4 ms·

> Historically, advanced civilizations have flourished in the cooler climate I can think of a couple of advanced civilizations which developed in warmer climes

> Historically, advanced civilizations have flourished in the cooler climate I can think of a couple of advanced civilizations which developed in warmer climes immediately (Indus valley and Egyptian). Would like to believe climate contributed much lesser (unless extreme like Tundras) to advancement of civilization vs other factors - easier transport/availability of water/natural resources.

ianai 7y ago
People are heat machines. We definitely get more done around an optimal temperature.
- adventured 7y ago
  Interesting consideration. It's true that the overwhelming share of the most productive economies [1] are not at the extreme in terms of heat. [2] Among the 70 hottest countries, only three make the list in terms of economic output per capita: Qatar, UAE, Singapore. Among the 100 hottest countries, only four make the list (Saudi Arabia is added to the prior group at #71). It's a rather staggering data point. Basically all the best economies are in the coolest half block. Only Singapore exists in the hottest 100, as a non-resource state. The best economies group starts near avg ~15 celsius and on down on the list, with Portugal and Greece. Israel and Australia are outliers at 19c & 21c. In the bottom ~66 coolest, you have this group: US, China, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Spain, Canada, Switzerland, Portugal, Greece, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, South Korea, New Zealand, Belgium, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Austria, Ireland, Netherlands, Czech, Slovakia, Slovenia, Iceland, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, Turkey, Chile. Uruguay just missed that list, they're #70 coolest and have a per capita output ($17k) comparable to Latvia, Hungary and Chile. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_yearly_temperature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_y...
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - belltaco 7y ago
    Interesting, the economic output per capita of Qatar, UAE and SA appears to come from oil resources rather than human capital.
    - adventured 7y ago
      Right, Singapore is the only hot nation that is also high in economic output per capita and not heavily dependent on oil/gas for their output. Taiwan ($25k output) is also comparable to Australia on avg yearly celsius, it'd be hit or miss to make the top 100 hottest countries list. Thailand has a shot of breaking out of the grouping. They're about as hot as Singapore, and their GDP per capita has climbed to ~$7,200 (up from $2k 17 years ago). Given another 10-15 years I could see them matching something like Hungary or Poland today (~$15k output). And before the crash, for a decade, Venezuela used to be a moderately successful economy and they're also comparable to Singapore on heat (another oil resource state though).
  - SamReidHughes 7y ago
    If you count U.S. states individually, you'll find Arizona, Texas, Louisiana, Florida, and Hawaii being big outliers.
    - adventured 7y ago
      It's a difficult separation for sure. Many of the US states seem like outliers if you look at other nations. The benefit of being part of a nation that has both an extremely high GDP per capita and extreme scale (330m people). Puerto Rico is an example of this in action. Prior to the hurricane their per capita output was $32,000. Comparable to Italy and South Korea. Yet few would make that comparison, in regards to quality of life, development level, et al. It's of course an artificial inflation, with Puerto Rico getting to ride the US economy. The second poorest state by output is Arkansas, at $42k. That prompts an odd situation of then comparing Arkansas versus countries with similar per capita output such as Japan, UK, France, New Zealand, etc. Does Kentucky ($47k) really compare with Finland ($50k)? Or is that mostly the benefit of riding the US output machine. Some states certainly compare better with Finland, such as Massachusetts or Washington for example. Except their output levels are astronomical at $82.5k and $74k. And all of that naturally opens up questions about Singapore or Australia's output benefit re China. Or Canada's benefit from being next to the US and isolated (versus eg EU nations being near each other and all competing for trade).
DiabloD3 7y ago
To be fair, those civilizations flourished during a time of a different climate than it is today.
easytiger 7y ago
Check your history on that. Climate was much more temperate in egypt 2000 years ago

ianai 7y ago

People are heat machines. We definitely get more done around an optimal temperature.

adventured 7y ago
Interesting consideration. It's true that the overwhelming share of the most productive economies [1] are not at the extreme in terms of heat. [2] Among the 70 hottest countries, only three make the list in terms of economic output per capita: Qatar, UAE, Singapore. Among the 100 hottest countries, only four make the list (Saudi Arabia is added to the prior group at #71). It's a rather staggering data point. Basically all the best economies are in the coolest half block. Only Singapore exists in the hottest 100, as a non-resource state. The best economies group starts near avg ~15 celsius and on down on the list, with Portugal and Greece. Israel and Australia are outliers at 19c & 21c. In the bottom ~66 coolest, you have this group: US, China, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Spain, Canada, Switzerland, Portugal, Greece, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, South Korea, New Zealand, Belgium, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Austria, Ireland, Netherlands, Czech, Slovakia, Slovenia, Iceland, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, Turkey, Chile. Uruguay just missed that list, they're #70 coolest and have a per capita output ($17k) comparable to Latvia, Hungary and Chile. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_yearly_temperature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_y...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- belltaco 7y ago
  Interesting, the economic output per capita of Qatar, UAE and SA appears to come from oil resources rather than human capital.
  - adventured 7y ago
    Right, Singapore is the only hot nation that is also high in economic output per capita and not heavily dependent on oil/gas for their output. Taiwan ($25k output) is also comparable to Australia on avg yearly celsius, it'd be hit or miss to make the top 100 hottest countries list. Thailand has a shot of breaking out of the grouping. They're about as hot as Singapore, and their GDP per capita has climbed to ~$7,200 (up from $2k 17 years ago). Given another 10-15 years I could see them matching something like Hungary or Poland today (~$15k output). And before the crash, for a decade, Venezuela used to be a moderately successful economy and they're also comparable to Singapore on heat (another oil resource state though).
- SamReidHughes 7y ago
  If you count U.S. states individually, you'll find Arizona, Texas, Louisiana, Florida, and Hawaii being big outliers.
  - adventured 7y ago
    It's a difficult separation for sure. Many of the US states seem like outliers if you look at other nations. The benefit of being part of a nation that has both an extremely high GDP per capita and extreme scale (330m people). Puerto Rico is an example of this in action. Prior to the hurricane their per capita output was $32,000. Comparable to Italy and South Korea. Yet few would make that comparison, in regards to quality of life, development level, et al. It's of course an artificial inflation, with Puerto Rico getting to ride the US economy. The second poorest state by output is Arkansas, at $42k. That prompts an odd situation of then comparing Arkansas versus countries with similar per capita output such as Japan, UK, France, New Zealand, etc. Does Kentucky ($47k) really compare with Finland ($50k)? Or is that mostly the benefit of riding the US output machine. Some states certainly compare better with Finland, such as Massachusetts or Washington for example. Except their output levels are astronomical at $82.5k and $74k. And all of that naturally opens up questions about Singapore or Australia's output benefit re China. Or Canada's benefit from being next to the US and isolated (versus eg EU nations being near each other and all competing for trade).

DiabloD3 7y ago

To be fair, those civilizations flourished during a time of a different climate than it is today.

easytiger 7y ago

Check your history on that. Climate was much more temperate in egypt 2000 years ago