Hospitals & Asylums

The 2010 World Atlas: MDGs 1990-2015 and the 2009 Factbook

By Anthony J. Sanders

Economic growth, around 3.5% since 1946, contracted 0.8% in 2009 and global trade plummeted nearly 25% from 2008 levels, the largest single year drop since WWII. Purchasing power parity of GWP dropped to $70.29 trillion (2009 est.) from $70.84 trillion (2008 est.) and the official exchange rate GWP was $58.07 trillion U.S. dollars. Per capita income retreated about 2% to $10,500 (2009 est.) from $10,700 (2008 est.) as global unemployment rose from 7% in 2008 to nearly 9% in 2009 while underemployment, especially in the developing world, remained much higher. The number of hungry people rose from 700 million to a record high of 1.2 billion. The IMF reports economic growth to be stable at 1.7% in the first quarter and 3.2% in the second quarter of 2010. The UN Millennium Development Goal Report 2009 brings into question whether Goal 1 to halve poverty, <$1 day, from 45.5% in 1990 to 22.75% in 2015, has been jeopardized by the recession. In 2007, only 21.5% were extremely poor, however the recession plunged 100 million more people below $1 a day and poverty increased to 22.9%, so in 2009 Goal 1 was not achieved. Both 90% primary school enrollment rate and 50% reduction in people needing water are both achievable at current rates of growth. The AIDS drugs arrived and rates of infection and death went down. To achieve all the health related goals the utility bill for water and sewage connections must be paid, folic acid multi-vitamins are damned. The short term plan for 2010 is for the bailouts to cease and ODA to exceed the $154 billion committed. The long term plan is to levy a carbon tax to finance eco-friendly water, sewage and electricity (solar) connections in slums by 2030. The medium term plan to finance the MDGs for 2015 is for the U.S. Dollar and Euro basket to experimentally appreciate developing nation currencies - equalizing exchange rate GDP with purchasing power parity GDP rate, in pursuit income equality and more purchasing (selling) power so:

US $ per XR (¦) Þ GDP XR = GDP PPP

¦ = ( GDP PPP – GDP EX ) + 1

GDP EX

According to the CIA World Factbook, hereafter the Factbook, the world population reached 6,821,176,973 by May 15, 2010 from 6,790,062,216 in July 2009, presuming a growth rate of 1.133%. The birth rate was 19.86, death rate 8.83, and infant mortality 44.13 per 100,000. The average life expectancy was 66.12 years, 64.29 for men and 68.07 for women. The median age was 28.4, 27.7 for men and 29 years for women. Developing nations usually exhibit higher growth rates as the result of higher birth rates but they often have higher rates of infant mortality and higher rates of death, thus a young, growing population. European nations generally exhibit low growth rates, low birth rates, low infant mortality, an older population. In Eastern Europe and a few other nations the population is actually in decline. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria has already been successful reducing the prevalence of HIV. Infant mortality has also gone down 10-25% in most developing nations to 44.14 globally with a high of 180.21 in Angola and low of 2.32 in Singapore. The overall literacy rate has risen to 82%, 87% for men and 77% for women however in the United States the ability of college graduates to compose prose documents has declined from 40% a decade ago to 30% in 2008. The World Prison Brief reports that in 2010 the total global penal population was 9.778 million, an average of 144 people per 100,000 were behind bars. The highest concentration of prisoners per 100,000 occurs in the Americas with (374), mostly because the United States’ (753) is the most populous and concentrated in the world, and Europe (294). The lowest rates of incarceration are in the Middle East and Central Asia (61). The Russian Republic (609) has been declining with some relapse. The state prison population declined for the first time in 30 years in 2009 although the federal penitentiary continued to grow. The US, Russian and all other legal systems over the arbitrary legal limit of 250 detainees per 100,000 need to make a concerted effort to safely commute detainees to halfway houses and compensate victims of false arrest and torture thereby reducing the prison population and staying out of trouble.

Table 1: Global Recession 2009
Nations	Territory	Population	GDP billion	Per capita Income	ODA 2008 million	Government Constitutive Documents Date of Independence
	World Political Vital Stat Economics	6,788,879,813	70,239	$10,348	125,114 -91,102	United Nations
	South East Asia	2,203,566,902	19,173	$8,700	12,916 -9,792	Association of South East Asian Nations
25	Middle East & Central Asia	1,934,348,065	8,263	$4,272	2,124 -31,104	Organization of Islamic Conferences
45	Europe	731,782,548	18,257	$24,975	78,447 -4,186	European Union
54	Africa	991,760,344	2,835.2	$2,858	-38,806	African Union
51	America	927,421,954	21,711	$23,420	31,627 -7,214	Organization of American States
Sources: CIA World Factbook July 2009, World Prison Brief 18 March 2010, OECD Development Aid at a Glance 2010 Historical Records: HA-2010, HA-2007, HA-2006

Without any work from either myself or the UN Human Development Report whose Fighting climate change: Human solidarity in a divided world 2007/2008 conspicuously took two years, economic growth declined 0.8% in 2009. It was the first global downturn since WWII. The food and fuel crises in 2007-2008 and the global financial and economic crisis of 2009 pushed 100 million people in low-income countries into poverty as a result of a doubling of food prices. The number of hungry people worldwide rose from 842 million in 1990-1992 to 873 million in 2004-2006 and to 1.02 billion people during 2009, the highest level ever. The IMF assures us however that global economic recovery is stable with 1.7% growth in the first quarter and 3.2% in the second quarter of 2010. The credit crisis affected both industrialized and developing nations. Its primary characteristic was a panic amongst foreign occupying powers, who, struggling with high oil prices and opiate relieving pain and social breakdown from the conquerors of the Soviet Union, spuriously decided to nationalize several banks, squandering the sovereign immunity from bankruptcy on the large banking corporations the prior administration laundered his funds with, at great expense to the free market. The side effects of the bank nationalizations valued at $4 trillion in 2009, and $1 trillion in 2010, were immediate massive flights of capital from the stock markets, quickly leading to layoffs and high unemployment, negative economic growth and record government spending and budget deficits valued at 7% of GWP in 2009. By strengthening industrialized currencies, instead of devaluating to offset the printing of money, the crisis was not only devastating to international trade, that dropped 25%, but spread to developing nations, who without the resources to bail out their financial sectors nor a social safety net for the unemployed, could not compete. Liberal democracies must compensate those emerging markets marginalized by the market distortion.

Table 2: Top 20 Losers of 2009, in billions
#	Country	GDP PPP	Growth Rate	Loss Value	#	Country	GDP	Growth Rate	Loss Value
1	United States	14,260	-2.4%	342.24	11	Netherlands	654.9	-3.9%	25.54
2	Japan	4,137	-5.3%	219.26	12	Romania	255.4	-7.2%	18.39
3	Russia	2,116	-7.9%	167.16	13	Sweden	333.5	-4.4%	14.67
4	Germany	2,811	-5%	140.55	14	Finland	182.6	-7.6%	13.88
5	United Kingdom	2,149	-4.8%	103.15	15	Ireland	176.9	-7.5%	13.27
6	Mexico	1,482	-6.5%	96.33	16	Hungary	184.9	-6.7%	12.39
7	Italy	1,760	-4.8%	84.48	17	Belgium	381	-3.1%	11.81
8	Spain	1,368	-3.6%	49.25	18	Austria	323.1	-3.5%	11.31
9	Ukraine	294.3	-14.1%	41.50	19	Czech Republic	256.6	-4.1%	10.52
10	Canada	1,285	-2.5%	32.13	20	Venezuela	350.1	-2.9%	10.15
Source: World Economics HA-2010

To analyze the 0.8% global economic contraction of 2009, 83 of 211 reporting nations exhibited negative GDP growth.

The biggest GDP losses of 2009 occurred in Eastern Europe, Latvia (-17.8%), Lithuania (-15%) and Estonia (-14.1%)

EU members, Ukraine (-14.1%), Moldova (-7.7%) and Russia (-7.9%).  Many major economies exhibited significantly

negative economic growth, Finland (-7.6%), Ireland (-7.5%), Mexico (-6.5%), Japan (-5.3%), Germany (-5.0%), United

Kingdom (-4.8%), and Italy (-4.8%), United Arab Emirate (-3.5%), Canada (-2.5%), the United States (-2.4%), France

(-2.2%) and Greece (-2%).  The United States reported the biggest loss in dollar value, a GDP $342.24 billion less than

in 2008, Japan came in second losing $29.26 billion and Russia came in third losing $167.16 billion.  The GDPs of the

top 20 losers had a combined value of $34.8 trillion, 49.5% of GWP.  The total GDP loss suffered by this group of 20

was $1.4 trillion, 4.1% of group GDP and 1.9% of GWP.  As a whole developing nations exhibited strong growth

despite a decline in world oil and commodity prices, Azerbaijan (+32.5%), Qatar (+9.5%), China (+8.7%), Vietnam

(+7.8%), India (+6.5%), Djibouti (+6.4%) and Indonesia (+4.5%) recorded the biggest gains, while growth continued

in least developed countries.  Note, the exchange rate devaluation was unfair and GDP purchasing power and per capita

income, in many developing nations, declined although their economic growth rates were positive.

Table 3: 20 Biggest Borrowers of 2009, in billions
#	Country	Deficit	Deficit % GDP	Debt % GDP	GDP Ex. rate	#	Country	Deficit	Deficit % GDP	Debt % GDP	GDP Ex. rate
1	United States	-1,701	-11.8%	52.9%	14,430	11	Netherlands	-37.1	-5%	62.2%	799
2	Japan	-383	-7.5%	192.1%	5,108	12	Greece	-36.5	-11%	113.4%	342.2
3	United Kingdom	-312.1	-14%	68.5%	2,224	13	Korea, South	-35.7	-4.4	28%	809.7
4	France	-216	-8.1%	79.7%	2,666	14	Turkey	-35.5	-5.8%	48.5%	608
5	China	-164.7	-3.4%	18.2%	4,814	15	Australia	-34.8	-3.7%	18.6%	930.8
6	Germany	-142	-4.3%	77.2%	3,273	16	Canada	-32.7	-2.4%	72.3%	1,335
7	Spain	-115.9	-7.9%	50%	1,466	17	Ireland	-29.78	-13%	63.7%	229.4
8	Italy	-107.9	-5%	115.2%	2,114	18	Venezuela	-26.9	-7.5%	19.4%	357.6
9	India	-107.3	-9.8%	59.6%	1,095	19	Belgium	-26	-7%	99%	366.9
10	Russia	-101.3	-8.2%	6.9%	1,232	20	Mexico	-19.6	-28%	37.7%	1,017
Source: World Economics HA-2010

Fiscal stimulus packages worth about $4 trillion in 2009, 7% of GWP, nationalized many banks in Western Europe and the

United States.  The combined global budget deficit for 2009 amounts to 7% of GWP and more than half, 125 of 236 nations,

had deficits greater than 3%.  $3.6 trillion, 90% of the $4 trillion bailout, went to the nations with the 20 largest budget deficits

in dollar value.  This group of 20’s combined GDPs totaled $45.2 trillion, 64.3% of the GWP at purchasing power and 80%

at exchange rate value.  The total budget deficit of these major economies was 8.1% of the groups total GDP and 6.6% of the

GWP.  Another $1 trillion has already been withdrawn from the free market for Spain, Portugal and Greece in 2010.

Government budgets and budget deficits have dramatically expanded, at the expense of the free market.  Declining revenues

and the costs of nationalizing banks have led to many budget deficits in Western nations exceeding the European Union limit

of 3% of GDP.  The budget deficit in the United States, 11.8% of GDP, has the highest dollar value in the world at $1,701

billion.  Japan -$383 billion (-7.5%), the United Kingdom -$312.1 billion (14%) and France -$212 billion (3.4%) followed

close behind.  The nations with the highest deficits as % of GDP were Zimbabwe (38%), Iraq (27.6%), Palestine (21.8%),

Eritrea (20%), Bhutan (19%), Afghanistan (17%), United Kingdom ((14%), the Baltic Republics, Slovakia (15.2%), 10.8%

in Latvia (11%) and the United States (11.8%).

Table 4: Regional Budget Totals, 2009
Region	GDP Ex. rate trillions	Budget Revenue billions	Budget Expense billions	Surplus Deficit billions	Deficit % GDP Ex. rate
World	54,184.4	15,463	19,385	-3,922	-7.2%
Africa	1,449.4	369.07	420.81	-51.7	-3.6%
America	16,200	3,295	5,089	-1,794	-11%
Europe	18,744	7,357	8,563	-1,206	-6.4%
Middle East and Central Asia	3,885	939.1	1,121.6	-182.5	-4.7%
South East Asia	13,906	3,502.5	4,190.4	-687.9	-0.5%
Source: World Economics HA-2010

The Great Recession of 2009 was mostly demanded by the 11.8% of GDP deficit of the United States’, valued at

$1,701 billion, driving the pan-American budget deficit to 11%, the most in the world of 7.2% deficits.  Europe had

a 6.4% deficit, Middle East and Central Asia 4.7%, Africa 3.6% leaving Asia 0.5%, alone within the 3% limit of the EU.

Governments are spending more than they are earning in revenues.  Governments have only two ways to finance the

deficit, taking investors from the stock market or by printing money.   By keeping their currency strong, to stave off

oil prices, governments decided to finance the deficit with the stock market, rather than to print the money and

devaluate to stimulate exports and manufacturing.  As a result of investment lost to capital markets labor markets

were slashed, cutting consumer income and spending and consequently government revenues  The Federal Budget

in Balance FY 2009-2012 encourages governments to calculate reasonable agency spending increases, eg. 3% per

year, from the last year the deficit was within the arbitrary limit of 3% of the GDP, as the baseline year.  States must

relinquish private holdings, reduce military spending and eliminate all offensive operations to cut spending to pre-war

levels.  America Political Economy 2010 indicates States have two sources of revenues, old-fashioned customs duties

and sales taxes or newfangled Marxist individual and corporate income taxes.  To foster a consumer economy States

must exempt the poor from income taxes to tax the incomes of the rich and the profitable corporations in the act of

making more money than their family needs.  Commodity taxes and protectionist tariffs are riskier and may constitute

a combination in restraint of trade, ie. Smoot-Hawly Tariff Act of 1932 is widely believed to have caused the last global

depression.

