Discrepancies everywhere

From my old notes:

In Essays in Persuasion Keynes touched on the ideas of Professor Commons. Commons described three economic epochs--the Era of Scarcity, the Era of Abundance, and the Era of Stabilization. The era of scarcity, Keynes notes, was "the normal economic state of the world up to (say) the fifteenth or sixteenth century". The era of abundance occupied the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and "culminated gloriously in the victories of laissez-faire". And in 1925 Keynes wrote that "we are now entering" the era of stabilization, identifying Professor Commons as "one of the first to recognize" it.

From Brad DeLong Introducing Partha Dasgupta

Back in 1800, nearly the entire world lived in dire poverty...

//

Which is it? Global poverty in 1800, or the glorious culmination of the era of abundance?

You could say that for us "the world" is the world, but for Keynes the world was only Europe, or only part of Europe. And maybe you'd be right. Still, DeLong's statement creates an impression that Keynes contradicts.

Or maybe you are thinking that compared to the way things are now, life in the year 1800 was a life of poverty everywhere, even Europe. But of course if we look back in time it seems that way. If we imagine ourselves in the year 1800, looking back in time, we would have to say that we were far better off then than those who came before.

"Back in 1800, nearly the entire world lived in dire poverty". Those words from DeLong are the first words in his "Introducing Partha Dasgupta" post. For me they put his whole post in doubt.

Maybe it's just a little oversimplification on DeLong's part. So?