Economic Growth of 6.5% is better than 2% . Period.
But let be clear here for educational purposes and we do not confuse people.
Per capita income and Economic Growth are 2 different things.
Definition of 'Economic Growth'
An increase in the capacity of an economy to produce goods and services, compared from one period of time to another. Economic growth can be measured in nominal terms, which include inflation, or in real terms, which are adjusted for inflation. For comparing one country's economic growth to another, GDP or GNP per capita should be used as these take into account population differences between countries.
2) Per capita income is usually the GNI or sometime GDP divided by the population. S
"per-capita income is the overall income of a population divided by the number of people included in the population, it does not always give an accurate representation of the quality of life due to the function's inability to account for skewed data. For instance, if there is an area where 50 people are making $1 million per year and 1,000 people making $100 per year the per capita income is $47,714, but that does not give a true picture of the living conditions of the entire population. "
One thing to agree is higher economic growth rate does not necessarily translate to immediate improvement of take home average salary or standard of living . Size of population and how fast GDP is growing relative to it , is what we need to look at. In that sense comparing 7% economic growth in Sri Lanka with 2-3% in UK is not suitable.
However with time ,Economic growth can improve standard of living with better education, healthcare, transportation, savings , policies etc.
Well 6.5% even is better than developed economies right?
This is a misconception. Level of growth is related level of per capita income.
At per capita income of 40,000 level : 2% -3% is equal to
Per capita income of 1,000 level growth of 7%-8%