Table 5: Global Stock Market Values 2007-2009
	GDP PPP trillion	Unem ploy ment	Public Debt % GDP	Stock of Money trillion	Stock of Quasi Money trillions	Stock of Domestic Credit trillion	Publicly Traded Shares trillions	Exports trillions	Imports trillions	External Debt trillions	Direct Foreign Investment
2009	70.29	8.7	56%					12.09	12.03	56.9
2008	70.84	7.2	48.9%					15.94	15.99	60.83	16.36
2007	68.81			12.35	27.31	69.9	64.99				17.05
Source: CIA World Fact Book - World July 2009

Free capital resources were drained by the bailout of the industrialized financial sector. Record contractions in stock and labor

markets were reported, exacerbating the exact contraction of economic growth, subsidies were intended to ameliorate.  As

consequence to this vicious cycle, industrialized governments contracted an unhealthy interest in keeping their currency strong

and developing nation currencies were unfairly devalued.  Although growth remains strong, devaluation resulted in

disproportionately less purchasing power in many developing nations in the form of high food prices.  To offset the distorting

effects of the financial sector bailouts, beyond the reach of ODA, the only countermeasure available to developing nations and

emerging markets is to appreciate their currencies against the industrialized nation currency basket.  This would increase the

exchange rate GDP and per capita of consumers in developing nations to afford more food and industrial technology on the

international market.  Appreciation would expand industrialized markets to billions of consumers in developing nations,

stimulating growth. Nations would need to be classified into four categories, industrialized with per capita >$20,000, middle

income <$20,000 but >$10,000, developing <$10,000 and least developed <$1,000.  Industrialized nations would collectively

redress three decades of depreciation of developing nation currencies and middle income nations could decide which direction

they wish to go on the basis of their trade balance.  Economic progress caused by appreciating the exchange rate GDP would

be monitored as purchasing power parity GDP.  Although ODA would be devalued, developing nations would mathematically

have more purchasing power and the whole world would have greater exchange rate GDP.  If this experiment works currency

appreciation can hasten global economic equality in regular increments.  Although the needs of least developed nations will still

need to be met with ODA the independence of currency appreciation may prove to be a more sustainable method to make large

jumps in per capita purchasing power.  Appreciation will get us back into the grace of Goal 1.

Table 6: MDGs for 2015 Progress Report 1990 & 2005
Primary Indicator	1990	2005	Goal
Goal 1: Halve Poverty <$1 day	45.5%	21.5%	22.75%
Goal 2: Universal Primary Education	82.0%	89.0%	90.0%
Goal 3: 1.0 Gender Ratio in Education	0.89	0.96	1.00
Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality 2/3	9.3%	6.7%	3.1%
Goal 5: Reduce Maternal Mortality 3/4	430	400	143
Goal 6: Halt & Reverse Spread of AIDS	8	33.3	<
Goal 7: Halve Lack of Access to H₂0	77%	87%	88.5%
Goal 8: Develop Global Partnership	52.7	107.1	>
Sources: UN Millennium Development Goal Report 2009

The adoption of the Millennium Declaration in 2000 by 189 States Members of the United Nations, 147 of which were represented by their Head of State, was a defining moment for global cooperation in the twenty-first century. The Declaration gave birth to a set of eight goals that break down into 21 quantifiable targets that are measured by 61 indicators, known as the Millennium Development Goals to End Poverty for 2015. The eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) –have galvanized unprecedented efforts to meet the needs of the poorest. The UN Millennium Development Goal Report 2009 brings into question whether Goal 1 to halve poverty, <$1 day, from 45.5% in 1990 to 22.75% in 2015, has been jeopardized by the recession. In 2007, only 21.5% were extremely poor, however the recession plunged 100 million more people below $1 a day and poverty increased to 22.9%, so Goal 1 was not achieved in 2009. Both 90% primary school enrollment rate and 50% reduction in people needing water are both achievable if current rates of growth are sustained. The AIDS drugs arrived and rates of infection and death went down. To achieve all the health related goals the utility bill for water and sewage connections must be paid, folic acid multi-vitamins be damned. The short term plan for 2010 is for the bailouts to cease and ODA to exceed the $154 billion committed. The long term plan is to levy a carbon tax to finance eco-friendly water, sewage and electricity (solar) connections in slums by 2030. The medium term plan to finance the MDGs for 2015 is for the U.S. Dollar and Euro basket to experimentally appreciate developing nation currencies - equalizing exchange rate GDP with purchasing power parity GDP rate, in hopes of making nutritious food available at affordable prices.

Table 7: Goal 1 Number and % of People in Poverty and Hungry, 1990 & 2007
Region	Pop. Million 1990	% Pop. <$1.25 1990	Pop. <$1.25 1990	% Hungry 1990	Pop. Million 2007	% Pop <$1.25 2007	Pop. <$1.25	% Hungry 1990	% Pop <$2 2007	Pop. <$2
East Asia & Pacific	1,600	80%	1,280	15	1,912	16.8%	321	10	38.7%	740
Europe and Central Asia	400	2%	8	6	442	3.7%	16	<5	8.9%	39
Latin America and Caribbean	400	11.3%	45.2	12	556	8.2%	46	8	17.1%	95
Middle East and North Africa	200	4.3%	9	8	319	3.6%	12	8	16.9%	54
South Asia	1,100	52%	572	24	1,523	40.3%	614	21	73.9%	1,125
Sub-Saharan Africa	500	57%	285	32	819	50.9%	417	29	72.9%	597
OECD	900	0%	0%	<5	965	0%	0%	<5	0%	0
World	5,300	45.5%	2,412	16	6,620	21.5%	1,426	14	40%	2,650
Source: World Bank 2007, The Millennium Development Goals Report 2009 Goal 1 Indicator 1.1 & 1.9

The World Bank revalued poverty from living on less than US$1.25 per day (PPP) in 2005 dollars, up from $1.06 in 1990 dollars, and moderate poverty as less than $2 a day. It has been estimated that in 2008, 1.4 billion people had consumption levels below US$1.25 a day and 2.7 billion lived on less than $2 a day. The primary objective of the MDGs, Goal 1 is “Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer hunger or live in extreme poverty of less than $1 a day” the goal is broken down into three targets, a. Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whose income is less than one dollar a day. B. Achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all, including women and young people. C. Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger. The Secretary General’s February 2010 Report: Keeping the promise: a forward-looking review to promote an agreed action agenda to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by 2015 reports there were still 1.4 billion people living in extreme poverty in 2005, down from 1.8 billion in 1990. However, as China has accounted for most of this decrease, without China, progress does not look very encouraging; in fact, the number of people living in extreme poverty actually went up between 1990 and 2005 by about 36 million. The number of “$1 a day poor” went up by 92 million in sub-Saharan Africa and by 8 million in West Asia during the period 1990 to 2005. Eastern Europe suffered a decline in purchasing power after independence and the number of extremely poor rose from 2% to 3.7%. Since the 2009 crisis 300 million new jobs will be needed to bring employment back to pre-crisis levels. In sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Asia, poverty and hunger remain stubbornly high. The number of hungry people worldwide rose from 842 million in 1990-1992 to 873 million in 2004-2006 and to 1.02 billion people during 2009, the highest level ever. 852 million people, mainly in the developing world, are still chronically or acutely malnourished. Most of them are in Asia, particularly India (221 million) and China (142 million). Sub-Saharan Africa has 204 million hungry and is the only region of the world where hunger is increasing. Nonetheless, if the economic crisis is reasonably redressed the primary target of Goal 1 to halve the “proportion of people living in extreme poverty by 2015” was achieved by 2007, failed in 2009, but quite achievable with ODA and currency appreciation.

Table 8: Goals 2 & 3 Equal Access to Primary Education, Gender, Literacy 1990 & 2007
Primary School Enrollment Completion	Ratio Girls to Boys 1991	Ratio Girls to Boys 2007	Enrollment Rate 1991	Enrollment Rate 2007	Completion Rate 1999	Completion Rate 2007	Literacy 1990 Male/Female	Literacy 2007 Male/Female
World	0.89	0.96	82.0%	89.0%	81.7%	87.3%	82.4% 70.0%	88.4% 79.4%
Developing	0.87	0.95	79.6%	88.1%	78.9%	85.8%	76.6% 59.1%	85.4% 73.4%
Northern Africa	0.82	0.94	82.8%	95.6%	86.6%	95.1%	61.4% 35.7%	77.3% 58.3%
Sub-Saharan Africa	0.83	0.90	53.5%	73.5%	49.9%	63.1%	63.1% 45.0%	71.1% 53.8%
Latin America & Caribbean	0.99	0.97	86.7%	94.9%	96.6%	100.4%	87.7% 85.6%	91.7% 90.3%
East Asia and Pacific	0.94	0.99	96%	95.2%	101.8%	100.7%	87.8% 70.1%	96.6% 90.5%
South Asia	0.77	0.95	71.9%	89.8%	66.9%	80.6%	60.1% 34.0%	74.4% 53.3%
Europe and Central Asia	0.99	0.99	90.0%	93.6%	95.9%	96.6%	99.4% 97.2%	99.6% 99.1%
OECD	0.99	1.00	97.9%	96.4%	99.2%	98.6%	99.4% 98.8%	99.5% 99.2%
Source: The Millennium Development Goals Report 2009 Indicator 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 & 3.1

Goals 2 “Ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling” and Goal 3, “to ‘eliminate’ gender disparity in primary and secondary education as soon as 2005 were idealistic. Nonetheless there has been remarkable progress towards achieving universal primary education in developing countries since 1990, with many countries having crossed the 90 per cent enrolment threshold. Enrolment in primary education has increased fastest in sub-Saharan Africa, from 54 per cent in 1990 to 74 per cent in 2007. Truancy remains a problem and more than 72 million children of primary school age around the world, about half of them in sub-Saharan Africa, remain out of school. Furthermore, dropout rates remain high in many countries, implying that achieving 100 per cent primary school completion rates remains a challenge, but remedial courses are always an option. Use of the Internet has increased steadily, with almost one fourth of the world’s population having Internet access. However, less than 18 per cent of the population in developing countries was using the Internet (and only 4 per cent in the least developed countries), compared with over 60 per cent in developed countries. The gender gap in primary school enrolment has narrowed in the past decade, albeit at a slow pace. In developing countries in 2007, over 95 girls of primary school age were in school for every 100 boys, compared with 91 in 1999. Progress in secondary schooling has been slower, and in some regions, gaps are widening. In sub-Saharan Africa, the percentage of enrolment of girls compared with boys in secondary education fell from 82 per cent in 1999 to 79 per cent in 2007. Only 53 of the 171 countries with available data had achieved gender parity in both primary and secondary education, 14 more than in 1999. The share of national parliamentary seats held by women has increased only slowly, averaging 18 per cent as at January 2009. While this is far from the 30 percent target envisioned in the Beijing Platform for Action, it represents a rise from 11 per cent 10 years earlier. At the present rate it will take another 40 years for developing countries to reach between 40 and 60 per cent share of parliamentary seats for women.

Table 9: Goals 4 & 5 Maternal, Infant, and Child Mortality 1990 & 2008
Region	Maternal Mortality P. 00,000 1990	Maternal Mortality p 00,000 2005	Maternal Mortality % Change ’90-‘05	Infant <1 Mortality Per 000 1990	Infant <1 Mortality Per 000 2008	Infant <1 Mortality % Change ‘90-‘07	Child <5 Mortality Per 000 1990	Child <5 Mortality Per 000 2008	Child <5 Mortality % Change ’00-‘08
World Average	430	400	-6.9%%	62	45	-27.4%	93	67	-27.7%
Latin America & Caribbean	190	130	-31.5%	42	19	-54.8%	42	23	-45.2%
Arab States	270	240	-11.1%	57	33	-42.1%	77	43	-44.2%
Sub-Saharan Africa	940	900	-4.3%	108	86	-20.4%	184	144	-21.7%
South Asia	650	500	-23.1%	88	57	-35.2%	124	76	-38.7%
Far East & Pacific	230	150	-34.8%	41	22	-46.3%	44	28	-36.4%
OECD	13	8	-38.5%	8	5	-37.5%	10	6	-40%
Sources: UNICEF. State of the World’s Children: 20 Years on the Convention of the Rights of the Child Statistical Tables: Basic Indicators & Women. November 2009

To achieve MDG 4 child mortality would need to go down by 53.5%, or 7.6% annually where average annual decline for the past 18 years has been only 1.54%. Infant mortality statistics for children under one year of age are much rosier in the Factbook. Although Angola, the nation where the most infants died per 1,000 born, suffered 191.2 infant deaths in 2006 and 180.21 in 2009, a reduction of 5.8%, in that same time period nearly all other nations improved, many by as much as 25% over 3 years. MDG 5 calls for a reduction in the maternal mortality ratio by three-quarters between 1990 and 2015. At the present rate of progress, the world will fall well short of the target for maternal mortality reduction. During the 15 years between base year 1990 and 2005 maternal mortality decreased only 6.9%, 0.46% annually. MDG 4 aims, by 2015, to reduce by two-thirds the mortality rate among children under-5. Deaths among children under five years of age have been reduced from 12.5 million per year (1990) to 8.8 million (2008). Although substantial progress has been made, during the 18 years between base year 1990 and 2008 the child mortality rate declined only 27.7%. The goal is one third of 90 – 30. Improvements in public health services are essential, including safe water, nutrition and better sanitation. Education, especially for girls and mothers, will also save children's lives. To theoretically improve maternal and child survival rates is to ensure all pregnant and breastfeeding women have access to a one year supply of multi-vitamins containing folic acid. While no substitute for a nutritious diet or clean water for drinking and washing, multi-vitamins with folic acid can supplement a diet of rice to improve the chances of a complication free birth and healthy baby. These child health related development goals are otherwise tied to hygiene, nutrition, obstetric and pediatric training and vaccination and the availability of clean water and sewage. The global cost of maternal and child health in developing countries can be minimized by collectively investing in folic acid multi-vitamins and vaccinations, +/- $10 billion globally, annually, $5 billion in Sub-Saharan Africa, where maternal and child mortality is highest.

