Talk:Economy of Romania/Archive 1

message: Rronline, please update the dates (both numbers can't be from September 2003), and place a link to the place where you got this. --Joy [shallot] 21:33, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  average gross salaries 

message: I'm not Romanian, neither an expert on Romanian society, so I'm not sure, but the poverty rate for me doesn't seem so unrealistic. I mean, the poverty rate of 8% in Hungary is from 1993, which is right in the first phase of a major socioeconomic crisis, and in terms of poverty it was rather "just" the beginning. Reportedly the worst years in terms of the emerging extreme poverty were 1993-1996, due to government policies and general economical collapse. For example in 1992 the number of active earners was 4,1777 million in 1993 it was 3,8884 million, and in 1997 3,657 million - in the same period the number of people who were registered as unemployed actually fell from 663000 to 477500. So I think it seems quite clear that the percentage of people living under the poverty level increased significantly from 1993 to 1997, and didn't change significantly since then. Actually, according to recent sociological research around 8% of Hungarians live in total, extreme poverty, which means almost complete segregation from the labour market and quite simply being unable obtaining enough food, normal housing etc.
The total percentage of people living under the subsistence level (circa half of the median income) is actually 25-30%. 
This is Hungary, where the general macroeconomic situation is said to be much more favourable than in Romania, with the GDP/capita twice as high (13900$ by PPP in 2003) and the Gini-index 6,7 percent lower.
Of course, I don't know how the poverty level is calculated in Romania, but if it's done the same way than in Hungary (where it is 20-30% of the pop. below it) it is possible that it is as high as that.
Again, I don't really know the situation in Romania, so I can easily be wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kolmis (talk • contribs) 19:05, 31 January 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, poverty in Romania can be found especially in the rural areas (about 45% of the Romanians live in rural areas), in some areas where there was big not efficient industry that was scrapped. (such as Valea Jiului, parts of Moldavia) and among the Gypsies (most of them are not very well integrated into the work market). However, in the last few years, the poverty was reduced by a signifiant amount because many worked abroad, in the Western Europe, and brought home the incomes. (since the salaries in W. Europe are much higher than in here) Bogdan | Talk 19:39, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  poverty 

message: Poverty rate (in Romania) is the percentage of people that spend more than 50 % of their income on buying food.Just found out today at the economy class. ;)
The percentage of poor peple caculated by the experts of the Europeean Union ( by their standards ) is 40% . I read a newspaper article today with the poverty top in countries associated to the EU ( Turkey - 60% Bulgaria - 50% Lithuania - 45% Romania - 40% ). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kostyel (talk • contribs) 18:09, 18 March 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  How poverty is calculated 

message: The figures for GDP and GDP/capita do not correspond to the ones from the main page of Romania ( the rectangle from the right with general info)
Can somebody update them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.180.100.36 (talk • contribs) 17:48, 19 March 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Figures for GDP 

message: ... has any one read the latest report on Romania' economic growth by AP via Forbes.com ?
Do they have a solid base for such predictions ? As far as I know, average wages in Romania are now around 210 euros/month. Also, car dealers and supermarket chains report incredible figures as to the rise in consumption. 
Associated Press
Romania's Economy Is Growing Strongly
07.22.2005, 10:01 AM
Romania's economy is expected to grow strongly in 2005 and 2006, with economists forecasting lower inflation and higher employment, the government said Friday.
The country's official planning commission said tax cuts enacted this year have led to higher consumption and the creation of 162,000 jobs in the first five months of the year.
The economy grew about 5.9 percent over the same period, and is expected to maintain this pace over the next two years, the commission said.
"The growth comes mainly from the private sector (industrial output and trade) and the evolution can be considered to be due to the lower taxes," the commission added.
On Jan. 1, Romania replaced its corporate taxes of 25 percent and individual income taxes of up to 40 percent with a flat tax of 16 percent. The tax cuts have led a 12 percent jump in household consumption, which was also boosted by a 13 percent rise in wages.
Romania's exports rose 17.2 percent, while imports rose 22 percent as Romanians spent their extra cash by buying more foreign-made goods, including televisions sets, monitors and cars.
The trade deficit was about euro3.2 billion (US$3.8 billion) in the first five months of the year, well within the target for 2005.
Inflation is expected to reach 8.2 percent in 2005 and 6.5 percent in 2006, down from 9.3 percent in 2004. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Giorge (talk • contribs) 13:45, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signs of development 

