is America the new Rman Empire?

[xoxoxoBruce]

From this list of reasons for the fall of the Roman Empire

Unemployment

During the latter years of the empire farming was done on large estates called latifundia that were owned by wealthy men who used slave labor. A farmer who had to pay workmen could not produce goods as cheaply. Many farmers could not compete with these low prices and lost or sold their farms. This not only undermined the citizen farmer who passed his values to his family, but also filled the cities with unemployed people. At one time, the emperor was importing grain to feed more than 100,000 people in Rome alone. These people were not only a burden but also had little to do but cause trouble and contribute to an ever increasing crime rate.

Now substitute Illegal Aliens for Slaves.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

From this list of reasons for the fall of the Roman Empire
Now substitute Illegal Aliens for Slaves.

And still, you have to pay them. Or else word gets around and you don't get anybody looking for work. I'd say calling them "slaves" is stretching the term unconscionably. Remember that "unfair treatment" differs considerably in definition from "slavery," for slavery is a mere subset.

Now the big thing that keeps us from being a new Empire is our country's fundamentally anti-imperial mindset. We remain in that habit, and have a certain, inchoate understanding that imperial conquest does not serve our trade interests, which we set first in priority -- fundamentally, it's that wealthy trade partners, not being tapped for tribute nor constrained in their own markets and trade, trade more, and the enrichment becomes mutual.

Capitalism, basically, is what keeps us non-imperial. The logic of empire was based on a mercantilistic economic model, which we rejected in the 1770s and -80s for good and all, having been on the short end of that stick.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

And still, you have to pay them. Or else word gets around and you don't get anybody looking for work. I'd say calling them "slaves" is stretching the term unconscionably. Remember that "unfair treatment" differs considerably in definition from "slavery," for slavery is a mere subset.

Here you miss the point quite completely. Whether they're actually slaves or not isn't relevant- the point was the use of extremely low-cost labor on huge farms which destroys small business.

Because of economies of scale, capitalism constantly pulls towards monopoly, and should be managed.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Thank you, HM. Yes, I said "Now substitute Illegal Aliens for Slaves", I didn't say substitute the words.