[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7CW7S0zxv4[/video]

I’m unsure of some of the claims, I don’t have any grounding in historical macroeconomics or macroeconomics for that matter – but part of me thinks India would have entered a large state of decline even without the British empire. The industrialisation of the west decoupled gdp from population size and meant that we could produce economic growth on a per capita basis – a quick cursory glance at global gdp seems to indicate that the easts share of world gdp seemed to dip with european colonialism but plummets with the industrialisation of the US. Was the easts fall from economic hegemony just hastened by colonialism?

Thoughts?

Thoughts?

You have far too much time on your hands?

Do you not have some receptionist to shout at?

Just a bit manic – no receptionists to wind up unfortunately, so my energy has to be directed somewhere.

Also, I just like reading about the world around me. Too much stuff to know, too little time.

Britain owes India reperations reparations

Cheers woppit. Didn’t catch that!

Tom
Ask your supervisor,she will know .

Not sure % of world GDP is a useful measure. If one area increases it’s GDP then the rest has a smaller % of world GDP without being any poorer.

Where did the data for year 1 come from?

The industrialisation of the west decoupled gdp from population size and meant that we could produce economic growth on a per capita basis

Yep, pretty much as worked out by Malthus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus

And if anyone owes anybody, they owe us for financing WW1 and WW2 until we were broke.

By 1916, Britain was funding most of the Empire’s war expenditures, all of Italy’s and two thirds of the war costs of France and Russia, plus smaller nations as well. The gold reserves, overseas investments and private credit then ran out forcing Britain to borrow $4 billion from the U.S. Treasury in 1917–18.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_World_War_I#British_Empire

Tom
Ask your supervisor,she will know .

Biologist, if I told any of my friends or colleagues that economics interested me they’d look at me as if I was crazy.

Maybe I’ll ask the missus – think it will just exasperate her though. 😀

What would you think if a boat load of Indians sailed up the Thames and said “Don’t worry, chaps, we’re going to run things for you now”?

The UK has obviously gained a huge historical advantage from administering other countries for its own benefit (and from the slavery industry). It would be very difficult to put a present day figure on that benefit, but I’d guess it’s substantially more than the development aid we’ve subsequently provided.

I’m not doubting that at all KCR, what I’m skeptical of is that Britain is responsible for Indias decline into economic obscurity during the 20th century. I think it was inevitable, it’s just a hunch though.

As you say though, we did of course profit massively from India and do untold damage to the country.

Surely his maths are off from the start, since his 27% figure would have also included the economies of Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh & Burma.

I also think it’s dubious to assume that cotton would have continued to be such important segment of the world economy, or that other countries would not have begun to grow it in the absence of British influence in India, nor can they ignore the vital importance of tea cultivation, or that it’s value on an international scale would drop so significantly.

Its pretty much the same argument that the Greeks had saying that the Germans should let them off the national debt as a repayment for their invasion in WWII.

The UK has obviously gained a huge historical advantage from administering other countries for its own benefit (and from the slavery industry). It would be very difficult to put a present day figure on that benefit, but I’d guess it’s substantially more than the development aid we’ve subsequently provided.

Why is it obvious? Other western countries which didn’t have empires have done equally well as the UK in the 20th century. As has South Korea, Taiwan, Zimbabwe (before Mugagbe rule), etc. Maybe India needs to look closer to home for the cause of it’s current problems. A space race before indoor plumbing for example. What about the caste system is that Britain’s fault?

The UK has obviously gained a huge historical advantage from administering other countries for its own benefit (and from the slavery industry)

Care to explain what a historical advantage is.

As you say though, we did of course profit massively from India and do untold damage to the country.

Care to tell us some specifics on the untold damage.

Advantage? Well, funnelling the profits from developing Indian natural resources like cotton and jute back into the UK economy and UK private wealth, for example.

Examples of damage? Wikipedia reckons half a million killed and 14 million displaced following partition.

Which of these gentleman should I make my cheque out to?

A space race before indoor plumbing for example.

There is no space race, it was fought and won several decades ago.

And if you stopped and thought about it you would probably realise just how essential and vital India’s space programme is.