Table 10: Goal 6 HIV/AIDS Pandemic Eases Between 2004 & 2007
Nation	Life Ex. 2006	Life Ex. 2009	% Change 2004- 2007	HIV % Pop. 2004	HIV % Pop. 2007	% Change 2004- 2007	HIV Death 000s 2004	HIV Death 000s 2007	% Change 2004- 2007	HIV Death per 000 2004	HIV Death per 000 2007	% Change 2004-2007
Botswana	33.9	61.85	82.5%	37.3%	23.9%	-35.9%	350	300	-14.3%	33	11	-66.6%
Central-African Republic	43.4	44.47	2.3%	13.5%	6.7%	-46.6%	260	160	-38.5%	23	1	-95.7%
Guinea-Bissau	46.6	47.9	2.8%	10%	1.8%	-82%	17	16	-5.9%	1.2	1.1	-8.3%
Lesotho	34.5	40.38	17%	28.9%	23.2%	-19.7%	320	270	-15.6%	29	18	-37.9%
Malawi	41.3	50.03	21.1%	14.2%	11.9%	-16.2%	900	930	3.3%	84	68	-19.1%
Mozambique	40.3	41.18	2.2%	12.2%	12.5%	2.5%	1,300	1,500	15.4%	110	81	-26.4%
Namibia	43.9	51.24	16.7%	21.3%	15.3%	-28.2%	210	1,300	519%	16	140	775%
South Africa	43.3	48.98	13.1%	21.5%	18.1%	-15.8	3,600	5,700	58.3%	370	350	-6.8%
Swaziland	33.2	47.85	44.1%	38.8%	26.1%	-32.7%	5,300	190	-96.4%	17	10	-41.2%
Zambia	39.7	38.63	2.7%	16.5%	15.2%	-7.9%	220	1,100	400%	89	56	-37.1%
Zimbabwe	39.1	45.77	17.1%	24.6%	15.3%	-37.8%	920	200	-78.3%	170	5.1	-97%
Sources: 2006 African Vital Statistics HA-9-3-6, 2009 World Vital Statistics HA-23-5-10

The good news- the $8-10 billion invested in the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Fund 2005-2008 increased the number of people in low and middle-income countries receiving antiretroviral therapy for HIV 10-fold in five years (2003-2008). The Factbook reports there was a reduction in the prevalence of HIV/AIDS worldwide between 2004 and 2007, of particularly significance to highly affected South African Customs Revenue Service dependent governments. The United Nations however reports the number of people living with HIV rose from an estimated 29.5 million in 2001 to 33 million in 2007 and it remains to be seen if they can concede to the Factbook statistics in fulfillment of Goal 6 of the MDGs “of achieving universal access to treatment for HIV/AIDS by 2010 and of halting and reversing.8 the spread of HIV/AIDS by 2015”. Encouraging news reports indicate a full recovery is possible with a healthy skepticism of readily available treatment. According to the CIA, both infection and mortality rates in Botswana dropped from 37.3% to 23.9% (-36%) and life expectancy increased from 33.9 to 61.85 (+82.5%), between 2001 and 2007; during the same time period Swaziland rates dropped from 38.8% infected to 26.1% (-32.7%) and life expectancy increased from 33.2 to 47.85 (+44.1%); in Zimbabwe incidence dropped from 24.6% to 15.3% (-37%) and life expectancy increased from 39.1 to 45.77 (+17.1); South Africa from 21.5% to 18.1% (-15%) while life expectancy dropped from 43.3 to 48.98 (+13.1%). In Washington DC, the HIV positive population is reported to have risen above 5%, the highest in the United States, where less than 1% of the population is infected; although they give asylum to the Court of International Trade of the United States (CoITUS) (so named in the Customs Court Act of 1980).

Table 11: Goal 7 Environment Compared with 1990
Region	Forest Land 1990	Forest Land 2005	CO₂ 10⁶Ton 1990	CO₂ 10⁶Ton 2005	Ozone Abuse 1990	Ozone Abuse 2005	H₂0 Used 2000	Protect Areas 2006
World	31.3%	30.3%	21,899	28,013				12.1%
Developing			6,803	13,817	247,536	55,419	6.7%	13.0%
North Africa	1.3%	1.5%%	232	437	6,203	1,972	77.5%	3.7%
Sub-Saharan Africa	29.2%	26.5%	465	652	23,449	1,295	2.2%	11.5 %
Latin America and Caribbean	50.2%	46.3%	1,078	1,449	76,048	7,386	1.4%	21.0%
East Asia	16.5%	19.8%	2,940	6,235	103,217	29,870	21.4%	14.0%
South Asia	14.0%	14.2%	1,009	2,051	3,338	4,408	26.6%	5.6%
South Eastern Asia	56.3%	46.8%	427	1,045	21,108	3,299	4.5%	7.5%
Western Asia	3.3%	3.5%	646	1,127	11,470	6,979	47.5%	17.9%
Europe and Central Asia	38.6%	38.6%	3,796	2,303	139,454	1,672	5.4%	7.6%
Oceania	68.3%	63.4%	6	11	47	33	0.0%	7.2%
OECD	30.4%	30.8%	11,173	12,979	826,801	4,793	9.3%	16.9%
Sources: The Millennium Development Goals Report 2009 Indicator 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.5 & 7.6

Goal 7 is, “to integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programs to reverse loss of environmental resources”. Biodiversity loss has been slowed somewhat, and between 1990 and 2005 the percent of forested land has declined 1% from 31.3% to 30.3% while the protected terrestrial and marine habitats have risen to 12.1%. The primary concern since 1990 has been climate change. Concern for Ozone depleting fluorocarbons led to the replacement of these products with more ozone friendly products and between 1990 and 2005 ozone depleting substances released into the atmosphere decreased from 826,801 to 4,7793 in OECD nations and from 247,536 to 55,419 in developing nations. Climate change however continued unabated. Some 262 million people were affected by climate disasters annually from 2000 to 2004, over 98 percent of them in the developing world. In the OECD countries one in 1,500 people was affected by climate disaster, while in developing countries the ratio is one in 19—a risk differential of 79. Scientists turned their scrutiny upon CO2 emissions (greenhouse gases) from the burning of fossil fuels upon which the economy is dependant. Current concentrations of CO2 have reached 380 parts per million (ppm). If ppm reaches 750 parts per million, average global temperatures could increase by more than 5°C. The threshold for dangerous climate change is an increase of around 2°C. Un-redressed, energy-related CO2 emissions could rise by more than 50 percent over 2005 levels by 2030. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) global carbon budget for energy-related emissions would amount to around 14.5 Gt CO2 annually, however current emissions amounted to 28 Gt .in 2005, up from 22 Gt in 1990. Avoiding dangerous climate change will require rich nations to cut emissions by at least 80 percent, with cuts of 30 percent by 2020. Emissions from developing countries would peak around 2020, with cuts of 20 percent by 2050. To reach the global target of a 2.2-2.7 per cent reduction in energy intensity, developed countries need to reduce their energy intensity by 2.2-2.4% a year, double the 1.2% per cent reduction between 1990 and 2007. At the global level, the energy system – supply, transformation, delivery and use – is the dominant contributor to climate change, representing around 60 per cent of total current greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The central message is that the international community must come together in a common effort to cease exploiting alternatives to solar power and transform to solar energy over the coming decades.

Table 14: Goal 7B H₂O and Sanitation Access 1990 & 2006
Region	Access to H₂O 1990	Access to H₂O 2006	Access to H₂O Goal	Sanitary Access 1990	Sanitary Access 2006	Sanitary Access Goal	Slum Living 1990	Slum Living 2005
World	77%	87%	88.5%	54%	62%	78%
Developing	71%	84%	85.5%	41%	53%	70.5%	46.3%	35.7%
North Africa	85%	92%	92.5%	62%	76%	86%	36.2%	14.5%
Sub-Saharan Africa	49%	58%	74.5%	26%	31%	63%	71.5%	62.2%
Latin America and Caribbean	84%	92%	92%	68%	79%	84%	33.7%	27.0%
East Asia	68%	85%	84%	48%	65%	74%	43.7%	36.5%
South Asia	74%	87%	87%	21%	33%	60.5%	57.2%	42.9%
South Eastern Asia	73%	86%	86.5%	50%	67%	75%	49.5%	34.2%
Western Asia	86%	90%	94%	79%	84%	89.5%	22.5%	25.8%
Europe and Central Asia	93%	94%	96.5%	90%	89%	95%
Oceania	51%	50%	75.5%	52%	52%	76%		24.1%
OECD	98%	99%	99%	99%	99%	99.5%
Sources: The Millennium Development Goals Report 2009 Indicator 7.8, 7.9 & 7.10

Goal 7 a & b. are, a. Reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to drinking water and b. Achieve significant improvements in the lives of at least 100-million slum dwellers worldwide by 2020”. Human Development Report 2006: Beyond scarcity: Power, poverty and the global water crisis, found some 1.1 billion people in developing countries have inadequate access to water, and 2.6 billion lack basic sanitation. Even if the targets are achieved, there will still be more than 800 million people without water and 1.8 billion people without sanitation in 2015. Every year some 1.8 million children die as a result of diarrhea and other diseases caused by unclean water and poor sanitation. Water purification explains almost half the mortality reduction in the United States in the first third of the 20th century. In Great Britain the expansion of sanitation contributed to a 15-year increase in life expectancy in the four decades after 1880. In 1990, 77% of the population had access to water and in 2006 that number had risen to 87%, 96% urban and 78% rural. In aggregate the world is on track for the target for water largely because of strong progress in China and India, but only two regions are on track for sanitation (East Asia and Latin America). In 1990 in aggregate 54% of the world population had access to sanitation and in 2006 that number had risen to 62%, 79% in urban areas and 45% in rural areas. On current trends Sub-Saharan Africa will reach the water target in 2040 and the sanitation target in 2076. For Sub-Saharan Africa to get on track, connection rates for water will have to rise from 10 million a year in the past decade to 23 million a year in the next decade. South Asia’s rate of sanitation provision will have to rise from 25 million people a year to 43 million a year. The additional costs of achieving the water and sewage related Millennium Development Goal is estimated at $10 billion a year, about 15% of total ODA should go for new water, sewer and electric connections and other public works, 10% for vaccines and pharmaceuticals and 25% for education, leaving 50% for food and cash benefits.

Table 13: Industrial Power Supply 2009
Industrial Production Growth	Electricity Production	Electricity Consumption	Electricity Exports	Electricity Imports
-2.7% (2009)	19.25 trillion kWh (2007)	17.93 trillion kWh (2007)	615.4 billion kWh (2008)	613.9 billion kWh (2008)
Oil Production	Oil Consumption	Oil Exports	Oil Imports	Oil Proved Reserves
87.51 million bbl/day (2008)	84.34 million bbl/day (2008)	61.96 million bbl/day (2007)	66.5 million bbl/day (2007)	1.365 trillion bbl (2009)
Natural Gas Production	Natural Gas Consumption	Natural Gas Exports	Natural Gas Imports	Natural Gas Proved Reserves
3.127 trillion cu. M (2008)	3.073 trillion cu. M (2008)	949.9 billion cu. M (2008)	947.2 billion cu. M (2008)	182.1 trillion cu. M (2009)
Source: CIA World Fact Book - World July 2009

Clean, efficient, affordable and reliable energy services are indispensable for global prosperity. Developing countries in particular need to expand access to reliable and modern energy services if they are to reduce poverty and improve the health of their citizens with more affordable water and sewage connections. Worldwide, about 1.5 billion people still lack access to electricity, and around 2.5 billion people rely on traditional biomass, such as dung or wood, for energy. Modern sources of energy include fuels such as natural gas, liquid petroleum gas (LPG), diesel and biofuels such as biodiesel and bioethanol. Technology, such as improved cooking stoves, can also enable cleaner and more efficient delivery of traditional fuels. Currently most power sector investment is made by government-owned or private, usually regulated, electric utilities. The $20 trillion projected to be spent between 2004 and 2030 to meet energy demand could lock the world on to an unsustainable trajectory. Ten percent of this, $200 – 210 billion will be necessary in 2030 to return global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to current levels, 0.3 to 0.5% of global domestic product in 2030 and 1.1 - 1.7% of global investment in 2030. About $148 billion out of the $432 billion of projected annual investment in power sector is predicted to be shifted to renewables, carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage (CCS), nuclear energy, wind, hydro and solar power. Raising fuel efficiency standards by 20 miles per gallon would cut oil consumption by 3.5 million barrels a day and save 400 Mt CO2 emissions a year. Carbon Capture and Storage (CSS) is holds out the promise of coal-fired power generation with near-zero emissions. For energy efficiency it is estimated $30-35 billion of capital is required for low-income countries and $140-170 billion for middle-income countries annually until 2030. Implementation can be done with great speed and intensity: In the early 90s, China was electrifying over 30 villages a day Viet Nam granted almost 400 people access to electricity per hour for 15 years, South Africa made a new grid connection every 30 seconds, placed a pole in the correct position every 10 seconds and strung 200m of cable every minute If recent national trends in energy access continue, over the next 20 years an estimated 400 million people will gain access to electricity.

