to your HTML Add class="sortable" to any table you'd like to make sortable Click on the headers to sort Thanks to many, many people for contributions and suggestions. Licenced as X11: http://www.kryogenix.org/code/browser/licence.html This basically means: do what you want with it. */ var stIsIE = /*@cc_on!@*/false; sorttable = { init: function() { // quit if this function has already been called if (arguments.callee.done) return; // flag this function so we don't do the same thing twice arguments.callee.done = true; // kill the timer if (_timer) clearInterval(_timer); if (!document.createElement || !document.getElementsByTagName) return; sorttable.DATE_RE = /^(\d\d?)[\/\.-](\d\d?)[\/\.-]((\d\d)?\d\d)$/; forEach(document.getElementsByTagName('table'), function(table) { if (table.className.search(/\bsortable\b/) != -1) { sorttable.makeSortable(table); } }); }, makeSortable: function(table) { if (table.getElementsByTagName('thead').length == 0) { // table doesn't have a tHead. Since it should have, create one and // put the first table row in it. the = document.createElement('thead'); the.appendChild(table.rows[0]); table.insertBefore(the,table.firstChild); } // Safari doesn't support table.tHead, sigh if (table.tHead == null) table.tHead = table.getElementsByTagName('thead')[0]; if (table.tHead.rows.length != 1) return; // can't cope with two header rows // Sorttable v1 put rows with a class of "sortbottom" at the bottom (as // "total" rows, for example). This is B&R, since what you're supposed // to do is put them in a tfoot. So, if there are sortbottom rows, // for backwards compatibility, move them to tfoot (creating it if needed). sortbottomrows = []; for (var i=0; i
Once again, for no reason other than that it's really popular (and that we actually received an e-mail requesting an update), we've thrown the nations of the European Union into an economic cage match against the individual United States to find out where they all rank with respect to each other!
In our version of an economic cage match, the only deciding factor is how each nation ranks with respect to each others Gross Domestic Product (GDP) adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity (PPP), population and their GDP-PPP per Capita. What makes this version different from last year's smackdown is that we've updated it all, using data exclusively from 2007.
We've put this data into the dynamic table you see below, which will allow you to sort the data in the table by clicking on the various column headings. Doing so will almost instantaneously sort the data in the table from low to high value or from high to low (by clicking a column heading a second time.) To restore the original order, you'll need to refresh this page in your web browser.
We'll have some more commentary below the table - in the meantime, you know you can't resist....
2006 GDP-PPP Rankings of EU Nations vs Individual US States |
---|
US State or EU Nation | 2007 GDP-PPP [billions USD] | 2007 Population | 2007 GDP-PPP per Capita [USD] |
---|---|---|---|
United States - All | 13,743.02 | 301,621,157 | 45,563.85 |
US - Alabama | 165.80 | 4,627,851 | 35,825.70 |
US - Alaska | 44.52 | 683,478 | 65,133.04 |
US - Arizona | 247.03 | 6,338,755 | 38,971.06 |
US - Arkansas | 95.37 | 2,834,797 | 33,642.97 |
US - California | 1,812.97 | 36,553,215 | 49,598.04 |
US - Colorado | 236.32 | 4,861,515 | 48,611.18 |
US - Connecticut | 216.27 | 3,502,309 | 61,749.55 |
US - Delaware | 60.12 | 864,764 | 69,519.55 |
US - District of Columbia | 93.82 | 588,282 | 159,479.64 |
US - Florida | 734.52 | 18,251,243 | 40,244.88 |
US - Georgia | 396.50 | 9,544,750 | 41,541.58 |
US - Hawaii | 61.53 | 1,283,388 | 47,944.97 |
US - Idaho | 51.15 | 1,499,402 | 34,112.93 |
US - Illinois | 609.57 | 12,852,548 | 47,427.95 |
US - Indiana | 246.44 | 6,345,289 | 38,838.10 |
US - Iowa | 129.03 | 2,988,046 | 43,180.73 |
US - Kansas | 117.31 | 2,775,997 | 42,256.89 |
US - Kentucky | 154.18 | 4,241,474 | 36,351.51 |
US - Louisiana | 216.15 | 4,293,204 | 50,346.08 |
US - Maine | 48.11 | 1,317,207 | 36,522.73 |
US - Maryland | 268.69 | 5,618,344 | 47,822.81 |
US - Massachusetts | 351.51 | 6,449,755 | 54,500.36 |
US - Michigan | 381.96 | 10,071,822 | 37,923.92 |
US - Minnesota | 254.97 | 5,197,621 | 49,055.14 |
US - Mississippi | 88.55 | 2,918,785 | 30,336.60 |
US - Missouri | 229.47 | 5,878,415 | 39,036.03 |
US - Montana | 34.25 | 957,861 | 35,759.89 |
US - Nebraska | 80.09 | 1,774,571 | 45,133.73 |
US - Nevada | 127.21 | 2,565,382 | 49,588.33 |
US - New Hampshire | 57.34 | 1,315,828 | 43,577.88 |
US - New Jersey | 465.48 | 8,685,920 | 53,590.64 |
US - New Mexico | 76.18 | 1,969,915 | 38,670.70 |
US - New York | 1,103.02 | 19,297,729 | 57,158.23 |
US - North Carolina | 399.45 | 9,061,032 | 44,083.94 |
US - North Dakota | 27.73 | 639,715 | 43,339.61 |
US - Ohio | 466.31 | 11,466,917 | 40,665.59 |
US - Oklahoma | 139.32 | 3,617,316 | 38,515.57 |
US - Oregon | 158.23 | 3,747,455 | 42,224.12 |
