patrick.net

thunderlips11 says

If you check the link above, you'll see that Ancient Egypt was a centrally planned economy. Peasants didn't generally own their plots, it was granted to them by the state, on a life-long lease. The irrigation system was centrally controlled, as well.

Priests were more administrators than Clerics. Yes, they performed public rituals, but they spent much of their time estimating the harvest, calculating the dates the Nile would flood, planning canals and estimating the potential harvest.

Was that before Yuya or after Yuya? It's silly to consider all ancient Egypt as a monolith. The various kindom period and dynasties spanned 3000 years! Things run in cycles not unchanging monoliths. It was quite clearly stated in the Bible that people all over the land were forced to sell themselves into slavery to the Pharaoh in the later stages of Joseph/Yuya's economic bust. Obviously, they had to be non-slaves before they sold themselves into slavery.

Most records from the Fertile Crescent deal in loans of grain and grain seed, not in coin.

One can have monetary accounting units in grains, cattles or weight of precious metal. So long as they were dealing with accounts, it hardly mattered. Grain, when specified as generic grain instead of specific type and moisture, and represented in numbers in accounts could well be the currency, just like dollar is today, instead of any reference to silver coins.

And finally, it's proposed that once the numbers of sharecroppers got to high, there would be a lot of civil unrest. In those days there wasn't much of a police force and no tear gas, so a teeming mass of disenfranchised humanity had nothing to lose and couldn't really be stopped if they got mad enough.

That's another reason why I take a dim view of any conception of Egyptian pharaohs always ruled by the whip and treated everyone like slaves owned by the state (i.e. the idealized bureaucratic state). Pharaohs who chose to rule that way probably did not last very long.

Reality says

Was that before Yuya or after Yuya? It's silly to consider all ancient Egypt as a monolith. The various kindom period and dynasties spanned 3000 years!

That's true, but Egypt was a centrally planned economy pretty much the whole time through with few exceptions until the coming of Alexander. Nile-flood dependent agriculture, the basis of Egypt's wealth and power, lends itself to central planning.

As for Yuya, is there any evidence he was Joseph? Or that he was involved in running the economy? He is referenced as the "Master of Horse", and before that a Priest of a Fertility Deity (not Yahweh) in Upper Egypt. It appears he was a high official under King Tut, but nothing suggests he was in charge of the economy of Egypt, other than his gravesite. But that could be for his status as Cavalry Commander of all Egypt, or the fact he was the Pharaoh's father in law.

Reality says

One can have monetary accounting units in grains, cattles or weight of precious metal. So long as they were dealing with accounts, it hardly mattered. Grain, when specified as generic grain instead of specific type and moisture, and represented in numbers in accounts could well be the currency, just like dollar is today, instead of any reference to silver coins.

Yes, but by definition, commodities aren't fiat money, which was one possibility you suggested above. I'm also not sure that farmers traded grain in an abstract way for goods, such as using papyrus currency or other commodity "representation". It's more likely they got a few jugs of wine today, for the promise of sacks of grain during the harvest.

I'm under the impression that coinage or other forms of money rarely found in the homes or burial sites of ancient Egyptians, and that the vast majority of the daily economy was reciprocity barter. At least until the end of the pre-Classical Dark Age.

But I'm open to be evidence that it isn't the case.

thunderlips11 says

The idea of a Jubilee is very interesting, and there are many theories about why they had to forgive debt.

Mayan did the same thing every 52 (I think it was 52) years. All debts reset, plus they completely put out all fire for one entire day.

Bap33 says

Mayan did the same thing every 52 (I think it was 52) years. All debts reset, plus they completely put out all fire for one entire day.

It's interesting stuff, eh?

For some reason, I find Jubilees appealing. The idea that periodically, the slate is cleared and everyone gets a fresh start.

thunderlips11 says

That's true, but Egypt was a centrally planned economy pretty much the whole time through with few exceptions until the coming of Alexander. Nile-flood dependent agriculture, the basis of Egypt's wealth and power, lends itself to central planning.

How many centrally planned economies do we know have lasted a really long time? That's with even the help of modern broadcasting systems radiating out central commands. Central planning tend not to be sustainable; even Yuya/Joseph's was no exception. Before the arrival of Alexander, the Egyptian court historian system simply lent itself to tall tales, just like Rameses' boast inscription boasting a great victory at Kadesh when in fact the Egyptians had a qualified loss and were forced into a treaty.

As for Yuya, is there any evidence he was Joseph?

Yes. Do a google search, there are multiple sources making the link.

Yes, but by definition, commodities aren't fiat money, which was one possibility you suggested above. I'm also not sure that farmers traded grain in an abstract way for goods, such as using papyrus currency or other commodity "representation". It's more likely they got a few jugs of wine today, for the promise of sacks of grain during the harvest.

Commodity money -> representation money -> fractional reserve banking -> fiat money -> bubble and collapse. Rinse and repeat. As for jugs of wine today in exchange for sacks of grain at harvest in the future, after such a credit is established how long do you think it would be before "a standard sack of grain" is developed for accounting/representation purpose as the creditor sell off that promise to someone else in exchange for something else.

I'm under the impression that coinage or other forms of money rarely found in the homes or burial sites of ancient Egyptians, and that the vast majority of the daily economy was reciprocity barter. At least until the end of the pre-Classical Dark Age.

Coinage need not arise when economies use commodity as currency. In fact, coinage by governments is the first step towards debasement and eventually fiat money. Gold and silver by weight as money do not have to be coined. If the society has institutional memory for past government abusive currency debasement, they wouldn't use coin but would accept metal by weight instead. Examples include the rise of 92% (Sterling) silver measured in Troyes weight as currency in the markets in Northern France at the end of the post-Roman Dark Ages (that gave us Pound-Sterling eventually), as people still remembered how Romans debased silver dinarii a few hundred years previously. The Egyptians apparently used "talent" (a weight unit) for gold and silver in large transactions.

Bap33 says

The stuff that was predicted to happen, has, but you can ignore that if you wish. The Jews ignored it too.

What specific prophecies came true? