Hacker Neue

Preferences
simonebrunozzi parent
Probably meant 60-70%
cbhl
It's worth noting that the scale of the graph above it has a _logrithmic_ scale so I do think it is actually 6% to 70%.

That page is estimating fatalities of 10k to 100k people and economic losses of 10B to 100B USD.

(For context: Myanmar GDP is about 67B USD, according to Wolfram Alpha.)

Someone
I think they are making that prediction from nothing more than their seismographs, the population density and GDP at the affected locations.

If so, it isn’t surprising there’s a lot of uncertainty in their estimates.

Also look at the histogram with of “Estimated Fatalities”. The highlighted bar is for “10,000 to 100,000”

sph
60-70% loss in GDP would mean the literal end of the country, it's a ludicrously large figure no one could ever rebuild from. This is a 7.7 earthquake; it probably is 6–7% GBP which is still significant.
quickthrowman
It’s only $40B, Myanmar is exceptionally poor. For example, AAPL’s net profit is higher than Myanmar’s GDP.

I’m pretty sure China can dig around in their couch cushions and help them out, the military junta is heavily reliant on China already.

Probably the ‘shadow GDP’ of Myanmar from heroin and scam call centers is higher than the official GDP, but that’s pure speculation on my part.

miohtama
Not Myarmar, but in Cambodia scams are soon or already larger business than official GDP

https://thediplomat.com/2024/09/laos-and-cambodia-dont-inclu...

v3ss0n
it is possbile , we are at literal end of the country with Junta bombing whatever they want and Revolution forces fighting to save the country .
jeffbee
60% loss can be recouped by 10 years of compounding 5% growth.
quesera
Mathematically valid, but...

If Myanmar had a stable and reliably growing economy, the world would be a different place.

Turning Myanmar into a country with a stable economy that could grow at 5% annually would be worthy of a Nobel Prize in economics.

Practically, recovery costs in the neighborhood of 60% of Myanmar's GDP represents many decades of development. Or enormous foreign aid from China. I'm not sure how valuable Myanmar is to China though.

v3ss0n
We almost had that chance back in 2010-2020.. only if coup and COVID didn't happened..
lucianbr
That's assuming otherwise zero growth, or other nations standing still or stuff like that.

Also, 10 years of constant 5% growth is a lot to ask for in general. Maybe not impossible, but really hard. Now, think that you need to have 5% growth in the first year after the earthquake, in a devastated nation. Infrastructure destroyed, people killed. Lots.

It sounds pretty near to impossible.

These numbers have some meaning you know. It's easy to type "5% growth". Much, much harder to actually achieve it.

How is the dead part of the population being replaced in this scenario? Who is achieving this growth if the population is decimated?

jeffbee
I'm not sure about any of these questions, I am just pointing out how wrong it is to suggest that a -60% economic setback is historically fatal. The economy of Myanmar increased 8-fold in the last 30 years.
sph
60% loss in GDP is roughly 60% loss in population. You don't recoup citizens in 10 years with 5% growth.
jeffbee
You're suggesting this earthquake killed thirty million people?
sph
No i'm suggesting that the earthquake didn't kill that many people, so it cannot have lost 60% GDP which makes no sense whatsoever.
baq
I hope not... I'd rather this was indeed 6-70 with a mode much closer to 6 than 70

This item has no comments currently.