Talk:Economy of Ghana

Latest comment: 1 month ago by 2001:1C00:C26:B800:AD49:7A93:5367:C57C in topic Economic transparency

Untitled

edit

Please note that the link associated with "VALCO" is incorrect. Valco in this context should refer to the Volta Aluminium Company, a joint venture between the Ghanaian government and Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Company, formed to construct and operate the aluminum smelter in Tema. I lived in Accra and Tema between 1966 and 1968 while my father, Arthur M. Warren was the Senior Project Engineer for KACC. Davidw3012 (talk) 16:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ghana's GDP

edit

The CIA World Factbook 2008 puts Ghana's GDP at roughly half what it was in 2006 - e.g Ghana's 2007 per capita (est.) is '1,400$', down from '2,800$' in 2006.

What happened, and why is there no information about this, anywhere? Something "ENORMOUS" has happened, and yet nothing is written. Is a loss in GDP of this magnitude not indicative of a catastrophe? Ghana's GDP is lower today than it was in the 1990s; and all this within the span of a year. Yet not a word (not a single word, anywhere) from anybody dealing with Ghanaian economics or affairs.

... Either the CIA world factbook is completely and utterly 'wrong', or something devestating has happened to Ghana. Does anybody have information?

--70.68.179.142 (talk) 22:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

More on GDP per capita

edit

Ok, so what is going on here? The GDP per capita figures are way off and the sources don't support them. I don't want to start editing just yet because big pages such as this is usually taken care of by active wikipedians, but this is pretty bad.

31.192.203.47 (talk) 17:45, 22 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Sources

edit

just noticing there are no citations in this article whatsoever --voodoom (talk) 06:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

There is no source for the Gini Coefficient. I am pretty sure it is not correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.211.64.254 (talk) 15:16, 28 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Potential bias?

edit

I have not spent much time checking the article's history of edits, but a quick read of the introductory section as well as other sections makes it clear that the article attempts to portray Ghana's economy in a particularly positive light. It may well be that Ghana's economy is doing very well, but it is not the article's duty to emphasise that. Not that what is said is not correct; but stating that Ghana has "a diverse and rich resource base" in the first line is certainly contentious, giving the historical importance of natural resources for Ghana's economy, which have been worrying economists and political observers alike (cf. Gyimah-Boadi & Prempeh (2012) - Oil, Politics, and Ghana's Democracy). Other comments, about Ghana's National Agricultural Export programme creating jobs for Ghanaians, are fairly random, and unsubstantiated by evidence. I don't have enough expertise on the matter to edit this article right away, but somebody should look into it in any case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.157.48.37 (talk) 00:38, 25 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Economy of Ghana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:10, 19 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Economy of Ghana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:19, 16 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Economy of Ghana

edit

This article requires a lot of attention because of its Top importance rating. There is too many outdated information that requires a quick remedy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JustSwanzy (talkcontribs) 17:43, 1 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Economic transparency

edit

Hi everyone,

The economic transparency section starts out with a paragraph that directly cites the Heritage Foundation's "Economic Freedom Index" as a source. This is a partisan source with a stated political interest. Would it not be better to qualify the given remarks by mentioning who they come from? 2001:1C00:C26:B800:AD49:7A93:5367:C57C (talk) 22:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC)Reply