Utopia Talk / Politics / Ancient China less equal than the Rome

Pillz breaker of wtb	Tue May 27 21:34:12 May 27, 2025 Ancient China was less equal than the Roman Empire. Here’s why. A comparison of wealth gaps in ancient empires reveals stark differences and lasting consequences. Analyzing inequality in Rome and China The researchers, from Università Bocconi in Milan, Cambridge University in the UK, and Stanford University in California, suggest that the greater levels of income inequality led to instability and eventually the downfall of the Han, whereas the (relative) equality among Roman citizens was a contributing factor to the centuries-long Pax Romana. http://big.../china-more-unequal-than-rome/ Long article.
TheChildren Member	Tue May 27 23:48:51 and yet 2000 years after, here we r boy. here we r boy. 17 if not 18 centuries out of da last 20 centuries, we been supapowa world leaders facts speak 4 themselves
williamthebastard Member	Tue May 27 23:58:45 So the Roman Empire was more socialist than China. Gotcha
williamthebastard Member	Wed May 28 00:00:50 Since youve never been to school: a core tenet of conservatism is that society must have inequality because thats the "natural order of things", while a core tenet of socialism is that since all humans only get one single shot at life and life can be incredibly painful or incredibly rewarding, inequalities should be balanced such that a much greater segment of the population gets a chance at living a decent life.
Sam Adams Member	Wed May 28 11:30:54 And the best most successful approach is in the middle between the extremes. You want some inequality but not too much.
Pillz breaker of wtb	Wed May 28 11:33:19 Lol @ wtb
williamthebastard Member	Wed May 28 16:10:29 Sam is starting to sound like a social democrat
Pillz breaker of wtb	Wed May 28 16:12:37 How are you so absolutely devoid of thought
murder Member	Wed May 28 20:02:36 Equality under the law is important. Economic equality is not. You just need to make it possible for everyone to take care of their basic needs and have the opportunity to rise. It doesn't matter if one guy has a megayacht with gold plated everything and you don't.
Sam Adams Member	Wed May 28 22:31:17 Its preferable to let the egregiously stupid and lazy die or go to prison too. But anyone with a decent work ethic or a shred of honor should have an acceptable standard of living or things get unstable and revolution becomes likely.
williamthebastard Member	Wed May 28 23:13:16 "In the Han Empire, the richest 1% earned 26% of the total income. Things were less extreme in the Roman Empire, at least at the higher end of the scale. There, the richest 1% earned 19% of total income" "the top 1% of households in the United States held 30.9% of the country's wealth," So the US is more extreme than the Han Empire and way more extreme than the Roman Empire.
williamthebastard Member	Wed May 28 23:15:52 "The bottom 50%, however, earned 25% — virtually the same as in China." "The bottom half of the USA holds 6%." The USA is far more extreme than both the Han Empire and the Roman Empire.
williamthebastard Member	Wed May 28 23:19:03 "A standard land tax was enforced across the empire, and other taxes were actually progressive, with wealthier merchants paying double the poll tax rate and five times the property rate of a free peasant." Or, as Magas would call it, communism
williamthebastard Member	Wed May 28 23:23:14 "The bottom half of the USA holds 6%." Oh, sorry, that article itself states that the bottom half of the US only own 2%, compared to the 25% in both the Han and the Roman empires.
williamthebastard Member	Wed May 28 23:24:51 The Elons sure are raking it in from the poorest halve of the country
williamthebastard Member	Wed May 28 23:28:15 i.e. the half that every single american here belongs to. And yet they still love him and his buddies. But, of course, there were loads of the bottom half in China that cluelessly and obliviously loved the Han Empire living off the fat of the land produced by the bottom half
Sam Adams Member	Wed May 28 23:37:22 You are confusing income and wealth. And yes the US has slightly more inequality than ideal right now.
williamthebastard Member	Thu May 29 00:04:04 "You are confusing income and wealth." Im using the same parameters as the article in the OP uses for comparison except for when I apparently overvalued what the bottom half of the USA owns at 6% when its apparently only 2%, according to the OP. When the bottom half of the Han and Roman Empire owned 25% of the wealth compared to the bottom half of the US owning 2%, I think rather stronger words than "slightly more inequality" are warranted
williamthebastard Member	Thu May 29 00:04:48 The bottom half, thats you Sam.
williamthebastard Member	Thu May 29 00:09:08 Also, the rich pay comparatively less taxes in the US than in both the Han and the Roman Empires Han: "A standard land tax was enforced across the empire, and other taxes were actually progressive, with wealthier merchants paying double the poll tax rate and five times the property rate of a free peasant." USA: "the poorest 20 percent pay an effective 20.2 percent rate while the top 1 percent pay an effective 33.7 percent rate"
williamthebastard Member	Thu May 29 00:37:26 Man, the contemporary parasitical ruling class in the US have pulled a historical amount of wool over the eyes of their subjects.
jergul large member	Thu May 29 03:45:13 Romans and the Han dynasty held slaves. They are part of the wealth and, indirectly, income models. They are not part of the inequality model and would change it dramatically if they were. At least the US does not have those outside of the prison system (prison labour is an explicit exception in anti slavery legislation).
williamthebastard Member	Thu May 29 03:57:43 Hmmm, but Romans apparently saw little economic difference between slaves and the working class, sometimes called wage slaves in our era or servants just a century ago "Elite Romans whose wealth came from property ownership saw little difference between slavery and a dependence on earning wages from labor."
williamthebastard Member	Thu May 29 04:15:07 Theres little or no economic difference between receiving bank notes at the end of the week that just about cover your boarding and food, a lifestyle familiar to millions of Americans, or receiving food and boarding for indentured servitude
williamthebastard Member	Thu May 29 08:02:50 I mean, people like Pillz who cant afford to pay for a roof over their heads are arguably poorer than slaves "pillz Member Wed Feb 14 15:48:01 Changed careers, less stable pay, etc. Stopped paying rent."
Pillz breaker of wtb	Thu May 29 09:23:34 You can tell how wrong wtb is on a subject based on how many posts he makes. Like wow.
Sam Adams Member	Thu May 29 10:33:56 "The bottom half, thats you Sam." Lol no.
williamthebastard Member	Fri May 30 01:21:18 Interestingly, two hallmarks of the Roman Empire were that it was the most multicultural place on Earth at the time, where both Africans and plenty of what are today known as Arabs rose to prominent positions, and homosexuality was fully accepted (a social norm it shared with those oh so famous Spartan warriors, not to mention the elite Greek force called the Sacred Band of Thebes, which was the garrison that defeated Sparta and consisted entirely of homosexuals)
TheChildren Member	Fri May 30 01:57:12 murica less equal than 5000 years of human sapien civ murica as we know it is less equal than any civilization on da planet going back thousands of years heres why A comparison of wealth gaps in different civs reveals stark differences and lasting consequences. 4 xample, u could be 200 billion rich while never deliverin any hypaloop or space rockets, but da man "next door" relies on food stamps and shit
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: