• 9
  • 2
  • 3
  • 15
  • 8
  • 5
  • 3
  • 1
  • 1
  • 11
  • 83
  • 53
  • 10
  • 6
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2
  • 5
  • 11
  • 11

Recent Posts

  • C

    @cernel My period atlases give the following values for the Union of South Africa:
    1936: 9,589,898
    1937: 9,800,000
    1941: 10,521,000
    (but the 1937 and 1941 ones are merely estimates)
    (only about 2 millions Europeans)
    I'm sure better data can be easily obtained somewhere on the internet, if not in the Maddison database itself.

    read more
  • C

    @rogercooper I see there is a major problem for South Africa. There is no population value for all years from 1914 to 1949!? How is it possible they give the GDP per capita but not the population!? South Africa is pretty important for WW2. How to get around this? I really don't understand how the population value can be missing in the moment you have to divide by that to get a per capita value. Getting the GDP for South Africa cannot be skipped for WW2.

    read more
  • C

    @cernel Ok, I found what appears to be a fairly reliable reference (Princeton University, New Jersey):
    https://irs.princeton.edu/sites/irs/files/Rebasing Maddison_May_2017.pdf
    An important implication of using different relative price levels is that the poverty level may change. With the 1990 price levels, the subsistence level income was estimated at between 350 and 400 international dollars per year (Maddison, 2003). The poverty line was equal to around $ 1 per day, and was based on the first international poverty line which was set at $1.01 per day using 1985 PPP’s, which was later updated to $ 1.08 per day using the 1993 PPP’s (Ravallion, Datt and van de Walle, 1991; Chen and Ravallion, 2001). This made the interpretation of historical income series very intuitive. By using other relative prices, this subsistence level of income changes. The price level (in US dollars, the standard used in these calculations) increased by 59% between 1990 and 2011, bringing the poverty line to 636 dollars of 2011. Moreover, The World Bank slightly raised the absolute poverty line to 1,90 US dollars a day or 694 dollars per year, expressed in 2011 prices.

    694 United Statesian dollars looks about what I had in mind; so, in this case, the approach that I suggest you using is to calculate what I would call the "GDP Above Subsistence" (practically, the "usable" GDP), by the equation (assuming using 2011US$):

    GDPAS = (cgdppc - 694$) ⋅ pop

    Still, India is going to be overvalued, since it was a country with a lot of people and that was somewhat decently productive (surely in a better shape than China), but that, at the end, contributed relatively little to the war effort of the British Empire (and had some major famines, as well), at least economically.

    read more
  • S

    @cernel said in How would you rate countries and territories considering realism in big WWII maps.:

    The energy consumption ones seem really good enough for a linear mono-resource production representation, except only that thing of missing India (not a terrible obstacle, but annoying; plus I really don't understand why it is missing before 1947

    The energy comsumptions is not good enough, the Soviets were even stronger than the British Empire let alone the United Kingdom.

    India is missing because it wasn't independent country.

    read more