Is it based on country size (population) or wealth (GDP)?
203844
In the General Assembly, each country is entitled to one vote on any issue.\n\nIn the Security Council, things are about different.  Only 15 countries sit on the Council, and 5 of them are permanent.  The five permanent members (China, Britain, France, the United States, and Russia) still all have one vote, as do the 10 others.  The permanent members, however, all have the power to veto any legislation.  So if just one of the permanent members disagrees with the resolution, it will fail.
279416
talent hunt, manpower and wider access to global technology and wealth...but you must have to have a proper planning. make sure, others would be mounting pressure on you not to increase your population. there are many other challenges.
246697
A sum of average wages in every country multiplied by number of employed in every of them... If to count only legally working persons.\n\nADDITION taking into account other answers: currency matter little - almost all products move all over the world now. Another thing that some people evaluate the same services more or less. Mostly because of lower investment into their self-esteem and education... That makes one countries even more poor than they could be.
26308
The amount of money is constantly fluctuating.\n\nEach country regulates its own currency.  If you print too much, the value of your currency will decrease.  The value of the money is based on the country's productivity.  The USA has the biggest GNP at $11.75 trillion.  A country's currency will go up or down in value based on the actions in that country.  If it prints more money, its value will drop in comparison to other countries that are not printing out more money.
283978
The government affects GDP by collecting taxes and making purchases (goverment consumption).  Y = C (consumption) + I (investment) + G (Government = T (taxes)- P (purchases)) + (X-M) (Exports - Imports or Current Account)  \nSince Government purchases typically exceed taxes it is acceptable to also write Y = C + I + (X-M) - G
590662
These are the US Census statistics for 2003 regarding average family households.\n\nhttp://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/002484.html\n\nA household with combined income of 100k per year would not necessarily be considered wealthy on net income alone but depending on asset management and ownership they could be.\nWhile many, if not most Americans, would consider themselves as 'wealthy' with a combined net income of 100k per year this is not realistic in itself without also owning a very stable and substantial financial portfolio as 100k per year in combined income alone would not generate long term future benefits unless managed and invested wisely.
113956
OK. here are the factors I'd use, and, depending on your predilections, you can weigh them differently.\nHistory\nArt\nMusic\nPubs - nightspots\nTheater\nArchitecture\nNeighborhoods\nTransportation\nSafety\nPeople who, like, say "like" all the time \nA city whose highest cultural attainment is a map of where "the stars live."
398177
If it were me, I would look at countries with a high population that do not have adequate transportation.  More countries are expanding and you're going to have needs there as more and more people join the workforce.  What you need to do, is research to identify what countries, what their needs are and how your company can supply those needs, in a profitable manner.
5791
It's not a complete answer, but see Table 694 in the Stat Abs US, 2004.
384626
gross domestic product   \n\nhere it is measured in US$\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)
61828
I would recommend the excellent book The World's Banker : A Story of Failed States, Financial Crises, and the Wealth and Poverty of Nations.  Or Guns, Germs and Steel, by Jared Diamond.  Or perhaps "The open veins of Latin America", by Eduard Galeano.\n\nThe arguments are very complex and the analysis of history and culture very interesting, but I will boil it down and make it very simple.\n\nSuccessfull cultures in today's world are almost entirely based on the values of a particular culture (yes there are other factors, but bear with me).  Countries that approach economics from an exploitationist perspective (see Spain in the 16th century in the new world) or many countries today where a few people control the mineral and resource wealth of a country fail repeatedly until eventually the values of the people change.  \n\nCountries that have promoted mercantilism, trade and commerce generally prosper, because in order to create a climate in which commerce can flourish, soceity has to value the traits that are conducive to commerce (transparency, rule of law, meritocracy, etc).  A smart businessman hires the best people he can to do the job, not necessarily his family members (as is the norm in some countries).  \n\nSo, how is it that countries that have relatively few natural resources are rich and powerful (Great Britain, Japan for instance)?  They are mercantilists to one extent or another.  Look at the Netherlands. Almost no natural resources, and only 14 million people.  However, they own many major businesses that operate in the US and have influence out of proportion to their size.  Why?  they figured it out early and got with the program.
295621
Depends on what nation.
561026
Nominal GDP  is based on the current(nominal)  price level. It tells us about the current year GDP on current year price level. \n\nReal GDP is based on the base year price level. It tells us about the GDP on real basis. This is free of the variations in price level.
370620
If you have a budget you could get Taylor Nelson Sofres or ACNielsen to help. Both of them have research panels over multiple countries using the same definitions in each country - therefore you will be able to compare.\n\nYou might also try EuroStat:\n\nhttp://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page?_pageid=0,1136184,0_45572592&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
89710
it depends on migration or...\nimigration rates.
145115
No, it should not. I think it should be conditional for EDUCATION. It has been proven, especially in the usa, that people who are more educated have fewer children.
191848
I believe that globalization affects all, so in that regard I disagree with you. However, i believe that it is the rich people (haves) that are benefiting form the trend of globalization therefore marginalizing the poor (have nots). The reason for this belief lies in the fact the system of globalization is based on the fact the world is at different stages of development, what this means is that the disparity between the rich nations and the poor nations is so large that it is worth a Multi-National Corporations(MNCs) while to invest and "exploit" the population of a lesser developed national because they simply charge less for their labour. The rich people continue to have and get more while the poor people continue to rely on the rich (west) for handouts.