Table 14: Goal 8 Global Partnership for Development 1990-2008
	1990	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008
ODA All Developing billion	52.7	58.3	69.1	79.4	107.1	104.4	103.5	119.8
ODA Least Developed billion	15.1	15.8	22.4	23.4	24.6	30.0	32.0
Developing Duty Free Exports			71%				83%
Developing Import Tariff			9.4%		8.8%		8.4%
OECD Agro-subsidy	2.03%		1.17%	1.13%	1.05%	0.97%	0.89%
Line Tel. Developing p. 100	2.3%						13.3%
Line Tel. Developed p. 100	42.4%						47.6%
Cellular Sub. Developing p. 100	(2000)	5.5%				38.6%
Cellular Sub. Developed p. 100	(2000)	47.8%				100%
Internet Developing p. 100	(2000)	2.1%					12.7%
Internet Developed p. 100	(2000)	29.9%					63.5%
Sources: The Millennium Development Goals Report 2009 Indicator 8.1, 8.6, 8.7, 8.14, 8.15 & 8.16

Goal 8 is, develop a partnership for global development. The plan is A. to develop an open, rule-based, predictable, non-discriminatory trading and financial system and includes a commitment to good governance, development, and poverty reduction – both nationally and internationally. B. To address the special needs of the least developed countries tariff and quota free access for exports; enhanced program of debt relief for HIPC and cancellation of official bilateral debt; and more generous ODA for poverty reduction. C. Address the special needs of landlocked developing countries and small island developing States. D. Deal comprehensively with the debt problems of developing countries through national and international measures in order to make debt sustainable in the long term. E. In co-operation with pharmaceutical companies, provide access to affordable, essential drugs in developing countries. Substantial progress has been made with regard to debt relief, but full delivery on the heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) initiative requires continued efforts from the international community. By September 2009, 35 out of 40 eligible countries had qualified for debt relief under the initiative, 26 of which had qualified for irrevocable debt relief, totalling $57 billion under the HIPC initiative and $23 billion in additional debt relief under the MDR initiative. Debt service as percent of the cost of exports of good and services have gone down from 19.1% in 1990 to 4.1% in 2007. The proportion of developing nation exports admitted duty free has risen from 53% to 83% while the tariff barrier to imports has gone down from 10.4% to 8.4%. OECD domestic agricultural subsidies have gone down from 2.03% in 1990 to 0.89% of GDP in 2007. Cellular subscription in OECD countries has subsided somewhat since the recession due to cost and benefits lost to wiretapping and social decay.

Table 15: 26 ODA Donors 2003 & 2008
#	Country	ODA 2003 million	ODA 2003 % GDP	ODA 2008 million	ODA 2008 % GDP	#	Country	ODA 2003 million	ODA 2003 % GDP	ODA 2008 million	ODA 2008 % GDP
1	Australia	1,465	0.23%	2,954	0.32%	14	Luxembourg	241	0.88%	415	0.88%
2	Austria	1,024	0.4%	1,714	0.45%	15	Netherlands	4,235	1%	6,993	0.88%
3	Belgium	1,452	0.46%	2,386	0.65%	16	New Zealand	165	0.17%	348	0.32%
4	Canada	2,000	0.2%	4,785	0.34%	17	Norway	2,200	1.2%	3,963	1.1%
5	Denmark	2,025	1.2%	2,803	0.9%	18	Portugal	1,028	0.54%	620	0.28%
6	Finland	655	0.43%	1,166	0.49%	19	Saudi Arabia	?22?	?0.006?	1,734	0.45%
7	France	8,475	0.49%	10,908	0.41%	20	Spain	2,547	0.27%	6,867	0.47%
8	Germany	7,836	0.33%	13,981	0.43%	21	Sweden	2,704	1.1%	4,732	1.8%
9	Greece	464	0.21%	703	0.21%	22	Switzerland	1,379	0.55%	2,038	0.42%
10	Ireland	586	0.5%	1,328	0.58%	23	United Arab Emirates	?5.2?	?0.007?	181	0.08%
11	Italy	2,484	0.15%	4,861	0.23%	24	United Kingdom	7,497	0.42%	11,500	0.52%
12	Japan	8,859	0.22%	9,579	0.19%	25	United States	19,000	0.19%	26,842	0.19%
13	Kuwait	?175?	?0.33%?	209	0.18%
Source: World Economics HA-2010, HA-2007

Clause A.C., “more generous ODA for countries committed to poverty reduction” has proven the most efficient

measurement of international economic cooperation.  Not all nations, especially least developed nations, have the

resources or infrastructure to trade effectively.  ODA fell out of use during the neo-liberal 1990s, growing only

10.5%, from $52.7 billion to $58.3 billion, over the 12 years till 2002, 0.8% annually.  Then, awakened to

international responsibility by the global conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, ODA grew rapidly, with the objective

of achieving the MDGs, to $69.1 billion in 2003, 18.5% growth, to $79.4 billion in 2004, 14.9% growth, to

$107.1 billion in 2005, phenomenal 35% growth.  Energy prices and insecurity in the bank however cut into

donor confidence in 2006 and receipts by developing nations declined to $104.4 billion, -2.5% growth, dropping

again in 2007 to $103.5 billion, -0.9% growth.  United by the economic crisis and obligated to fulfill the 2015

goal of contributing 0.7% of GDP to ODA as collateral for IMF loans ODA picked up to $119.8 billion, 15.7%

growth.  The G-8 is calling for $154 billion ODA in 2010, 17.1% annual growth, and this growth in ODA

seems to be sustainable.  Insulated against negative GDP growth by the unfulfilled obligation to contribute 0.7%

of GDP aid levels are expected to continue to grow even in a downturn.  The biggest controversy among

donors is that the contributions of Islamic oil and South Korea to ODA are unaccounted for the by OECD.

According to reports the successful Islamic oil exporting nations contribute 4% of their GDP although the

available statistics belie this theory and their contributions are within 0.09% and 0.54% of GDP.  Islamic oil

is a generous benefactor who has graduated nearly as many African and Asian nations as OECD has in

Eastern Europe.

Table 16: Class of 2006-2009
#	Status	Per Capita 2009	Per Capita 2006	#	Status	Per Capita 2009	Per Capita 2006		Status	Per Capita 2009	Per Capita 2006
	>$900				>$10,000				>$20,000
1	Comoros	$1,000	$600	16	Gabon	$13,900	$5,800	32	Bahamas	$29,800	$17,700
2	Congo, Republic of	$4,100	$800	17	Grenada	$10,800	$5,000	33	Czech Republic	$25,100	$16,800
3	Ethiopia	$900	$800	18	Kazakhstan	$11,800	$8,700	34	Dominica	$10,200	$5,500
4	Kiribati	$6,100	$800	19	Lebanon	$13,100	$5,100	35	Korea, South	$28,000	$19,200
5	Malawi	$900	$600	20	Libya	$15,200	$8,400	36	Oman	$23,900	$13,400
6	Sierra Leone	$900	$800	21	Malaysia	$14,800	$9,700	37	Panama	$11,900	$6,900
7	Tanzania	$1,400	$700	22	Mexico	$13,500	$9,600	38	Portugal	$21,800	$17,900
8	Timor-Leste	$2,400	$400	23	Romania	$11,500	$7,700	39	Saudi Arabia	$20,400	$12,900
9	Yemen	$2,500	$800	24	Russia	$15,100	$9,800	40	Trinidad & Tobago	$23,100	$10,500
	>$10,000			25	Saint Kitts & Nevis	$15,200	$8,800		<$900
10	Anguilla	$12,200	$7,500	26	Saint Lucia	$10,900	$5,400	41	Central-African Republic	$700	$1,200
11	Azerbaijan	$10,400	$4,600	27	Saint Vincent	$18,100	$2,900	42	Eritrea	$700	$1,000
12	Belarus	$11,600	$6,800	28	Serbia	$10,400	$2,400	43	Niger	$700	$900
13	Brazil	$10,200	$8,100	29	Seychelles	$19,400	$7,800		<$20,000
14	Bulgaria	$12,600	$8,200	30	Turkey	$11,200	$7,900	44	Guam	$15,000	$21,000
15	Costa Rica	$10,900	$9,600	31	Venezuela	$13,100	$5,800
Source: World Economics HA-2010, HA-2007

A class of 40 nations graduated from their pre-existing development status between 2006 and 2009 and five were held back.

Per capita income is not the only form of evaluating human development, the Human Development Report uses a composite

human development index to gauge development.  Generally, graduation from LDC status takes a per capita income of $900,

graduating from developing to middle income $10,000 and from middle income to high income $20,000.  Despite the crisis

and backsliding more nations graduated than were held back.  9 nations graduated from least developed to developing,

Comoros, the Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Kiribati, Malawi, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Timor-Leste and Yemen.  25 nations

graduated from developing to middle income, Anguilla, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Brazil, Bulgaria, Costa Rica, Dominica,

Gabon, Grenada, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Mexico, Panama, Romania, Russia, Saint Kitts and Nevis,

Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent, Serbia, Seychelles, Turkey and Venezuela to middle income.  7 nations graduated to high

income, Bahamas, Czech Republic, Oman, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Trinidad & Tobago.  Four nations

were held back as LDC, the Central African Republic, Eritrea, Niger and Zimbabwe.  Guam was held back in middle

income.  While global economic growth may have slowed per capita income had a mind of its own.  Industrialized nation

per capita, including Arabian oil producers, increased dramatically, although many industrialized nation GDPs went

down the workers seemed to earn more at the expense of the GDP. Offshore banking nations did spectacular.  Middle

income and developing nations struggled, more often than not victoriously, to grow, but there were quite a few falls in

per capita income.  Most new graduates to middle income did not eschew assistance during the crisis.  The OECD

needs to welcome the Arabian oil producing states, South Korea and wealthy island states into their donor portfolio.

Table 17: 10 Least Developed Countries 2009, by per capita under $1,000
Country	Population	Per capita GDP PPP	GDP PPP	GDP ex. rate	ODA million 2008	ODA per capita	Below Poverty Line	Deficit % GDP Ex. rate	Inflation	Trade Balance % GDP	External Debt billions
Zimbabwe	11,392,629	$100	0.332	N/A	-611	$53.60	68%	-38%	5.1%	-285%	5.17
Burundi	9,511,330	$300	3.247	1.427	-509	$53.60	68%	-3%	14.1%	-16.7%	1.2
Congo,Democratic Republic of the	68,692,542	$300	21.33	11.23	-1,620	$23.60		-11.6%	16.7%	8%	10
Liberia	3,441,790	$500	1.627	0.878	-1,250	$367.60	80%	-0.6%	11.2%	-677%	3.2
Guinea-Bissau	1,533,964	$600	0.933	0.443	-132	$88.00			3.8%	15.1%	0.942
Somalia	9,832,017	$600	5.731	2.763	-758	$77.35			N/A	-18%	3
Central-African Republic	4,511,488	$700	3.32	2.006	-256	$56.89		-1.4%	0.9%	-4.5%	1.153
Eritrea	5,647,168	$700	4.198	1.714	-143	$25.54	50%	-20%	15.5%	-33.7%	0.311
Niger	15,306,252	$700	10.45	5.386	-605	$39.54	63%	0%	0.1%	-6.9%	2.1
Afghanistan	28,395,716	$800	23.35	13.47	- 4,865	$171.30	36%	-17%	30.5%	-35.3%	0
Source: World Economics HA-2010

The UN defines Least Developed Countries as low income countries with a three-year average per capita gross national

income (GNI) of under USD 750, those above $900 qualify for graduation.  The geo-political ramifications of the crisis

is primarily that the Afghan conquerors of the Soviet Union have proved themselves morally superior to the European

Union and the United States, but needs to tax the opium and foreign occupying powers to prosper themselves.  Arabian

economic growth rates and their oil exploiting protégé have enjoyed dramatic growth despite oil price slump.  Some

middle income nations graduated from developing status between 2006 and 2009, particularly in Central and Southeastern

Europe, but many still receive subsidies during the credit crisis.  For instance, Serbian per capita, liberated from newly

independent Montenegro, rose from poorest, in all of Europe, around $2,400 in 2006 to $10,400.  Negative economic

growth and budget deficits in United States and Europe spread to dependant nations.  Many per capita incomes were

devaluated in light of the recession, although many of their economic growth rates remained positive.  According to

the Factbook there are sixteen nations with per capita incomes below $1,000 and 10 below the $900 threshold.

Zimbabwe had the lowest per capita ever reported in the Factbook, $100, although growth was estimated at 3.7%,

95% of workers are unemployed, 60% live below the poverty line, the deficit is 38% of GDP, public 304% of GDP,

trade deficit 285% and the nation received only $53.60 per capita in aid.  A second round of assistance should be

administrated to the LDCs on a basis of ODA per capita.