Effective communications for country with a population of 1.2 billion and a vast land mass isn’t a luxury but a necessity. And apart from the obvious, eg, commerce and finance, there’s the need to provide medical advise to remote areas without effective health care.

India’s space programme supplies the Indian government with vital information concerning soil erosion, forestry management, general fauna and flora conservation, fisheries, drought and flood monitoring, mapping, geological data for mining, and urban planning. It is vital for essential weather forecasting.

India has on its borders a potentially hostile neighbour, the space programme gives it an element of security with information about foreign troop movement and bases.

Their space programme also provides India with revenue as they agree contracts with other governments to launch telecommunication and weather satellites. It saves them vast amounts of money by not forcing them to rely on other countries.

India’s space programme makes complete sense, unless you think India should forever remain a backward, poor, and underdeveloped country, abandoning it would be an act of supreme stupidity. IMO

EDIT : Obviously it gives Ukipers and the BNP something to rant about.

The UK gives £1/4billion a year in foreign aid to India.

I thought it was 250m over five years until 2019. Definitely not 250m a year

“The UK gives £1/4billion a year in foreign aid to India”

I give them £102 X 2 in visa fees every time me & the Mrs go to Goa

The russians only give them £35 a head. Maybe thats part of the payback.

Wikipedia reckons half a million killed and 14 million displaced following partition

Was partition a wholly British thing? Not sure it was…?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12607537

£36bn a year spent on defence
£750m on space programme.

Love the Brit reasoning

There is no space race, it was fought and won several decades ago.

Not in Asia it wasn’t.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/09/24/in-asian-space-race-india-is-the-first-to-mars/

India’s space programme makes complete sense, unless you think India should forever remain a backward, poor, and underdeveloped country, abandoning it would be an act of supreme stupidity. IMO

Wow! How do most of the other countries in the world manage without a space program? How did the Europeans and Americans industrialise without space communications?

How do missions to the Moon and Mars help alleviate poverty at home? Would India’s slum dwellers choose a space mission or hot and cold running water and sewers?

I thought it was 250m over five years until 2019.

It would appear that UK aid to India ends in 2015. India has stated that it no longer wants UK aid.

Aid for trade is a well-established British government policy, much of it aimed at selling weapons to underdeveloped countries.

Examples of damage? Wikipedia reckons half a million killed and 14 million displaced following partition.

The partition was the choice of the Indians.

In February of 1947, the British government announced that India would be granted independence by June 1948. Viceroy for India Lord Louis Mountbatten pleaded with the Hindu and Muslim leadership to agree to form a united country, but they could not. Only Gandhi supported Mountbatten’s position. With the country descending further into chaos, Mountbatten reluctantly agreed to the formation of two separate states, and moved the independence date up to August 15, 1947.

http://asianhistory.about.com/od/india/f/partitionofindiafaq.htm

How did the Europeans and Americans industrialise without space communications?

You think that India has no right to want to be more advanced than the Europeans and Americans were in between 1750-1940 ?

Well you’re entitled to your opinion.

However India clearly thinks otherwise. I agree with them. Hence my remark “IMO”

Tom_W1987 – Member
…As you say though, we did of course profit massively from India and do untold damage to the country.

Wasn’t there something like 4 million deaths from famine in India during WW2?

Apparently caused by Britain taking most of the food crops for the war effort and leaving none for the Indians. Churchill didn’t seem to feel that brown people mattered.

Another stellar piece of Imperial plundering and puts Britain in the top table in the genocide league.

Churchill didn’t seem to feel that brown people mattered.

But he did have strong views on the subject, to quote Churchill : “The Indian people brought this upon themselves by breeding like rabbits” and “why isn’t Gandhi dead if the famine is so bad?”

There have been no major deaths through famine in India since it gained independence. Presumably they are still “breeding like rabbits”.

Amartya Sen the Indian economist argues that famines are never caused by a shortfall of supply but by poverty. A sharp rise in the price of rice and a fall in purchasing power, while supply remained fairly stable, is what caused the Bengal Famine according to Amartya Sen.