Erm... no it has come directly from the science, which has largely been carried out well away from the depredations of unrestrained capitalism. The forces of conservatism have fought free thought and scientific progress every step of the way.
Did you make that post on a laptop, desktop or smart phone?
It is interesting that the Soviet Union made some very impressive breakthroughs technologically - in those areas that it funnelled cash and resources into - but was very poor at getting the results into the hands of consumers. The exploitation (in a positive sense) of scientific progress seems to arise much more easily in a market (not necessarily capitalistic) system than in a planned economy.
Erm... no it has come directly from the science, which has largely been carried out well away from the depredations of unrestrained capitalism. The forces of conservatism have fought free thought and scientific progress every step of the way.
Did you make that post on a laptop, desktop or smart phone?
It is interesting that the Soviet Union made some very impressive breakthroughs technologically - in those areas that it funnelled cash and resources into - but was very poor at getting the results into the hands of consumers. The exploitation (in a positive sense) of scientific progress seems to arise much more easily in a market (not necessarily capitalistic) system than in a planned economy.
The strength of capitalism is to have a million people working on a hundred thousand different things.
Erm... no it has come directly from the science, which has largely been carried out well away from the depredations of unrestrained capitalism. The forces of conservatism have fought free thought and scientific progress every step of the way.
Capitalism has ensured that the fruits of technological progress have been very unequally shared, particularly in the last few decades.
Utter claptrap. That will be why we're all using soviet computing technology, because capitalism thwarted its development. Keep your heads in the sand.
Just saw this show up in my timeline in the middle of a bunch of retweets by Liz Kendall, very disappointed to check and find it wasn't actually Liz Kendall who retweeted it.
If we're talking about capitalism v communism, then in terms of scientific progress for the masses, capitalism works far better.
If we're talking about conservatism (which I take to mean the role of the state is to create "a stable world of enduring values") versus socialism (the role of the state is social progress) then the picture is more complicated. Conservatism has the upper hand in driving creation, but if we're only concerned with technology as a means to an end, then socialism has a good chance. What we really need is a mix of the two, which is what we have.
I really feel W8.x is just throwing things at me - forcing me to have a logon password, the apps things, can't use Esc to get out of a rabbit hole and on and on.
I really DO NOT WANT to see a screen full of boxes and *features* that feel like advertorials.
And releasing it as uninstallable standard on non-touchscreen PC/laptops was an appalling decision. I know many who are just WTF is this.
I made this mistake and hence use a W7 emulator to hide 80% of it on one laptop.
Erm... no it has come directly from the science, which has largely been carried out well away from the depredations of unrestrained capitalism. The forces of conservatism have fought free thought and scientific progress every step of the way.
Did you make that post on a laptop, desktop or smart phone?
It is interesting that the Soviet Union made some very impressive breakthroughs technologically - in those areas that it funnelled cash and resources into - but was very poor at getting the results into the hands of consumers. The exploitation (in a positive sense) of scientific progress seems to arise much more easily in a market (not necessarily capitalistic) system than in a planned economy.
The strength of capitalism is to have a million people working on a hundred thousand different things.
Trillion dollar question.
Is this really about "capitalism" (which concerns ownership of the means of production) or is it about "free markets" (which concerns the means of exchange)?
Would the same kind of transfer of technology from academia and military (where even a closed and kleptomaniac regime like North Korea can get scientific progress to take place) to the everyday consumer occur so seamlessly in a socialist but market-based and anti-managerialist economy, of the kind moderate Marxists like Chris Dillow advocate? What about in the kind of distributivist society preferred by G. K. Chesterton, Hilaire Belloc, or Catholic Social Teaching?
I really feel W8.x is just throwing things at me - forcing me to have a logon password, the apps things, can't use Esc to get out of a rabbit hole and on and on.
I really DO NOT WANT to see a screen full of boxes and *features* that feel like advertorials.
And releasing it as uninstallable standard on non-touchscreen PC/laptops was an appalling decision. I know many who are just WTF is this.
I made this mistake and hence use a W7 emulator to hide 80% of it on one laptop.
I really feel W8.x is just throwing things at me - forcing me to have a logon password, the apps things, can't use Esc to get out of a rabbit hole and on and on.
I really DO NOT WANT to see a screen full of boxes and *features* that feel like advertorials.
And releasing it as uninstallable standard on non-touchscreen PC/laptops was an appalling decision. I know many who are just WTF is this.
