What's new

The Economic History of the Last 2,000 Years in 1 Little Graph

For those wondering why Pakistan isn't mentioned in the graph :- :-)


we may say "India sub-continent" map also. with India-China graph of last 2000 years....

before start of British Empire in South Asia by nearly mid 19th century, since Sikh Empire map in this thread, the Wealth distribution of Hindu - Muslims was measured over 90+% on Hindu's sides and remaining to other religions of South Asia...

the graph of post#1 show Hindu's wealth of over 90+% of Hindus in South Asia by mid 19th century.
It would only be said Indian or Indian subcontinent in the map, they won't even be said South Asia as the issue has to be addressed :-)
 
Last edited:
.

More 2,000 years in a single graphic​

Did JP Morgan's striking chart on 2,000 years of economic history bungle the x-axis? Why yes, it did.

AAAGGGGHHHH! How could Michael Cembalest of JP Morgan do it? Did he really produce a stunning chart of global economic history—but compress the time-series on the x-axis in horrid, improper ways?

Why yes, he really did.

Wipe away the tears from your eyes if you're an economist, or the frothy-mouthed rage from your face if you're an infographic designer. As the chart below shows, the first increment of time is 1,000 years. The next, same-sized increment is compressed into 500 years. This is followed by increments of some 100 years, 80, 30, 20, even one of 13 years and 27 years. It ends with a few decades and an eight-year increment.

2econhist-jpmorgan-june12[1].jpg


If hauled before the infographics court of law, Mr Cembalest would surely be sentenced to many years of studying Edward Tufte's works on the dos and don'ts of visualising quantitative information. There are few strict rules of infographics. But Mr Cembalest somehow smashed into one of the biggest and most obvious of them.
How does Mr Cembalest plea? In a quick email exchange, he writes:
"The 'Eye on the Market' [research report]…contains charts that are both empirical and stylistic in nature. Some are meant to cover specific economic, financial and market relationships, and others are meant to provide broad context for geopolitical discussions our clients are interested in. … They will have to stand on their own merits."
Graphic detail sentences him guilty as charged. We are dismayed on two counts.

First, the information contained in the chart is extraordinary and deserves to be presented in its full flavour. As the compressed time series from his report on June 18th highlights, at the start of the common era, Asia represented around three-fourths of global output (measured in gross domestic product). Its dominance lasted until as recently as 1860, when the industrial revolution in the Europe and America pumped up those economies. At their zenith around 1950, they accounted for four-fifths of output and have since been on relative decline. :-)

In other words, the current hand-wringing over the ascent of Asia needs to be seen in historical context: as the restoration of Asian economic supremacy after a small blip. As Derek Thompson at The Atlantic rightly simplifies it in a blog post, "everything to the left of 1800 is an approximation of population distribution around the world and everything to the right of 1800 is a demonstration of productivity divergences around the world."

Second, we lament our ruling because we are huge fans of Mr Cembalest's work, especially his delightful chart last year to explain the Eurozone crisis by way of Lego figurines (available here, from Wired).

As for giving credit where it is due, the figures underlying the chart come from the late Angus Maddison, who pioneered the retrospective quantification of economic measurement (as described in our tribute to him). Many people are familiar with the data as the basis of the famous TEDTalk by Hans Rosling of the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, who presented the information as an animated infographic using Gapminder software.

The Economist has developed its own infographics of 2,000 years of economic history with Mr Maddison's data. One in 2010, nicknamed "GDP since Jesus" charts just that (below, with commentary here). We encountered the same layout difficulties as Mr Cembalest, so chose a bar chart to distinguish specific years, and fiddled with the spacing of increments on the x-axis to designate missing chunks of time. The result is imperfect, but we did as much as possible to disclose, not camouflage, the imperfections. (In retrospect, we should have done more on the right-hand side of the chart, such as perhaps making the bar widths proportionately thinner….)

