Thread 214738539

How come chuds never mention 70% of world GDP was china + India between the roman empire and the 16-17 century?

>>214738539 (OP)
chatgpt disagrees with you and gave me a lot more arguments backed with sources and calculations

how come chuds never mention my big fucking balls?

>>214738539 (OP)
>GDP
>16-17 century

>>214738779
>there wasn't economic activity before the XX century

>>214738779
GDP is eternal chud

how can gdp even be measured before the industrial revolution?

>>214738801
GDP is a meaningless guesstimate for anything that's not a modern capitalistic country with open market.

>>214738902
>>214738843
>Measure cost of production of goods based on the current technology using the cost of materials + worker wages
>Use goverment census data for taxation purposes
>Use other book keeping archive records
>Do basic math taking into account the workers average salary per hour of work
It's not magic how GDP is calculated.

GDP is completely meaningless for pre-industrial economies, almost 1:1 to population

>>214738801
99% of it was agriculture, nobody gives a shit

>>214739098
>>214739106
>Basic math analisis can't be done because some BS

How come your chuds never mention this?

>>214739098
it's basically meaningless now too though

>>214738962
Except that's not how its calculated. Its calculated by projection. Economists select 1990 data for GDP, then proxies for historical economic growth and then go back in time. And economists are notoriously clueless when they step out of their field.

>Use other book keeping archive records
>Use goverment census data for taxation purposes
Scarce, low quality and historians dont have time to dig through them.

>Do basic math taking into account the workers average salary per hour of work
Most people at the time were not wagies ffs, vast majority of people were peasants selling surplus produce on the market. With markets for that surplus produce and petty craftsmen often being localized.

Your concept of "economy" is meaningless for agrarian societies.

>>214739431
>agrarian economies are a completelly not possible to understand economic system to modern economic analisis
retarded nigga doesn't even know basic shit like experimental archeology.

>>214739458
Nigger, you sound like your idea of history is thinking everyone was like your society, just with different paintjob.

Market based measurements are meaningless for societies where most of produce does not end up in the market and when most of labour is not done for a wage. Even doing GDP for something modern, like SSSR is very difficult and you will get vastly different results based on authors biases.

>>214739542
>you can measure production using basic labor of theory analisis

Nigga, if I need 1 hour to produce X amount of output, that can be used to measure stuff.

We still measure human productivity in terms of hours and that doesn't change under any economic system.

You argument is that economists can't study agrarian societies and primitive tribes today.

Which is like claiming that they were magical and shit, which goes againts the most basic notions of how science works.

>>214739596
>You argument is that economists can't study agrarian societies and primitive tribes today.
Nigger, you dumdum. My argument is that using market-centric metrics for agrarian societies leads to meaningless results. You can do economic history, just don't be a complete retard about it.

You can easily imagine a alternative society where all sexual activity is monetized. Even if that society had the exact same level of production like ours, it would have higher GDP simply because previously non-monetized activity became monetized. Like have you ever read a serious paper on methodology of this shit?

>>214739827
>economics as a science is limited only to european nations + anglo nations after WW1

>>214739827
Imagine all this cope to avoid to accept that China and India were wealthier than european until the 17-18 century.

Read on the opium wars and why it happened.

>>214738539 (OP)
>16-17th century

>>214740088
>17-18th century
>opium wars (took place in the 19th century)

please select a specific century already

>>214739992
>Economics ≡ GDP counting
>>214740088
Define "wealthier"

>>214740147
I'm not an expert on history, but britain was becoming wealthier than china by the first industrial revolution.

So to be more exact take 18-19 century.

India was so wealthy compared to europe a trade route block to india was the main reason Columbus discovered america by accident.

Amerindian indians were called indians, because europeans were expecting to reach India.

>>214740169
India had the monopology of spices and basic shit like suggar back then.

China had the monopology of silk, and ceramics.

Both also had a major industrial output in textiles back then.

>>214738539 (OP)
GDP per capita in western Europe was already higher during the late middle ages, it just had fewer people.