message: I removed the following section:
=== Romania's GDP to near 100 billion euros in 2007 ===
Romania's GDP over 2005-2007 will go up by 10 billion euros per year, and will stand in 2007 at 96.138 billion euros, Ziarul Financiar daily informs on Thursday by publishing data provided by Unicredit.
The estimates of Unicredit's macroeconomic research team show that while GDP will go up by 5.7% per year, industrial production will record average rates slightly lower, some 4.6% in 2006 and 4.9% in 2007.
The prognosis drawn up by Unicredit indicates also a progressive reduction in inflation, from some 8% in 2005 to some 5.5% in two years' time.
The current account deficit will experience the some period a descending trend to 6.6%, but unemployment will slightly go up each year: 6.1% in 2005, 6.2% in 2006 and 6.3% in 2007. 
Moreover, direct foreign investments will represent an average of 4.7% of GDP, but the country's foreign debt will maintain its share around 28.4% - 28.5%.
This looks much more like a news article than an encyclopedia article. Feel free to reinsert the part of the contents that doesn't change daily (like, which Thursday was the publication...) IF it is NPOV, ie., either proven to be unbiased or mentioning both optimistic and pessimistic data (this looks quite optimistic to be sure). Also, have a heading like "Future prospects" instead of an expression in newspaper headline style. I chose to remove this because there is no way I could copyedit it into something encyclopedic. KissL 10:20, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. "Dacia Logan, Aro and Daewoo Romania are all inimitable romanian goods - the products of great engineering and a hallowed tradition of style and elegance." Well, at least I had a good laugh. Vay 21:51, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed section 

message: "As Romania is one of the most popular touristic country [sic] in the world, tourism is a significant contributor to the Romania Economy"
I had a good laugh too. Forget Italy, France, Spain, forget package holidays in Thailand etc., Romania is _the_ touristic country. Additionally, when you make a claim such as "tourism is a significant contributor to the Romania [sic] Economy," numbers would be welcome. What's the percentage of GDP coming from the tourism industry?
"among Europe's most extensive skiing resorts"? Austria, Switzerland, France, Norway, what do you have to say?
"Romania is perhaps best known for its fashion houses; Agnes Toma, Steil, Steilmann and others." Known by whom? Again, forget French and Italian fashion. "Perhaps". More likely however, I think Romania is best known for other "things", such as beggars in European capitals and orphanages.
"Romania's economic strength is [...] in small and medium-sized family-owned firms. Its major industries are precision machinery, motor vehicles, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, electric goods, and fashion and clothing." Precision machinery industry owned by families? Maybe if shareholders are one big happy family. Motor vehicles built by "small and medium-sized firms"? Additionally, "precision machinery", listed as "major", does not even show up in the table entry at "main industries", where textiles and footwear are listed first.
Back up the claims! How many small and medium-sized firms are there? What's their activity sector? What's their share of the total number of firms? How much do they contribute to the GDP, percent-wise?
Sorry, but this article looks more like a spoof than an encyclopedia article.
"Romania has been very successful in developing dynamic telecommunications, industrial robots, aerospace, and weapons sectors."
Can you back up this claim? I see a discrepancy between this claim and the "main industries" entry in the summary table. What means "very successful"?  How much did the turn-around or the profits of these sectors increase? There's no aerospace company listed at List of Romanian Companies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srn (talk • contribs) 19:31 - 20:30, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  On various claims 

message: Why is it $187.7 billion? I think it's closer to $87.7 billion. List of European countries by GDP says $80 billion... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.127.25.98 (talk • contribs) 17:58, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  GDP 

message: I've removed the entry that stated this. Whoever wrote that forgot to mention what was the term of comparision: GDP, PPP, labour force.. ? Also some references would do good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.79.232.234 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seventh largest economy in Europe ? 