Table 18: Millennium Development Goals and Beyond 2000-2020
	2000	2005	2010	2015	2020
Population	6.0 billion	6.6 billion	6.8 billion	7.0 billion	7.2 billion
GDP	$50 trillion	$60 trillion	$70 trillion	$85 trillion	$100 trillion
Per capita	$8,000	$9,000	$10,000	$12,000	$15,000
ODA needed	$50 billion	$100 billion	$200 billion	$400 billion	$800 billion
ODA actual	$50 billion	$100 billion	$150 billion
Sources: Human Development Report International cooperation at a crossroads: Aid, trade and security in an unequal world 2005; Hospitals & Asylums Political Platform. Chapter 8: International Development. 2009. Fig. 8-5. pg. 314

The distribution of development assistance has always been highly skewed. Most of the increase in ODA since 2000 has been limited to a few occupied countries, namely, Iraq and Afghanistan. Together, these two countries received about a sixth of country allocations from DAC countries, even though they account for less than 2 per cent of the total population of the developing countries. African aid lags far behind commitments and far behind needs. It has become clear that neither aid nor trade will completely satisfy development needs. Effective and innovative measures to raise domestic revenues without raising consumer prices, in a sustainable manner and to efficiently allocate these resources for development are essential. Most importantly, the international community should intensify international tax cooperation. For instance, to offset the cost of power connections in developing nations it has been proposed to create a Climate Change Mitigation Facility (CCMF) to mobilize the $25–50 billion needed annually to support low-carbon transitions in developing countries. There are two ways of putting a price on carbon. The first is to directly tax CO2 emissions. The second route to carbon pricing is cap and trade. Under a cap-and-trade system, the government sets an overall emissions cap and issues tradable allowances that grant business the right to emit a set amount. Those who can reduce emissions more cheaply are able to sell allowances. Many essential medicines are inaccessible to the poor in developing countries for two main reasons. Firstly, there are large gaps in the availability of medicines in both the public and private sectors; secondly, the prices of the medicines that are available are high in relation to their international reference prices. The multinational drug companies, based mostly in developed countries, should be encouraged to practice dual pricing policies, i.e., lower prices for developing countries. The affordability of medicines is expected to deteriorate as a result of the global economic crisis. Incomes for many are falling and currency depreciations are further pushing up the cost of imported medicines.

Table 20: Regional Balance of International Trade 2009
Country	Exports billion	Imports billion	Trade Balance billion	Trade Balance % GDP	External Debt billion
World	12,092	12,325	-233	-0.4%	58,823
Africa	392.55	404.08	-11.52	-0.8%	323.54
America	2,042	2,483	-441	-2.7%	15,256
Europe	5,016	4,973	43	0.2%	37,100
Middle East and Central Asia	1,047.7	1,020.5	-27.2	-0.7%	1,212.8
South East Asia	3,594	3,444	150	1.1%	4,931
Source: World Economics HA-2010

International trade contracted 25% in 2009 and remains sluggish. The overall pattern of international trade remains the same, with Asia and Europe as the net exporters and America as the net importers, but aggregate consumer demand is low and little interested in more foolish investments, inflation or social interaction. The probable cause of the slump in world trade is that the $4 trillion bank nationalizations of 2009 and $1 trillion of 2010 are indeed subsidies for the purposes of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. The impact of these industrialized nation financial sector subsidies on trade was that massive amounts of capital were withdrawn from the stock markets, resulting in market crashes and layoffs in the global free market that disproportionately affected less insured developing nations. Much of the recent economic growth in developing nations is the result of the elimination trade barriers to developing nation exports, in 2003 71% and by 2007 83% of developing nation exports was duty free. To jump start international trade international economic cooperation should strive to reduce the price of nutritious food and the price of imports to developing nations. Industrialized and export nations are encouraged to adopt dual pricing systems to provide special low prices for developing nation necessities. To be efficient, developing nations are encouraged to eliminate tariffs on necessary supplies, such as food and medicine, in order to get them to the needy. The recession endures because of the high price of food in developing nations and the lessening of consumer demand in industrialized regions. The goal of international trade policy at the crossroads should be to expand consumer purchasing power in developing countries to satisfy basic human needs, particularly those defined in the Millennium Development Goals.

Table 21: Exchange Rate Arrangement of a Few Nations Grouped (a) Advanced Countries and (b) Emerging Market Countries
Exchange Rate Regime; No. Countries	Countries
a. No separate legal tender/ currency board (13)	Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong SAR, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, San Marino, Spain
Pegged rate in horizontal band (1)	Denmark
Managed Float (1)	Singapore
Independent Float (10)	Australia, Canada, Iceland, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States
b. No separate legal tender / currency board (34)	Bulgaria, Ecuador, Estonia, Greece*, Lithuania, Panama, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Bosnia, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Rep. of Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Djibouti, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Mali, Marshall Islands, Fed. States of Micronesia, Niger, Palau, Senegal, St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Togo
Fixed pegs (54)	Argentina, Egypt, Jordan, Latvia, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Slovenia, Venezuela, Islamic Rep. of Afghanistan, Angola, Aruba, The Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia Cape Verde, Comoros, Costa Rica, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana, Guyana, Honduras, Islamic Rep. of Iran, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, FYR Macedonia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritania, Mongolia, Namibia, Nepal Netherlands Antilles, Oman, Rwanda, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Vietnam, Rep. of Yemen, Zimbabwe
Pegged rate in horizontal band (4)	Cyprus, Hungary, Slovak Republic, Tonga
Crawling peg (5)	Azerbaijan, Botswana, China,, Iraq, Nicaragua
Managed float within crawling band (43)	Colombia, Czech Republic, India, Malaysia, Peru, Philippines, Romania, Russia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Algeria, Armenia, Bangladesh, Burundi, Cambodia, Croatia, Dominican Republic, The Gambia, Georgia, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyz Republic, Lao PDR, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Moldova, Mozambique, Myanmar, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, So Tom and Prncipe, Serbia, Seychelles, Sudan, Tajikistan, Uruguay, Zambia
Independent float (9)	Brazil, Chile, Indonesia, Israel, Korea, Mexico, Poland, South Africa, Turkey, Albania, Dem Rep. of Congo, Somalia, Tanzania, Uganda
Source; Fischer, Stanley. Mundell-Fleming Lecture Series: Exchange Rate Systems, Surveillance and Advice. IMF Staff Papers. Vol. 55 No. 3. July 1, 2008. Pp 367-383

In conclusion, industrialized nations are a basket case, and to redress the distortion to the market caused by the industrial nation subsidies compounded by an inappropriate depreciation of developing nation currencies, industrialized nations must behave as a currency basket that appreciates developing nation currencies to redress the bailout and decades of unjust depreciation. Industrialized nations bore us with their monotonous struggle between dollar and euro. For decades neo-liberal policies of the industrialized nations have devalued developing nation currencies to exploit natural resources at low costs and foster unequal growth based on foreign trade. In the recent Mexican and Asian financial crisis, that similarly started in the mortgage sector, the nations being bailed out were forced to devaluate, this stimulated trade and their economies quickly recovered. When the industrialized nations propped up their financial sectors at the expense of the global stock market and the market collapsed they depreciated developing nation currencies, spreading the financial contagion to the most vulnerable nations who had nothing to do with the crisis, industrialized nations gained an unfair advantage over developing nations by manipulating the exchange rates in violation of Article IV Section I, paragraph iii of the IMF Articles of Agreement. Developing nation not only got less ODA, less direct foreign investment, but the law was broken and their currencies were depreciated, when they should have been appreciated, and many had less purchasing power. This prolongs the crisis because aggregate demand is less. The industrialized basket needs to swallow their pride because supply side economies are less efficient, they need to appreciate developing nation currencies as compensation for the unfair financial sector subsidies and to reverse decades of depreciation with the stated intention of increasing developing nation purchasing power. Appreciation will create a win-win situation where an increase in aggregate demand from developing nations would stimulate economic growth in industrial nations.

Table 22: Application of the Formula for Devaluating to Offset the Cost of a Bailout in 2008 Thus, Wherefore,
Country	GDP	Bailout	Reserve
United States of America	13,780	900	71	-0.07
European Union	14,430	1,000	448	-0.05
United Kingdom	2,130	600	57	-0.26
China	7,099	585	1,534	0.13
South Korea	1,206	36	262	0.19
Source: CIA World Fact Book December 31, 2007 last updated November 6, 2008 Total US reserves were $47 billion on Sept. 10, $180 billion on Oct. 8 and $329 billion on Oct. 22

The exact dimension of the appreciation is open to interpretation. When the bailouts took place a formula was proposed in Devaluating United Nations Currency Enforcement CAP = US$ -7%, € -5.5% whereby industrialized nations would devaluate their currency with developing nations on the basis of the size of their bailout, eg., $4 trillion for 2009, 7% of GWP, less international reserves, of about $1 trillion. However as the result of the special, self-defeating, interests of the depository institutions that were being bailed out, and the extreme prejudice that has guided currency exchange policy for the past several decades, the industrialized nations were too proud to devaluate. A new formula is therefore proposed to overcome the self-conscious reserve of industrial nations, whereby emerging market nation currencies would be appreciated to the full extent of their purchasing power parity and this would theoretically both increase emerging market nation exchange rate to equal purchasing power parity and reduce the industrial nation exchange rate to be more equal or less than purchasing power. Appreciating emerging market nation currencies from exchange rate to purchasing power parity would overcome longstanding policies of depreciation and harmonize currency exchange rates, keeping international prices for commodities low for everyone. Nations will need to take into consideration their trade balances. Devaluating has been proven to help to sell exports; appreciation however helps the domestic economy. Industrial nation exports will expand to emerging markets, to stimulate free trade and employment. Emerging market nations will capitalize upon increased purchasing power to buy basic human necessities and industrial technology.

Table 23: Regional Demand for Appreciation, 2009 US $ per XR (¦) Þ GDP XR = GDP PPP ¦ = ( GDP PPP – GDP EX ) + 1 GDP EX
Country	Population	GDP PPP billion	GDP Ex. rate billion	Differential P – X X
World	6,788,418,173	70,263	58,070	12,193 21%
Africa	991,760,344	2,835	1,449	1,386 95.7%
America	927,414,548	21,711	16,200	5,511 34%
Europe	731,174,482	18,257	18,749	-492 -2.6%
Middle East and Central Asia	1,934,506,098	8,263	3,885	4,378 117%
South East Asia	2,203,562,701	19,173	13,906	5,267 37.9%
Source: World Economics HA-2010

Currency appreciation should have been done a long time ago, currency appreciation should have occurred before or to offset the cost of the financial sector bailout, emerging market currency appreciation holds great promise. Redressing global income inequality is only a matter of mathematics, the math is however very time consuming, and without reward, that is probably why it is not done. By calculating the regional need for appreciation one can discern that the Middle East and Central Asia, mostly because India’s extreme depreciation gives weight to a general trend, is in need of appreciation by 117% to equal purchasing power parity, followed closely by Africa where equality with purchasing power parity amounting to 95.7% of exchange rate GDP in 2009. It is a relatively simple matter for a single nation to calculate the differential and determine what their desired exchange rate should be. The only mathematical quirk is that the differential plus one formula only works with US $ per foreign currency. The dollar and euro should strive for equality The decision becomes more complex when groups of nations have banded together in a common currency, such as the euro, west, central and east African currencies, east Caribbean dollars and US dollars, wherefore a democratic decision must be determined from the aggregate with national decisions weighted by population. Without pay the proposed one vote per person method of IMF voting will have to wait, however the formula for giving a nation’s vote weight, is to total the group, calculate the percentage of each nation’s population in relation to the whole. Now that the formula for appreciation has been perfected, tried and trued, it should not be difficult for international economists and their staffs to restore equality between purchasing power and the exchange rate, thereby expanding consumer purchasing power in emerging markets, to achieve the MDGs and sustain the 21^st century goal of global income equality.

