Egypt, India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, China, Iraq, Mongolia, Nigeria, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Vietnam

[^_^ 5,021]

The world is going to become richer and richer as developing economies play catch up over the coming years, according to Willem Buiter, chief economist at Citigroup.

...

Buiter's analysis of the world's long-term prospects offer some hope that better times are ahead but if he is right power will shift from the West to the East very quickly.

...

"Developing Asia and Africa will be the fastest growing regions, in our view, driven by population and income per capita growth, followed in terms of growth by the Middle East, Latin America, Central and Eastern Europe, the CIS, and finally the advanced nations of today," he wrote.

"For poor countries with large young populations, growing fast should be easy: open up, create some form of market economy, invest in human and physical capital, don't be unlucky and don't blow it. Catch-up and convergence should do the rest," Buiter added.

Buiter has constructed a "3G index" to measure economic progress; 3G stands for "Global Growth Generators" and is a weighted average of six growth drivers that the Citigroup economists consider important:

1. A measure of domestic saving/ investment

2. A measure of demographic prospects

3. A measure of health

4. A measure of education

5. A measure of the quality of institutions and policies

6. A measure of trade openness

Using that index the nations to watch over the coming years are Bangladesh, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Mongolia, Nigeria, the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Vietnam.

"They are our 3G countries," Buiter said.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/41775174

[Marzy 1]

What will happen to a develop world?

[^_^ 5,021]

What will happen to a develop world?

I imagine the US will be well among our peers in the developed world. We're demographically much healthier than either Europe or Japan.

I believe the key word to keep in mind is convergence.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I know my developing market fund has been kickingass for the last 10 years.

[^_^ 5,021]

I know my developing market fund has been kickingass for the last 10 years.

Go long, but not too long. You are "some old guy", after all

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Go long, but not too long. You are "some old guy", after all

My "investment counselor" recommended mediocre investments. I picked that fund on my own, and that is the only one taking off, like a rocket. Total return around 800% since inception.

https://www.oppenheimerfunds.com/fund/investors/overview/DevelopingMarketsFund

[^_^ 5,021]

My "investment counselor" recommended mediocre investments.

Those guys don't usually look out for you. Their incentive structure is all wrong.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Those guys don't usually look out for you. Their incentive structure is all wrong.

So I have noticed. Once they get their commission, they tend to lose all enthusiasm for the client, especially if you like to front-load investments like I do.

Edited February 26, 2011 by Some Old Guy

[^_^ 5,021]

So I have noticed. Once they get their commission, they tend to lose all enthusiasm for the client, especially if you like to front-load investments like I do.

In their defense, if your happiness/success alone determined their compensation, they wouldn't be able to work with many small investors at all.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

How come you didn't post this headline:

U.S. WILL BE THE WORLD'S THIRD LARGEST ECONOMY

"China should overtake the US to become the largest economy in the world by 2020, then be overtaken by India by 2050," he predicted.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/41775174

[^_^ 5,021]

How come you didn't post this headline:

If you like that headline so much, go ahead and post it.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

If you like that headline so much, go ahead and post it.

1) I was going to, until I realized the article looked familiar.

or

2) I just did.

[BishopM 114]

The world is going to become richer and richer as developing economies play catch up over the coming years, according to Willem Buiter, chief economist at Citigroup.

...

Buiter's analysis of the world's long-term prospects offer some hope that better times are ahead but if he is right power will shift from the West to the East very quickly.

...

"Developing Asia and Africa will be the fastest growing regions, in our view, driven by population and income per capita growth, followed in terms of growth by the Middle East, Latin America, Central and Eastern Europe, the CIS, and finally the advanced nations of today," he wrote.

"For poor countries with large young populations, growing fast should be easy: open up, create some form of market economy, invest in human and physical capital, don't be unlucky and don't blow it. Catch-up and convergence should do the rest," Buiter added.

Buiter has constructed a "3G index" to measure economic progress; 3G stands for "Global Growth Generators" and is a weighted average of six growth drivers that the Citigroup economists consider important:

1. A measure of domestic saving/ investment

2. A measure of demographic prospects

3. A measure of health

4. A measure of education

5. A measure of the quality of institutions and policies

6. A measure of trade openness

Using that index the nations to watch over the coming years are Bangladesh, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Mongolia, Nigeria, the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Vietnam.

"They are our 3G countries," Buiter said.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/41775174

Ian Morris has written an interesting book convering this exact topic of emerging countries/economies: Why the West rules...for now: The Patterns of History, and what they Reveal about the Future.

I just finished reading this book. Its not a difficult read if you have a bit of familiarity with global anthropology/global history/global economics. In this book, Ian traces the societal development of man over a course of 30,000 years or so, specifically focusing on the historical/anthropological development of Eastern and Western societies on either side of the Movius Line. He then uses this information to generate models which trend toward what might take place in the Western and Eastern development of society and leverage of international power in the next 100 years.

But, specifically to the OP's post, Ian also discusses an economic term known as the 'Advantage of Backwardness'. In short, the Advantage of Backwardness' simply states that an innovation (in anything from farming through technology) may take 1000s of years to develop initially by the society developing the innovation, but can be capitalized upon almost instantaneously by those societies which don't develop it. Hence, leveling the playing field, per se.

The Advantage of Backwardness is in definite display as we now easily see developing countries rapidly gaining ground on developed nations. Learning how to capitalize (no pun intended) upon this development is where the USA will have its challenges. Will it embrace the development of these nations, or become even more protectionistic? Good questions worth asking, without a doubt...

Blessings, BishopM

[웃 910]

How come you didn't post this headline:

U.S. WILL BE THE WORLD'S THIRD LARGEST ECONOMY

"China should overtake the US to become the largest economy in the world by 2020, then be overtaken by India by 2050," he predicted.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/41775174

Does it really matter if their economy is larger? They have BILLIONS ( > 1 billion) of people in each of those countries. Of course they should have a larger economy. But when you look at how much the average person makes it is something like $1,000 a year in India and $4,000 a year in China. Those are very dangerous numbers.

To put those dangerous numbers in perspective; in Iraq the GDP per capita is $2,800 per year...133% higher than in India ($1200)....

So it is great that India will be the 2nd largest economy in 40 years, but in the meantime it is one of the poorest countries in the history of mankind..

Edited February 27, 2011 by Lord Infamous

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Does it really matter if their economy is larger? They have BILLIONS ( > 1 billion) of people in each of those countries. Of course they should have a larger economy. But when you look at how much the average person makes it is something like $1,000 a year in India and $4,000 a year in China. Those are very dangerous numbers.

To put those dangerous numbers in perspective; in Iraq the GDP per capita is $2,800 per year...133% higher than in India ($1200)....

So it is great that India will be the 2nd largest economy in 40 years, but in the meantime it is one of the poorest countries in the history of mankind..

It does matter, if you look at the world with a hive mentality, as opposed to an individual mentality. A nation pools all its resources together, and acts as a single entity on the world stage. As for GDP, as the world's economies continue to exploit cheap labor, look for that GDP per Capita to decline in modern nations, and to incline in developing nations.