A) The country that I have picked for the intended to be from is Australia for no specific reason. They should remain in the U.S. because of the U.S. is known for their strong economy and rights for each individual citizen. Also Australia's GDP per capita is low showing that their market for this decade has been weak and there hasn'r been a lot of production. An economy that is weak is not a good sign for the country and if there was a family or a person looking to move to that country, the smart thing to do would be to stay in the United States.
B) Even though the market in Australia is weak and it's GDP per capita is low there are some pros about moving to the coutnry that was founded by Great Britain. One pro is that the life expectancy for the country is high which means that the medical mal practice is strong. Having a high life expectancy for the country is a good thing to look for when wanting to move to that country. Another pro which is big for Australia is that it's unemployment rate is low and it's job market is very strong. The availability for employment in Australia is 113% showing that the chances of getting a good job that will help you raise your family is high and the job market is at an all time high.
C) The problems of looking at GDP and basing a decision of whether to move because of it are that the numbers could be off. This year could be better than the last and the numbers could be from a year that wasn't successful. The economy for any country isn't consistent and you can't base such a big decision of moving to a different country on one year of GDP per capita. Look at other things such as medical, employment, interest rates, and banking systems to base a decision on.
D) The problems of using the UN Human Development Indicator in their decision to move are that the numbers for the data can be off or just plain incorrect. Slso the data that is being reviewed is from the year 2005 which can mean many things such as it was two years ago and the numbers could have shifted immensely from that year until this year. Again an economy isn't consistent just like anything and the numbers for 2005 can be totally different from the next years results and then the year after that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
1)I think for this post you are right on some aspects. However, you did not mention the limitation with GPD as a measure of a country's economic well-being. Look at the notes (available on WebCT if you did not take notes in class) or read the textbook. Even though GDP can serve as a good measure for eocnomic well-being despite its limitation, the social well-being for a society includes much more than just economic well-being.
2)Typos/grammatical list to be fixed:
"to be from is Australia" (to be is Australia;
because of the U.S. is (because the U.S. is );
"hasn'r been" ( hasn't been )
"medical mal practice" (medical malpractice )
"One pro is that the life expectancy for the country is high which means that the medical mal practice is strong."(This does not make sense to me: did you mean "One pro is that the life expectancy for the country is high which means that the medical mal practice is low." or "One pro is that the life expectancy for the country is high which means that the medical care in Australia is good.")
"The problems of looking at GDP and basing a decision of whether to move because of it are that the numbers could be off."(The problems of looking at GDP and basing a decision of whether to move on it are that the numbers could be off.) Base....on...
"as medical, employment, interest rates, and banking systems"(as medical care system/ or medical care quality, employment, interest rates, and banking systems)
"Slso the data "(Also the data )
"the next years results" (the next year's results )
Post a Comment