22-201034nac119[1].jpg
:-)

A second chart from last year (below, and with a commentary here) is both simple and startling. Among the points it presents is that in the first decade of the 21st century, the population of the world produced more economic output than in the first 19 centuries of the common era combined.

 

Attachments

  • 22-201034nac119[1].jpg
    22-201034nac119[1].jpg
    29.4 KB · Views: 38
.

The Economic History of the Last 2,000 Years in 1 Little Graph​

That headline is a big promise. But here it is: The economic history of the world going back to Year 1 showing the major powers' share of world GDP, from a research letter written by Michael Cembalest, chairman of market and investment strategy at JP Morgan.

https://cdn.theatlantic.com/media/mt/business/Screen Shot 2012-06-20 at 9.37.55 AM.png
View attachment 962056

In Year 1, India and China were home to one-third and one-quarter of the world's population, respectively. It's hardly surprising, then, that they also commanded one-third and one-quarter of the world's economy, respectively.

Before the Industrial Revolution, there wasn't really any such thing as lasting income growth from productivity. In the thousands of years before the Industrial Revolution, civilization was stuck in the Malthusian Trap. If lots of people died, incomes tended to go up, as fewer workers benefited from a stable supply of crops. If lots of people were born, however, incomes would fall, which often led to more deaths. That explains the "trap," and it also explains why populations so closely approximated GDP around the world.


You ignore North America's population was 3 million in 1600. It is 330 million now. It is not going back to the 0% in 1700 ever again
 
. . .
Give it another 50 years, the trend will revert back to year one.

i was discussing, what you think, since when South Asia had cheaper labors than USA? the graph as below shows that at least till 1870, South Asia might be having expansive labor than US, i think :coffee:
India looks dominant since Ashoka time till upto 1000. while upto 1820, US looks like lower grade country than others. since 1870, i guess they have expansive labors

.
=>
22-201034nac119[1].jpg


 
Last edited:
.
i was discussing, what you think, since when South Asia had cheaper labors than USA? the graph as below shows that at least till 1870, South Asia might be having expansive labor than US, i think :coffee:
India looks dominant since Ashoka time till upto 1000. while upto 1820, US looks like lower grade country than others. since 1870, i guess they have expansive labors

.
=> View attachment 964841

If we look at the value of rupee in 1947 to dollar, we were equal. It was how resources were exploited by Britain for 250 years for its own benifit, we saw how india became from 25℅ of world exporter to some 1℅ in 1947. After some 75 years we doubled to 2℅ of world trade. I don't have data on wages in 1700s to compare if India was rich in comparison to the West.
 
.
If we look at the value of rupee in 1947 to dollar, we were equal. It was how resources were exploited by Britain for 250 years for its own benifit, we saw how india became from 25℅ of world exporter to some 1℅ in 1947. After some 75 years we doubled to 2℅ of world trade. I don't have data on wages in 1700s to compare if India was rich in comparison to the West.

if we have a close look on the graph, Indian subcontinent was nearly levelling the USA till 1870, and maintained some dignity till 1913 also.
1940s to 70s looks little bad, but it has recovered to some extent upto now:

if we see how USA might be thinking about India in 1820, for example, its something 1000s history can't be changed. they were virtually very cheap labors till 1820, as in graph :-)
=>
22-201034nac119[1].jpg

 
.
here is a class on how Indian economy fell during British presence in India.
Indian economy fell from 17% of World GDP to 2% during British presence in India :-)
If we look at the value of rupee in 1947 to dollar, we were equal. It was how resources were exploited by Britain for 250 years for its own benifit, we saw how india became from 25℅ of world exporter to some 1℅ in 1947. After some 75 years we doubled to 2℅ of world trade. I don't have data on wages in 1700s to compare if India was rich in comparison to the West.

here is a class on how Indian economy fell during British presence in India.
Indian economy fell from 17% of World GDP to 2% during British presence in India