I made this mistake and hence use a W7 emulator to hide 80% of it on one laptop.
Erm... no it has come directly from the science, which has largely been carried out well away from the depredations of unrestrained capitalism. The forces of conservatism have fought free thought and scientific progress every step of the way.
Capitalism has ensured that the fruits of technological progress have been very unequally shared, particularly in the last few decades.
Utter claptrap. That will be why we're all using soviet computing technology, because capitalism thwarted its development. Keep your heads in the sand.
Yes, because the choice is between unrestrained capitalism and stalinism. You loon.
The Spinning Jenny - invented by James Hargreaves to improve operations in his weaving workshop The continuous steam engine - invented by James Watt, the owner of an instrument making business The Stephenson rocket - invented by George Stephenson, owner of a locomotive company Vulcanized rubber - invented by factory owner Charles Goodyear Anethesia - invented by dental company owner Horace Wells The phonograph - invented by inventor and businessman Thomas Edison in a commercial research lab The motor car - invented by factory owner Karl Benz Tin canning - invented by merchant Peter Durand
Invention and science: nothing to do with capitalism!
Much as I hate to interrupt your discussions as to which is better between capitalism and communism, I need to point out that the percentages above add up[1] to less than 100%. Is Betfair Exchange actually running an underround? In which case, there's an arb to be had. Please feel free to fill your boots, you princes of Maine, you kings of New England...
What we really need is a mix of the two, which is what we have.
Agree. Its just the balance that is in question. Except with a lot of nutters here, who seem to believe black is white and capitalism is responsible for technological progress (I'm happy to agree that market systems are useful for their accessibility to consumers).
I can add 'sixth form debating' to the long list of the asinine catchphrases born from right wing intellectual cowardice.
Erm... no it has come directly from the science, which has largely been carried out well away from the depredations of unrestrained capitalism. The forces of conservatism have fought free thought and scientific progress every step of the way.
Did you make that post on a laptop, desktop or smart phone?
It is interesting that the Soviet Union made some very impressive breakthroughs technologically - in those areas that it funnelled cash and resources into - but was very poor at getting the results into the hands of consumers. The exploitation (in a positive sense) of scientific progress seems to arise much more easily in a market (not necessarily capitalistic) system than in a planned economy.
The strength of capitalism is to have a million people working on a hundred thousand different things.
Trillion dollar question.
Is this really about "capitalism" (which concerns ownership of the means of production) or is it about "free markets" (which concerns the means of exchange)?
Would the same kind of transfer of technology from academia and military (where even a closed and kleptomaniac regime like North Korea can get scientific progress to take place) to the everyday consumer occur so seamlessly in a socialist but market-based and anti-managerialist economy, of the kind moderate Marxists like Chris Dillow advocate? What about in the kind of distributivist society preferred by G. K. Chesterton, Hilaire Belloc, or Catholic Social Teaching?
It is often difficult to disentangle the features of what we think of as communism or indeed aspects of socialism, from the other perspective.
Britain long had state ownership of the means of production without anyone realising it. The British government has owned bookies, mobile phone makers, car makers, steelworks, railways, airlines, oil companies, travel agents. Some were well known to be publically owned. Many, like Channel 4 are not.
Thus I would imagine that state ownership per se is not the limiting factor. Rather, the difficulties in encouraging competition between state-owned businesses are far more problematic (and in most communist countries, utterly collapsed).
What we really need is a mix of the two, which is what we have.
Agree. Its just the balance that is in question. Except with a lot of nutters here, who seem to believe black is white and capitalism is responsible for technological progress (I'm happy to agree that market systems are useful for their accessibility to consumers).
I can add 'sixth form debating' to the long list of the asinine catchphrases born from right wing intellectual cowardice.
You seem quite keen on the word asinine.
Is that a word you learnt last week in sixth form and are keen to use wherever possible to demonstrate your own 'intelligence'?
The Spinning Jenny - invented by James Hargreaves to improve operations in his weaving workshop The continuous steam engine - invented by James Watt, the owner of an instrument making business The Stephenson rocket - invented by George Stephenson, owner of a locomotive company Vulcanized rubber - invented by factory owner Charles Goodyear Anethesia - invented by dental company owner Horace Wells The phonograph - invented by inventor and businessman Thomas Edison in a commercial research lab The motor car - invented by factory owner Karl Benz Tin canning - invented by merchant Peter Durand
Invention and science: nothing to do with capitalism!
What we really need is a mix of the two, which is what we have.
