the denominator

Brad De Long delong at econ.Berkeley.EDU
Wed Jun 3 06:08:00 PDT 1998



>Immanuel Wallerstein makes a cryptic comment in a recent article to the
>effect that discussions of capitalist economic output are irrelevant
>inasmuch as they ignore "the dominator", which is to say, population
>growth. He is either implying that in real dollars, global per capita
>output is stagnant or declining; or that if we figured in the unfigurable
>(i.e. environmental degradation, alienated existence-he's essentially a
>Frankfurt Schooler on culture) it would be. Either of which makes sense
>to me; its just that I don't have the data. So will one of your many
>economists help me here? Do we have useful figures for the earth's total
>output, and is it in decline per capita?
>
>Kenneth Mostern
>Department of English
>University of Tennessee
>
>"Talent is perhaps nothing other than successfully sublimated rage."
> Theodor Adorno

You asked for it :-) ...

Bear in mind that these are only preliminary estimates...

The series come in three flavors. My "preferred" version; a version that rejects Michael Boskin and company's conclusions about how the invention of new goods and new types of goods have added to material wealth; and a series that abandons any attempt to track pre-1500 movements in income per capita and just assumes that pre-1500 per capita output was constant.

The estimates are ppp-concept international prices 1990 dollar estimates. That is, they use:

--purchasing power parities rather than real exchange rates to translate amounts from one currency to another

--relative prices that are an average of those prevailing worldwide (rather than relative prices in a rich country like the United States) to value different kinds of production

--are scaled to set U.S. output in 1990 equal to its historical then-current-dollar level.

And note that these estimates have all the problems of GDP estimates--there are no deductions for damage to the ozone layer, and the production of thermonuclear weapons counts as a a plus...

I don't know what Wallerstein is thinking of. I suspect that he is generalizing from Africa, which he knows best--and where output has been at best near-stagnant for a generation--to the world as a whole...

Year Average World GDP per Capita ==== ============================

Year Preferred Ex-Boskin Constant pre-1500 ==== ========= ========= =================

-1000000

92

340

115

-300000

92

341

115

-25000

92

343

115

-10000

93

344

115

-8000

96

357

115

-5000

103

381

115

-4000

109

406

115

-3000

113

420

115

-2000

112

415

115

-1600

121

449

115

-1000

127

471

115

-800

143

530

115

-500

137

509

115

-400

130

483

115

-200

113

420

115

1

109

404

115

14

102

380

115

200

98

362

115

350

94

350

115

400

97

360

115

500

102

379

115

600

104

387

115

700

112

414

115

800

116

430

115

900

131

486

115

1000

133

494

115

1100

124

459

115

1200

104

386

115

1250

99

367

115

1300

89

331

115

1340

109

406

115

1400

128

476

115

1500

138

512

115

1600

141

524

140

1650

150

556

155

1700

164

607

172

1750

178

662

190

1800

195

722

210

1850

300

788

300

1875

429

948

429

1900

679

1263

679

1920

956

1550

956

1925

1108

1735

1108

1930

1134

1716

1134

1940

1356

1915

1356

1950

1622

2138

1622

1955

1968

2505

1968

1960

2270

2792

2270

1965

2736

3251

2736

1970

3282

3768

3282

1975

3714

4119

3714

1980

4231

4533

4231

1985

4634

4797

4634

1990

5204

5204

5204

1995

5840

5641

5840

TOTAL WORLD GDP (IN BILLIONS OF 1990 INTERNATIONAL DOLLARS)

-1000000

0.01

0.04

0.01

-300000

0.09

0.34

0.11

-25000

0.31

1.15

0.38

-10000

0.37

1.38

0.46

-8000

0.43

1.61

0.52

-5000

0.51

1.91

0.57

-4000

0.77

2.84

0.80

-3000

1.59

5.89

1.60

-2000

3.02

11.20

3.09

-1600

4.36

16.16

4.12

-1000

6.35

23.55

5.73

-800

9.72

36.05

7.79

-500

13.72

50.90

11.46

-400

16.02

59.44

14.09

-200

17.00

63.05

17.19

1

18.50

68.65

19.48

14

17.50

64.91

19.59

200

18.54

68.80

21.77

350

17.93

66.53

21.77

400

18.44

68.40

21.77

500

19.92

73.90

22.34

600

20.86

77.39

22.92

700

23.44

86.97

24.06

800

25.53

94.70

25.21

900

31.68

117.52

27.73

1000

35.31

131.00

30.36

1100

39.60

146.91

36.67

1200

37.44

138.90

41.25

1250

35.58

132.01

41.25

1300

32.09

119.06

41.25

1340

40.50

150.27

42.39

1400

44.92

166.64

40.10

1500

58.67

217.64

48.70

1600

77.01

285.70

76.41

1650

81.74

303.24

84.53

1700

99.80

370.26

104.67

1750

128.51

476.75

136.67

1800

175.24

650.11

189.00

1850

359.90

945.60

359.90

1875

568.08

1256.10

568.08

1900

1102.96

2052.38

1102.96

1920

1733.67

2810.15

1733.67

1925

2102.88

3293.03

2102.88

1930

2253.81

3409.69

2253.81

1940

3001.36

4237.90

3001.36

1950

4081.81

5379.21

4081.81

1955

5430.44

6913.80

5430.44

1960

6855.25

8431.84

6855.25

1965

9126.98

10845.34

9126.98

1970

12137.94

13934.06

12137.94

1975

15149.42

16801.40

15149.42

1980

18818.46

20162.78

18818.46

1985

22481.11

23270.25

22481.11

1990

27539.57

27539.57

27539.57

1995

33644.33

32503.40

33644.33

2000

41016.69

38281.97

41016.69

"Now 'in the long run' this [way of

summarizing the quantity theory of | <delong at econ.berkeley.edu> money] is probably true.... But this | Brad De Long **long run** is a misleading guide to | Dept. of Economics current affairs. **In the long run** | U.C. Berkeley we are all dead. Economists set | Berkeley, CA 94720 themselves too easy, too useless a | (510) 643-4027 283-2709 task if in tempestuous seasons they | (510) 642-6615 fax can only tell us that when the storm | http://econ161.berkeley.edu/ is long past the ocean is flat again."

--J.M. Keynes



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list