It's basically two ratios of per capita GDP, per capita gross domestic product, so average income.

less energy per capita.

Now we're going to change and look at the level of per capita income.

One, the red line, is the ratio of British to Indian per capita income.

Last in Europe GDP per capita.

Here it is, which says that the bigger you are the more you have per capita, unlike biology higher wages, more super creative people per capita as you get bigger, more patents per capita, more crime per capita.

Carbon dioxide emission, metric ton per capita.

From now on we count per capita.

We were having negative per capita growth.

Country A has surpassed Country B with 700 per capita GDP as compared with 650 per capita GDP.

That's not U.S. GDP per capita, which will be over a million, but world GDP per capita 200,000.

But from now on, we count per capita.

Per capita food production is up by a third.

And this is GDP per capita on this axis.

And everyone is responsible for the per capita emission.

Here is GDP per capita from 1900 to 1929.

Country A, in 1990, had about 300 per capita GDP as compared with Country B, which had 460 in per capita GDP.

China still has large areas of underdevelopment and per capita income is a better measure of the sophistication of the economy.

Look, there's a very little known fact countries that have a legal average income per capita of 1,000 dollars don't produce drugs.

I would instead put income per person.

Less petrol stations per capita the bigger you are not surprising.

The per capita average in Africa, India, China, Japan, EU, Russia.

A hundred dollars per capita, per person, is something that any state government can afford to do.

When the economic growth goes to eight percent and population growth drops to 1.5 percent, then per capita income is doubling every nine years.

You know, Americans use seven times the CO2 per capita as Chinese.

So it'll show you GDP per capita, population, longevity, that's about it.

And these are countries from United States here, with 40,000 per capita,

Well we've shown you that GNP per capita doesn't make any difference.

I'm not sure how to do that or reducing per capita consumption.

Income per person 400, 4,000, and 40,000 dollars.

Income per person. I can put that here.

Over the last hundred years, the average human lifespan has more than doubled, average per capita income adjusted for inflation around the world has tripled.

They're saying the total income fell by 1.4 , but the population must have grown by about 1.5 , and so the average per capita was 3 .

The vast majority of its people are living in really miserable poverty despite an income per capita that's on a par with that of Portugal.

And China was emitting 0.6, and India was emitting 0.32 tons per capita.

Up and to the right bigger population density and higher per capita consumption.

And here the income per person in comparable dollars.

When India was growing at about three, 3.5 percent and the population was growing at two percent, its per capita income was doubling every 45 years.

You can see the great diversity of population densities and of per capita consumptions.

And now I have income per person on this axis.

But if you look at that same index of health and social problems in relation to GNP per capita, gross national income, there's nothing there, no correlation anymore.

But if you come back to a poorer country, where the GNP per capita is,

And on this axis, I'm showing dollars per person in income.

Even at that rate, by 2100 average GDP per capita in the world will be 200,000.

And yet manages to spend half of what the Unites States spends on health per capita.