Tweet
Personally I prefer to blame the "right place at right time" theory. IE there was going to be an IR at some point, and somebody had to be top dog during it... certainly the iron/coal and political situation helped, but at some point you have to acknowledge that sometimes things just happen the way they do.
-
<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote. -
I think most of us are ignoring the utter stupidity of some of the statements thereOriginally posted by Proteus_MST
Before 1800 there was no gain in living conditions compared to the stone ages?
So things like the roman times were just some kind of fantasy invented by authors of history books?
<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.Comment
-
As well as cannibals may have difficulties to assimilate into a non-cannibal society I guess.Societies that went straight from the hunter-gatherer state to the modern economy may have historically rooted, cultural disadvantages in competing in a capitalist world.
Same vice versa.
BlahComment
-
Ooooooh. Let us miss the point!Originally posted by Kidicious
Cotton being available in large supplies should be included in 1) and just having an ideal climate for manufacturing won't get you there without the raw materials.
**** oMaximoso" expacularaiOne day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
I'm sure there's not one.Originally posted by Dauphin
Ooooooh. Let us miss the point!
**** oMaximoso" expacularai
I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
Only if you think geographic proximity is the same as influence or control on territories thousands of miles away.One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
Couldn't other features of Medieval England account for the lack of growth? I'm thinking bubonic plague, primitive labor system, complete lack of upward mobility, Viking invasions...maybe the history experts can straighten me out here.But this is the convenient fantasy of modern economists. Medieval England was much more pro-market than even Thatcherite England – the average government tax rate then was less than 1 per cent – yet achieved no growth.Comment
-
They put that online on the Times website???
Someone over there has been smoking the peace pipe too much
"An archaeologist is the best husband a women can have; the older she gets, the more interested he is in her." - Agatha Christie
"Non mortem timemus, sed cogitationem mortis." - SenecaComment
-
............and if someone would please tell this 48 year old Grampalicious, who has been part of the work force for 33 years, one more time how I have it made because I am white and therefore am guaranteed a great job and I should somehow feel responsible for minorities not holding my position,
This allways kills me, no one gets me out of bed to work an 18-20 hour shift three days in a row, no one said I am guarenteed anything!
But maybe some scientists way back when were bored and made me, nah, dun think so........
All my ancestors have been workers and they are German,Irish and Canadian descent, so I am pretty much a Maflower melting pot off spring as well
GrampaliciousHi, I'm RAH and I'm a Benaholic.-rahComment
-
You're taking this seriously?Originally posted by Proteus_MST
Before 1800 there was no gain in living conditions compared to the stone ages?
So things like the roman times were just some kind of fantasy invented by authors of history books?
The English were just lucky to be a filthy people who squatted happily above their own faeces
That should have been written by a frog.(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.Comment
-
or a Scot, or an Irishman.(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.Comment
-
It's really a very screwed up article. Medieval England didn't experience economic growth because it didn't engage in trade; it didn't expand the factors of production. To say that it was pro-market is just absurd.Originally posted by Elok
Couldn't other features of Medieval England account for the lack of growth? I'm thinking bubonic plague, primitive labor system, complete lack of upward mobility, Viking invasions...maybe the history experts can straighten me out here.I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
There's a simpler explanation.
Capitalism can establish itself only where the potential workers are ignorant and craven, so it is no surprise that it first arose in England.Only feebs vote.Comment
-
Max Weber would disagreeI will never understand why some people on Apolyton find you so clever. You're predictable, mundane, and a google-whore and the most observant of us all know this. Your battles of "wits" rely on obscurity and whenever you fail to find something sufficiently obscure, like this, you just act like a 5 year old. Congratulations, molly.
Asher on molly bloomComment
-
Higher living standards are created by labor unions, spreading the wealth among all those who take part in creating it.Originally posted by Kidicious
The high standard of living is due to the colonization of the New World and the exploitation of slaves. Free markets and capitalism create wealth, not higher living standards.
Comment
Comment