23-11-2004 04:37									#181
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Then the Danes will not have a country to come home to, if that is their attitude. Just because this is what you want to see doesn't mean that all the groups that are in Denmark will also want this.

Since danes don't don't mess around as in the good old days (~1000 AD), most are at home, so that is not a problem. You are not very clear, but i guess that your second statement are about immigration (otherwise it don't make sense) - well, immigration has been reduced dramatically over the last three years, and except from some small political parties, the common opinion in both public and political are that it's the way it should be.

quote: Originally posted by Heresson I think it was better for the peasants because they were not bound to the land (were they?), but the general level of science, of agriculture etc dropped. Almost entire Gaul was farmland in Roman times, almost as it is today. In MA, it was largely covered with forests. The number of population reduced too.

I must admit that i have never heard about a period of time where peasants wasn't bound to the land except for the last 40 - 50 years. About Gaul beeing pure farmland, there you are totally wrong. On the contrary, most parts was wilderness and only small areas around cities was cultivated.

Just take the numbers from http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/RomTab.html Acoording to this there was approx 7 mill working roman people in the year 47. Agreed, that are only roman citizens, but even with a factor 2 for the noncitizens, you won't be able to that kind of agriculturing that you are talking about.

Barinthus : if you add a 0 i'll agree.

Kuci : first we need to get a foothold on terminus.

Ben : I ask the same question as Kontiki.

	23-11-2004 04:43									#182
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Blackcat - as in 50,000,000? Ok sure, you got a deal. It's vastly better than 5,000,000,000!!!!

	23-11-2004 05:03									#183
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Yuk, sorry, i really meant approx 2-3 bill. - used to much time counting romans :-) Thats a little more zeros and a minor nuber.

It should be possible to get a balance with that number, but as it looks it we are in short time reaching 10 to 12 bill and then i think the fan are going to have trouble to cope all what will hit.

	23-11-2004 05:12									#184
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom Hmm- then who were those peasants who farmed the land in Augustan times?

Did I write peasants? Damn, I meant serfs.

	23-11-2004 05:14									#185
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Ned No doubt you identified yourself has a religion-hating bigot first.

Actually, I keep my religion hating bigroty to myself if I know what's good for me. I only discuss my views with close friends or people on the internet who can't hit me. Religious people tend to be rather violent.

	23-11-2004 15:37									#186
	Get a bigger avatar today!

No, I agree, Che. Christians can be violent, mainly because their beliefs are so strong.

Here is a bit of history I was unaware of. But in 1897, a revolution broke out in Brazil lead by a radical catholic. They defeated several Brazilian armies before being wiped out to the last man. Fascinating.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...604#post3452604

	23-11-2004 18:30									#187
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Assuming Cantor is correct. Heck, there weren't even peasants in the Roman Empire 'till it was declining. I doubt one should compare the end of the Empire with the flowering of the Middle Ages. Interesting sidebar. It was with the triumph of Christianity that Rome collapsed. Now that Christianity is triumphing in America, we too seem to be on the verge of collapse.

Actually in a way the fall of Rome was sort of revenge for centuries of bad habits. When the Huns began encroaching upon eastern europe tribes flocked to the empire for shelter. One of those tribes was the Visigoths. Upon being allowed entry they were herded into a pen and given an inadequate amount of food to support their population. The Roman troops guarding them then bargained with the hapless Goths: sell your children into slavery in exchange for food. Eventually the Visigoths were given vacant land to settle upon, but the men were forced into the Roman army. Over a decade or so their families were continually ill treated by the Romans. Eventually a leader arose from the Goths employed by the Romans. He gathered about him an army trained and armed by the Romans, marched upon Rome and sacked it. Rome never recovered, for soon afterwards the Huns began raiding the empire.

	23-11-2004 19:11									#188
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Hence the prayer, "Jesus, save me from your followers." I don't think any Christians understand their religion, since Jesus was trying to show people how to be better Jews, not create a whole new religion. Boy did you people ever get it wrong.

Christians = better Jews
"Jews" = worse Jews

Modern Judaism is as different from the one 2000 years ago as Christianity

Also, remember when a pagan lady stepped to Jesus and took some of his power to heal herself. Jesus said that it's not good to feed the dogs when the children are in need or sth, and the lady replied that even dogs get some food from the table of their masters, and He agreed.
Such behaviour does not quite fit Jesus (calling pagans dogs), and I think that perhaps it's an interpolation, but still, it's in the Bible.

quote: I must admit that i have never heard about a period of time where peasants wasn't bound to the land except for the last 40 - 50 years

Perhaps in Denmark...

quote: About Gaul beeing pure farmland, there you are totally wrong. On the contrary, most parts was wilderness and only small areas around cities was cultivated.

You are wrong.

quote: Acoording to this there was approx 7 mill working roman people in the year 47. Agreed, that are only roman citizens, but even with a factor 2 for the noncitizens, you won't be able to that kind of agriculturing that you are talking about

Are You kidding? This numbers are the numbers of all Roman citizens. You should multiply it at least several times to get the number of the empire. And it is in no relevance to the population of Gaul.

	24-11-2004 01:47									#189
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I think the count of Roman citizens only counted men who were citizens. As the link stated, until Social War, Roman citizens consisted mainly of the citizens of Rome itself. After the social war it included Italians in southern Italy. It wasn't until the early 200s that Rome made every male of the Empire a citizen.

It was Emperor Diocletian who created the system that tied people to their occupations. He did so because people began to abandon farms and other occupations due to the price controls he imposed on Empire.

Price controls also lead to a decline and eventually to a collapse of trade. In its place people began to barter to pay for things. Without money, people also had an increasingly difficult time paying taxes.

In the closing decades of the Empire, taxes became so crushing that citizens farmers sold their land to the local senator, who did not have to pay taxes, and was given the right to continue to farm the land in exchange for a share of the crop and protection from an increasingly lawless environment.

The rise in banditry also made the roads unsafe. Trade declined. Soon too the maintenance of the roads themselves ended.

All this time Christianity continue to spread in the western Empire. Partly because of the pacifism taught by the church, Romans increasingly refused to serve in the Army. As a result, the Army increasingly became composed of German mercenaries where only the officer corps were Roman citizens. This had the unfortunate effect of teaching the Germans how to properly arm themselves and fight so that the Roman advantage in weapons and training ceased to exist. The Romans could no longer defeat the German armies, who then overran Empire until the whole West was occupied by German and Goth forces.

So, in a way, Christianity helped bring about the collapse of the Roman Empire because its own citizens refused to join the Army. But equally important to the collapse of Empire were Diocletian's price controls and his edict tying people to their occupations.

	24-11-2004 01:49									#190
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: So, in a way, Christianity helped bring about the collapse of the Roman Empire because its own citizens refused to join the Army

you know, I was just thinking about this... I was even pondering starting a thread about Christianity causing the demise of the Roman Empire.

	24-11-2004 01:55									#191
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Meh. I don't buy that. It *might* have been a contributing factor, but THE reason? Come on.

Rome was up against a horde of barbarians, and had a host of internal problems to deal with. Civil wars, insane/inept emperors (indeed Imperial Rule, period), plague, overstretch...

I'm no expert on Rome, but I doubt Christianity was anything more than a minor player in the Fall.

-Arrian

	24-11-2004 02:20									#192
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: How many Christians do you know? I know plenty, and they are among the meanist, nastiest, most hate-filled people I've ever met.

Not been my experience either.

Just remember this Che, just because one is a Chrisitian, doesn't mean one is going to be better than everyone else. Rather, they will be better than they would be if they weren't Christian.

It's very true that those who need the most help, tend to ask for it, when those who don't think they need much help turn it down.

	24-11-2004 02:22									#193
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Such behaviour does not quite fit Jesus (calling pagans dogs), and I think that perhaps it's an interpolation, but still, it's in the Bible.

It's the analogy, the pagans are the dogs to the child Jews.

