India likely to be world`s no. 1 economy by 2050: Citi

[CardSharp]

Well I appreciate your modesty. But what you said is not entirely true. India has been the most wealthiest for the most part of last 2000 years not China. China had overtaken India marginally once or twice for few centuries. Here is the list.

http://www.theworldeconomy.org/MaddisonTables/MaddisontableB-18.pdf

Well if you wanna go back to true historical norm, then India should top the list ain't it?

How did they determine what India was? By it's present British defined border?

 

[applesauce]

Well I appreciate your modesty. But what you said is not entirely true. India has been the most wealthiest for the most part of last 2000 years not China. China had overtaken India marginally once or twice for few centuries. Here is the list.

http://www.theworldeconomy.org/MaddisonTables/MaddisontableB-18.pdf

Well if you wanna go back to true historical norm, then India should top the list ain't it?

ummm no, you know why? for most of that time India was not unified, it was a collection of independent states rather than one nation.

 

[ares]

How did they determine what India was? By it's present British defined border?

Was China not China before Mao came along ?

 

[StingRoy]

ummm no, you know why? for most of that time India was not unified, it was a collection of independent states rather than one nation.

That does not discount the fact that the cumulative GDP of these separate economies (independent states) would have been the aggregate GDP of India, had India been united back in the historical times.

 

[true_indian]

How did they determine what India was? By it's present British defined border?

They were calculated based on wealth of geographical landmass that is India now. Much like they calculated for China.

 

[tanlixiang28776]

Was China not China before Mao came along ?

China has been a single country since the Qin dynasty

 

[true_indian]

ummm no, you know why? for most of that time India was not unified, it was a collection of independent states rather than one nation.

SO how does that matter? They may be individual states back then but they are all part of India now aren't they? We are still the same people aren't we? If each of those individual states gets back to their historical norm that should be enough for India to be richest again, isn't it?

 

[ares]

China has been a single country since the Qin dynasty

Do you mean Qin or Qing?

 

[tanlixiang28776]

Do you mean Qin or Qing?

Qin not Qing

 

[ares]

Qin not Qing

So do you not consider Tibet part of China?

The area colored in olive drab shows the Tibetan Empire as it was in 820

 

[CardSharp]

So do you not consider Tibet part of China?

Wasn't now it is.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

So do you not consider Tibet part of China?

The area colored in olive drab shows the Tibetan Empire as it was in 820

China started to control over Tibet since 13th century.

 

[CardSharp]

They were calculated based on wealth of geographical landmass that is India now. Much like they calculated for China.

So essentially meaningless numbers and how did they calculated a US dollar denominated international trade figure from the time of Christ to today?

 

[true_indian]

So essentially meaningless numbers and how did they calculated a US dollar denominated international trade figure from the time of Christ to today?

Same goes with your fellow countrymen predicting China was the richest country for most part of 2000 years. Was I the person who brought that up yet claiming to be modest?

 

[tanlixiang28776]

Same goes with your fellow countrymen predicting China was the richest country for most part of 2000 years. Was I the person who brought that up yet claiming to be modest?

It was easy to know because despite China's backwardness and decline its GDP still accounted for a third of the world all the way up to 1840. This is well documented.