The poor free Romans were basically all on wellfare. I'd have to push myself harder than I care to to come up with any innovation that was not just a military improvement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian
Printable View
The poor free Romans were basically all on wellfare. I'd have to push myself harder than I care to to come up with any innovation that was not just a military improvement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian
Seriously? :rolleyes:
Profit margins were getting lower but were still there. However when you tack on the risk of the Royal Navy stopping you, seizing your ship and cargo with no compensation and possibly doing something unpleasant to your person in an exercise of summary justice, the profit margin might not be worth the risk compared to other, less controversial cargoes. The political will to act against the slave trade might not have arisen if the margins had still been at their prior higher levels though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
I don't think the Roman's actually invented any of those things, though.
They certainly innovated on them all though. Pre-Roman roads may have existed but were nothing like Roman roads. Same with the aqueducts, sanitation, etc, etc, etc
To say that the greatest ancient empire never innovated anything is just such bovine manure - but fits with Hazir's hatred of the British. I guess he just hates success.
Interesting how you make a comment on the lack of economic merit of slavery about Britain.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
I didn't.
I know they're mostly played by British actors in film, but I don't think the Romans were really British. And yeah, the romans innovated - and invented - plenty I was just being nitpicky.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Actually you did. You also missed the fact that I excluded the military from that statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
just to put it to rest:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_technology
Never would have thought anyone would actualy try to claim Romans didn't innovate or I would have posted it originaly.
LOL, don't think I was clear. I meant Hazir hates the British, he seems to have no regard for the Romans. Its tall poppy syndrome. I suppose the Greeks never did anything for philosophy either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
As for the military, while Roman Roads were a military product, other innovations mentioned such as aqueducts, sanitation etc were not. To say that Romans didn't innovate (even excluding the military) is just a joke.
I think the Romans could have done a lot better than forcing pretty much all their free citizens on wellfare yes. You think that having everybody who has a vote in elections should be on the dole? I am quite surprised. I may also point out that the Roman empire lasted between 500 and 1500 years, depending on where you start to count and where you stop to count. I am under-impressed indeed with the innovations they have produced in all that time. Even the Brits managed to innovate more in a much shorter time.
Obviously someone fails at reading relatively short well compiled text. It took centuries to just rediscover some of the innovations Rome enjoyed some lasting as long as 19th century! It sure takes a lot impress Hazir:) Or is it similar to Drago and you cant grasp the concept of innovation if you have not recently bought a flat screen TV produced in the Roman Empire.
Could it have done better if it did things differently, sure maybe, we will never know, but the fact is it did better then anyone else during its time and many centuries after.
Nothing in that article contains anything even remotely new for me. It is far less than you could have expected from an empire that was around for at least 500 years (if you see Roman empire as the empire run from Rome, which is rather more limited than experts would). They built aqueducts and plumbing when Caesar ran the show, having them still around 500 years later is not proof of an innovative society.Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian
It's not the fact that roman structures still stand today, it's the fact that technologies invented by Rome remained unmatched many centuries after it seized to exist, some of which remained so until 19th century that should impress you.
Let me try this with small words; if you stay the same for 500 years, you are not very innovative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian
Also you don't seem to understand the difference between invention and innovation. It should make one despair to see an empire so brimming with potential not using any of it.
Hazir says
and what we all see is "since it doesn't advance to cause of contemporary total European integration, it's worthless"Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
You've got any idea how stupid this kind of comment makes you look? It is no coincidence that you and Steely landed in my ignore list at about the same time. Randblade at least believes in what he writes, you're just acting like a jackass.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
My point was and remains, that slavery does not benefit a society and that it actually holds back innovation. Good to know that you're one of those people who thinks slavery is a good thing. Also, you realise that as european integration was concerned the Roman Empire was a roaring success? So much so that all strive for integration in Europe ever since inevitably at some point gets labelled Roman Empire mark X ?
Your "point" is meaningless. What started this thread really going? Your constant pissing match with Rand. What started this latest tangent? Your constant pissing match with Rand. What do we all see every time you're that dismissive or contemptuous of something? Your constant pissing match with Rand. It always ends up tying back to that somehow as we press you for details and explanations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
If I call you a despicable cunt again, will you put me back on it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Brilliant and true! :haha:Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
The Romans were the single most innovative society in the Ancient world. Yes the Egyptians and Greeks were incredibly innovative too - and I'm sure before them the Mesopotamians were too. But I love how that the Roman Empire was such a roaring success it can be compared to even now - yet apparently at the same time it was nothing anyway, not such a big deal, nothing to look at here.
The reality is that for 1500 years between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Industrial Revolution that was the pinacle of civilisation. Yes the British finally started to firstly catch up with and then finally innovate past the Romans with the Industrial Revolution but that was well over a thousand years in the making, with true credit going to the Italians etc for the Renaissance too (again look at the meaning behind that word). There is a reason that we use the phrase Dark Ages and it isn't a lack of physical luminosity.
I think they most striking think about the Romans to the modern eye is how close their mentality was to ours when it came to organizing their society - they didn't invent roads, but they did take the concept and turn it into an what was essentially a kind of early mass transit system, featuring standardized widths, and a system of way stations and changing stations.