 
.
If we look at the value of rupee in 1947 to dollar, we were equal. It was how resources were exploited by Britain for 250 years for its own benifit, we saw how india became from 25℅ of world exporter to some 1℅ in 1947. After some 75 years we doubled to 2℅ of world trade. I don't have data on wages in 1700s to compare if India was rich in comparison to the West.

i was discussing in another thread, about comparison between India-Indonesia and China. economy of India-Indonesia is not driven by export of low-tech goods like CHina. for example, what CHina export to India which India can't manufacture??? there might be few things but mostly the export would mean for it, which China doesn't export. upto 2002-04, CHinese products were said to be cheap products, in price and quality both....
ASEAN can also manufacture almost all, what China-Vietnam manufacture. but reduce currency, Yuan, and export, .... and what if OECD economy fallen, CHinese economy driven by export of low Tech product faced this trend. post#37 of the thread as below:

Export would mean for it. India-Indonesia-Pakistan never let itself fall on the race of reduce currency and drive export like China....
China-India-Russia are as Industrialised and US. and here i find EU's nations mostly compared to ASEAN type countries. a wide range of Industries which China has, is seen in India-Russia and US also.
for example, there was Thunder aircraft in UK but now they only have Eurofighter among them all which is nothing. as a one nation, Russia has all what an Industrialised nation would be said to be......
here I find Pakistan's economy healthy, which is not driven by export. never let your economy dependent on export of low tech products like Vietnam. Pakistan will finally catch up with India-ASEAN, as its a developing country, and Pakistan has all what it need to have. economy based on export driven, on other's money, won't be said good...
 
Last edited:
.
If we look at the value of rupee in 1947 to dollar, we were equal. It was how resources were exploited by Britain for 250 years for its own benifit, we saw how india became from 25℅ of world exporter to some 1℅ in 1947. After some 75 years we doubled to 2℅ of world trade. I don't have data on wages in 1700s to compare if India was rich in comparison to the West.

here we have news about GDP on PPP of world. here, i would say, US's economy has large share of "Value Added" factor and share of imported components. US is a 'bubble' economy.
here, CHinese economy was mainly driven by export since 80s, its dependence on OECD economy and others has yet to come with result. what if OECD and other countries dont import Low Tech products of China-Vietnam type countries? how much debt they have yet to borrow to see ground reality of "reduce currency, Yuan, to drive export/growth" since last century? which they did since 80s.
for example, i find Pakistan-Indonesia type economy healthy. its fate of Pakistan to finally catch up with India-ASEAN, but never let your economy dependent on export. its no good money .....
=>

List of countries by GDP (PPP)​

8ef8135e5nmt8acqzjmdx417rrwbwxv[1].png


 
Last edited:
.
If we look at the value of rupee in 1947 to dollar, we were equal. It was how resources were exploited by Britain for 250 years for its own benifit, we saw how india became from 25℅ of world exporter to some 1℅ in 1947. After some 75 years we doubled to 2℅ of world trade. I don't have data on wages in 1700s to compare if India was rich in comparison to the West.

we have a news as below also. who are those who run Western economy in US-NATO? are they their own people? think again.....
see this. Indians have given US a 'peon' difference there. American Household income at $59,990 looks like 'peon' to Hindus at $141,906 :-)

from here, how long US-EU can be maintained? they are more a 'bubble' economy. as discussed in the thread as below:
 
Last edited:
.
If we look at the value of rupee in 1947 to dollar, we were equal. It was how resources were exploited by Britain for 250 years for its own benifit, we saw how india became from 25℅ of world exporter to some 1℅ in 1947. After some 75 years we doubled to 2℅ of world trade. I don't have data on wages in 1700s to compare if India was rich in comparison to the West.

here we have a news as below, about QS Global who translated different institutes with GMAT-GRE score. those who run economy of India and then visit US-OECD countries also :-)
.
=>
Indian MBA students world’s most academically distinguished

BANGALORE: It is students from IIM-Bangalore, not from Harvard or Stanford or even MIT, who excel at GMAT, the entrance test for the creme de la creme of B-schools across the world.

