Tapsearch Com EditorIt was better being a Slave in Rome
October 15th 2008 00:19
Bizarre Politics Reports:
Maureen Dowd says It's Rome all over again
Maureen Dowd, top columinist for the New York Times, writes about the decline and fall of the American Empire echoes the experience of the Romans, who also tumbled into the trap of overleveraged empire hussies - and as our sand-castle economy washes away.....
She enlists Gary D. Farney , a professor of history at Rutger University, to translate from English to Latin " The Battle of Gall", relating to our times when Small Money has been taking a hit for years with Big Money is now taking a hit. But, they get bailed out while the millions who lost their jobs, small businesses and homes, are outside looking in at the Big Bail Out of Big Money.
The article prompted us to review our old history book about of the Roman Empire.
The parallels are easy to compare. During the Roman times, it was better to be a slave than a freeman. Slaves had a roof over their heads and were able to have a family to raise more slaves. They were relatively confortable compared to the freemen. The freemen for many years had to survive outside the populated cities. When the factories came , they were employed. However, if they tried to unite in a guild or get more pay, they were fired and replaced by slaves. In many cases the slaves had to work around the clock to earn their keep. There were times when reform came but usually it did not last too long. Some slaves were switched to being tenant farmers but for the most part, not much changed in their lives.
Problems came when slave labor and cheap freemen labor blocked innovation. The Romans held on to their process too long. Instead of pursuing new technology, they stayed with the cheap manual slave labor. Societies who do not pay their workers enough money, usually do not have enough incentives left for new innovations. The econonmy becomes stale and dies away.
In Rome the investors used various financial tools to get more money and take over bankrupt cities and lands. It worked for a few but not for the general population. The Romans had no ships of their own. The Greeks had a major share of ships and the story of St Pauls tells us about his sailing on three different Greek ships in his journey to convert other nations. When Rome finally tried to build ships, their Empire was fading away.
In time the money games played out. The workers represented many different nationalities that were distant from the Roman culture. In the end there were not enough Romans to go around to support their empire and global economy.
The end was predictable - much like it is today in the U.S.A.
Federal Chairman Ben Bernanke told us to shop with our economic stimulus money for
"domestically produced goods" to save our economy but did not tell us where to find these goods since so much is imported. People did shop but the money went to where the products are made to help stimulate economies outside the USA. See Ben says buy USA and Greenspan Dancing in the Dark
It's Rome all over again.
She enlists Gary D. Farney , a professor of history at Rutger University, to translate from English to Latin " The Battle of Gall", relating to our times when Small Money has been taking a hit for years with Big Money is now taking a hit. But, they get bailed out while the millions who lost their jobs, small businesses and homes, are outside looking in at the Big Bail Out of Big Money.
The article prompted us to review our old history book about of the Roman Empire.
The parallels are easy to compare. During the Roman times, it was better to be a slave than a freeman. Slaves had a roof over their heads and were able to have a family to raise more slaves. They were relatively confortable compared to the freemen. The freemen for many years had to survive outside the populated cities. When the factories came , they were employed. However, if they tried to unite in a guild or get more pay, they were fired and replaced by slaves. In many cases the slaves had to work around the clock to earn their keep. There were times when reform came but usually it did not last too long. Some slaves were switched to being tenant farmers but for the most part, not much changed in their lives.
Problems came when slave labor and cheap freemen labor blocked innovation. The Romans held on to their process too long. Instead of pursuing new technology, they stayed with the cheap manual slave labor. Societies who do not pay their workers enough money, usually do not have enough incentives left for new innovations. The econonmy becomes stale and dies away.
In Rome the investors used various financial tools to get more money and take over bankrupt cities and lands. It worked for a few but not for the general population. The Romans had no ships of their own. The Greeks had a major share of ships and the story of St Pauls tells us about his sailing on three different Greek ships in his journey to convert other nations. When Rome finally tried to build ships, their Empire was fading away.
In time the money games played out. The workers represented many different nationalities that were distant from the Roman culture. In the end there were not enough Romans to go around to support their empire and global economy.
The end was predictable - much like it is today in the U.S.A.
Federal Chairman Ben Bernanke told us to shop with our economic stimulus money for
"domestically produced goods" to save our economy but did not tell us where to find these goods since so much is imported. People did shop but the money went to where the products are made to help stimulate economies outside the USA. See Ben says buy USA and Greenspan Dancing in the Dark
It's Rome all over again.
| 72 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Cibbuano
20/20 Filmsight
Science News
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
Apparently, from the news, the most American of all American goods are risky securities...