Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Ride the Tiger with CD -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Proud Deplorable who wrote (133684)	10/9/2008 1:33:03 AM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 314075

There have been many empires. The all died when barbaric races that were more vigorous could harass and encroach on and overstrain far flung defenses -- and as taxes grew onerous upon the people, the defenders of the empire became effete, and lazy. Dependent on slavery, and corruption, the people could no longer bring to bear the resources necessary to face the resolute hordes who bore long standing grudges against their repression. Spengler predicted the same decline of the civilization and outlined his reasons for it in his book Decline of the West. He predicted it was inevitable and unstoppable. Similar financial crisis plagued Rome for centuries. They preceded the fall of Rome. A common factor that is always drawn upon is the debasement of coinage. But even before Rome had debasement it has runaway inflation and wage and price controls. The reasons seem to be that it tried to run a mercantile economy, and the strain of the transport, and subsidization of the frontier of the empire led to inflation and a lopsided plunder based economy. We may liken the Roman plunder to the influence of US trade in the Americas and elsewhere. WE never saw ourselves as plunderers but Yanqui Go Home was not an entreaty to hard working managers to take more time off. ******************************** Perhaps the most important factor associating the era of Commodus as the beginning of imperial decline was the status of the Roman economy. The lack of slave imports via military conquest in an agrarian slave labor economy, the absence of military plunder, the limited supply and expense of valuable metal extraction which undermined the monetary system, the cost of grain doles, public welfare (alimenta) and appeasement of the populace through expensive games (ie bread and circuses), the growing bureaucracy, cost of luxury imports, etc. all played pivotal roles in weakening the economic state. The increase in taxation, which developed into what might be considered a form of legal extortion, to compensate for the high cost of operating the state was not only economically stagnating, but had the effect of limiting voluntary contributions from the aristocracy and otherwise wealthy citizenship. Obama and other tax and spend plutocrats take note. ****************************************

To: Proud Deplorable who wrote (133684)	10/9/2008 1:49:59 AM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 314075

Joseph Tainter: (Things is getting too complex, W. Better head back to the hills and staht brewin' wiskey agin.) In his 1988 book "The Collapse of Complex Societies" Tainter presents the view that for given technological levels there are implicit declining returns to complexity, in which systems deplete their resource base beyond levels that are ultimately sustainable. Tainter argues that societies become more complex as they try to solve problems. Social complexity can include differentiated social and economic roles, reliance on symbolic and abstract communication, and the existence of a class of information producers and analysts who are not involved in primary resource production. Such complexity requires a substantial "energy" subsidy (meaning resources, or other forms of wealth). When a society confronts a "problem," such as a shortage of or difficulty in gaining access to energy, it tends to create new layers of bureaucracy, infrastructure, or social class to address the challenge. For example, as Roman agricultural output slowly declined and population increased, per-capita energy availability dropped. The Romans "solved" this problem by conquering their neighbours to appropriate their energy surpluses (metals, grain, slaves, etc). As a consequence of the growing Empire, the cost of maintaining communications, garrisons, civil government, etc. increased. Eventually, this cost grew so great that any new challenges such as invasions and crop failures could not be solved by the acquisition of more territory. At that point, the empire fragmented into smaller units. We often assume that the collapse of the Roman Empire was a catastrophe for everyone involved. Tainter points out that it can be seen as a very rational preference of individuals at the time, many of whom were actually better off (all but the elite, presumably[citation needed]). Archeological evidence from human bones indicates that average nutrition actually improved after the collapse in many parts of the former Roman Empire. Average individuals may have benefited because they no longer had to invest in the burdensome complexity of empire. In Tainter's view, while invasions, crop failures, disease or environmental degradation may be the apparent causes of societal collapse, the ultimate cause is diminishing returns on investments in social complexity[9]