Agree. Its just the balance that is in question. Except with a lot of nutters here, who seem to believe black is white and capitalism is responsible for technological progress (I'm happy to agree that market systems are useful for their accessibility to consumers).
I can add 'sixth form debating' to the long list of the asinine catchphrases born from right wing intellectual cowardice.
What's the problem? They say without question that we live in a capitalist society. And that must be right. And they associate progress with the developments achieved in this capitalist society. Which must be right.
If you want to say "we live in a 90% capitalist, 10% communist" society, go ahead. But that is semantics.
The Spinning Jenny - invented by James Hargreaves to improve operations in his weaving workshop The continuous steam engine - invented by James Watt, the owner of an instrument making business The Stephenson rocket - invented by George Stephenson, owner of a locomotive company Vulcanized rubber - invented by factory owner Charles Goodyear Anethesia - invented by dental company owner Horace Wells The phonograph - invented by inventor and businessman Thomas Edison in a commercial research lab The motor car - invented by factory owner Karl Benz Tin canning - invented by merchant Peter Durand
Invention and science: nothing to do with capitalism!
How many of these people were scientists?
All of them. They gained scientific expertise through their work as capitalists.
What we really need is a mix of the two, which is what we have.
Agree. Its just the balance that is in question. Except with a lot of nutters here, who seem to believe black is white and capitalism is responsible for technological progress (I'm happy to agree that market systems are useful for their accessibility to consumers).
I can add 'sixth form debating' to the long list of the asinine catchphrases born from right wing intellectual cowardice.
You seem quite keen on the word asinine.
Is that a word you learnt last week in sixth form and are keen to use wherever possible to demonstrate your own 'intelligence'?
Its just very apt to describe most of you lot - just insert one of the following synonyms: 'stupid, foolish, pointless, brainless, mindless, senseless, doltish, idiotic, imbecilic, imbecile, insane, lunatic, ridiculous, ludicrous, absurd, preposterous, nonsensical, fatuous, silly, childish, infantile, puerile, immature, juvenile, inane, witless, half-baked, empty-headed, unintelligent, half-witted, slow-witted, weak-minded' if the repetition gets too much.
The Spinning Jenny - invented by James Hargreaves to improve operations in his weaving workshop The continuous steam engine - invented by James Watt, the owner of an instrument making business The Stephenson rocket - invented by George Stephenson, owner of a locomotive company Vulcanized rubber - invented by factory owner Charles Goodyear Anethesia - invented by dental company owner Horace Wells The phonograph - invented by inventor and businessman Thomas Edison in a commercial research lab The motor car - invented by factory owner Karl Benz Tin canning - invented by merchant Peter Durand
Invention and science: nothing to do with capitalism!
How many of these people were scientists?
All of them. They gained scientific expertise through their work as capitalists.
No, they were engineers and inventors, who couldnt have achieved what they did without drawing from huge amounts of work done by actual scientists.
What we really need is a mix of the two, which is what we have.
Agree. Its just the balance that is in question. Except with a lot of nutters here, who seem to believe black is white and capitalism is responsible for technological progress (I'm happy to agree that market systems are useful for their accessibility to consumers).
I can add 'sixth form debating' to the long list of the asinine catchphrases born from right wing intellectual cowardice.
You seem quite keen on the word asinine.
Is that a word you learnt last week in sixth form and are keen to use wherever possible to demonstrate your own 'intelligence'?
Its just very apt to describe most of you lot - just insert one of the following synonyms: 'stupid, foolish, pointless, brainless, mindless, senseless, doltish, idiotic, imbecilic, imbecile, insane, lunatic, ridiculous, ludicrous, absurd, preposterous, nonsensical, fatuous, silly, childish, infantile, puerile, immature, juvenile, inane, witless, half-baked, empty-headed, unintelligent, half-witted, slow-witted, weak-minded' if the repetition gets too much.
I can see this line of exchange is being most productive. Can you continue the petty bickering please?
The most powerful point the left has, and the reason that Corbyn and co. are afloat at all in my book, is that the very richest are too rich. They have too much compared to the rest of us.
We need to find a way of getting them to part with just a little more. Taxation doesn;t seem to work. In fact, I'm not sure what does.
What we really need is a mix of the two, which is what we have.
Agree. Its just the balance that is in question. Except with a lot of nutters here, who seem to believe black is white and capitalism is responsible for technological progress (I'm happy to agree that market systems are useful for their accessibility to consumers).
