newly demoted...
Oh, my. Elmat, don't take your role as thread head too seriously. Capital preservation is my middle name.
As far as demoted, no sleep lost here, not interested in groupthink or changing thoughts and opinions to please anyone.
I am sorry that you took offense to my pointing out to you that Europe deserves a seat at any global economic table and not on a rotating basis, and that Germany is a global giant. Brazil has enormous promise but isn't quite there yet. But facts are facts.
Germany:
economist.com
Brazil:
economist.com
By some measures, Germany has the third largest global economy. Brazil is number ten. And Europe, to which you would give a rotating seat is.....drumroll.....number ONE.
cia.gov
Brazil's economy is admittedly growing faster than Germany's. But Brazil has not yet made it. However, singling out growth rates as the only defining element is to focus too much on one factor.
If you use GDP growth per capita as the defining element, you end up with a G8 which includes Bosnia-Herzegovina and Equatorial Guinea as members but not the US, Germany nor Brazil.
globalis.gvu.unu.edu
You are choosing promise over reality. There have been a lot of promising countries which have stumbled, i.e., Argentina in the 1900s, earlier 20th century versions of Brazil, Zimbabwe, any number of post-colonial African failed states, etc.
Until the promise is established as reality, it is a stretch to suggest that any country 'deserves' a seat at G7. I think China now deserves a place at the table, Russia, too, perhaps. Brazil and India are not quite there yet. |