US - Pennsylvania | 531.11 | 12,432,792 | 42,718.48 |
US - Rhode Island | 46.90 | 1,057,832 | 44,335.96 |
US - South Carolina | 152.83 | 4,407,709 | 34,673.34 |
US - South Dakota | 33.93 | 796,214 | 42,619.20 |
US - Tennessee | 243.87 | 6,156,719 | 39,610.22 |
US - Texas | 1,141.97 | 23,904,380 | 47,772.21 |
US - Utah | 105.57 | 2,645,330 | 39,907.31 |
US - Vermont | 24.54 | 621,254 | 39,505.58 |
US - Virginia | 382.96 | 7,712,091 | 49,657.61 |
US - Washington | 311.27 | 6,468,424 | 48,121.46 |
US - West Virginia | 57.71 | 1,812,035 | 31,848.72 |
US - Wisconsin | 232.29 | 5,601,640 | 41,468.75 |
US - Wyoming | 31.51 | 522,830 | 60,275.81 |
European Union - All | 14,430.00 | 490,426,060 | 29,423.40 |
EU - Austria | 322.00 | 8,199,783 | 39,269.33 |
EU - Belgium | 376.50 | 10,392,226 | 36,229.00 |
EU - Bulgaria (*) | 86.71 | 7,322,858 | 11,841.01 |
EU - Cyprus | 21.40 | 788,457 | 27,141.62 |
EU - Czech Republic (*) | 251.00 | 10,228,744 | 24,538.69 |
EU - Denmark | 203.30 | 5,468,120 | 37,179.14 |
EU - Estonia (*) | 28.69 | 1,315,912 | 21,802.37 |
EU - Finland | 188.40 | 5,238,460 | 35,964.77 |
EU - France | 2,075.00 | 63,718,187 | 32,565.27 |
EU - Germany | 2,807.00 | 82,400,996 | 34,065.12 |
EU - Greece | 327.60 | 10,706,290 | 30,598.83 |
EU - Hungary | 191.70 | 9,956,108 | 19,254.51 |
EU - Ireland | 191.60 | 4,109,086 | 46,628.37 |
EU - Italy | 1,800.00 | 58,147,733 | 30,955.64 |
EU - Latvia (*) | 40.05 | 2,259,810 | 17,722.73 |
EU - Lithuania (*) | 59.98 | 3,575,439 | 16,775.56 |
EU - Luxembourg | 38.14 | 480,222 | 79,421.60 |
EU - Malta | 9.40 | 401,880 | 23,390.07 |
EU - Netherlands | 645.50 | 16,570,613 | 38,954.50 |
EU - Poland | 623.10 | 38,518,241 | 16,176.75 |
EU - Portugal | 232.30 | 10,642,836 | 21,826.89 |
EU - Romania (*) | 247.10 | 22,276,056 | 11,092.63 |
EU - Slovakia | 110.20 | 5,447,502 | 20,229.46 |
EU - Slovenia | 56.19 | 2,009,245 | 27,965.73 |
EU - Spain | 1,361.00 | 40,448,191 | 33,647.98 |
EU - Sweden | 338.50 | 9,031,088 | 37,481.64 |
EU - United Kingdom | 2,130.00 | 60,776,238 | 35,046.59 |
The GDP and population data for the United States as a whole, as well as for the European Union as a whole, was obtained by adding up the state and national values we found for each. GDP-PPP per capita was found by dividing each region's 2007 GDP figure by its population estimate as of July 1, 2007.
We will note that the CIA's estimate of GDP-PPP for some European nations for 2007 is really different from what they indicated for 2006. For instance, nations such as Greece, the Netherlands and Spain would have effectively seen their GDP-PPP per Capita grow by more than 20%, even though the CIA also indicates that economic growth in these nations has been growing at comparatively moderate rates.
We wondered if that might be an effect of the relative valuations of the U.S. dollar with respect to the Euro, but we would then expect nations like France and Germany to also have similarly high levels of year-over-year GDP-PPP per Capita growth, but that's just not the case - their year over year growth is in the single digits.
So, we just might have a mystery! We don't know why the 2007 GDP-PPP for these nations is so different from what it was in 2006.
Since this kind of ranking invariably draws commentary from other quarters of the blogosphere, we thought it might be fun to try an experiment - why not have an open contest for the blog that can best explain why the data is the way that it is?
For our part, we'll be happy to link to, and possibly excerpt analysis from, the blogs that drive the most traffic to this post (in other words, you don't need to e-mail us to enter - you just need to link to us from your post that proposes a solution to this mystery!) We'll reserve a place of honor for the blogger who offers the most compelling analysis.
If it helps make that analysis easier, we've shaded the original EU-15 nations in light purple, while the twelve additional nations that have joined the EU in more recent years are shaded in light green.
What's more, we've also identified the nations in the EU with flat income taxes with asterisks (*). Those nations averaged 12.2% year over year growth in their GDP-PPP per capita.
And that's where we'll leave the rest to you! We'll look forward to what you come up with!
Labels: gdp
Welcome to the blogosphere's toolchest! Here, unlike other blogs dedicated to analyzing current events, we create easy-to-use, simple tools to do the math related to them so you can get in on the action too! If you would like to learn more about these tools, or if you would like to contribute ideas to develop for this blog, please e-mail us at:
ironman at politicalcalculations
Thanks in advance!
Closing values for previous trading day.
This site is primarily powered by:
The tools on this site are built using JavaScript. If you would like to learn more, one of the best free resources on the web is available at W3Schools.com.