Talk:Economy of Brazil/Archive 1

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:

Also see Anwar 14:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
 * OK forget the above presumption. I just found the actual forex conversion rate at Anwar 14:29, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
 * One more thing. Inflation and consequent interest rate environment are reflected in the forex movements. Anwar 11:20, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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).

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).

Debt as % of GDP
The stated is from 2005 from some newspaper or something, the CIA factbook says of 2006 it is like 50%--198.29.1.65 07:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Expand the Article
The article Economy of Brazil is bad and need of attention. Now, this Talk page will serve of “rough draft” to expand the article. Before making definitive editions in the main article, the changes will be made here. Below I made a list of sources to extract information.  Fe li pe  ( talk ) 17:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Banco Central do Brasil
 * BCB in English
 * Economy and finance
 * Exchange and Foreign Capital
 * Museum of Money


 * Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística
 * IBGE in English
 * Brazil in Summary (Portuguese)
 * GDP 2006


 * World Bank
 * Brazil in Wolrd Bank
 * Infrastructure in Brazil (I)
 * Infrastructure in Brazil (II)
 * Brazil Country Brief


 * Government
 * Government official site in English
 * About Brazil
 * Indicators
 * Investments, Infrastructure and partnerships
 * Importing and Exporting
 * Programs
 * Brazilian Exporters
 * Foreign Trade
 * Ministry of External Relations
 * Sustainable growth
 * The green revolution
 * Labor and employment
 * Infrastructure
 * Science and technology
 * Tourism
 * Foreign affairs


 * Other
 * Brazil Trade Net
 * Economic News of Brazil (Portuguese)
 * Financial Indicators (Portuguese)
 * Reuters
 * Reuters Brazil (Portuguese)
 * Bovespa in English
 * Goldman Sachs BRIC Report
 * Latin Focus

COPY OF THE ARTICLE Economy of Mexico
A major review of this article is needed! urgent! since user Joao is copy-pasting chunks of text from the article Economy of Mexico, a very well developed article. That is not fair to the users that created that article and of course, copy-pasting from other article is wrong and highly unaccurate. Please, somebody correct that or I'll have to do it by myself. Alex  Covarrubias  ( Talk? ) 22:09, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, come on, you crazy? I used only the model of the Economy of Mexico article, but the texts are completely different. And this is the Free Encyclopedia, and all its content can used and be edited.  Fe li pe  [[Image:BRAlogo1.png|15px]] ( talk ) 22:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any inconsistencies in the article, Joao made a great contribution and if he copied the model from the economy of Mexico article is not a problem since this is common practice in WP.Chico 23:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Since Felipe Invited me to participate in this project, until now, I have seen a remarkable improvement. I regret not having the chance to participate actively, as requested. I will try to help you guys out. There a few things here and there that need attention and need to be expanded, but overall you guys have done a great job. Congratulations!
 * One of the few things that I would change is to eliminate "magazine-type" qualitative sentences, and try to make it as encyclopedic and quantitative as possible. For example, comments such as "It was a long road to reach the position of 10th largest economy in the world.", while true in general terms, these are are more "novel-type" and not "encyclopedic-type" comments. China's situation only 50 years ago was far, far worse than Brazil and today they are the second largest economy in PPP. I prefer quantitative arguments and not qualitative arguments. A better alternative is: "Since 1808 the industrial sector has grown remarkably, at a pace of XX% a year, and Brazil is now consolidated as one of the most advanced industrial sectors in LA (with citation) and an important exporter in the area with over XXX million USD a year." This sentence sounds more encyclopedic.
 * I would also try to avoid qualitative comparisons between countries. For example: "the industrial sector is the most advanced in LA". This is subjective, and will invite edit wars. First you need to reference it. Then you need to define "advanced" (developed? high-tech? diversification? value of exports?), then you would need to compare it in quantitative terms. For example, from the World Bank you can get the percentage high-tech industrial exports. Brazil is not the first one, so you'd have to rule that out. Maybe diversification, what sort of industrial activities are performed in Brazil? R&D or Assembly? Can we get a percentage? Or perhaps you can say "the industrial sector in Brazil is the largest in LA in terms of GDP percentage" or "in overall value of exports" (if it is true, I haven't researched that myself, maybe it is not true). Numbers speak a lot more than qualitative claims, and nobody will be able to refute them. If anyone changes that claim, you would have a solid quantitative proof to revert. =) This in fact has helped us (in some areas, I know we might need to change some stuff in Economy of Mexico), but overall, vandalism has been greatly reduced there, because administrators will always revert back to a quantitative solid and referenced argument, but they will rarely revert a qualitative argument.
 * I hope this helps,
 * -- the D únadan 14:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, beware that you are copying verbatim text form your sources. You cannot copy the text and cite it. That still constitutes a copyright violation. You must paraphrase it. Only if you put the text in quotations with a direct link, then you can copy the text without paraphrasing it, but you cannot put quotations over entire sections, even if they are cited. Please review WP:Cite.-- the D únadan 16:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

