The relationship between climate and wealth

Oh, duh! <nods>. I see.

How does "PPP (Purchasing power parity) per capita GNI" relate to the 'regular' GNI per capita? Has it anything to do with the issue c.i. raises - like, that it calculates in the effect of diverging prices or something?

How come it is so difficult to find any indications of average wages, by the way, do you know?

PPP takes into account prices of commodities.

As I wrote before, globalization has made prices of goods quite similar all over the world (the more protectionist the economy, the more expensive the goods: some food products in Europe, equipment in some Third World countries). Even more, if exchange rates are let to the market (no space for an economic policy of overvaluating or devaluating a currency).

The prices of services -which are harder to export- makes a difference on purchasing power parity. Some times, it is because of the exchange rate, but more often it is because most services are work-intensive, not capital intensive and wages are lower in poorer countries.

We have seen the difference in the cost of a maid.

Let me make a couple of other examples: a first class bus ticket from Prague to Karlovy Vary (170 Km = 105 miles) cost, in 2002, about 3 dollars. That's the price of a 5 Km (3 mile) taxi ride in Mexico City. And less than the starting fare for taxis in several US cities.
The average price of a male haircut in Mexico City is 8 dollars. In Guatemala City it is 1.50 dollars. In the US, it should be above 20 dollars.
Of course, as c.i. noted, there are things besides wages that go into prices. What's the lease for a barber shop - salon in Manhattan? What's the lease in Kentucky, in Sao Paolo, in Calcutta?
So, a similar wage would be able to buy the same TV, the same car or the same shirt in different countries (just a bit more expensive in richer ones, because of the salesperson wage and the store cost or rent), but very different amounts of haircuts, taxi rides, nanny or nurse services, etcetera.
[c.i. pays $30 dollars an hour for a maid; I balk because I pay $30 dollars a day for the nurse that takes care of my mother].

As for average wages, the underground economy in many third world countries makes them hard to track. In Mexico we have the "average industrial wage", quite easy to track with precision, and the "average wage", which comes from a national panel of income and expenditures of households, and is really a big poll.

Succinctly put, Craven. I agreed with your point of view. I believe we have discussed this before. I thought your thesis was concise and well-spoken. I wonder what others have to say regarding the matter.

Long time no see. Yeah, we've discussed this one before. Probably several times while in Brazil. BTW, the Surgeon I mentioned was Edson. You'd taught him too, right?

When we are comparing prices around the world a difficulty arises due to different lifestyles.

The way I have tried to correct for it is to attempt to compare the costs of an hours unskilled labor.

Another way is to calculate the hours worked per calorie available per person.

Climate skews this something terrible. The $1,200 US that I have to use to heat my home annually is not required in The Carribean Islands or much of Brazil. A bit more would be required in Nova Scotia or Moscow

So then I tried to assign a value to sunlight. Wow Calories available to humans due to climate is difficult to figure.

All this also enters into the premise of the thread, as Nature currently provides some value. Consider the value added in Caracas, Los Angeles, and Ottowa. The expense of water in Nevada and Somalia. Importing food in Japan and Hawaii.

This particular facet has interested me as I will retire in another year and am considering moving somewhere where a fixed amount of cash will provide the most comfortable lifestyle. Frankly I am tending towards Belize, but I sure am not sure .

Hope you come up with something.

Didn't someone come up with a Big Mac or Whopper index as an aid to determinng relative purchasing power?

Hey, I found it! Big Mac Index.

Dunno why they'd use that. It's priced to different classes in different countries (for example, in Brazil it's for the middle class, with a steak dinner being cheaper).

They'd do much better to use a coke (I've seen some of these, it's also skewed very drastically in some countries).

aka,

You seem to think the thesis is about quality of life, I don't know how I gave that impression.