Table 24: US Dollar Appreciation Survey Country by Country, 2009 ¦ = ( GDP PPP – GDP EX ) + 1 GDP EX US Dollars per Foreign Currency (¦) = Ideal Rate of Exchange
Country	Per capita PPP	GDP PPP billion	GDP Ex. rate trillion	Differential Ratio ¦ P – X X	Exchange Rate: Sum of Differential plus one multiplied by the exchange rate of US Dollars per Foreign Currency yields the Desired Exchange Rate GDP XR = GDP PPP	Ideal Rate # per US/ US per #
Afghanistan	$800	23.35	13.47	9.88 73.4%	afghanis (AFA) per US $ 50.25, US $ per AFA 0.019 (2008)	30.3 0.033
Albania	$6,300	22.9	11.86	11.04 48.2%	leke (ALL) per US $ 93.928, US $ per ALL 0.011 (2009)	62.5 0.016
Algeria	$7,000	239.6	136.4	103.2 43%	Algerian dinars (DZD) per US $, 72.57, US $ per DZD 0.0138 (2009)	50.76 0.0197
Andorra	$44,900	4.22	4.22	0	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.7338 1.363
Angola	$8,900	114.4	70.53	43.87 62.2%	kwanza (AOA) per US dollar 77.17, US dollars per (AOA) 0.013 (2009)	47.62 0.021
Anguilla	$12,200	0.175	0.175	0	East Caribbean dollars (XCD) per US $ 2.7, US $ per XCD 0.37 (2007)note: fixed rate since 1976	2.7 0.37
Antigua & Barbuda	$18,100	1.55	1.194	0.356 29.8%	East Caribbean dollars (XCD) per US $ 2.7 US dollars per XCD 0.37(2007) note: fixed rate since 1976	2.08 0.48
Argentina	$13,800	558	304.9	253.1 83%	Argentine pesos (ARS) per US $ 3.7639, US $ per ARS 0.27 (2009)	2.024 0.4941
Armenia	$5,900	16.18	8.785	7.395 84.2%	drams (AMD) per US $ 360.07 US $ per AMD 0.00278 (2009)	196.1 0.0051
Aruba	$21,800	2.258	2.258	0	Aruban guilders/florins (AWG) per US $ 1.79, US $ per AWG 0.559 (2006)	1.79 0.559
Australia	$38,800	824.3	930.8	-106.5 -11.4%	Australian dollars (AUD) per US $ 1.2894, US $ per AUD 0.776 (2009)	1.45 0.69
Austria	$39,400	323.1	378.8	-55.7 -14.7%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.86 1.1623
Azerbaijan	$10,400	86.03	43	43.03 100.1%	Azerbaijani manats (AZN) per US $ 0.811 US $ per AZN 1.233 (2009) note: on 1 January 2006 Azerbaijan revalued its currency, with 5,000 old manats equal to 1 new manat	0.405 2.467
Bahamas	$29,800	5.278	7.49	-2.212 -29.5%	Bahamian dollars (BSD) per US $ 1 (2005-2009)	1.42 0.705
Bahrain	$38,400	27.99	19.59	8.4 42.88%	Bahraini dinars (BHD) per US $ 0.376. US $ per BHD 2.66 (2009)	0.26 3.80
Bangladesh	$1,600	242.4	93.2	149.2 160.1%	taka (BDT) per US $ 69.047, US $ per BDT 0.0145 (2009)	26.53 0.0377
Barbados	$18,500	4.569	3.637	0.932 25.6%	Barbadian dollars (BBD) per US $ 2 US $ per BBD 0.5 (2003-2006)	1.59 0.628
Belarus	$11,600	116	46	70 152.2%	Belarusian rubles (BYB/BYR) per US $ 2,850, US $ per BYB/BYR 0.000351 (2009)	1,136.4 0.00088
Belgium	$36,600	381	366.9	14.1 3.8%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.707 1.415
Belize	$8,100	2.485	1.424	1.061 74.5%	Belizean dollars (BZD) per US $ 2 US $ per BZD 0.5 (2005-2009)	1.15 0.87
Benin	$1,500	13.25	6.476	6.774 104.6%	Communaute Financiere Africaine francs (XOF) per US $ 481.35, US $ per XOF 0.0021 (2009) note: the West African CFA franc (XOF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since 1 January 1999	232.56 0.0043
Bermuda	$69,900	4.5	4.5	0	Bermudian dollars (BMD) per US dollar - 1.0000 (fixed rate pegged to the US dollar)	1
Bhutan	$5,400	3.763	1.493	2.27 152%	ngultrum (BTN) per US $ 46.6, US $ per BTN 0.0215 (2009) note: the ngultrum is pegged to the Indian rupee	18.48 0.0541
Bolivia	$4,600	45.11	17.76	27.35 154%	bolivianos (BOB) per US $ 7.0699, US $ per BOB 0.14 (2009)	2.812 0.3556
Bosnia& Herzegovina	$6,300	29.07	17.16	11.91 69.4%	konvertibilna markas (BAM) per US $ 1.4352, US $ per BAM 0.697 (2009) note: the convertible mark is pegged to the euro	0.847 1.181
Botswana	$13,100	26	10.94	15.06 137.7%	pulas (BWP) per US $ 7.4632, US $ per BWP 0.134 (2009) , 6.7907 (2008), 6.2035 (2007), 5.8447 (2006), 5.1104 (2005)	3.135 0.319
Brazil	$10,200	2,025	1,499	526 35.1%	reals (BRL) per US $ 2.0322, US $ per BRL 0.492 (2009)	1.504 0.665
British Virgin Islands	$38,500	0.853	1.095	-0.242 -22.1%	The US dollar is used
Brunei	$50,100	19.43	14.87	4.56 30.7%	Bruneian dollars (BND) per US $ 1.45, US $ pre BND 0.69 (2009)	1.11 0.90
Bulgaria	$12,600	90.51	45.3	45.21 99.8%	leva (BGN) per US $ 1.4352, US $ per BGN 0.70 (2009)	0.71 1.40
Burkina Faso	$1,200	18.79	7.871	10.919 139%	Communaute Financiere Africaine francs (XOF) per US $ 481.35, US $ per XOF 0.0021 (2009) note: the West African CFA franc (XOF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since 1 January 1999	200 0.005
Burma(Myanamar)	$1,100	56.92	26.83	30.09 112%	kyats (MMK) per US $ 1,090, US $ per MMK 0.0009 (2009) 5.761 (2005) note: 2005 was official	500 0.002
Burundi	$300	3.247	1.427	1.82 127.5%	Burundi francs (BIF) per US $ 1,227.75, US $ per BIF 0.0008 (2009), 1,198 (2008), 1,065 (2007), 1,030 (2006), 1,138 (2005)	526.32 0.0019
Cambodia	$1,900	28.09	11.03	17.06 155%	riels (KHR) per US $ 4,135.39, US $ per KHR 0.00024 (2009)	1,666.6 0.0006
Cameroon	$2,300	42.76	22.08	20.68 93.7%	Cooperation Financiere en Afrique Centrale francs (XAF) per US $ 481.35, US $ per XAF 0.0021 (2009) note: the Central African CFA franc (XAF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since 1 January 1999	243.9 0.0041
Canada	$38,400	1,285	1,335	-50 -3.7%	Canadian dollars (CAD) per US $ 1.1548 (2009), US $ per CAD 0.866	1.19 0.84
Cape Verde	$3,400	1.7	1.7	0	Cape Verdean escudos (CVE) per US $ 81.319, US $ per CVE 0.012 (2009)	81.319 0.012
Cayman Islands	$43,800	2.25	2.25	0	Caymanian dollars (KYD) per US $ 0.8496, US $ per KYD 1.177 (2006)	0.8496 1.177
Central-African Republic	$700	3.32	2.006	0.72 35.9%	Cooperation Financiere en Afrique Centrale francs (XAF) per US $ 481.35, US $ per XAF 0.0021 (2009) note: since the Central African CFA franc (XAF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since January 1999	344.9 0.0029
Chad	$1,600	16.26	7.056	9.204 130.4%	Cooperation Financiere en Afrique Centrale francs (XAF) per US $ 481.35, US $ per XAF 0.0021 (2009) note: the Central African CFA franc (XAF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since 1 January 1999	208.33 0.0048
Chile	$14,700	243.7	152.1	91.6 60.2%	Chilean pesos (CLP) per US $ 569.37, US $ per CLP 0.0018 (2009)	344.8 0.0029
China	$6,600	8,789	4,814	3,975 82.6%	Renminbi yuan (RMB) per US $ 6.8249, US $ per RMB 0.15 (2009)	3.70 0.27
Colombia	$9,200	401	231.3	169.7 73.4%	Colombian pesos (COP) per US $ 1,990, US $ per COP 0.0005 (2009)	1,149 0.00087
Comoros	$1,000	0.761	0.531	0.23 43.3%	Comoran francs (KMF) per US $ 361.4, US $ per KMF 0.0028 (2007) note: the Comoran franc is pegged to the euro at a rate of 491.9677 Comoran francs per euro	250 0.004
Congo, Republic of	$4,100	16.41	8.733	7.677 87.9%	Congolese francs (CDF) per US $ 464.69, US $ per CDF 0.002 (2006)	263.16 0.0038
Congo,Democratic Republic of the	$300	21.33	11.23	10.1 89.9%	Cooperation Financiere en Afrique Centrale francs (XAF) per US $ 483.21, US $ per XAF 0.0021 (2009) note: the Central African CFA franc (XAF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since January 1999	250 0.004
Cook Islands	$9,100	0.184	0.183	0.001 0.5%	NZ dollars (NZD) per US $ 1.6204, US $ per NZD 0.617 (2009)	1.61 0.62
Costa Rica	$10,900	48.63	29.64	18.99 64.1%	Costa Rican colones (CRC) per US $ 580.01, US $ per CRC 0.0017 (2009)	357.1 0.0028
Cote d’Ivoire	$1,700	35.82	23.18	12.64 54.5%	Communaute Financiere Africaine francs (XOF) per US $ 469.21, US $ per XOF 0.0021 (2009) note: the West African CFA franc (XOF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since 1 January 1999	333.33 0.003
Croatia	$17,600	79.21	62.45	16.76 26.8%	kuna (HRK) per US $ 5.4331, US $ per HRK 0.18 (2009)	4.386 0.228
Cuba	$9,700	111.1	56.52	54.58 96.6%	Cuban pesos (CUP) per US $ 0.9259, US $ per CUP 1.08 (2009)	0.47 2.12
Cyprus	$21,200	22.97	23.49	-0.52 -2.2%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.734, US $ per EUR 1.36 (2009)	0.75 1.33
Czech Republic	$25,100	256.6	191.9	65 33.9%	koruny (CZK) per US $ 19.373, US $ per CZK 0.05 (2009)	14.93 0.067
Denmark	$36,000	198.6	311.9	-113.3 -36.3%	Danish kroner (DKK) per US $ 5.4742, US $ per DKK 0.18 (2009) note: the Danish krone is pegged to the euro	8.70 0.115
Djibouti	$2,800	2.011	1.102	0.909 82.5%	Djiboutian francs (DJF) per US $ 177.71, US $ per DJF 0.0056 (2007)	100 0.01
Dominica	$10,200	0.743	0.380	0.363 95.5%	East Caribbean dollars (XCD) per US $ 2.7, US $ per XCD 0.37 (2003-‘07)	1.38 0.72
Dominican Republic	$8,300	80.53	45.24	35.29 78%	Dominican pesos (DOP) per US $ 36.141, US $ per DOP 0.028 (2009)	20 0.05
Ecuador	$7,400	108.2	56.27	51.93 92.3%	note: the US dollar is legal tender
Egypt	$6,000	471.2	190.2	281 147.7%	Egyptian pounds (EGP) per US $ 5.6, US $ per EGP 0.18 (2009)	2.22 0.45
El Salvador	$7,100	42.92	22.43	20.49 91.4%	the US dollar became El Salvador's currency in 2001
Equatorial Guinea	$36,600	23.2	11.31	11.89 105.1%	Cooperation Financiere en Afrique Centrale francs (XAF) per US $ 481.35, US $ per XAF 0.0021 (2009) note: , the Central African CFA franc (XAF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since 1 January 1999	232.56 0.0043
Eritrea	$700	4.198	1.714	2.484 145%	nakfa (ERN) per US $ 15.5, US $ per ERN 0.065 (2009) note: the official exchange rate is 15 nakfa to the dollar	6.29 0.159
Estonia	$18,700	24.36	18.26	6.1 33.4%	kroon (EEK) per US $ 11.482, US $ per EEK 0.087 (2009) note: the kroon is pegged to the euro	8.62 0.116
Ethiopia	$900	76.74	34.32	42.42 123.6%	birr (ETB) per US $ 11.86, US $ per ETB 0.084 (2009) note: since 24 October 2001, exchange rates are determined on a daily basis via interbank transactions regulated by the Central Bank	5.26 0.19
Falkland Islands	$35,400	0.105	0.105	0	Falkland pounds (FKP) per US $ 0.5302, US $ per FKP 1.89 (2008) note: the Falkland pound is at par with the British pound	0.5302 1.89
Faroe Islands	$48,200	1.56	2.45	-0.89 -36.3%	Danish kroner (DKK) per US $ 5.4742, US $ per DKK 0.183 (2009)
Fiji	$3,900	3.704	3.084	0.62 20.1%	Fijian dollars (FJD) per US $ 1.7313, US $ per FJD 0.578 (2006)	1.44 0.694
Finland	$34,900	182.6	238.2	-55.6 -23.3%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.96 1.045
France	$32,800	2,110	2,666	-556 -20.9	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.92 1.08
French Polynesia	$18,000	4.718	6.1	-1.382 -22.7%	Comptoirs Francais du Pacifique francs (XPF) per US $ 87.59, US $ per XPF 0.011 (2007) 105.66 (2003) note: pegged at the rate of 119.25 XPF to the euro	117.7 0.0085
Gabon	$13,900	20.99	11.06	9.93 89.8%	Cooperation Financiere en Afrique Centrale francs (XAF) per US $ 481.35, US $ per XAF 0.0021 (2009) note: since 1 January 1999, the Central African CFA franc (XAF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro	250 0.004
Gambia, The	$1,400	2.471	0.735	1.736 236.2%	dalasis (GMD) per US $ 27, US $ per GMD 0.037 (2009)	8.33 0.12
Georgia	$4,400	20.29	11.11	9.18 82.6%	laris (GEL) per US $ 1.6996, US $ per GEL 0.588 (2009)	0.93 1.074
Germany	$34,100	2,811	3,273	-462 -14.1%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.36 (2009)	0.85 1.17
Ghana	$1,500	36.57	14.93	21.64 145%	cedis (GHC) per US $ 1.4, US $ per GHC 0.71 (2009) , 1.1 (2008), 0.95 (2007), 9,174.8 (2006) note: in 2007 Ghana revalued its currency with 10,000 old cedis equal to 1 new cedis	0.57 1.74
Gibraltar	$38,500	1.106	1.106	0	Gibraltar pounds (GIP) per US $ 0.6494, US $ per GIP 1.54 (2009) note: the Gibraltar pound is at par with the British pound	0.6494 1.54
Greece	$32,100	341	342.2	-1.2 -0.35%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.36 (2009)	0.738 1.355
Grenada	$10,800	1.156	0.691	0.465 67.3%	East Caribbean dollars (XCD) per US $ 2.7, US $ per XCD 0.37 (2003-07)	1.61 0.62
Greenland	$35,400	2.03	2.03	0	Danish kroner (DKK) per US $ 5.4742, US $ per DKK 0.18 (2009)	5.4742 0.18
Guam	$15,000	2.5	2.773	0.273 9.8%	the US dollar is used
Guatemala	$5,200	69.21	36.9	32.31 87.6%	quetzales (GTQ) per US $ 8.1613, US $ per GTQ 0.12 (2009)	4.44 0.225
Guernsey	$44,600	2.742	2.742	0	Guernsey pound per US $ 0.6494, US $ per Guernsey Poung 1.54 (2009) note: the Guernsey pound is at par with the British pound	0.6494 1.54
Guinea	$1,000	10.48	4.488	5.992 133.5%	Guinean francs (GNF) per US $ 5,200, US $ per GNF 0.00019 (2009)	2,272.7 0.00044
Guinea-Bissau	$600	0.933	0.443	0.49 110.6%	Communaute Financiere Africaine francs (XOF) per US $ 481.35, US $ per XOF 0.0021 (2009) note: the West African CFA franc (XOF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since 1 January 1999	227.27 0.0044
Guyana	$3,800	2.844	1.21	1.634 121%	Guyanese dollars (GYD) per US $ 204.57, US $ per GYD 0.0049 (2009)	83.33 0.012
Haiti	$1,300	11.9	6.989	4.911 70.3%	gourdes (HTG) per US $ 41.366, US $ per HTG 0.024 (2009)	24.39 0.041
Honduras	$4,200	33.17	14.75	18.42 124.9%	lempiras (HNL) per US $ 18.9, US $ per HNL 0.053 (2009)	8.40 0.119
Hong Kong	$42,700	301.6	211.3	90.3 42.7%	Hong Kong dollars (HKD) per US $ 7.75, US $ per HKD 0.129 (2009)	5.435 0.184
Hungary	$18,600	184.9	125.7	59.2 47.1%	forints (HUF) per US $ 200.64, US $ per HUF 0.005 (2009)	135.14 0.0074
Iceland	$39,600	12.15	11.92	0.23 1.9%	Icelandic kronur (ISK) per US $ 128.417, US $ per ISK 0.0078 (2009) , 85.619 (2008), 63.391 (2007)	125 0.008
India	$3,100	3,560	1,095	2,465 225.1%	Indian rupees (INR) per US $ 46.78 (2009), US $ per INR 0.0214	14.3 0.07
Indonesia	$4,000	969.2	521	448.2 86%	Indonesian rupiah (IDR) per US $ 10,399.2, US $ per IDR 0.000096 (2009), 9,143 (2007)	555.55 0.00018
Iran	$12,900	876	335.7	540.3 160.9%	Iranian rials (IRR) per US $ 9,900, US $ per IRR 0.0001 (2009) note: Iran has been using a managed floating exchange rate regime since unifying multiple exchange rates in March 2002	3,846 0.00026
Iraq	$3,600	112	70.93	41.07 57.9%	Iraqi dinars (IQD) per US $ 1,170, US $ per IQD 0.00085 (2009)	769.23 0.0013
Ireland	$42,200	176.9	229.4	-52.5 -22.9%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.95 1.05
Isle of Man	$35,000	2.719	2.719	0	Manx pounds (IMP) per US $ 0.6494, US $ per IMP 1.54 (2009) note: the Manx pound is at par with the British pound	0.6494 1.54
Israel	$28,400	206.8	194	12.8 6.6%	new Israeli shekels (ILS) per US $ 3.93, US $ per ILS 0.25 (2009)	3.75 0.266
Italy	$30,300	1,760	2,114	354 -16.7%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.88 1.135
Jamaica	$8,200	23.24	12.06	11.18 92.7%	Jamaican dollars (JMD) per US $ 88.674, US $ per JMD 0.011 (2009)	47.61 0.021
Japan	$32,600	4,137	5,108	-97.1 -19%	yen (JPY) per US $ 94.5, US $ per JPY 0.01 (2009)	125 0.008
Jersey	$57,000	5.1	5.1	0	Jersey pounds per US $ 0.6494, US $ per Jersey pound 1.54 (2009) note: the Jersey pound is at par with the British pound	0.6494 1.54
Jordan	$5,300	33.05	22.82	10.23 44.8%	Jordanian dinars (JOD) per US $ 0.709, US $ per JOD 1.41 (2009)	0.49 2.04
Kazakhstan	$11,800	182.3	108.3	74 68.3%	tenge (KZT) per US $ 147.84, US $ per KZT 0.0068 (2009)	87.72 0.0114
Kenya	$1,600	63.73	30.57	33.16 108.5%	Kenyan shillings (KES) per US $ 78.042, US $ per KES 0.0128 (2009)	37.04 0.027
