Really makes you think

Yes, yes, that's right, do your bidding to your masters! Colonialism is good for you, goy! It happens to all countries!

take your strawmans back to with you

Yes, I'm sure increasing your GDP per Capita by 8x in the space of 50 years isn't meaningful

What are the sources on those numbers? They disagree with most charts I've seen.

1990 dollars.

Oh wow! It's almost like technology in the world has advanced?

I don't mean the actual quantity. I mean that in the chart , the developed economies were growing at a steady rate until Keynesian policies kicked in, after which they kicked into overdrive and blew their previous performance away. Note that all the developed economies have a kink in their lines.

In the figures I'm used to, like , you get a fairly smooth exponential over the entire twentieth century. There are blips for the great depression and whatnot, and a slow down in the end, but postwar economies do not grow more rapidly than prewar economies.

>2008

Not an argument.

Yeah it's almost like the developing countries grow slower after they are developed?

It wasn't. I don't argue with bait.

1990 dollar or the 2000 dollar is a common unit to use for historical purposes. There's a lot of historical data available in 1990 dollars, which means that to show adjusted for inflation value, it's often better to convert everything to 1990 or 2000 dollars. even data from post 1990/2000.

Look how great they did under Mughal rule.

Not really.

Well, they outperformed the Qing.

Considering they decided that the right course to take when their population quadrupled was to kill off as much commerce as they could the Qing got by 'okay'.

>tfw india will surpass britain's gdp in your lifetime

You don't know what you are talking about

>1.4 billion "people"
>65 million people
>71 years after independence
>still lower GDP than former master

Still no porcelain either... really makes you think

They didn't have modern technology before 1950.

1950: $600
1990: $1500

150% growth over 40 years = 2.3%

Pretty dismal by postwar standards, independence was a mistake.

>>Reddit

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geary–Khamis_dollar

The numbers for China are pretty suspect. The Song had good technology, and economy, but it's not overall better than Ming, and Qing losing some 25% of their per capita productivity between 1700 and 1750 strikes me as odd, since that period sits smack in the middle of the Qing golden age.

Japan having higher numbers for 1800 over 1700-1750 is suspect as well. Japan was suffering from a currency shortage during the mid-late 1700's, which would have had an effect on average productivity.

Qing saw a population boom with little economic growth to show for it, hence GDP per capita dropping. Period sources also emphasize the poverty was which growing, parents to had to kill or sell their children into slavery often as they couldn't feed them. Europeans noted the low price of a Chinese slave in those days. On top of that you see the Qing issue some downright hilarious laws which only hurt their economy.

>hur dur if i ignore every year after 1990 then my point makes sense

Legit kill yourself

>technology didn't advance from 1820 to 1950

im pretty sure you dont have ppp data before the 50's

Reminder to the Indian nationalist who keeps spamming these threads that the only reason India even has a common language is thanks to British rule.

1990 onwards is when they opened the call centers.

india doesn't have a common language.

It would have even less of a common language had they been left in isolation, and if there had been one it would likely have been Persian or Arabic