Chile Forum

Oh some of us did indeed give and now find it best to pursue our inalienable rights and preserve our wealth away from a certain geographical locale.

The storm cannot be avoided like it could have 10 years ago so now the best some of us can do is preserve what we have and contribute to rebuilding after the dust settles.

JHyre wrote:

Oh some of us did indeed give and now find it best to pursue our inalienable rights and preserve our wealth away from a certain geographical locale.

The storm cannot be avoided like it could have 10 years ago so now the best some of us can do is preserve what we have and contribute to rebuilding after the dust settles.

I hear you without being quite to that point, just yet. Of course, tomorrow may be different, and today I could be wrong.

Problem with waiting for dust to settle....that can take a long, long time. I'm presently thinking of lapse between say, fall of Rome and the Renaissance. That sort of waiting period would thoroughly cornhole one's schedule.

John Hyre

And then when I move somewhere else, I'll do the same.

True, thus the spirit of pursuing of Happiness at the most basic level and perpetuating the concept as rebuilding day may never come in our lifetime. In the grand scheme of human history, it would not be the first Dark Age or probably the last one.

California South wrote:John, that's very "you". I would have expected no less. We may have dissimilar politics, but you. like many others here on this forum, walk your talk.

For the downside from history we return to Vincenzo's email to me:

"Dear David,

"I invite you to read the last few sentences of the below article from The Lessons of History, by Will and Ariel Durant. It is about how the destruction of the Roman Empire through the taxation channel made people 'slaves,' in other words how serfdom emerged. This is my number one fear for Italy, but I guess France is making the same mistakes, just starting from a lower debt level. You can also find an online version of the book, thanks to Google.

"Rome had its socialist interlude under Diocletian. Faced with increasing poverty and restlessness among the masses, and with the imminent danger of barbarian invasion, he issued in A.D. 3 an edictum de pretiis, which denounced monopolists for keeping goods from the market to raise prices, and set maximum prices and wages for all important articles and services. Extensive public works were undertaken to put the unemployed to work, and food was distributed gratis, or at reduced prices, to the poor. The government – which already owned most mines, quarries, and salt deposits – brought nearly all major industries and guilds under detailed control. 'In every large town,' we are told, 'the state became a powerful employer, standing head and shoulders above the private industrialists, who were in any case crushed by taxation.' When businessmen predicted ruin, Diocletian explained that the barbarians were at the gate, and that individual liberty had to be shelved until collective liberty could be made secure. The socialism of Diocletian was a war economy, made possible by fear of foreign attack. Other factors equal, internal liberty varies inversely with external danger.

"The task of controlling men in economic detail proved too much for Diocletian's expanding, expensive, and corrupt bureaucracy. To support this officialdom – the army, the courts, public works, and the dole – taxation rose to such heights that people lost the incentive to work or earn, and an erosive contest began between lawyers finding devices to evade taxes and lawyers formulating laws to prevent evasion. Thousands of Romans, to escape the tax gatherer, fled over the frontiers to seek refuge among the barbarians. Seeking to check this elusive mobility and to facilitate regulation and taxation, the government issued decrees binding the peasant to his field and the worker to his shop until all their debts and taxes had been paid. In this and other ways medieval serfdom began."