Some questions

[Pana]

I've been musing about this for the past six months. Keep in mind that I am not an economics person so my terms are probably not correct but hopefully I'll get the gist of it over.

Prior to the mass industrialization that took place over the last few hundred years, what was the economy before that based on? Did it play as big of a part then as it seems to now (i.e. influence on other economies). Prior to industrialization people largely did without or made their own/grew their own. So what fueled the economy. The economy as reflected in the different stages of a countries development. Like prior to the revolution in France when it was a monarchy. Or like in Canada before the surge in industrialization?

Is a world economy just a modern phenomenon? Or would spice trade, silk trade, tea trade a few hundred years ago also be considered a world economy?

[Egg]

It was just manual labor as opposed to machine labor in cities and industry. Labor was more specialized.

The standard of living and world population increased with industrialization.

But, yes, trade was huge. The East India Company out of Britain is a good example.

Trade in resources has been big forever really.

[Egg]

Think of it this way, colonialism was a HUGE part of the western european economies. Look into mercantalism and colonialism as those were the economic processes following feudalism.

[Dr Exile]

Pana,

Read about the Hanseatic League, cir 1150 AD.

A somewhat tolerable article can be found here:

http://depts.washington.edu/baltic/papers/hansa.html

[Pana]

But was the economy a monstrous thing (relative to the times) then as it is now? It seems that when there was more self-sufficiency, the economy was smaller. At least in my convulted thinking on this.

Edited to add, after your comment...

Colonialism - did it fuel only the higher economic stratum of the time?

[Pana]

Pana,

Read about the Hanseatic League, cir 1150 AD.

A somewhat tolerable article can be found here:

http://depts.washington.edu/baltic/papers/hansa.html

Thank you, I will.

[Egg]

Your last question is a really good one - yes there was a world economy - imports and exports were around but, I believe, economies were far more insular than they are now. It's oil and electricity that really changed everything. Also, a lot of what you see happening in the economy now is from the Markets (wall street, the nasdaq, the Dow). At one time, the price of a company in the market was based on what the company actually produced and sold, now it's mostly based on speculation. There are plenty of companies that don't really turn a profit in the real world but only do based on speculation.

[Egg]

But was the economy a monstrous thing (relative to the times) then as it is now? It seems that when there was more self-sufficiency, the economy was smaller. At least in my convulted thinking on this.

Edited to add, after your comment...

Colonialism - did it fuel only the higher economic stratum of the time?

I agree.

Well, look at it this way, yes the rich were the ones really making out but soldiers were employed in larger numbers and so were merchants and sailors. Not much different than today really. Back then the PTB didn't have to come up with excuses to colonize, now we need a war and a reason to go to war to do so.

remember this too, the bankers were given out money at something like 100 to 1 (they'd lend out 100 ounces of gold for every 1 ounce they actually had). When the European monarchs realized this they reduced it to 9 to 1 (what we have today basically). Why they didn't do away with it entirely was because they needed the money to colonize Africa and other parts of the world. To pay soldiers, to buy and build ships, etc.

[Pana]

Chomsky called the U.S. economy a war economy. Egg, this is what you are describing, yes?

It's kind of like back in tribal days when you would raid another tribe and take away the booty (women, people with some kind of specialized knowledge, weapons, pots and pans - which were the resources back then)?

[Egg]

Chomsky called the U.S. economy a war economy. Egg, this is what you are describing, yes?

It's kind of like back in tribal days when you would raid another tribe and take away the booty (women, people with some kind of specialized knowledge, weapons, pots and pans - which were the resources back then)?

We still are the resource, Pana. In these fiat economies, the money is legitimate until we legitimize it through our labor. So many of us are in debt that we feel forced to work. They've sugar coated slavery as far as I'm concerned.

But, yeah, I'm with Chomsky. We are most certainly a war economy. The three things the US still produces well are films, tools and war (including weapons and actual war).