Re:Roman Empire per capita GDP shows the Romans were poorer ...
by dogruck on Wednesday October 11, 2017 @10:00PM
(#15455126)
Doesn't look too happy to me -- maybe because I'm over 30 and would be dead. Also, I loved my mother (who is dead) -- but at least she didn't die in childbirth.
Re:Roman Empire per capita GDP shows the Romans were poorer ...
by red75prime on Thursday October 12, 2017 @04:12AM
(#15456425)
Life expectancy at birth was low because of high children mortality. If you've made it to adolescence, you could expect to live 50-80 years.
https://condensedscience.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/life-expec...
Re:Roman Empire per capita GDP shows the Romans were poorer ...
by dogruck on Thursday October 12, 2017 @05:07AM
(#15456647)
Losing many of my children, wives, and loved ones sure would make me sad.
Re:Roman Empire per capita GDP shows the Romans were poorer ...
by red75prime on Thursday October 12, 2017 @08:23AM
(#15457429)
It would surely make you sad, if you had time-traveled there. If you had been living there, you probably would be a bit more fatalistic and willing to accept untimely deaths as a part of natural order, having no experience of better life.
Re:Roman Empire per capita GDP shows the Romans were poorer ...
by dogruck on Thursday October 12, 2017 @09:01AM
(#15457609)
Does your logic also apply to the millions of people living in slavery and profound poverty today?
I concede that people adjust their expectations to norms that surround them. But I also feel there are certain floors in the human condition -- the death of a child being one of those rock bottoms.
http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/10/01/55101875...