NPOV
I read the article and wass a little disconcerted with the overoptimistic tone of it,one could even think that its a developed country they're talking,it's true that Brazil is the most robust economy of Latin America,but like India,Mexico,China,etc it still lacks the caracteristics that make a developed country so its more a major underdeveloped country.It would be good that the article would mention this factos:socioeconomic inequality,external debt,regional economical disparity and foreign capital dependence.Its 	ridiculous that the only thing the article says about this is one phrase ¨Ineqaulity is a historic problem for Brazil, but has improved in recent years¨.--Andres rojas22 19:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree, I don't think this article is NPOV. More like PPOV -> Propaganda Point of View --82.83.4.254 21:00, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

GDP Per head 2007
The latest statistics show Brazilian per capita GDP to be 8,800 USD (http://www.indexmundi.com/pt/brasil/produto_interno_bruto_(pib)_per_capita.html). The article must be updated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.60.74.203 (talk) 20:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Population below poverty line
The article says only 4.1% are below poverty line.

Fundação Getúlio Vargas says they are 29% and the CIA says they are 31%. Opinoso (talk) 11:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Eletrobras logo.png
The image Image:Eletrobras logo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:


 * File:Log-itu.png
 * File:Gerdaulogo.png
 * File:Bradesco.png
 * File:Banco do Brasil logo.png
 * Image:Usiminas logo.png
 * Image:Unibanco Logotype.svg
 * Image:Oi logo.svg
 * Image:Log-itu.gif
 * Image:Gerdaulogo.gif

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --10:51, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

India?
Why the article shows India stats on its right side? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rargenta (talk • contribs) 23:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

ITC external link on trade data
Hello everyone, I am working for the International Trade Centre (ITC). I would like to propose the addition of an external link that could lead directly to the specific country’s trade data held by ITC. I would like you to consider this link under the WP:ELYES #3 prescriptions. Moreover, the reliability and the pertinence of this link can be supported by the following facts 1) ITC is part of the United Nations 2) No registration is required 3) Trade data (imports/exports) are regularly updated 4) The link gives direct access to the trade database of the specific country 5) The addition of reliable trade data to the Economy section of the country could provide an appropriate contribution to the information therein contained. Thank you for your attention.Divoc (talk) 19:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Resource WSJ

 * Brazil's Economic Boom Has a Dark Side September 13, 2011 WSJ's John Lyons details some drawbacks to Brazil's skyrocketing economy, including an abundance of cash and a potential real-estate bubble.
 * Dark Side of Brazil's Rise by John Lyons
 * Brazil, Others May Join on Aid for Europe by John Lyons in São Paulo and Bob Davis in Washington D.C. 99.181.147.115 (talk) 23:13, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

potential NYT resources
97.87.29.188 (talk) 20:00, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * http://video.nytimes.com/video/2012/01/07/world/americas/100000001270046/haitians-find-hope-in-brazil.html
 * http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/07/world/americas/brazils-boom-absorbs-haitis-poor-for-now.html

How to update of recent changes in rankings
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

Following Poldavo's opinion, I found an inconsistency in the right table (ranking Brazilian's economy in 6th and 7th), and in the first paragraph (raking 7th and 8th). Although by recent facts (from December 2011) it seems that Brazilian economy surpassed UK's