	24-11-2004 02:26									#194
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Are you of the opinion that the planet can sustain an infinite number of people?

Why limit ourselves to one?

	24-11-2004 02:26									#195
	Increase Your PM Length

Edit: Already answered.

Last edited by Kontiki on 24-11-2004 at 02:32

	24-11-2004 02:42									#196
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Why limit ourselves to one?

Is this a serious answer? In any event, it doesn't really address the issue, does it?

	24-11-2004 02:45									#197
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Sure it does. You are assuming that we are limited by the constraints of the Earth, and I'm saying that this is not always going to be so.

Why should we be so shortsighted? Folks 50 years ago weren't.

	24-11-2004 03:26									#198
	Got spare money?

So to you, the practical path is to continue to multiply infinitely and constantly ship excess population off to other planets? Are you even slightly aware of the rather massive issues with this?

	24-11-2004 03:53									#199
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Don't count your chickens before they hatch. As of this minute we have only one planet so therefore we should keep that in mind. Once it becomes a reality that we can expand to other planets, then fine, let population explode. However even by then we should maintain strict population controls. 5 million on this planet, 3 million on that one, and 1 million on that small one in the corner....

	24-11-2004 04:50									#200
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Ned All this time Christianity continue to spread in the western Empire. Partly because of the pacifism taught by the church, Romans increasingly refused to serve in the Army. As a result, the Army increasingly became composed of German mercenaries where only the officer corps were Roman citizens. This had the unfortunate effect of teaching the Germans how to properly arm themselves and fight so that the Roman advantage in weapons and training ceased to exist. The Romans could no longer defeat the German armies, who then overran Empire until the whole West was occupied by German and Goth forces. So, in a way, Christianity helped bring about the collapse of the Roman Empire because its own citizens refused to join the Army. But equally important to the collapse of Empire were Diocletian's price controls and his edict tying people to their occupations.

Christianity wasn't the only reason for the decline in the Roman Army. One major reason was the shift in the ratio of mobile to fixed forces. In the 2nd century one of the emporers paid off some of his troops by granting them land along the Rhine border. The "limini" legions were paid in land and were committed to regional defence, they could not be mobilized for service in other provinces. By the 5th century the majority of legions were of this type, there were fewer than 7 mobile legions, and therefore under the threat of invasion Rome's ability to mount a defence was reduced.

I'm certain that disillusionment with a government that was increasingly seen as unstable, effete, and oppressive reduced enlistments also.

I wonder what fraction of the Roman population was Christain by the 5th century anyway? Even though Constantine had declared the empire Christain shortly before his death within a generation the old religion was back in place as the imperial favorite. At the beginning of the 5th century Christianity again became the state religion. These changes occurred due to the fortunes of imperial politics, but I don't know if they reflected the beliefs of the populace at large.

	24-11-2004 04:51									#201
	Inflate your Upload Space

For those Europeans favoring population controls, are you facing any sort of humanitarian problems in your country due to expanding population? (I would like you to answer this question, and not some other question that involves places outside your country.)

	24-11-2004 05:01									#202
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Why limit ourselves to one?

No, no reason for that execpt for a minor problem or two. First problem is that the price to get somebody away from this planet is extreme - even with the newest thecnology you need at least five zeros per person, add to this, if this should be taken seriously, we are talking about millions of people, so the price of such a solution demands figures with at least 11 zeros. Second, where should they go ? At the moment - nowhere. I admit that in my version of Imperium galactica they have some fancy units that can terraform a planet relatively cheap, but i haven't heard that NASA or other similiar instititutions are planning such a thing. Other stars ? Nope, it will be Colombus repeated - small crew, result unknown.

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Why should we be so shortsighted? Folks 50 years ago weren't.

Shure the were. Try to explain www to someone back in 1950 - at that time they thought that 30-40 computers (size thattime) was enough to cover any need of computation.

If progress in space technique was as rapid as computer thecnology, you might have a point but since this isn't the case, it would be crazy to rely on that.

