(still working my way through the mountain of FWk posts which acumulated
during my christmas break...)

On Mon, 31 Dec, Steve Kurtz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

[Harry Pollard had written:]
>>The point is that a half millennium ago, it was possible to have a 
>>pretty good working life with high wages, so why isn't it possible now?
>>
>>So, there's my question for today.
>>
>
>Two factors immediately come to mind.
>
>1. Mechanization (industrial revolution) harnessed non-human calories to 
>an increasingly greater extent during the 500 years. This decreased the 
>leverage of muscle in competition for money. Automation/Robotics is a 
>continuation of this.
>
>2. The number of available laborers increased by approximately 1000% 
>during the 500 years. Rapidly increasing the supply of potential labor 
>(at the same time that mechanization and automation were growing) 
>undoubtedly caused gluts to greater and greater extents than during 
>prior millenia of much slower population growth.

Also, it should be remembered that the period immediately following
the plague was like a paradise all over europe: all the infrastructure
was in place for a much larger population. A small group of people
essentially inherited a fully functioning civilization, and all the
skills required to keep it going were in high demand. It was hardly
a normal situation, and if people had "a pretty good working life with
high wages", that was neither surprising nor maintainable.

as Steve then quotes:

>  http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldhis.html
>
>
>  Historical Estimates of World Population
>
>(Population in millions.  When lower and upper estimates are the same 
>they are shown under "Lower.")

[table also snipped horizontally to fit 80 columns, discarding empty
columns for eras quoted]

>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                                           McEv-
>                                             edy
>       --Summary-- Bira- --Durand---         and Thomlinson-   UN,
>Year   Lower Upper   ben Lower Upper  Haub Jones Lower Upper   1995  USBC
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------

[...]

> 1100   301   320   301                     320
> 1200   360   450   400               450   360
> 1250   400   416   416                                         400
> 1300   360   432   432                     360   400
> 1340   443         443
> 1400   350   374   374                     350
[ * ]
> 1500   425   540   460   440   540         425                 500
> 1600   545   579   579                     545

Note the drop between 1340 and 1400. at the * there would be a second drop
between 1440 and 1480. As these are world figures, the european figures
would be much higher ratios, of course.

                                        -Pete Vincent


Reply via email to