Lubin reports: "Some 1,500 years after the fall of the Roman Empire, the supposedly advanced and progressive United States of America is plagued by even worse income inequality. Tim De Chant at Per Square Mile reached this conclusion based on a study by historians Walter Schiedel and Steven Friesen. Rome's top 1% controlled 16 percent of the wealth, compared to modern America where the top 1% controls 40 percent of the wealth."
John Cleese, Michael Palin and Graham Chapman as ruling Romans in Monty Python's 'Life of Brian' (1979). (photo: FOCUS Features)
Even the Ancient Roman Empire Wasn't as Unequal as America
17 December 11
ome 1,500 years after the fall of the Roman Empire, the supposedly advanced and progressive United States of America is plagued by even worse income inequality.
Tim De Chant at Per Square Mile reached this conclusion based on a study by historians Walter Schiedel and Steven Friesen.
Rome's top 1% controlled 16 percent of the wealth, compared to modern America where the top 1% controls 40 percent of the wealth.
Looking at the Gini coefficient, where 0 means perfect equality and 1 means perfect inequality, Rome measured between 0.42 and 0.44. Modern America scores worse at 0.45, and some areas are much worse like Fairfield County, Conn. with an alarming 0.54.
De Chant comments on a telling line from the essay by Shiedel and Friesen:
At the end, they make a point that's difficult to parse, yet provocative. They point out that the majority of extant Roman ruins resulted from the economic activities of the top 10 percent. "Yet the disproportionate visibility of this 'fortunate decile' must not let us forget the vast but - to us - inconspicuous majority that failed even to begin to share in the moderate amount of economic growth associated with large-scale formation in the ancient Mediterranean and its hinterlands."
In other words, what we see as the glory of Rome is really just the rubble of the rich, built on the backs of poor farmers and laborers, traces of whom have all but vanished. It's as though Rome's 99 percent never existed. Which makes me wonder, what will future civilizations think of us?
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Live Occupy Wall Street Tweets
 19 May 2012
|
 19 May 2012
|
 20 May 2012
|
 19 May 2012
|
 19 May 2012
|
 20 May 2012
|
 21 May 2012
|
 21 May 2012
|
 21 May 2012
|
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Another similarity is Rome's expansion into Europe. Resources were exhausted in process, though in hindsight we see some value in the assimilation of Roman culture in places they sought to dominate. In the end, the Roman conquest of Britain happened less than a century before the beginning of the Dark Ages.
What value have we brought to the countries we've occupied? Not democracy. We don't even have true democracy in this country any more. Our economy has been devastated by the cost of the wars, tax cuts to the rich, and the excesses of Wall Street, policies facilitated by our leaders. How many more bad decisions can we afford?
RSS feed for comments to this post.