Once again it is the migration and usage of language phrases that triggered this. Being exposed to the language elements of cotton production creates a catalytic event in applying those words and terms. Dr Johnson's dictionary was published in 1755, just prior to many of these inventions. Language terms provide the abstract concepts with sufficient clarity to turn them into reality.
Samual crompton lived in BOLTON fomerly Bolton-le-moors Lancashire at the hight of the cotton trade Bolton had 242 cotton mills 12 bleach works by 1980 no one mill survived. and before railways the cannals were the cargo highways
Great course package (MALTHUS UCDAVIS). Concepts useful for estimation of market size, eco growth, business life cycle, business valuation, impact of Schumpeter innovation, effects of incentives, role of govt and regulatory bodies, effects of public policies, taxation, regulations, demographic shift, trade and commerce mechanics etc. Can the CROWD on TH-cam suggest any more applications (& how) for these MALTHUSIAN CONCEPTS.
It would be nice to know the name of the speaker. Can someone tell us, and the date of the talk? The two factors that were essential preconditions to the Industrial Revolution were military victory on land and sea over Napoleon, and also the enormous capital available in the City of London stemming from the cotton and sugar trades. The capital mountain accumulated by Britain during the 18th century paid not just for all British factories, railways, housing, beautiful Regency architecture, basic infrastructure and coalmines but also all of the same globally in the next 130 years. In 1914 the UK owned most of South America, a continent where it had almost no military presence.
" victory over Napoleon" was a hardly a precondition of the industrial revolution , when Napoleon was defeated the industrial revolution in England had already been going for more than half a century.
What this guy is completely leaving out around 28:00 is that Hemp not cotton was the main textile fiber of that period .. I liked this lecture up to this point then I started to wonder the credibility of this lecture. The main export from the the pre revolution period colonies was sot weed , hemp, then cotton. The British Crown Corp. colonized India @the same time as America. The Crown Corp. and did not allow them to produce textiles.
Tropical Recording. Com Hemp? Do you mean flax which was used to produce linen? Hemp is used to produce ropes. The East Indian company did not prevent textiles being made in India, they made their money from it.
But the motivation of all of these revolutionaries is to get rich via the patent. So the patent is a common thread motive as the motivator for the industrial revolution. So the answer would be the endogenous reason. Institutions. Patent. End of discussion. Nobel prize please.
In Britain from 1800 to 1900. 20,000 Water-wheels decreased in number. Windmills decreased in number. The Englishman Thomas Newcomen's 1,500 Atmospheric Pumps disappeared. The Scotsman James Watt's 500 Steam Powered Engines and their descendants increased in number to 10,000,000 !!! For every SINGLE Water-wheel in 1800, we now had 500 James Watt type Steam Engines in 1900 !!! That's an increase of 500 times in Power Output for the whole country, and consequently a 500 times increase in Production capacity !!! This WAS the Industrial Revolution !!! The only things new at that time, that hadn't existed before, was James Watt's Invention of the World's first PRACTICAL Steam Powered Engine. Nothing to do with Spinning and Weaving or the myriad of so-called other " Industrial Revolution ". It was a Power Revolution!
Textiles the most important, you've got to be joking! Take away James Watt's Steam Power and Steam machinery and you'd have no Industrial Revolution! Just Newcomen 70 years old Atmospheric Pumps and Arkwright's 2000 years old Water-Wheels! It was James Watt's invention of the world's first PRACTICAL High Pressure Steam Engine in Scotland. That's what happened! James Watt dumped Thomas Newcomen's Atmospheric Power and Arkwright's Water-Power for Steam Power. To achieve this he had to invent a new engine, the world's first PRACTICAL High Pressure Steam Engine. It changed every single industry, including textiles, and created many new ones. Newcomen's pump supplied atmospheric power, not steam power. It was a 70 years long blind alley.
The textile industry represented a much bigger proportion of British exports than steam engines during the 18th century and the first half of the 19th century. Textiles were the dominant product of industrial Britain.
In Britain from 1800 to1900. 20,000 Waterwheels decreased in number. Windmills decreased in number. The Englishman Thomas Newcomen's 1,500 Atmospheric Pumps disappeared. The Scotsman James Watt's 500 Steam Engines and their descendants increased in number to 10,000,000 !!! For every SINGLE Waterwheel in 1800 there were now 500 James Watt type Steam Engines and their descendants in 1900 !!! The Power output of the whole country increased by 500 times, and so, Production capacity !!! In one human lifetime. And you don't need a flowing river of water for each one either! This WAS the Industrial Revolution, it was a Power Revolution and it was kicked off by only one single Invention, James Watt's Invention of the world's first PRACTICAL Steam Powered Engine in Scotland. It was nothing to do with efficiency, it was all due to the dumping of Newcomen's Atmospheric Power and Arkwright's Water-Power for Steam Power. Take away James Watt's Steam Power and you don't get an Industrial Revolution.
Industrial Revolution could not have occurred in England unless Robert Clive occupied Bengal in India, from where all the capital to build factories in England came. But the British historians do not mention that at all. The money came from the exploitation of Bengal in India since it was occupied by the East India Company in 1757. India also provided the market in the 19th century and as a result industry in India was wiped out due to the free trade with Britain.
" all the capital" are you sure about that? In fact the East India Company became less profitable after it morphed from a trading company into a state. Taking control of Bengal added huge costs to the EIC's operations.
Brilliant and comprehensive lectures, thank you for uploading!
Once again it is the migration and usage of language phrases that triggered this. Being exposed to the language elements of cotton production creates a catalytic event in applying those words and terms.
