|
|
|
|
|
by weland
3907 days ago
|
|
> I'd say it's a matter of debate how good that control is when who's controlling it is either incompetent or has it's own interests -- or worst, both. The problem is that, in the example quoted, no one had that control. Gold mines run dry and you're fucked. Not because some incompetent banker is controlling the gold supply, but because there is no more damn gold. The most competent financial advisor of Rome -- a figure so gargantuan in the field of finance that, if transplanted to the modern world, would not only win that fake Nobel prize for economics, but would cause every other economist to retire out of shame -- would have been powerless. Because there was literally no more gold. Obviously, it wasn't the end of all things -- new mining facilities would be open, sometimes processes would be optimized in older ones, wars would be waged, but these things took time and needed money. |
|
I'm not suggesting the Romans needed to venture westward and discover the Americas, but did they really have no other options?