On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 11:10:04AM -0500, Robert J. Chassell wrote: > Does anyone know of long run British figures brought up to date and > more likely to be accurate? Is my thesis reasonable? As for an > explanation: Britain did not grow faster because people first had to > invent the technologies; and then investors had to discover which were > profitable.)
Interesting discussion and some graphs with answers to your question: http://www.efficientfrontier.com/ef/902/gmm.htm *** Angus Maddison, link below, gives the average annual compound real GDP growth rate for the U.K. as: 1500-1820 0.8% 1820-1870 2.05% 1870-1913 1.90% 1913-1950 1.19% 1950-1973 2.93% 1973-1998 2.00% http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/articles_of_the_month/maddison-millennial.html (see link to "full article" at bottom; if you have trouble viewing it, do "save link as..." and save it as a PDF file) *** For world stock and bond data for the 20th century, see _Triumph of the Optimists_, by Dimson, Marsh, and Staunton. For example, the real return on equities in the UK was: 1900 1.8% 10 0.2 20 3.1 30 3.0 40 3.0 50 4.7 60 5.0 70 4.2 80 5.4 90 5.8 *** And there is a great reference for these sorts of questions, and many others, coming out very soon: _The Birth of Plenty_ by William J. Bernstein, due out in April. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
