TM, if the UK had a lower percentage of the world's GDP in 1978 than did the USSR, well, obviously, that would translate into a lower level of actual GDP also!
Look, here's the simple math. Europe as a whole had 28% of the world's GDP in 78. Using the US GDP in 1978, based on 1996 dollars, which was 4.8 trillion, the entire world GDP would have been 24 billion. (Because 4.8 trillion is 20% -- America's share at the time -- of 24 trillion.) So, Europe's share would have been 28% of 24 trillion, or 6.7 trillion.
If the top four Euro producers produced 80% of that, they would have produced 5.4 trillion. (That's not an unrealistic assumption, I don't think, considering countries like Spain, Holland, Sweden, Belgium are left out).
I have a feeling Germany's share of that would have been larger than the other three, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and divide it equally by four. That's 1.3 trillion for UK. That's obviously a high estimate, since the UK GDP today is not much higher, and they did go through quite a boom in the last 20 years. Anyway, that is OBVIOUSLY a lot lower than 9% (USSR) of 24 trillion, or 2.2 trillion.
So there you go.
Now, I have no idea what they procuced either. I guess they just consumed it internally, or exported to other Eastern Bloc nations.
EDIT
That's not to say that the USSR was more productive than the UK (or Germany, or France etc), they obviously were not. The USSR had 270 million people, about the same as all of W Europe, yet only produced a third as much, per capita. They were way behind in this respect.
(Interestingly, a 2.2 trillion GDP (1996 dollars), puts their per capita GDP at $8000/head of population in 1978. A lot better than the $1800 per head (for Russia) that the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development reports in 1999. Talk about going backwards!)