	24-11-2004 05:16									#203
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Ned For those Europeans favoring population controls, are you facing any sort of humanitarian problems in your country due to expanding population? (I would like you to answer this question, and not some other question that involves places outside your country.)

Often in american movies there are scenes from a courtroom where a witness are asked a question, and are only allowed to answer yes or no despite the fact that both of these answers will be a lie. I don't know if that has anything to do with real world, but your question is in the same class.

Shurely, f.ex. denmark could take a coulple or three more million citizens, but that is not the question. Other countries could do the same, but at what price ? And would it solve the problem ? High, and no.

	24-11-2004 05:18									#204
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: So to you, the practical path is to continue to multiply infinitely and constantly ship excess population off to other planets? Are you even slightly aware of the rather massive issues with this?

The argument is only one of rate. I see nothing wrong with a monotonically increasing population doing just this. What you are trying to say is that you believe the rate of increase will outstrip other things, and I do not believe this to be the case.

	24-11-2004 05:21									#205
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Don't count your chickens before they hatch. As of this minute we have only one planet so therefore we should keep that in mind. Once it becomes a reality that we can expand to other planets, then fine, let population explode. However even by then we should maintain strict population controls. 5 million on this planet, 3 million on that one, and 1 million on that small one in the corner....

Why would there be a desire to colonise other planets if there are no population pressures on Earth?

Why do you also presume that a declining population will immediately reverse this trend?

Neither we have proof of. No nation has sustained a steady growth after declining below replacement levels.

	24-11-2004 05:21									#206
	Tired of ads?

Barinthus: Do you believe people ought to be able to have children without the approval of the state?

	24-11-2004 05:28									#207
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Technology crushed Malthus, and it will also crush the neo Malthusians.

quote: No, no reason for that execpt for a minor problem or two. First problem is that the price to get somebody away from this planet is extreme - even with the newest thecnology you need at least five zeros per person, add to this, if this should be taken seriously, we are talking about millions of people, so the price of such a solution demands figures with at least 11 zeros.

Do you think, given a stable colony another planet, that transport technology will not also improve to increase our lift capacity to make such transports economical?

I agree, with the current model, that space travel is prohibitively costly, but there is no reason why our current model should remain.

quote: Second, where should they go ? At the moment - nowhere. I admit that in my version of Imperium galactica they have some fancy units that can terraform a planet relatively cheap, but i haven't heard that NASA or other similiar instititutions are planning such a thing. Other stars ? Nope, it will be Colombus repeated - small crew, result unknown.

What do you think it was like during the Age of Discovery? We have lost that sense of travel, and adventure. There will be people signing up just for the chance to do this.

And what happened once Columbus successfully returned? Look at the New World. Why couldn't we do the same again in space?

quote: Shure the were. Try to explain www to someone back in 1950 - at that time they thought that 30-40 computers (size thattime) was enough to cover any need of computation.

Yes, but they dreamed. What dreams do we have today?

quote: If progress in space technique was as rapid as computer thecnology, you might have a point but since this isn't the case, it would be crazy to rely on that.

Malthus said the same as you. Yet, who was right, the folks who looked at all this newfangled agricultural tools, or Malthus?

	24-11-2004 05:33									#208
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

BC:

It can also be shown historically that population density drastically increases productivity.

So why are you afraid of putting more people in Denmark?

	24-11-2004 05:47									#209
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi The argument is only one of rate. I see nothing wrong with a monotonically increasing population doing just this. What you are trying to say is that you believe the rate of increase will outstrip other things, and I do not believe this to be the case.

Then you'll have no problem showing me mathematically how it's possible.

	24-11-2004 06:14									#210
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Barinthus: Do you believe people ought to be able to have children without the approval of the state?

Well I am not entirely comfortable with relegating the decision of whom can have children to the state but for a while I felt it was the only solution other than to exterminate a large number of people.

Then I realized that the population growth can be brought under control if we were to eliminate the Third World (by elevating them to the First World by massive improvements in their infrastructure, and so on), the global population growth will fall. Slower but more 'natural.' There will be no need for state getting involved unless the population has dropped so low that there is a need to reverse the trend.