I can add 'sixth form debating' to the long list of the asinine catchphrases born from right wing intellectual cowardice.
You seem quite keen on the word asinine.
Is that a word you learnt last week in sixth form and are keen to use wherever possible to demonstrate your own 'intelligence'?
Its just very apt to describe most of you lot - just insert one of the following synonyms: 'stupid, foolish, pointless, brainless, mindless, senseless, doltish, idiotic, imbecilic, imbecile, insane, lunatic, ridiculous, ludicrous, absurd, preposterous, nonsensical, fatuous, silly, childish, infantile, puerile, immature, juvenile, inane, witless, half-baked, empty-headed, unintelligent, half-witted, slow-witted, weak-minded' if the repetition gets too much.
Excellent. I look forward to seeing the use of your expanded vocabulary over the weeks to come.
I note that the migrant tragically killed in the last stampede of the Chunnel was a young man from the Sudan. He was around 20 to 30 years old apparently. Let's take an open look at this situation.
He was from the Sudan so most likely crossed the borders of Egypt and Syria into the toe of Italy. It could have been another direction of course but I am using the shortest possibility. If it was another he passed through even more safe countries of course.
When in Italy he has travelled the length of that country passing some of the most beautiful and stunning countryside in the world with good food and fine wines and healthy living. He then passes into France. Not for him the wonders of Monaco the French Riviera , the vineyards of France with good living warm weather oh no he is on a mission. He passes Switzerland lying to the east not a thought of stopping at Geneva and then no other French city town or village as he heads north his heart set on a dirty little campsite in the open situated in Calais. Here he waits probably for months in ramshackle conditions attempting to jump into containers on moving trucks or on top of trains that hurtle through the tunnel at breakneck speed risking injury or death.
To do this He has passed through some of the most majestic holiday destinations in the world perfectly safe countries simply to finally die under a lorries wheels in what he would have considered an unknown town in northern France.
The question everyone has to ask is why? Why go to all those lengths when he was perfectly safe anywhere in Europe. We all know why of course and Until that question is firmly and rigidly addressed then they will keep coming. It has nothing to do with seeking better conditions. He passed through countries with just that with not a blink of the eye.
It's now just a matter of time.... The dam is breaking.
I really feel W8.x is just throwing things at me - forcing me to have a logon password, the apps things, can't use Esc to get out of a rabbit hole and on and on.
I really DO NOT WANT to see a screen full of boxes and *features* that feel like advertorials.
And releasing it as uninstallable standard on non-touchscreen PC/laptops was an appalling decision. I know many who are just WTF is this.
I made this mistake and hence use a W7 emulator to hide 80% of it on one laptop.
I don't understand the problem people had with it, since the 8.1 update I've not had any problems at all in terms of bugs.
8.1 is great in terms of reliability, it's just unwieldy.
This is one of those rare things on which we are in complete agreement.
well I said I liked it. but then again, it was probably designed by people like me for people like me.
After my first half hour with it, I was literally* screaming at the computer with frustration. It's not quite a walled garden, but the gates are hidden with ivy.
*literally in a sense that Richard Nabavi would approve of.
The Spinning Jenny - invented by James Hargreaves to improve operations in his weaving workshop The continuous steam engine - invented by James Watt, the owner of an instrument making business The Stephenson rocket - invented by George Stephenson, owner of a locomotive company Vulcanized rubber - invented by factory owner Charles Goodyear Anethesia - invented by dental company owner Horace Wells The phonograph - invented by inventor and businessman Thomas Edison in a commercial research lab The motor car - invented by factory owner Karl Benz Tin canning - invented by merchant Peter Durand
Invention and science: nothing to do with capitalism!
How many of these people were scientists?
All of them. They gained scientific expertise through their work as capitalists.
No, they were engineers and inventors, who couldnt have achieved what they did without drawing from huge amounts of work done by actual scientists.
Something I almost posted when I made my point about the USSR failing to exploit their technology effectively: historically several civilizations have developed a level of science that put them very, very close to the position of being able to launch an industrial revolution. China, the Muslim world at its peak, the engineering genius of the ancient Greeks (which extended as far as steam turbines and mechanical computers).
The reasons that they did not industrialise are, of course, complex and controversial. But the idea that social technological progress depended on science and brilliant engineers alone is clearly naïve.
I can add 'sixth form debating' to the long list of the asinine catchphrases born from right wing intellectual cowardice.
When it comes to British politics, "intellectual" is a word redolent with the kind of wanky whimsy so beloved of the Milibands of this world.
