Re:Stop Pretending You’re Not Rich
by Consultant32452 on Monday June 12, 2017 @06:47PM
(#14541750)
>Teaching a man to fish isn't that helpful if you then own all of the poles and materials to make the poles and refuse to share.
In a world with free markets and free trade how would this be possible? I'm having a hard time imagining a single person or even a corporation owning, for example, all of the iron across the entire globe.
Re:Stop Pretending You’re Not Rich
by boomboomsubban on Monday June 12, 2017 @08:58PM
(#14542277)
It was about the grain dole, the rich bought all the land that the soldiers owned while they were off at war and then forced the state to auction the land won to the highest bidder. This led to the free market and free trade of soldiers, where competition is not at all in the public interest.
Re:Stop Pretending You’re Not Rich
by Consultant32452 on Monday June 12, 2017 @09:55PM
(#14542433)
Sorry, but stealing someone's land and turning them into a slave is not a free market. No one is putting Rome up as an ideal for its economic or political freedom. But why would the wealthy people even bother stealing the land in the first place? Because once they were able to control that capital (the land) they could produce more grain than subsistence levels and turn a profit. This incentive allowed Rome to produce so much grain they could offer a public dole in spite of its other ethical problems.
Re:Stop Pretending You’re Not Rich
by boomboomsubban on Monday June 12, 2017 @10:29PM
(#14542520)
They didn't steal the land, that came later afterwards the republic fell. They used their wealth in a free market political field to start wars that the citizen army left to fight, then stepped in to buy the land that the owners were too busy at war to maintain.
And no, control of that land isn't what enabled the grain dole. The lands won by the army did.
This isn't that different than capitalist Venezuela. Loan someone in Venezuela a bunch of arms, they fight, then they have to repay you and look at those discovered oil fields they have!
>as well as some slavery and conquering which impoverish some populations to enrich others).
Massive understatement, roughly 15% of the population of Rome were slaves and the Pax Romana is often seen as one of the causes of the breakdown of the economy. This is a common theme with capitalism and it's enrichment periods. It's very hard to argue that most of the world benefitted from colonialism.
>And Rome periodically put them back into grinding poverty by reducing the size of the grain dole because it was too expensive? Funding consumption can't reduce long term poverty (give a fish vs teach to fish).
And capitalism periodically put them back into grinding poverty with massive crashes or unchecked greed. Teaching a man to fish isn't that helpful if you then own all of the poles and materials to make the poles and refuse to share.