Comments by "David H" (@DavidHalko) on "Why Are Muslim Countries Poorer? - VisualEconomik EN" video.

  1. 1:15 - “problem with Muslim countries… colonialism” The United States were colonies, it did not seem to be a problem for their economy.
    57
  2. 1:50 - “… by 1000 [A.D.], the Muslim world accounted for 10% of global GDP” That is because that was the peak of their conquests, where they forced their subject to pay the Jizya. 3:20 - “what happened between the 10th and 16th centuries to bring the economic progress to a screeching halt?” Europeans started developing better weapons & ships, sailing around Africa to avoid pirates by sea & land, faster ships outran the Islamic Pirates so their booty diminished, and eventually the lower technology conquerors were kicked out of the Iberian Peninsula & even the Ottoman Empire was dissolved & from their colonial estates in North Africa & Middle East.
    37
  3. With more children being produced, that 50% workforce decrease should have been offset by many more productive members. (The person raising the children is in fact a productive member of society, the role would have to be paid for had it been costed out as child care, school teacher, and domestic work like cleaning & food shopping & clothes manufacturing! It should be, if not already, added into the GDP.) The issue is war. Many of those new children were lost to war. Productivity was severely reduced.
    13
  4.  @Omer1996E.C  - “gdp shrinks when it is taxed” - but it makes the conquerors rich, so the can invest & build, when they would not have the capital to do otherwise in their economic system. Foreign non-Muslim civilizations were forced to pay protection taxes (effectively Jizya) and that became a direct injection of funds into the conquerors, increasing GDP. The U.S., for example, when they became independent from Europe, disbanded their armed & naval forces, because they planned on being peaceful citizens of the world & never get involved in European affairs. Well, that lasted as long as the first Islamic Pirates, whose pirates ships captured & held them for ransom. The Islamic nations took huge sums of money from the US treasury… about ~50% to cover the US for the rest of that year! THAT is some nice GDP! LOL! The US fought 2 wars over it. In the end, it was Islamic Pirating that caused the US to create The Marines & maintain a standing army. All to avoid the yearly Jizya. Furthermore, sacking & raiding caravans & ships from foreign civilizations increase conqueror GDP since those losses were absorbed by the foreign civilizations being stolen from. In the end, it was this action that caused Gengis Khan to invade Central Asia, Middle East, and Eastern Europe. Islamic GDP boost eventually had its disadvantages. Islamic empires always had imperial conquests for exploitation. The Arab Slave Trade took their Black Gold from Africa, eunuchs were valued higher than non-eunuchs (because so many slaves died when cut & buried to their necks until the fever passed.) Ottoman Turks took a percentage of the most fit children from Eastern European Balkans for their slave armies, to die in battle against future conquests. The Persians took fit children from the Caucuses, for their slave armies, to fight against their conquests. Perhaps Islamic law prohibited unjust exploitation, but if the population being exploited were Kafirs, it was considered just. And there in is the problem. Once they run out of Kafirs to exploit, they had to expand their exploitation to find new ones. We saw this in North African conquests… North Africans were told to pay the Jizya, they said they were Muslims and did not have to pay. They were continually charged until there were revolts. Then, they got into the business, and decided to conquer farther west & across the straight to the Iberian Peninsula. Islamic conquerors just could not get enough of the booty & Jizya from conquered people groups, until they were forced not to, then their economies ceased growing quickly.
    9
  5.  @fatemad4012  - “overpopulation will cause wars” when people are told to want someone else’s land. The problem is not overpopulation, the problem is covetousness. God had it written from the days of Moses: “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.” ‭‭Exodus‬ ‭20‬:‭17‬ ‭NKJV‬‬
    3
  6.  @allahkakafirbanda1939  - “they themselves were the biggest invaders” - after Muslim pirates took Americans 🇺🇸 captive & wanted a yearly ransom [ie Jizya] to “prevent” future raids [when the US did not have a standing army] & the US had to create a standing military force to deal with them, then they did it again & there was a second military conflict, there was WW1 which the US got sucked into after many dead innocent Americans 🇺🇸 & then the US finally got involved, there was WW2 where the US got involved after having ships sunk & homeland invaded where Hitler aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood in Europe, there was Iraq 🇮🇶 where a bomb maker killed Americans on the US Homeland & retreated into Iraq 🇮🇶 & refused to give him up & an invasion later happened, there was Afghanistan 🇦🇫 where people who orchestrated the bombing of the US homeland were not given to America 🇺🇸 when requested & resulted in an invasion. It seems to be correct, had it not been for a very small minority of blood 🩸 thirsty Muslims who attacked America 🇺🇸 repeatedly, the US would not even have a standing army, military actions would have been completely unnecessary, and many forced invasions would have never occurred. Imagine a world where the US had no standing army - that would have been the world had Muslim Nations not started raiding US 🇺🇸 ships & killing Americans 🇺🇸. Interestingly enough, after the objectives were complete, the US left the various nations in peace, instead of annexing them like colonizing Islamic Caliphates, which committed genocide as they took over nations across the world. 🌍
    2
  7. Hi  @Grundewalt  - “Sounds terrible… economic analysis… economic benchmarks” That was a very fair assessment. I was trying to be as neutral as I possibly could be, when responding to the comment regarding 50% not being allowed to participate in the economic system. The reality is, there is an incredibly intangible aspect of children, which I did not express. I love young people, having worked with them for decades. Young people are the future, someone staying home to prepare them for the future is intangible!
    1