a simple browse over the tables, shows that Brazil hasn't grown in a few years, income is concentrated, but inflation is under control. Unbiased, concentrated information.
I created a page for Industry and Agriculture. They should cover the situation, history, location and output of brazilian industry and agriculture.
Herbert Alves 19:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
I think you are rigt, we should not cover economic history in this article, or give a deep covering about Industry and Agriculture, but we could keep small sections on both subjects giving links to the full articles. Also I think tables are not very encyclopedic, we may be able to present the same data in another form, until we are satisfied with another way we can keep the tables. I am just glad someone else is trying to improve this article with some work we can have a great article here. Chico 17:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Go ahead and create the sections for Agriculture and Industry, although I disagree with them. On my view, I would upgrade the article according to this page: http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Economia/0,,AA1391193-5599,00.html Add 2007 GDP growth prediction, 2007 inflation target and trade balance forecasts for 2007...Add numbers for 2006 inflation, GDP growth and so on...What do you think of this?
What do you mean by "encyclopedic"? Do you have any replacements for the tables? I agree that the tables don't look good, but besides the arguments above, the tables are the best way to present historical statistical data, they save space and they are in a sub-section. More important, they offer the foreign reader a brief background of vital brazilian economic statistic.
It could be argued that years covered in the tables and the topics of same don't follow a criteria, I agree, but we can solve that. Originally the tables presented information of the past 5 years (2001-05), I will bring the tables back to this format then, ok? Herbert Alves 18:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
What's up Chico Venâncio? I've been waiting for your answer for 3 weeks now. Should I go ahead and add the forecast of some key economic indicators for 2007? I will start getting ready, next week I will add those Herbert Alves 04:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Go ahead, I am not doing much editing these days, kind of a wikibreak, I'll come back to work on this article in about 2 months. I think 2007 estimates would be a fine addition. Chico 04:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Economy Of Brazil
This page must aim at current economical statistics of Brazil, recent Economic Events, short term economical prospects of Brazil.
I don't think economic history should be covered here, becsue there is a huge page covering this topic already.
Next year's inflation target, GDP growth estimate, primary surplus should be the topics of this page.
For example when mentioning Balance of Trade of Brazil, I don't think it should be mentioned that Brazil registred trade deficits after Plano Real was introduced, this already belongs to the economic history of Brazil.
Herbert Alves 01:21, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Transfered Agriculture and Industry to NEW topics
Agriculture is too important to be just a sub topic here, so is Industry.
Agriculture is huge, we need to talk about how we went from coffe to soy, the resurgence of sugarcane
Herbert Alves 06:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] = Added 5 new tables
I added tables of Inflation, GDP growth, capital formation, income distribution, and avearage exchange rate which is important in order to convert GDP or other informations.
Herbert Alves 20:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] National accounts
I wouldn't mind having some of the flow numbers, and especially the increase numbers, like GDP growth, for a few years back, one year really doedn't say a lot. Of course, you would like to have a chart of especially GDP growth rate.--Jerryseinfeld 20:40, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hmmm someone was playing around changing words into godzilla and the like but as i have a mastercopy i fixed it relatively quickly. Replayee
This page needs updates. Angra II Nuclear Plant has been in operation for years and we only import 12% of our oil, not 33%.
[edit] Oil Self-Sufficiency
The data concerning oil imports/exports and consumption/production is obsolete. Normally, I wouldn't much mind, but seeing as the country has recently reached a consumption/production ratio where it actually produces more than it uses, I'd say corrections are in order.
[edit] Macro-economic trend
Two remarks: (1) the numbers in the table are not in constant currency terms (or at least the source doesn't seem to indicate that), which means that the number takes inflation into account (i.e. "nominal growth" as opposed to "real growth"); (2) it could be useful to also state the growth in international currency terms (USD, or perhaps euro), as most people don't know how much a realo is worth. Sijo Ripa 10:34, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- I have changed the table from a new source. I prefer current prices plus the ruling forex conversion rate to the arbitrary constant prices as it reflects market reality better. But a new issue has come up. Dollar values of GDP are available from IMF but not the exchange rate of the Brazilian currencies in circulaton then. So I have presumed the exchange to be constant during 1942-94. The new table is based on this:
| Year | Brazilian Currency | US Dollar Exchange |
|---|---|---|
| 1942 | 1 old cruzeiro = 1,000 reis | |
| 1967 | 1 new cruzeiro = 1,000 old cruzeiros | |
| 1970 | 1 cruzeiro = 1 new cruzeiro | |
| 1986 | 1 cruzado = 1,000 cruzeiros | |
| 1989 | 1 new cruzado = 1,000 cruzados | |
| 1990 | 1 cruzeiro = 1 new cruzado | |
| 1993 | 1 cruzeiro real = 1,000 cruzeiros | |
| 1994 | 1 real = 2.75 cruzeiro reals |
Also see [1] Anwar 14:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Privatizations proceeds
Sources are needed to say: "By the end of 2003, Brazil's privatization program, which included the sale of steel and telecommunications firms, had generated proceeds of more than $90 billion." Chico 18:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC) I removed much of the Macro-economic trend section because it sounded like something out of a defense for Brazil's former president than something form an encyclopedia Chico 18:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Revision
This article needs a major revision, a few sections overlap, some even repeat each other. Most facts are not referenced, and much of the article is not NPOV. I am going to place a expert revision template. Chico 00:48, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Grammar Error
The following sentence is not grammatically correct and should be changed:
The Goldman-Sachs paper that proposed this group of countries would have rapid economic growth and by 2050 would eclipse the current major economies
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.202.120.159 (talk) 08:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Actually
There are a lot of grammatical and spelling errors in this page. It is fairly annoying. I don't do much Wiki editing. I am not sure what the procedure is, but the page needs work. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.202.120.159 (talk) 08:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC).