message: How can Romania account for a sixth of EU agricultural land when it's not in the EU? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.35.87.117 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agriculture 

message: This article prior to my corrections had some serious issues with the Euro and the Dollar. There were numerous occasions where euros were put instead of dollars. Also there are problems with the accuracy of some of the figures, as well as sourcing. FunkyFly 02:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some comments 

message: The article states that "Romania is one of the most popular destinations in the world". I find this claim highly dubious since in 2004 Romania had the 20th tourist sector in Europe and the 49th in the world. With 5,4 million foreign tourists Romania didn't even fit in the Top 15 European standings for 2005. I would suggest a more neutral phrase like "Romania is slowly emerging as a popular tourist destination etc." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.104.115.19 (talk • contribs) 12:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tourism

message: I fail to see why the GDP and growth data from the CIA factbook is erased and IMF is preferred, since the CIA data is used for imports, exports, and GDP composition.   /FunkyFly.talk_  15:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the CIA data 

message: no economic page for other countries have three estimates in the summary
so for the side bar, i propose only one estimate should remain, as it is a brief summary - for more in depth info you have the article and the references —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.196.150.164 (talk) 11:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  side bar statistics 

message: I checked out a couple of the sources and they showed the information in the article (though I don't know how authoratative those sources are).  My two cents is that the edit war should temporarally stop and give people time to read through the sources.  If they're viable they should stay in.  If not then they should be removed. Makgraf 19:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I'm not going to revert, but most of the numbers are not supported by sources. Also, for the record, I don't think anonymous edits should be allowed in Wikipedia, there's absolutely no responsibility for adding or removing info. -- AdrianTM 20:46, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007 Edit War 

message: Romania plans 2.7 percent budget deficit for 2008, due to pension hikes
7/25/2007 10:42:56 AM     
The Romanian finance minister on Wednesday said the country's proposed 2008 budget foresees a 2.7 percent deficit, with a 43 percent pension hike estimated to cost as much as euro6 billion (US$8.3 billion).
Economic growth, estimated to hover at about 6 percent for the next few years, will help support the additional spending, and the government does not plan to raise taxes, Economy and Finance Minister Varujan Vosganian said.
The government also plans a 6 percent cut in payroll taxes.
However, as the average pension increases from 396 lei (US$180, euro130) to 568 lei (US$260, euro190), the government will need to overspend again in 2008, Vosganian said.
Gross domestic product is estimated to be 438 billion lei (euro146 billion; US$202 billion), with the budget deficit estimated to reach 11.9 billion lei (euro3.9 billion; US$5.4 billion) _ about 2.7 percent of GDP.
The European Union, which Romania joined in January, and the International Monetary Fund have asked the government to tighten public spending and to reduce the budget deficit, which is expected to reach 2.8 percent this year.
In 2008, Romania also plans to spend more on education and health care, two sectors which have been underfunded for years, the finance minister said. http://www.wallst.net/news/news.asp?Source=APNEWS&id=67654&title=Romania%20plans%202.7%20percent%20budget%20deficit%20for%202008,%20due%20to%20pension%20hikes
Is there anybody checking the facts about boron? It is stated that Romania has 63% of the world's boron deposit, but this is actually Turkey (fact also found on wikipedia).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.85.5.25 (talk) 18:31, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Update GDP

message: How can a country with a total of 22.2 mil people with an average gross anual wage of 7000$ (12*$583) have a middle-class of 17.5 mil people with an average wage of $22-$25000 ?
Both figures are in the article basicly one after another.
That makes absolutly no sense. Living there, the second figure is hugely inflated, there's no way there's a 17.5 mil middle class, because there's not even that many people employed (school, retirement, people in rural areas, etc..). And $2000/month salary (44 milion lei/month) ?. There's less the 1% of the population making that much, try half that for an average middle-class salary.
Unless someone comes up with a way to explaint this, i'll cut the "growing middle class" numbers out.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Helixdq (talk • contribs) 16:48, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradicting and innacurate data 

message: The Romanian arms industry's main customer, for whom they mainly build warships, guns, nuclear weapons and equipment, is the Romanian Government.
Romania? Nuclear weapons? WTF? Is this a joke or what?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.120.253.157 (talk) 18:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is a joke