According to the QS Global 200 Business Schools report, Indian MBA candidates are the world's most academically distinguished, with students of the IIM-B, scoring the highest average of 780. :-) IIM-B students are ahead of the leading US institution Stanford and INSEAD in Europe, the survey said.

While the average GMAT score of Stanford is 730, INSEAD lies at 704. Second to IIM-B students in GMAT score are their counterparts from IIM, Ahmedabad with 767.
The survey says, "IIM Ahmedabad is notable for the extraordinarily high average GMAT scores of its students, with its figure of 767 exceeded only by fellow Indian institution, IIM Bangalore (780). This places the two ahead of any North American or European school for the academic quality of their student intake. The fact that students enrolled at both schools have an average of just two years of professional experience underlines the tendency for academically gifted students to move quickly on to the MBA qualification at the outset of their careers, rather than using it to up-skill at mid career, as is more common in Europe and North America."

IIM-B also appears in the survey as one of the emerging global business schools across the world, overtaking Melbourne Business School.

"It is the testimony to high quality talent that our country has. It is no surprise that Indian students have outscored others from across the globe.What is needed now is the establishment of premier institutes like Harvard and Stanford in India as well, so that these young minds could express their intelligence in best possible manner. This is possible only when full autonomy is provided to the universities," said T V Mohandas Pai, chairman, Manipal Global Education Services.

"At the time of independence, our universities at Mumbai, Chennai, Calcutta, Mysore and Baroda were among the top 200 in the world. Today, they do not fare in any ranking at all. This is the result of bad government policy. Full autonomy, independent board of governors and focus on research are the factors crucial for a good university," said Pai.

The colleges were also judged on different subjects under their programme. In corporate social responsibility, IIM-B ranked 21 among the top 50 business colleges across the globe, whereas IIM-A grabbed 19th rank.

When it comes to emphasis on start-ups and small businesses to kick-start private sector growth ( entrepreneurship), IIM-B ranked 25 and IIM-A ranked 17. Under 'innovation', IIM-B was placed at 17th with a score of 90.6, whereas IIM-A ranked 13, with a score of 97.4 out of 100.

QS is an online and offline meeting place for aspiring managers, B-schools and businesses for career and educational -related decisions.

Many leaders in India

For the leadership development programme, four colleges from India feature among top 50 universities. They are: IIM-A, IIM-B, IIM-C and Indian School of Business (ISB).
7Jt250SO4fs50QONO1j7AY7YKD2P+iDTAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC
:-)

Highlights of the survey

Schools ranked for employer reputation in 10 subject specializations. Harvard tops the table in three subjects, ahead of Stanford and MIT with two apiece. Wharton is number one for finance

Three Asian schools make the Elite global category: INSEAD Singapore, IIM-A and NUS Business School, National University of Singapore

No Elite Global schools in either Africa and Middle East, or Latin America
smile.png


.
 
Last edited:
.
and Pakistan has all what it need to have. economy based on export driven, on other's money, won't be said good...

Until someone comes up with a substitute for hydrocarbons Pakistan won't catch up
 
.
If we look at the value of rupee in 1947 to dollar, we were equal. It was how resources were exploited by Britain for 250 years for its own benifit, we saw how india became from 25℅ of world exporter to some 1℅ in 1947. After some 75 years we doubled to 2℅ of world trade. I don't have data on wages in 1700s to compare if India was rich in comparison to the West.

with reference to my last post#28, about TOI news about QS Global who translated different institutes of world with GMAT-GRE scores. here, with reference to the GMAT scores of Stanford, INSEAD etc.... what you guess, what would be the ratio of Foreign students/Asians in the GMAT-GRE scores of Western institutes, my last post#28 :coffee:
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom