4 ms·

Also mobile phone were really rare 15 years ago and the GDP/PPP was almost the same. So it seems to me that the article miss an important point. My explanation

Also mobile phone were really rare 15 years ago and the GDP/PPP was almost the same. So it seems to me that the article miss an important point. My explanation would be that the economy was less moneytized. Lot of slaves means few salaries means low GDP. Also the Roman economy was based on conquering and pillaging countries which allowed to sustain a negative import balance. I'm not sure if this translate well in terms of modern economy and GDP computation.

c3833174 9y ago
>Also mobile phone were really rare 15 years ago More like 20+, depending on the country.
Nomentatus 9y ago
Lack of monetization is fully taken into account already - the number given for income is not the sum of monetary transactions per individual but the income per individual however obtained including barter, food grown+consumed by oneself, self-built house, etc. Even in the late middle ages monetary transactions were not the common case so it would be absurd to conflate monetary transactions with average income.