"Relationship between climate and wealth"

IMO , natch, Quality of life is a fair indicater of wealth. I have made a couple of suggestions as to how you could possibly quantify your thesis but they are so subjective that I have little hope as to your being able to show the relationship, although I "believe" it. And I don't like to "believe" anything without some reason. And if I kind of do believe something I'd kind of like to know why and attempt to understand the reasoning behind my "beliefs".

So consequently I am here, as usual wondering about something

fbaezer already addressed the ideas about third world romanticized life. But that was a digression as well.

When I said "wealth" I wasn't speaking of an abstract "quality of life" index but rather about very quantifiable things like money.

I'm not saying that people in cold countries have a better quality of life. I am saying that less welcoming climates force more inductrialization, which in the past was a key to economic growth.

It's not a commentary of what climate makes for the best lifestle, just whether climate has had an influence on the economies of countries by forcing more inductrialization and more work.

Frankly I think it would be very easy to quanitify the general notion of cold climates doing better economically in this century.

Yes Craven, But a lot goes into wealth thats not necessarily money.
Perhaps a "satisfaction index" could show it but I am afraid that that would be largely subjective also. Now I am rellay cnfsued

Thanks for the link roger. I'm a thinkin on it.

Sure, having a buttload of natural resources is a big source of "wealth", having nice landscapes for tourists is "wealth". having oil is "wealth". But this is very obviously about a specific form of wealth. I am simply not discussing abstract concepts of wealth. I am not talking about all-forms-of-wealth-including-those-that-obviously-have-nothing-to-do-with-climate (e.g. oil).

And I am certainly not talking about a "satisfaction index" either. If you like the heat you might be more satisfied in a hot country.

For the purpose of this topic please replace "wealth" with "economy". I've spoken about economy very specifically all along and you continue to debate the abstract nature of wealth (e.g. "satisfaction???").

Bah, I'm just being way too picky, I'll go back to avoiding the thread instead.

Naa, I'm not even debating yet. At best we are heading towards a definition of wealth. "Relationship between Climate and Wealth", I think is the topic.

If you'd rather not discuss what we both believe and then try to figure out how to show it then thats fair enough. I am afraid that the relationship would be too subjective to debate even if we could come up with an acceptable definition of wealth.

If you would wish to only talk about money and it's appurtenances then the relationship should be rather easy to show. Just look at a map of per capita income and go on from there. But I have a sneaky suspicion that there is more to wealth than money.

Personally I think that the calories availiable per person would show wealth better but what do I know. I surely don't know how to figure it.

The reason I'd rather not discuss it is because you insist on ignoring the topic.

"Calories per person" is just another half-baked and off topic index you are bringing up.

One of the issues I brought up was that in colder climates you have to work harder for the food, I believe this makes for more industrialized nations and nations with better performing economies in this last century's economy.

You are suggesting that I test my thesis by several absurdly unrelated indexed such as how many calories are available. This is contrary to the very notion that the difficulty of securing those calories makes for more inductrialized nations. This is half-baked because the taste of the people influence it more than anything else. Cheap junky calorie filled food is something that of the nation has a tatse for will make the idiotic "calorie index" indicative of nothing but their taste for junk.

Your "satisfaction index" and "calories per person" have absolutely nothing to do with what I am talking about except when you wax philosophical about the definition and nature of the word "wealth".

Like I said, forget that I used "wealth" as it's very misleading to you. I am talking about economic standing. If you want to debate the nature of wealth feel free to do so, but it has nothing to do with the topic I was discussing and I'm not going to entertain it.

To me, it's like disussing the NBA finals and having someone incessanty interject that the sybolism of basketball makes him horny.

Relax, I'm done.

Your thesis is very easily and limitedly shown on a map. I agree with you--you won--

If you wished to say that the wealthiest countries are those in the temperate zone go ahead, I won't argue. I agree. Generally.

IMO I was no further afield than some other posts.

With your last point I agree. And I avoided the thread till my brother posted.

I just have to mention this irony: you used "wealthy" referring to economic wealth, without the pontificating about satisfaction and caloiries. ;-)