I chose to revert, and use the former sources, because such ranking update is still from a single source, and not considered a consolidated fact. But if this information is consolidated but another sources, in special in the List of countries by GDP (nominal), them I believe we can update in here as well. Always remembering to update both in the text, and also in the right menu. --Pedro 13:26, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Brazil surpassed UK as the 6th largest economy, and it was published in many newspapers around the world, includding the Guardian, Clarin, CNN, Corriere della Sera etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.55.62.233 (talk) 16:31, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Brazil is the 6th largest economy, and not the 11th
Brazil surpassed U.K. as the 6th largest economy in 2011, and this fact was noticed by almost all the most important newspapers of the world, includding The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/dec/26/brazil-overtakes-uk-economy). So this article must be changed to stay updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.96.55.123 (talk) 23:38, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

why is the ppp ratio so high?
If anyone can enlighten, why the PPP of Brazil is so high? The ratio is almost 1:1, like the USA and the stronger european economies -- this is very rare, if not unique, among nations with a large population living in developing regions. --173.66.9.11 (talk) 12:06, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I was just coming to discuss this topic, since the IMF data seems contradictory. It still does with the 2012 data:


 * Implied PPP rate listed for 2011: 1.806
 * GDP nominal (reported, not estimated): 4,143.015 billion reals (reported also as 2,492.908 $US)
 * GDP PPP: 2,294.243 international dollars (equal to US dollars)

from the first two numbers, we can derive the PPP ourselves as 7,482.28509 billion reals. Using the apparent exchange rate the IMF uses, for the PPP I get 4,502.191848 international dollars. Even with the current exchange rate it is 3,605b $US.

I'm still curious how to deal with these discrepancies. I don't think it makes any sense to list the data the way it is when the exchange rate is so low right now (the real tends to float about 1⅔ to the dollar, instead of ~2:1 as it is currently). --—  r obbie  page talk 15:10, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

New sources
Economic growth in 2012 could fall below last year's 2.7%, but various signs are showing that Brazil is going to make a leap in the right direction in the future. Brazil's economy faces its toughest tests for a number of years so the upcoming years are critical. Toyota aims to increase its share of the Brazilian market, which currently stands at less than 3%. Brazil's unemployment rate has dropped and its middle class is growing. Incomes for the least fortunate are improving as well, so they are building from the ground up. This article has a lot of key evidence explaining the growth and future of Brazil's economy.

Brazil has turned its attention as it is prepping host the globe's two largest sporting events, 2014 FIFA and 2016 World Cup. Due to a rapidly growing middle class and the trade opportunities from their national resources, Brazil's economy has grown incredibly. Brazil is not content with their current economic standpoint, although its economy has grown by 7.5 per cent in 2010 and 2.7 per cent last year. With the two events that will take place in Brazil, they predict this number to help extremely. Investors, world famous athletes, fans and viewers, media, and several other factors will come in to play with the economic boost.

Brazil's economy barely grew faster than Japan which raised doubts over an expected recovery in the once-booming emerging market. Brazil's government has struggled to maintain momentum after wowing investors with 7.5 per cent growth in 2010. Brazil's finance minister, Guido Mantega, has been confidently predicting an economic recovery. As a result of recent tax breaks on everything from lampshades to cars will start to show in the second half of the year. The finance minister telling how he plans on rising the current economic situation is valuable information.

Miyamoto, H. (2012, September 24). Challenges ahead for Brazil growth. The Nikkei Weekly (Japan). Retrieved from http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sf&sfi=AC01NBSimplSrch.

Petersharkey. (2012, September 13). Thriving Brazil is using sport to reach next level. Birmingham Post. Retrieved from http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sf&sfi=AC01NBSimplSrch.

Pearson, S. (2012, September 1). Brazilian boom fades as data cast doubt on rate of recovery. Financial Times (London, England. Retrieved from http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sf&sfi=AC01NBSimplSrch.

Schwimi (talk) 04:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Pensions
One serious and unexpected feature needs flagging up: the impact of pension payments on the Brazilian economy, current and future.

At this stage in its economic development, you would expect Brazil to have low pension payouts (as % of GDP) and a high wage earner/pensioner ratio compared to G7 countries.