But go ahead and wrap yourself in that flag. It seems quite apt....
Next you'll be talking about "workshops". I remember Alexi Sayle once saying that "anybody who uses the word "workshop" who isn't involved in light engineering is a ****". Can't argue with that....
I note that the migrant tragically killed in the last stampede of the Chunnel was a young man from the Sudan. He was around 20 to 30 years old apparently. Let's take an open look at this situation.
He was from the Sudan so most likely crossed the borders of Egypt and Syria into the toe of Italy. It could have been another direction of course but I am using the shortest possibility. If it was another he passed through even more safe countries of course.
When in Italy he has travelled the length of that country passing some of the most beautiful and stunning countryside in the world with good food and fine wines and healthy living. He then passes into France. Not for him the wonders of Monaco the French Riviera , the vineyards of France with good living warm weather oh no he is on a mission. He passes Switzerland lying to the east not a thought of stopping at Geneva and then no other French city town or village as he heads north his heart set on a dirty little campsite in the open situated in Calais. Here he waits probably for months in ramshackle conditions attempting to jump into containers on moving trucks or on top of trains that hurtle through the tunnel at breakneck speed risking injury or death.
To do this He has passed through some of the most majestic holiday destinations in the world perfectly safe countries simply to finally die under a lorries wheels in what he would have considered an unknown town in northern France.
The question everyone has to ask is why? Why go to all those lengths when he was perfectly safe anywhere in Europe. We all know why of course and Until that question is firmly and rigidly addressed then they will keep coming. It has nothing to do with seeking better conditions. He passed through countries with just that with not a blink of the eye.
It's now just a matter of time.... The dam is breaking.
The most powerful point the left has, and the reason that Corbyn and co. are afloat at all in my book, is that the very richest are too rich. They have too much compared to the rest of us.
We need to find a way of getting them to part with just a little more. Taxation doesn;t seem to work. In fact, I'm not sure what does.
Oooo.. could you do it with Con gaining all of UKIPs vote, and then maybe half of UKIPs vote? What a way to start the day...
Purely another thought experiment...
Conservative gains with 100% of UKIP going to Conservative in every seat
From Labour 67 (59 England, 8 Wales) From LibDem 3 (3 England) From SNP 1 (1 Scotland) From UKIP 1 (1 England) TOTAL GAINS = 72
Conservative gains with 50% of UKIP going to Conservative in every seat
From Labour 32 (27 England, 5 Wales) From LibDem 3 (3 England) From SNP 1 (1 Scotland) From UKIP 1 (1 England) TOTAL GAINS = 37
...next, I will combine the two experiments.
I think what this does is clearly identify target seats for both the Tories and Labour. Interesting to see that Cons really only have 3 LD target seats left. Shows how ruthlessly efficient they were in May.
BTW, what-iffery seems somewhat pejorative. In business, wouldn't this be called sensitivity analysis? Far more neutral.
I note that the migrant tragically killed in the last stampede of the Chunnel was a young man from the Sudan. He was around 20 to 30 years old apparently. Let's take an open look at this situation.
He was from the Sudan so most likely crossed the borders of Egypt and Syria into the toe of Italy. It could have been another direction of course but I am using the shortest possibility. If it was another he passed through even more safe countries of course.
When in Italy he has travelled the length of that country passing some of the most beautiful and stunning countryside in the world with good food and fine wines and healthy living. He then passes into France. Not for him the wonders of Monaco the French Riviera , the vineyards of France with good living warm weather oh no he is on a mission. He passes Switzerland lying to the east not a thought of stopping at Geneva and then no other French city town or village as he heads north his heart set on a dirty little campsite in the open situated in Calais. Here he waits probably for months in ramshackle conditions attempting to jump into containers on moving trucks or on top of trains that hurtle through the tunnel at breakneck speed risking injury or death.
To do this He has passed through some of the most majestic holiday destinations in the world perfectly safe countries simply to finally die under a lorries wheels in what he would have considered an unknown town in northern France.
The question everyone has to ask is why? Why go to all those lengths when he was perfectly safe anywhere in Europe. We all know why of course and Until that question is firmly and rigidly addressed then they will keep coming. It has nothing to do with seeking better conditions. He passed through countries with just that with not a blink of the eye.
It's now just a matter of time.... The dam is breaking.
