File talk:Prc1952-2005gdp.gif

Inflation
Is this adjusted for inflation? 71.137.83.153 06:17, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * no. the graph says it's nominal. --Naus 23:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Here is China's inflation rate index:
 * 1969 1970 1980 1990 1995 2000 2002 (year)
 * 42.83 42.83 49.26 100 193.47 210.94 209.25 (index relative to 1990)
 * With 1990 set at 100. 
 * As you can see the China's GDP has grown magnitudes more than the inflation rate since 1969.
 * --Naus 20:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * --Naus 20:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

This graph should be in a logarithm scale along the vertical axis. It would be more meaningful. --64.230.123.128 22:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily. If the intention was to show that China's GDP has been expanding exponentially, then you shouldn't do a logarithmic scale. --128.135.60.89 05:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


 * No. If the intention is to show GDP is expanding exponentially then a logarithmic scale should be used. If the expansion is exponential then with a logarithmic scale the graph will be linear, if the graph is not linear then the growth is not exponential. BradMajors (talk) 21:03, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree. The GDP of many countries grows exponentially. Even if year-on-year the growth is 1%, it's still exponential. With linear axis it's impossible to tell whether the rate of growth is increasing and at what rate. Ytoledano (talk) 12:24, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Also agreed. The GDP of every country increases exponentially. If this graph is intended to show that growth was faster under Deng, then it's intellectually dishonest. Either this should be a logarithmic scale, or (better yet) a graph of real GDP growth rates. CircleAdrian (talk) 05:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Someone replace this with REAL! GDP
I hate nominal.

-G


 * Historical GDP trends are usually done in nominal GDP with respect to the country's own currency. Take an Econ class. --128.135.60.89 05:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Nominal is misleading. If you want ACCURATE accounts, then use real... or didn't they teach that in your econ class?

-G
 * G, you are misleading as well as clueless. Nominal is no less "accurate" as real.  It just provides different information.  A lot of historical economic analysis in the US is done in nominal. --128.135.60.87 06:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Neither nominal GDP nor real GDP are inaccurate measurements though it is more difficult to accurate interpret nominal GDP.

It may be true that many US analysis is presented in nominal but those numbers only makes any practical sense to you if you are familiar with price developments in the US during the period of time. As long it is not expected that Wikipedia user should know Chinese inflation statistics by heart the graph should be in real GDP.(82.183.137.47 (talk) 11:13, 20 December 2007 (UTC))


 * For an exponential function like this, a logarithmic plot would probably be more useful. - MF —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.48.135.68 (talk) 20:12, 6 March 2011 (UTC)