Post Here Your Favorite Romney Policy Stances

[C0ckney]

Here's an example of something that would actually support the notion that life was improving in the 19th century better than simply calling someone a moron:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/200...husian-insult/

life did improve in the 19th century. someone living in 1900 was better off on average than someone in 1800. however, standards of living did fall, for a very considerable proportion of the population in the late 18th and early 19th centuries and took a long time to recover.

the population went from being mostly agricultural labourers, who were partially dependent on selling their labour, but who also had a little land of their own and rights to use common land to raise animals and gather fuel, to being mostly people solely dependent on selling their labour. it was a two stage process in england. first the peasants were forced to sell their land, or even had it stolen through enclosure and then economic pressures forced them into the towns and factories.

there's a lot of interesting analysis which has been done about people's diets. this tells us that the peasant in the early 18th centuries ate better than his counterpart (in town or country) in the early 19th. analysis of the poor law records tells us that people became a lot less independent (there is an enormous difference between someone partially dependent on selling their labour, and someone wholly dependent upon it) and many were forced into pauperism. the profusion of workhouses is further evidence for this.

[C0ckney]

in a way it's a bit like slavery in the americas. the descendents of those people taken from africa and used as slaves in the new world undoubtedly lead better lives on average, than they would have led, if their ancestors had been left in africa. so in that sense slavery built a better future for millions. however, of course, it was a disaster for those who were actually enslaved.

[Guynemer]

I always find it fascinating the directions different threads will take.

[Lorizael]

Yeah, you never know quite what path a thread will take to get to Hitler.

[Guynemer]

You know who else liked to walk down paths?

The guy who killed Hitler.

[Lorizael]

Man, whoever killed Hitler, he musta had balls.

[C0ckney]

well i'm in the middle of translating a very old and somewhat racist children's book into english, so i need something keep me entertained beside the seemingly endless stream of monkey references...

[Guynemer]

Tintin?

[Guynemer]

Man, whoever killed Hitler, he musta had balls.

ISWYDT

[C0ckney]

Tintin?

nah, it's an old brasilian book written in the 1920s. the author was moderately well known as poet and novelist (i've read one his novels, it wasn't very good) but he did some children's book as well. i don't know why the guy wants this book translated, maybe there's a shortage of casual racism in today's children's literature or something, but it's his money...

[regexcellent]

Is he like the Brazilian Rudyard Kipling?

[Zevico]

Bill Gates would probably be a pretty good president. Seriously, why not? He seems like a smart dude who gets stuff done.

Being good at business and being good at politics are two different things.

[MrFun]

Incidentally, the people who were starving weren't really allowed to own capital, either. Which is kind of the whole point of capitalism. It's literally embedded in the name.

Minimum wage workers in capitalist societies own capital? That's news to me.

[MOBIUS]

life did improve in the 19th century. someone living in 1900 was better off on average than someone in 1800. however, standards of living did fall, for a very considerable proportion of the population in the late 18th and early 19th centuries and took a long time to recover.

the population went from being mostly agricultural labourers, who were partially dependent on selling their labour, but who also had a little land of their own and rights to use common land to raise animals and gather fuel, to being mostly people solely dependent on selling their labour. it was a two stage process in england. first the peasants were forced to sell their land, or even had it stolen through enclosure and then economic pressures forced them into the towns and factories.

there's a lot of interesting analysis which has been done about people's diets. this tells us that the peasant in the early 18th centuries ate better than his counterpart (in town or country) in the early 19th. analysis of the poor law records tells us that people became a lot less independent (there is an enormous difference between someone partially dependent on selling their labour, and someone wholly dependent upon it) and many were forced into pauperism. the profusion of workhouses is further evidence for this.

Indeed. Perhaps the Olympic opening ceremony might start making sense to people reading this thread now?

Another reason why people from the Welsh coal mining valleys have such a massive chip on their shoulders with regards to the English oppressors! It's actually an incredibly fascinating period of time if you take the time to look into it: The Merthyr Rising; Dic Penderyn; The Red Flag; The Chartist Movement; The Rebecca Riots; Kier Hardie; The birth of the Labour Party...

And that's just for starters!

Americans can get a flavour of what was similarly happening in the US by reading the book King Coal, by Upton Sinclair

[Jaguar]

Minimum wage workers in capitalist societies own capital? That's news to me.

Anyone in a capitalist country can own capital. That's the beauty of it. Some of my Roth IRA was earned from a $9/hour wage when I was 17.