Kiribati	$6,100	0.597	0.115	0.482 419.1%	Australian dollars (AUD) per US $ 1.2894, US $ per AUD 0.7755 (2009)
Korea, North	$1,900	40	28.2	11.8 41.8%	North Korean won (KPW) per US $ 3,630, US $ per KPW 0.000275 (market rate December 2008) North Korean won (KPW) per US dollar 140, US $ per KPW 0.007 (official rate 2007)	2,564.1 0.00039 Market 100 0.01 Official
Korea, South	$28,000	1,356	809.7	546.3 67.5%	South Korean won (KRW) per US $ 1,296.88, US $ per KRW 0.00077 (2009)	769.23 0.0013
Kosovo	$2,500	5.3	3.237	2.063 63.7%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.45% 2.232
Kuwait	$54,100	145.7	116.2	29.5 25.4%	Kuwaiti dinars (KD) per US $ 0.283, US $ per KD 3.53 (2009)	0.23 4.43
Kyrgystan	$2,100	11.66	4.736	6.924 146%	soms (KGS) per US $ 43.069, US $ per KGS 0.023 (2009)	17.54 0.057
Laos	$2,100	15.07	5.788	9.282 160.4%	kips (LAK) per US $ 8,556.56, US $ per LAK 0.00012 (2009) 10,235 (2006)	3,333 0.0003
Latvia	$14,500	32.4	24.48	7.92 32.4%	lati (LVL) per US $ 0.5157, US $ per LVL 1.939 (2009)	0.389 2.566
Lebanon	$13,100	53.68	33.04	20.64 62.5%	Lebanese pounds (LBP) per US $ 1,507.5, US $ per LBP 0.00066 (2009)	1,000 0.001
Lesotho	$1,700	3.273	1.643	1.63 99.2%	maloti (LSL) per US $ 9.8, US $ per LSL 0.1 (2009)	5 0.2
Liberia	$500	1.627	0.878	0.749 85.3%	Liberian dollars (LRD) per US $ 59.43, US $ per LRD 0.749 (2006)	0.72 1.39
Libya	$15,200	95.88	61.32	34.56 56.4%	Libyan dinars (LYD) per US $ 1.2641, US $ per LYD 0.79 (2009)	0.81 1.235
Liechtenstein	$122,100	4.16	4.603	-0.443 -9.6%	Swiss francs (CHF) per US $ 1.1081, US $ per CHF 0.9 (2009)	1.23 0.813
Lithuania	$15,400	54.84	36.39	18.45 50.7%	litai (LTL) per US $ 2.5337, US $ per LTL 0.39 (2009)	1.69 0.59
Luxembourg	$78,000	38.37	47.06	-8.69 -18.5%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.90 1.11
Macau	$33,000	18.47	22.1	-3.63 -16.4	patacas (MOP) per US $ 7.985, US $ per MOP 1.365 (2009)	0.876 1.141
Macedonia	$9,000	18.77	8.929	9.841 110.2%	Macedonian denars (MKD) per US $ 45.129, US $ per MKD 0.022 (2009)	21.74 0.046
Madagascar	$1,000	20.5	9.079	11.421 125.8%	Malagasy ariary (MGA) per US $ 1,966.97, US $ pre MGA 0.0005 (2009)	1,000 0.001
Malawi	$900	12.81	4.967	7.843 157.9%	Malawian kwachas (MWK) per US $ 159.16, US $ per MWK 0.0063 (2009)	62.5 0.016
Malaysia	$14,800	381.1	209.8	171.3 81.65%	ringgits (MYR) per US $ 3.55, US $ per MYR 0.28 (2009)	1.953 0.512
Maldives	$4,200	1.673	1.359	0.314 23.2%	rufiyaa (MVR) per US $ 12.8, US $ per MVR, 0.078 (2009)	10.42 0.096
Mali	$1,200	15.52	8.86	6.66 75.2%	Communaute Financiere Africaine francs (XOF) per US $ 481.35, US $ per XOF 0.0021 (2009) note: the West African CFA franc (XOF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since 1 January 1999	270.270 0.0037
Malta	$23,800	9.831	7.805	2.026 26%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.582 1.717
Marshall Islands	$2,500	0.134	0.162	0.028 -17.3%	the US dollar is used	1.21 0.827
Mauritania	$2,100	6.568	3.279	3.289 100.3%	ouguiyas (MRO) per US $ 271.3, US $ per MRO 0.0037 (2006)	1.355 0.738
Mauritius	$12,400	15.9	9.264	6.636 71.6%	Mauritian rupees (MUR) per US $ 32.624, US $ per MUR 0.031 (2009)	19.23 0.053
Mexico	$13,500	1,482	1,017	465 45.7%	Mexican pesos (MXN) per US $ 13.64, US $ per MXN 0.0733 (2009)	9.36 0.1068
Micronesia	$2,200	0.238	0.238	0	the US dollar is used	1
Moldova	$2,300	9.986	5.391	4.595 85.2%	Moldovan lei (MDL) per US $ 11.105, US $ per MDL 0.09 (2009)	5.99 0.167
Monaco	$30,000	0.976	0.976	0	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.7338 1.363
Mongolia	$3,200	9.456	4.261	5.195 121.9%	togrog/tugriks (MNT) per US $ 1,442.8, US $ per MNT 0.000693 (2009)	666.66 0.0015
Montenegro	$9,800	6.708	4.496	2.212 49.2%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US $ per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.492 2.033
Morocco	$4,600	146.7	91.84	54.86 59.7%	Moroccan dirhams (MAD) per US $ 8.064, US $ per MAD 0.124 (2009)	5.05 0.198
Mozambique	$900	20.17	9.767	10.403 106.5%	meticais (MZM) per US $ 27.4, US $ per MZM 0.0365 (2009) 23,061 (2005) note: in 2006 Mozambique revalued its currency, with 1000 old meticais equal to 1 new meticais	13.33 0.075
Namibia	$6,400	13.58	9.145	4.435 48.5%	Namibian dollars (NAD) per US $ 8.54, US $ per NAD 0.117 (2009)	5.747 0.174
Nepal	$1,200	33.25	12.47	20.78 166.6%	Nepalese rupees (NPR) per US $ 77.44, US $ per NPR 0.0129 (2009)	29.07 0.0344
Netherlands	$39,200	654.9	799	-144.1 -18	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.895 1.117
New Caledonia	$15,000	3.158	3.3	-0.142 -4.3%	Comptoirs Francais du Pacifique francs (XPF) per US $ 87.59, US $ per XPF 0.0114 (2007) 105.66 (2003)	91.7 0.0109
New Zealand	$27,300	114.9	110.9	4 3.6%	New Zealand dollars (NZD) per US $ 1.6204, US $ per NZD 0.617 (2009)	1.57 0.639
Nicaragua	$2,800	16.53	6.372	10.158 159.4%	cordobas (NIO) per US $ 20.336, US $ per NIO 0.049 (2009)	7.874 0.127
Niger	$700	10.45	5.386	5.064 94%	Communaute Financiere Africaine francs (XOF) per US $ 481.35 US $ per XOF 0.0021 (2009) note: the West African CFA franc (XOF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since 1 January 1999	243.9 0.0041
Nigeria	$2,400	357.2	167.4	189.8 113.4%	nairas (NGN) per US $ 150.48, US $ per NGN 0.0066 (2009)	71.43 0.014
Niue	$5,800	0.01	0.01	0	New Zealand dollars (NZD) per US $ 1.6204, US $ per NZD 0.617 (2009)	1.6204 0.617
Northern Mariana Islands	$12,500	0.9	0.633	0.267 42.2%	the US dollar is used	0.70 1.42
Norway	$58,600	273.1	373.3	-100.2 -26.8%	Norwegian kroner (NOK) per US $ 6.3988, US $ per NOK 0.156 (2009)	6.41 0.156
Oman	$23,900	69.48	52.95	16.53 31.2%	Omani rials (OMR) per US $ 0.3845, US $ per OMR 2.6 (2009)	0.294 3.4
Pakistan	$2,600	449.3	168.5	280.8 166.6%	Pakistani rupees (PKR) per US $ 81.41, US $ per PKR 0.012 (2009)	31.25 0.032
Palau	$8,100	0.164	0.164	0	The US dollar is used	1
Palestine	$2,900	12.75	6.641	6.109 92%	new Israeli shekels (ILS) per US $ 3.93, US $ per ILS 0.254 (2009)	2.049 0.488
Panama	$11,900	40.32	25.04	15.28 61%	balboas (PAB) per US $ 1 (2009) note: the US dollar is the legal currency	1/639 0.61
Papua New Guinea	$2,400	14.02	8.296	5.724 69%	kina (PGK) per US $ 2.766, US $ per PGK 0.36 (2009)	1.64 0.61
Paraguay	$4,100	28.27	13.77	14.5 105.3%	guarani (PYG) per US $ 4,967, US $ per PYG 0.0002 (2009)	2,439 0.00041
Peru	$8,600	253	128.9	124.1 96.3%	nuevo sol (PEN) per US $ 2.88, US $ per PEN 0.347 (2009)	1.468 0.681
Philippines	$3,300	324.8	160.6	164.2 102.2%	Philippine pesos (PHP) per US $ 47.8, US $ per PHP 0.021 (2009)	23.81 0.042
Poland	$17,900	690.1	427.9	262.2 61.3%	zlotych (PLN) per US $ 3.1, US $ per PLN 0.32 (2009) note: zlotych is the plural form of zloty	1.938 0.516
Portugal	$21,800	233.4	222.4	11 4.9%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.699 1.43
Puerto Rico	$17,200	68.14	87.79	-19.65 -22.4%	the US dollar is used	0.82 1.22
Qatar	$121,700	101.4	93.63	7.77 8.3%	Qatari rials (QAR) per US $ 3.64, US $ per QAR 0.27 (2009) (2005)	3.45 0.29
Romania	$11,500	255.4	162.6	9.28 57.1%	lei (RON) per US $ 3.07, US $ per RON 0.326 (2009)	1.95 0.512
Russia	$15,100	2,116	1,232	884 71.8%	Russian rubles (RUB) per US $ 32, US $ per RUB 0.03 (2009 est.)	20 0.05
Rwanda	$900	10.13	5.07	5.06 99.8%	Rwandan francs (RWF) per US $ 568.75, US $ per RWF 0.002 (2009)	285.7 0.0035
Saint Kitts & Nevis	$15,200	0.753	0.553	0.2 36.2%	East Caribbean dollars (XCD) per US $ 2.7, US $ per XCD 0.37 (2007)	2 0.50
Saint Lucia	$10,900	1.75	1.003	0.747 74.5%	East Caribbean dollars (XCD) per US $ 2.7, US $ per XCD 0.37 (2007)	1.54 0.65
Saint Vincent	$18,100	1.55	0.632	0.918 145%	East Caribbean dollars (XCD) per US $ 2.7, US $ per XCD 0.37 (2007)	1.1025 0.907
Samoa	$5,400	1.025	0.574	0.451 78.6%	tala (SAT) per US $ 2.7594, US $ per SAT 0.36 (2006)	1.56 0.64
Samoa, American	$8,000	0.575	0.462	0.113 24.5%	US Dollar is used	0.80 1.245
San Marino	$41,900	1.662	1.048	0.614 58.6%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.46 2.16
SaoTomeePrincipe	$1,700	0.292	0.191	0.101 52.9%	dobras (STD) per US $ 16,000, US $ per STD, 0.0000625 (2009)	10,000 0.0001
Saudi Arabia	$20,400	585.8	384	201.8 52.5%	Saudi riyals (SAR) per US $ 3.75, US $ per SAR 0.266 (2009)	2.463 0.406
Senegal	$1,600	22.38	12.76	9.62 75.4%	Communaute Financiere Africaine francs (XOF) per US $ 481.35, US $ per XOF 0.0021 (2009) note: the West African CFA franc (XOF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since 1 January 1999	270.3 0.0037
Serbia	$10,400	78.36	42.88	35.48	Serbian dinars (RSD) per US $ 62.9, US $ per RSD 0.0159 (2008)	34.48 0.029
Seychelles	$19,400	1.682	0.664	1.018 153.3%	Seychelles rupees (SCR) per US $ 14.2, US $ per SCR 0.07 (2009), 8 (2008)	5.65 0.177
Sierra Leone	$900	4.622	2.088	2.534 121.4%	leones (SLL) per US $ 2,961.7, US $ per SLL 0.00034 (2006)	1,333 0.00075
Singapore	$50,300	235.7	165	70.7 42.8%	Singapore dollars (SGD) per US $ 1.4545, US $ per 0.6875 (2009)	1.018 0.982
Slovakia	$21,200	115.7	89.33	26.37 29.5%	Slovak koruny (SKK) per US $ 0.734, US $ per 1.36 SKK (2009), 21.05 (2008) note: on 1 January 2009 Slovakia adopted the euro as legal tender	0.57 1.76
Slovenia	$27,900	39.41	50.13	-10.72 -21.4%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.93 1.07
Solomon Islands	$2,600	1.57	0.676	0.894 132.2%	Solomon Islands dollars (SBD) per US $ 7.3447, US $ per SBD 0.136 (2006)	3.125 0.32
Somalia	$600	5.731	2.763	2.968 107.4%	Somali shillings (SOS) per US $ 1,438.3, US $ per SOS 0.0007 (2006) official rate; the unofficial black market rate was about 23,000 shillings per dollar in 2007	689.7% 0.00145
South Africa	$10,100	495.1	280.6	214.5 76.4%	rand (ZAR) per US $ 8.54, US $ per ZAR 0.117 (2009)	4.85 0.206
Spain	$33,700	1,368	1,466	-98 -6.7%	euros (EUR) per US $ 0.7338, US per EUR 1.363 (2009)	0.787 1.27
Sri Lanka	$4,500	96.43	41.81	54.62 130.6%	Sri Lankan rupees (LKR) per US $ 115, US $ per LKR 0.0087 (2009)	50 0.02
Sudan	$2,300	92.81	54.94	37.87 68.9%	Sudanese pounds (SDG) per US $ 2.34, US $ per SDG 0.427 (2009) , 2.1 (2008) note: in January 2007 Sudan redenominated its currency by transforming 100 units of Sudanese dinar into one unit of Sudanese pound	1.388 0.72
Suriname	$9,000	4.274	3.184	1.09 34.2%	Surinamese dollars (SRD) per US $ 2.745, US $ per SRD 0.364 (2007) note: in January 2004, the government replaced the guilder with the Surinamese dollar, tied to a US dollar-dominated currency basket	2.045 0.489
Swaziland	$4,400	5.882	2.963	2.919 98.5%	emalangeni per US $ 10.5, US $ per emalangeni 0.095 (2009)	5.291 0.189
Sweden	$36,800	333.5	402.4	-68.9 -17.1%	Swedish kronor (SEK) per US $ 7.821, US $ per SEK 0.128 (2009)	9.434 0.106
Switzerland	$41,700	317	489.8	-172.8 -35.3%	Swiss francs (CHF) per US $ 1.1081, US $ per CHF 0.9024 (2009)	1.71 0.584
Syria	$4,600	100.7	54.99	45.71 83.1%	Syrian pounds (SYP) per US $ 46.8599, US $ per SYP 0.021 (2009)	25.97 0.0385
Taiwan	$29,800	717.7	361.5	356.2 98.5%	New Taiwan dollars (TWD) per US $ 33.056, US $ per TWD 0.03 (2009)	16.66 0.06
Tajikstan	$1,800	13.8	4.741	9.059 191.1%	Tajikistani somoni (TJS) per US $ 4.3813, US $ per TJS 0.228 (2009)	1.515 0.66
Tanzania	$1,400	57.89	22.42	35.47 158.2%	Tanzanian shillings (TZS) per US $ 1,317.5, US $ per TZS 0.00076 (2009)	500 0.002
Thailand	$8,100	538.6	269.6	26.9 99.8%	baht per US $ 34.318, US $ per baht 0.029 (2009)	17.24 0.058
Timor-Leste	$2,400	2.74	0.606	2.134 352%	the US dollar is used	0.22 4.52
Togo	$900	5.202	2.804	2.398 85.5%	Communaute Financiere Africaine francs (XOF) per US $ 483.21, US $ per XOF 0.0021 (2009) note: the West African CFA franc (XOF) has been pegged to the euro at a rate of 655.957 CFA francs per euro since 1 January 1999	256.4 0.0039
Tonga	$4,600	0.552	0.262	0.29 111%	pa'anga (TOP) per US $ 2.0277, US $ per TOP 0.493 (2006)	0.96 1.04
Trinidad & Tobago	$23,100	28.41	23.27	6.14 26.4%	Trinidad and Tobago dollars (TTD) per US $ 6.2993, US $ per TTD 0.159 (2009)	5 0.2
Tunisia	$8,000	83.21	40.04	43.17 107.8%	Tunisian dinars (TND) per US $ 1.3494, US $ per TND 0.741 (2009)	0.65 1.54
Turkey	$11,200	863.3	608	255.3 42%	Turkish liras (TRY) per US 1.5548, US $ per TRY 0.643 (2009) note: on 1 January 2005, the old Turkish lira (TRL) was converted to new Turkish lira (TRY) at a rate of 1,000,000 old to 1 new Turkish lira; on 1 January 2009, the Turkish government dropped the word "new" and the currency is now called simply the Turkish lira	1.55 0.643
Turkmenistan	$6,900	33.58	16.24	17.34 106.8%	Turkmen manat (TMM) per US $ 2.85, US $ per TMM 0.35 (2009)	1.388 0.72
Turks & Caicos	$11,500	0.216	0.216	0	the US dollar is used	1
Tuvalu	$1,600	0.015	0.015	0	Tuvaluan dollars or Australian dollars (AUD) per US $ 1.2894, US $ per AUD 0.7755 (2009)	1.2894 0.7755
Uganda	$1,300	43.22	15.84	27.38 172.9%	Ugandan shillings (UGX) per US $ 2,073.3, US $ per UGX 0.00048 (2009) , 1,658.1 (2008),	769.23 0.0013
Ukraine	$6,400	294.3	117.1	177.2 151.3%	hryvnia (UAH) per US $ 7.7856, US $ per UAH 0.128 (2009) , 4.9523 (2008)	3.125 0.32
United Arab Emirates	$42,000	201.4	231.3	-30.7 -13.3%	Emirati dirhams (AED) per US $ 3.673, US $ per AED 0.272 (2009), note: officially pegged to the US dollar since February 2002	4.24 0.236
United Kingdom	$35,200	2,149	2,224	-75 -3.4%	British pounds (GBP) per US $ 0.6494, US $ per GBP 1.54 (2009)	0.672 1.488
United States	$46,400	14,260	14,430	-170 -1.18%	British pounds per US dollar: 0.6494, US $ per GBP 1.54 (2009) , 0.5302 (2008) Canadian dollars per US dollar: 1.1548, US $ per Canadian dollar 0.866 (2009) Chinese yuan per US dollar: 6.8249, US $ per Chinese yuan 0.147 (2009) 8.1943 (2005) euros per US dollar: 0.7338, US $ per Euro 1.363 (2009), 0.6827 (2008) Japanese yen per US dollar: 94.5, US $ per yen 0.0106 (2009) 110.22 (2005)
Uruguay	$12,700	44.52	31.98	12.54 39.2%	Uruguayan pesos (UYU) per US $ 23.017, US $ per UYU 0.043 (2009)	16.66 0.06
Uzbekistan	$2,800	77.55	30.68	46.87 152.8%	Uzbekistani soum (UZS) per US $ 1,469, US $ per UZS 0.00068 (2009)	5.88 0.0017
Vanuatu	$4,800	1.041	0.561	0.48 85.6%	vatu (VUV) per US $ 111.93, US $ per VUV 0.0089 (2006)	60.60 0.0165
Venezuela	$13,100	350.1	357.6	-7.5 -2.1%	bolivars (VEB) per US $ 2.145, US $ per VEB 0.466 (2009) 2,147 (2007) note: on 1 January 2008 Venezuela revalued its currency with 1000 old bolivares equal to 1 new bolivar; in January 2010 Venequela introduced a dual exchange rate system for the fixed rate bolivar, with 2.6 VEB per US dollar on essentials, and 4.3 VEB per US dollar on all other products	2.193 0.456
Vietnam	$2,900	258.1	92.84	165.26 178.6%	dong (VND) per US $ 17,740.8, US $ per VND 0.0000563 (2009)	6,250 0.00016
Yemen	$2,500	58.19	26.54	31.65 119.3%	Yemeni rials (YER) per US $ 203.05, US $ per YER 0.0049 (2009)	93.46 0.0107
Zambia	$1,500	18.5	12.44	6.06 48.7%	Zambian kwacha (ZMK) per US $ 5,237.4, US $ per ZMK 0.000191 (2009)	3,571.43 0.00028
Zimbabwe	$100	0.332			Zimbabwean dollars (ZWD) per US 234.25, US $ per ZWD 0.0043 (2009), 30,000 (2007), 162.07 (2006), 77.965 (2005) note: these are official exchange rates; non-official rates vary significantly	Needs purchasing power

