Done!Michael K Gray wrote:Shades of Amy?Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:I was just arguing that the Empire relying on exponential growth seems factually wrong to me.
It feels right therefore...The Roman Empire relied on profit to fund its empire.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:I believe it was a self sustained entity, and didn't "need" more growth after the Hadrian Wall and the Rhine river were established as final borders (to the North, at least). I may very well be entirely wrong about this, though.
Profit requires an excess of input over output.
An energy imbalance.
This is 'do-able' if one's outputs are (at best) less than the long-term naturally harvestable energy inputs from sunshine, wind, tidal, geothermal, and neutrino flux.
When combined with exploitation of local resources with which to manifest the realisation of these sources, the Roman Empire, the Incas, the Rapa Nui, the USA, exhibit the ultimate consequence of Malthus' unique and seminal observation.
Vis: That consumption will inevitably outstrip growth.
It has yet to be proven false.
Start one.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Fascinating stuff anyway. New thread for Roman history?
If I must really be honest, I think we (southern Europeans) are still perpetuating the Roman Empire's culture in many ways. Our culture, laws, political system, food...etc all seem to stem from Rome. I know I'm not being very skeptical about this, but it's an illusion I really enjoy. I'm going to brag for a second and state that I live within walking distance of some fabulous Roman ruins (Cemenelum). Also a couple hours driving distance from Arles, Orange, Vaison-La-Romaine, Nimes... My mother lives in Périgueux (Vesuna), where you can find one of the most elegant archeological museums ever conceived...
And I eat Pissalat...