Comments
Is this sixth form debate day or something?
https://twitter.com/GeneralBoles/status/626368436881461248
If we're talking about conservatism (which I take to mean the role of the state is to create "a stable world of enduring values") versus socialism (the role of the state is social progress) then the picture is more complicated. Conservatism has the upper hand in driving creation, but if we're only concerned with technology as a means to an end, then socialism has a good chance. What we really need is a mix of the two, which is what we have.
Is this really about "capitalism" (which concerns ownership of the means of production) or is it about "free markets" (which concerns the means of exchange)?
Would the same kind of transfer of technology from academia and military (where even a closed and kleptomaniac regime like North Korea can get scientific progress to take place) to the everyday consumer occur so seamlessly in a socialist but market-based and anti-managerialist economy, of the kind moderate Marxists like Chris Dillow advocate? What about in the kind of distributivist society preferred by G. K. Chesterton, Hilaire Belloc, or Catholic Social Teaching?
I'm using Win7 - I avoided Win8 after reading all the issues with it.
And I will wait to see all the comments on Win10 before (if) I download it.
Oh...
The Spinning Jenny - invented by James Hargreaves to improve operations in his weaving workshop
The continuous steam engine - invented by James Watt, the owner of an instrument making business
The Stephenson rocket - invented by George Stephenson, owner of a locomotive company
Vulcanized rubber - invented by factory owner Charles Goodyear
Anethesia - invented by dental company owner Horace Wells
The phonograph - invented by inventor and businessman Thomas Edison in a commercial research lab
The motor car - invented by factory owner Karl Benz
Tin canning - invented by merchant Peter Durand
Invention and science: nothing to do with capitalism!
[1] 35.5 + 34.2 + 26.3 + 2.1 = 98.1
I can add 'sixth form debating' to the long list of the asinine catchphrases born from right wing intellectual cowardice.
Britain long had state ownership of the means of production without anyone realising it. The British government has owned bookies, mobile phone makers, car makers, steelworks, railways, airlines, oil companies, travel agents. Some were well known to be publically owned. Many, like Channel 4 are not.
Thus I would imagine that state ownership per se is not the limiting factor. Rather, the difficulties in encouraging competition between state-owned businesses are far more problematic (and in most communist countries, utterly collapsed).
Is that a word you learnt last week in sixth form and are keen to use wherever possible to demonstrate your own 'intelligence'?
If you want to say "we live in a 90% capitalist, 10% communist" society, go ahead. But that is semantics.
Given their age profile, I'd say that very significant.
#Jezbollah
We need to find a way of getting them to part with just a little more. Taxation doesn;t seem to work. In fact, I'm not sure what does.
He was from the Sudan so most likely crossed the borders of Egypt and Syria into the toe of Italy. It could have been another direction of course but I am using the shortest possibility. If it was another he passed through even more safe countries of course.
When in Italy he has travelled the length of that country passing some of the most beautiful and stunning countryside in the world with good food and fine wines and healthy living. He then passes into France. Not for him the wonders of Monaco the French Riviera , the vineyards of France with good living warm weather oh no he is on a mission.
He passes Switzerland lying to the east not a thought of stopping at Geneva and then no other French city town or village as he heads north his heart set on a dirty little campsite in the open situated in Calais. Here he waits probably for months in ramshackle conditions attempting to jump into containers on moving trucks or on top of trains that hurtle through the tunnel at breakneck speed risking injury or death.
To do this He has passed through some of the most majestic holiday destinations in the world perfectly safe countries simply to finally die under a lorries wheels in what he would have considered an unknown town in northern France.
The question everyone has to ask is why? Why go to all those lengths when he was perfectly safe anywhere in Europe. We all know why of course and Until that question is firmly and rigidly addressed then they will keep coming. It has nothing to do with seeking better conditions. He passed through countries with just that with not a blink of the eye.
It's now just a matter of time.... The dam is breaking.
*literally in a sense that Richard Nabavi would approve of.
New thread.
The reasons that they did not industrialise are, of course, complex and controversial. But the idea that social technological progress depended on science and brilliant engineers alone is clearly naïve.
But go ahead and wrap yourself in that flag. It seems quite apt....
Next you'll be talking about "workshops". I remember Alexi Sayle once saying that "anybody who uses the word "workshop" who isn't involved in light engineering is a ****". Can't argue with that....
BTW, what-iffery seems somewhat pejorative. In business, wouldn't this be called sensitivity analysis? Far more neutral.
Clearly the value punt in the race anyway, seeing as I'd have got less return for Solow winning.