Work Cited

1. Central Intelligence Agency. World Factbook. July 2009 https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/

2. Hospitals & Asylums. American Political Economy HA-20-3-10 www.title24uscode.org/americaneconomichistory.htm

3. Hospitals & Asylums. Devaluating United Nations Currency Enforcement CAP = US$ -7%, € -5.5%: Price of Bailouts under Rule of Law HA-13-11-08 www.title24uscode.org/currency.htm

4. Hospitals & Asylums. Disseminating the World Financial and Economic Crisis and Its Impact on Development HA-14-8-09 www.title24uscode.org/crisis.htm

5. Hospitals & Asylums. Federal Budget in Balance FY 2011: Comparison of Bush and Obama HA-28-2-10 www.title24uscode.org/budget2010.htm

6. Human Development Report. International cooperation at a crossroads: Aid, trade and security in an unequal world. 2005

http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2005/chapters/

7. Human Development Report. Beyond scarcity: Power, poverty and the global water crisis. UN Development Program. 2006 http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2006/chapters/

8. Human Development Report. Deepening democracy in a fragmented world. 2002 http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2002/chapters/

9. Human Development Report. Fighting climate change: Human solidarity in a divided world. 2007/2008 http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2007-2008/chapters/

10. Human Development Report. Human Rights and Human Development. UN Development Program. New York. 2000 http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2000/chapters/

index.htm

12. IMF Staff Papers. Baracas, Adolfo; Erickson, Lennart; Steiner, Roberto. Fear of Declaring: Do Markets Care What Countries Say About their Exchange Rates. Vol. 55 No. 3. 2008. Pp 445-480 http://www.imf.org/External/Pubs/FT/staffp/2008/03/pdf/barajas.pdf

13. IMF Staff Papers. Fischer, Stanley. Mundell-Fleming Lecture Series: Exchange Rate Systems, Surveillance and Advice. Vol. 55 No. 3. July 1, 2008. Pp 367-383 http://www.imf.org/External/Pubs/FT/staffp/2008/03/pdf/fischer.pdf

14. Outcome of United Nations Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and its Impact on Development. New York 24-26 June 2009 http://tendays.socialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/dod220609.pdf

15. UNICEF. State of the World’s Children: 20 Years on the Convention of the Rights of the Child Statistical Tables: Basic Indicators & Women. November 2009. http://www.unicef.org/publications/files/SOWC_Spec_Ed_CRC_Statistical_Tables_EN_111809.pdf

16. United Nations. The Millennium Development Goals Report 2009 http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/Resources/Static/Data/2009%20Stat%20Annex.pdf

17. World Prison Brief. King’s College, London. 18 March 2010 http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/law/research/icps/worldbrief/

18. WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. Uruguay Round http://www.wto.int/english/docs_e/legal_e/24-scm_01_e.htm

Sources: UNICEF. State of the World’s Children: 20 Years on the Convention of the Rights of the Child Statistical Tables: Basic Indicators & Women. November 2009

1. Central Intelligence Agency. World Factbook. July 2009 https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/

6. Human Development Report. International cooperation at a crossroads: Aid, trade and security in an unequal world. 2005

9. Human Development Report. Fighting climate change: Human solidarity in a divided world. 2007/2008 http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2007-2008/chapters/