Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A general summary seems to be that China and India were major economic super powers from Year 0 to Year 1000. From 1000 on, Western Europe goes on rise taking share way from India and China till Europe become biggest in 1870.
United States up from 1820, till in 1950 reaches the same % of World Economy as Western Europe. Both the US and Europe looks go on slow downward trend form there. While, India and China both bottom out at low 5% by 1970s. Then followed up a return to growth take % of World Economy from USA and Europe.
This seems like pretty accurate chart. Though most interesting part I found is how rich India and China were back 1000 years ago when Europe or USA could hardly compare to them in global GDP share.
I don't know how accurate it is but I will say that it is telling how the relationship between the rise rise of western economies so mirrors the decline of national economies that, shall we politely say, came under their influence. It is also interesting to not how those same economies begin to rise in the post colonial era following the end of WW2.
I don't know how accurate it is but I will say that it is telling how the relationship between the rise rise of western economies so mirrors the decline of national economies that, shall we politely say, came under their influence. It is also interesting to not how those same economies begin to rise in the post colonial era following the end of WW2.
AFAIK that chart is pretty accurate. There was a better presented Economist chart showing the same but I am not able to locate it.
India constituted 25-35% of world GDP since BCE up to 1500, during which time China constituted ~ 20-25% and their positions inverted for the next couple of hundred years. After that period, both started a dramatic slide that not surprisingly perfectly correlates with British colonization of India and European intrusions into China. It took the exit of Westerners and their influence before the slide stopped and growth began. China appears poised to overtake the West and India is following close behind. As many are predicting, the last couple of hundred years were likely an aberration and the world seems poised to revert to the usual pattern of China / India dominating world economy.
AFAIK that chart is pretty accurate. There was a better presented Economist chart showing the same but I am not able to locate it.
India constituted 25-35% of world GDP since BCE up to 1500, during which time China constituted ~ 20-25% and their positions inverted for the next couple of hundred years. After that period, both started a dramatic slide that not surprisingly perfectly correlates with British colonization of India and European intrusions into China. It took the exit of Westerners and their influence before the slide stopped and growth began. China appears poised to overtake the West and India is following close behind. As many are predicting, the last couple of hundred years were likely an aberration and the world seems poised to revert to the usual pattern of China / India dominating world economy.
The British did not want to colonize India. The place was a disjointed shambles. India and China thrive on a using western system. The system in India was 100% setup by the British.
A general summary seems to be that China and India were major economic super powers from Year 0 to Year 1000. From 1000 on, Western Europe goes on rise taking share way from India and China till Europe become biggest in 1870.
United States up from 1820, till in 1950 reaches the same % of World Economy as Western Europe. Both the US and Europe looks go on slow downward trend form there. While, India and China both bottom out at low 5% by 1970s. Then followed up a return to growth take % of World Economy from USA and Europe.
This seems like pretty accurate chart. Though most interesting part I found is how rich India and China were back 1000 years ago when Europe or USA could hardly compare to them in global GDP share.
What the chart fails to convey is that in the first millennium AD every one was agrarian and the relative GDP was based on population since India and China had populations of 100-200 million people whereas other nations had populations of tens of millions of people. Populations in India and China grew so large in population since they depended on rice cultivation and learned how to farm this crop very intensively.They had the food to feed a giant (by first millennium standards) population .
These agrarian nations were not superpowers in the sense that they could project power beyond their frontiers or even sustain colonization beyond adjacent areas, Although China had the ability to sail into the Pacific and had guns and early cannons in the 14th Century thus assuring military might . China could not conquer Japan, SE Asia, Australia or sail the Pacific and make the Western lands of the Americas part of a Chinese World. The same can be said of India in the Indian Ocean. Although China and India were neighbors and only separated by a range of mountains. This was sufficient to keep both separated even though they certainly were aware of each others existence.
When the West arose it was not based on agriculture but trade, colonization and then industrial might (especially The British and then the Americans ). The West could project power all around the globe and had no problem taking power from both China and India. Who still out numbered them in some cases by more than an order of magnitude. The World is going back to a level playing field since all major players will have industrial might and the same technology so the superior numbers of Indians and Chinese will now be a factor again. For example both China and India will have 5 times the population of the USA and 3 times that of Europe.
Portugal than Spain than Netherlands later Britain dominated global trade at one point. Spain for example set up a global currency which was traded all over the world. Dutch changed the banking system systematic they later introduced to Britain after the Dutch invasion in 1704. The Dutch were great traders and left lasting legacy on trade, a good example of this is the creation of the settlement new Amsterdam aka NYC. Britain created shares of stocks. British Empire dominated trade after the French Indian war. After the defeat of napoleon British took Hong Kong, India, scrambled for Africa, controlled suez canal and conquered South Africa. Former British 13 colonies are an extension of British capitalism. China and India not have a global currency and often had closed door policies compared to open Door West. West dominated trade and banking for the past 500 years. In order for Asia to beat Europe, Asian a must adopt a European model of banking, finance and trade. China and India are on a collision course with themselves and with the west.
Portugal than Spain than Netherlands later Britain dominated global trade at one point. Spain for example set up a global currency which was traded all over the world. Dutch changed the banking system systematic they later introduced to Britain after the Dutch invasion in 1704.
What invasion?
Quote:
In order for Asia to beat Europe, Asian a must adopt a European model of banking, finance and trade.
They must also not make the same mistakes of the west in and ownership. If they do not they will dominate for sure.
They must also not make the same mistakes of the west in and ownership. If they do not they will dominate for sure.
For a time in the late 17th century, Great Britain and the Netherlands had the same ruler, William of Orange and his wife Queen Mary. He became King William III when Parliament took the crown of England away from James II and sent him into exile. It was offered to and accepted by William of orange. The House of Orange is one of the if not the longest surviving royal line in Europe. The new Dutch King Frederick-Wilhelm is the latest in the line of House of Orange to sit on this throne.
A general summary seems to be that China and India were major economic super powers from Year 0 to Year 1000. From 1000 on, Western Europe goes on rise taking share way from India and China till Europe become biggest in 1870.
United States up from 1820, till in 1950 reaches the same % of World Economy as Western Europe. Both the US and Europe looks go on slow downward trend form there. While, India and China both bottom out at low 5% by 1970s. Then followed up a return to growth take % of World Economy from USA and Europe.
This seems like pretty accurate chart. Though most interesting part I found is how rich India and China were back 1000 years ago when Europe or USA could hardly compare to them in global GDP share.
It's a pretty tremendous failing for a chart purporting to represent the major economies of the world from 0 - 2005 completely omits the entirety of Africa, the Middle East, Russia, Eastern Europe, and the Americas until the American revolution. How do they account, for example, for the Roman Empire (which was headquartered in western Europe at first, but spanned the Middle East and North Africa, as well--it was later headquartered in present day Istanbul)?
The United States could not compare to India and China 1000 years ago because the United States did not exist then.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