I had no idea that Turkey observes a national irony day at all, let alone so soon after Republic Day.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
For the military.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
Yeah, like I have to agree with the observation that I am obsessed with the EU or the euro. It's as wrong as your assumption that I am Turkish.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
And who made it about 'me' again? Hey, that would be you, like every single time.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
Just because I have more free time on my hands than anybody on this board besides CGT doesn't mean I want to spend it humouring your idiotic urge to have everything backed up three digits past the digital point. But even if I would, that is not really the point because you are not addressing my position, which is still that slavery does not benefit a society and that it was a drag on Roman society. You are merely addressing what you think I am preoccupied with.
Just another example of your generally being a twat.
Out of curiosity, in which way was slavery a drag on Roman society wrt innovation? I tried google but couldn't find anything immediately useful.
Slave labour competed with free Roman citizens who were not of senatorial or equestrian rank. That is pretty much everybody in Rome but the happy few. Basically you can say that it didn't pay for a Roman citizen to work, besides which working for your money got a social stigma attached to it. People did a lot of inventing, but it simply wouldn't cross their mind to put their inventions to something as base as 'work' (not much unlike classical Greeks by the way). A rather severe disconnect between invention and innovation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Putting their inventiveness to work in the military on the other hand was seen as honorable, which is why pretty much all innovation we see over the hundreds of years of Roman empire is seen in the realm of the military.
The first paragraph of this article sums it up nicely.
Interesting day today; Germany's debt auction flopped. But it's not so clear as to why exactly.
Next few months are going to be interesting; it looks like we're going to see the first example of 'enhance cooperation' as made possible by the Lisbon Treaty in the EU. At least that's what I read into the latest German/French plans about closer fiscal union for the eurozone. The interesting question that of course causes is, what does it mean for the EU members that are not using the euro yet? Will they be asked to join this enhance cooperation group before they are allowed to join the euro? I mean, that is presently not one of the requirements for entering the EMU.
If Berlin and Paris choose this route it effectively destroys every hope for the Cameron administration of 'clawing back' powers from Brussels and of course - what I really love about this procedure - is that referenda in individual countries no longer can stop progress for all other countries.
If I were Merkel I would simple exclude every country that doesn't sign up to this enhance cooperation from the eurobonds (which I think we'll see once this deal is done) .
Pssst, it's GGT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
And yes, I have a lot of "free time" on my hands, mostly because I'm semi-retired. That means I don't have to spend 40-60 hours/week in classes or at work. I have more time to surf the web for news, read trans-continental news, and follow the leads and links.
I also have more time to address those who think "we" are preoccupied with things we're really not, like this forum. Fuzzy likes to throw his comments in about forum personalities, calling a pissing match or emotive posting instead of addressing the big picture, the global picture.
It's quite frustrating, really. Hazir, you're one of the few here I can think of that's consistently been watching and reading the global picture. And seeing the pits and flaws. You've not been called a Chicken Little as I have....but you've been called a Europhile, among other things. Those labels totally miss the point.
People would have to be crack-smoking addicts to NOT see what a dire situation we're in, and only by our toes right now. And by "we", I mean all the developed nations.
And what is the point, praytell? J00s? The sky is falling? The sky is falling because of j00s?
No, we don't all miss the "global picture," we just don't all get our rocks off panicking about every cyclical downturn and blaming all our problems on those who have it better than us.
Anybody who is not very nervous about the ongoing financial crisis is living with his head in the sand. Meltdown may happen or not, but it is a real possible outcome for the present situation. We are not dealing with a cyclical downturn. That is merely an aggravating factor as we speak. I am completely deleveraged, and even I feel bloody uncertain about what kind of a situation we will have in a year or two.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
Also, demanding accountability for this financial crisis has got very little to do with 'blaming problems on those who have it better'. It has got everything to do with the fact that the 'masters of the universe' were playing a game of smoke and mirrors that all was about inflated balancesheets so that they could maximize their bonuses (or more precisely make off with the money) and let us deal with the mess. People are right to expect that these people are dealt with like any con man whose game came out. We see preciously little of that happening, either in the US or Europe.
Why hate on the British? Is it such a bad thing that where ever British/English culture prevailed, a prosperous society flourished?Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Are there any truly English speaking failed states in the world?
:D yeah, you'd have to say that because only by making 'english speaking' a requirement you can avoid a long list of failed states that gained their independence from Great Britain. Mind to explain Pakistan away? Or the beneficiairy effects of British influence in Iran? (I know the latter wasn't a colony technically speaking).
None that I can think of. And even those that aren't English speaking, such as Hong Kong and Singapore, attest to the positive impact of the British empire and their embracement of Western/English culture/knowledge.
It's interesting actually, out of all the European colonial powers, the British/English were the only ones who left a trail of prosperity and ultimately made todays world possible. We have a lot to thank them for, but these days everyone prefers to down play their contribution and instead focus on the negative aspects, because civilisation is such a bad thing.
Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Somalia, Sudan, Iraq, Kenya, Yemen (Aden), Burma.Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco
And even though it's not really a failed state issue; the Middle East Conflict keeping us busy right up till today, brought to you under the auspices of the British empire.
Well I'm not familiar with these two so I don't know what to comment. But compare the British track record with any other European colonial power.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
But if it makes you feel better, the Dutch were great too :D since they found Australia (and New Zealand) for the British and New York :p
The question was (cunningly) phrased as 'english-speaking'. I replied by simply taking the list of failed states, and check if they had been under British rule. About half of all failed states were. I didn't bother to go down to the states being on the verge of being declared a failed state.Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco
Alright then.
Well it still doesn't take away from the fact that the British empire created the modern world, more or less. Anyway, you have places like Hong Kong and Singapore that did end up becoming prosperous states, so it isn't soley a question of British rule.