In fact, because state-guaranteed pension benefits are so generous, the average retirement age is around 53!

(Just the quickest googling: an Economist article and an IMF paper from earlier this year.)

Really needs a section from someone who knows about this stuff!Skeptic12 (talk) 21:24, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Lead rewrite
The lead on this page is a load of junk. It is in need of substantial revision. It lists a lot of crap that is spurious in the context of a lead to an article on the economy of Brazil. It should be succinct and well formulated, not a dribbling rant on various topics which is what it is currently. AdamFouracre (talk) 21:38, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Citation #17 Page Not Found
Hello. Just noting that citation 17 is not functioning.

It links to http://www.chicagobooth.edu/alumni/clubs/pakistan/docs/next11dream-march%20'07-goldmansachs.pdf.

Have a nice day,

Sofus (talk) 23:19, 28 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkfire9825 (talk • contribs)

Adding a New Section
This article contains a lot of strong information. One thing to think about would be to create an additional section that highlights some of Brazil's current economic state, which isn't all that good. There are two good outside articles with a lot of information. http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21645248-brazils-fiscal-and-monetary-levers-are-jammed-result-it-risks-getting-stuck?zid=305&ah=417bd5664dc76da5d98af4f7a640fd8a

http://time.com/3716995/brazil/

--ISWikiUser550 (talk) 23:40, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Buying Mexico
Our country have money to buy Mexico — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thiago200002 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Sources and confiability
The administrators should keep an eye on this page. There are several pieces of information that simply contradict their own sources, sometimes, presenting absurd numbers (192% debt/GDP ratio, when the sources says 41%, 18% unemployment rate, while the source says 7,5%, the country being ranked as having the 9th largest nominal GDP and 6th largest GDP PPP, when it is actually the 7th largest by both critiria, etc.). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:14C:5B82:80A4:5CF8:CF65:7757:28D (talk) 02:05, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

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)

Removed the phrase in the first paragraph: "Portuguese arrived and smoked weed all day, and depressed the overall GDP" -phxchristian  (Obviously someone was having a little fun)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.98.119.89 (talk) 07:33, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

lowercase sigmabot III not archiving this page
keeps tripping Special:AbuseFilter/702 when attempting to archive this page. I've set up ClueBot III to archive this page. — MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Replied at Village pump (technical). PrimeHunter (talk) 00:54, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Economy of Brazil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091110120653/http://veja.abril.com.br/111109/popup_remuneracao.html to http://veja.abril.com.br/111109/popup_remuneracao.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:44, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

CIA world factbook. Really?
I'm currently doing a comparative research on the BRIC countries mostly focused on macroeconomic differences and similarities. I was looking for some reliable sources in order to collect this informations and I started using the CIA world factbook. Then a friend of mine just make me notice that the CIA world factbook itself, has no references. All the datas about countries' economy are without sources! I decided then to do a comparison between the data from the CIA e other sources (World Bank, IMF, OECD, Consulting companies, Governments) and there are many sensible differences in the data displayed. Datas on China are the most Biased. Data on Russia too.

I noticed that almost every country here on wikipedia.en is CIA worldfactbook based and that sounds weird for me. We are providing the world countries stats originated by a single Intelligence Unit that actually is serving the United States of America. Sounds really weird.


 * The CIA World Factbook is an American source, but I want to remind you that Wikipedia was also started by Americans. Where the information originated doesn't matter. Facts are facts. Most of the information presented isn't really subject for debate because it is immutable. The GDP of Brazil is the same when America looks at it as it would be if England looked at it. Or India, or Turkey, or Bosnia. The list goes on. Just because it comes from America doesn't mean its biased. Also, the data collected from the factbook comes directly from the counties themselves, so that's why it doesn't need a reference. SeabassTheFish (talk) 02:34, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:42, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * CENU, São Paulo, Brasil.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:53, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Brazil Product Exports (2019).svg

Page protection
For the recent vandalism history, I decided ask for the protection of the page. The main data that is change is the GDP nominal and PPP values without base source. B777-300ER (talk) 03:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

For the last time I ask for protection of this page. I will not revert the current vandalism.

B777-300ER (talk) 04:01, 22 July 2023 (UTC)