Dr Johnson's dictionary was published in 1755, just prior to many of these inventions. Language terms provide the abstract concepts with sufficient clarity to turn them into reality.
Role of scientific (and schooling) revolution? Chemistry and dyes?
Samual crompton lived in BOLTON fomerly Bolton-le-moors Lancashire at the hight of the cotton trade Bolton had 242 cotton mills 12 bleach works by 1980 no one mill survived. and before railways the cannals were the cargo highways
Great course package (MALTHUS UCDAVIS).
Concepts useful for estimation of market size, eco growth, business life cycle, business valuation, impact of Schumpeter innovation, effects of incentives, role of govt and regulatory bodies, effects of public policies, taxation, regulations, demographic shift, trade and commerce mechanics etc.
Can the CROWD on TH-cam suggest any more applications (& how) for these MALTHUSIAN CONCEPTS.
I luv it
It would be nice to know the name of the speaker. Can someone tell us, and the date of the talk? The two factors that were essential preconditions to the Industrial Revolution were military victory on land and sea over Napoleon, and also the enormous capital available in the City of London stemming from the cotton and sugar trades. The capital mountain accumulated by Britain during the 18th century paid not just for all British factories, railways, housing, beautiful Regency architecture, basic infrastructure and coalmines but also all of the same globally in the next 130 years. In 1914 the UK owned most of South America, a continent where it had almost no military presence.
If you are still curious, the prof is Gregory Clark at UC Davis.
" victory over Napoleon" was a hardly a precondition of the industrial revolution , when Napoleon was defeated the industrial revolution in England had already been going for more than half a century.
What this guy is completely leaving out around 28:00 is that Hemp not cotton was the main textile fiber of that period .. I liked this lecture up to this point then I started to wonder the credibility of this lecture. The main export from the the pre revolution period colonies was sot weed , hemp, then cotton. The British Crown Corp. colonized India @the same time as America. The Crown Corp. and did not allow them to produce textiles.
Tropical Recording. Com
Hemp? Do you mean flax which was used to produce linen? Hemp is used to produce ropes.
The East Indian company did not prevent textiles being made in India, they made their money from it.
But the motivation of all of these revolutionaries is to get rich via the patent. So the patent is a common thread motive as the motivator for the industrial revolution. So the answer would be the endogenous reason. Institutions. Patent. End of discussion. Nobel prize please.
Assaf Wodeslavsky
Except that the first innovators could not get the patent system to work for them ,see the previous lectures in this series.
In Britain from 1800 to 1900.
20,000 Water-wheels decreased in number.
Windmills decreased in number.
The Englishman Thomas Newcomen's 1,500 Atmospheric Pumps disappeared.
The Scotsman James Watt's 500 Steam Powered Engines and their descendants increased in number to 10,000,000 !!!
For every SINGLE Water-wheel in 1800, we now had 500 James Watt type Steam Engines in 1900 !!!
That's an increase of 500 times in Power Output for the whole country, and consequently a 500 times increase in Production capacity !!!
This WAS the Industrial Revolution !!!
The only things new at that time, that hadn't existed before, was James Watt's Invention of the World's first PRACTICAL Steam Powered Engine.
Nothing to do with Spinning and Weaving or the myriad of so-called other " Industrial Revolution ".
It was a Power Revolution!
Textiles the most important, you've got to be joking!
Take away James Watt's Steam Power and Steam machinery and you'd have no Industrial Revolution!
Just Newcomen 70 years old Atmospheric Pumps and Arkwright's 2000 years old Water-Wheels!
It was James Watt's invention of the world's first PRACTICAL High Pressure Steam Engine in Scotland. That's what happened!
James Watt dumped Thomas Newcomen's Atmospheric Power and Arkwright's Water-Power for Steam Power.
To achieve this he had to invent a new engine, the world's first PRACTICAL High Pressure Steam Engine. It changed every single industry, including textiles, and created many new ones.
Newcomen's pump supplied atmospheric power, not steam power.
It was a 70 years long blind alley.
The textile industry represented a much bigger proportion of British exports than steam engines during the 18th century and the first half of the 19th century. Textiles were the dominant product of industrial Britain.
In Britain from 1800 to1900.
20,000 Waterwheels decreased in number.
Windmills decreased in number.
The Englishman Thomas Newcomen's 1,500 Atmospheric Pumps disappeared.
The Scotsman James Watt's 500 Steam Engines and their descendants increased in number to 10,000,000 !!!
For every SINGLE Waterwheel in 1800 there were now 500 James Watt type Steam Engines and their descendants in 1900 !!!
The Power output of the whole country increased by 500 times, and so, Production capacity !!!
In one human lifetime.
And you don't need a flowing river of water for each one either!
This WAS the Industrial Revolution, it was a Power Revolution and it was kicked off by only one single Invention, James Watt's Invention of the world's first PRACTICAL Steam Powered Engine in Scotland.
It was nothing to do with efficiency, it was all due to the dumping of Newcomen's Atmospheric Power and Arkwright's Water-Power for Steam Power.
Take away James Watt's Steam Power and you don't get an Industrial Revolution.
sometimes he is funny but why students don't laugh
#HYP3
Industrial Revolution could not have occurred in England unless Robert Clive occupied Bengal in India, from where all the capital to build factories in England came. But the British historians do not mention that at all. The money came from the exploitation of Bengal in India since it was occupied by the East India Company in 1757. India also provided the market in the 19th century and as a result industry in India was wiped out due to the free trade with Britain.
" all the capital" are you sure about that?
In fact the East India Company became less profitable after it morphed from a trading company into a state. Taking control of Bengal added huge costs to the EIC's operations.
hi
#HYP3
#HYP3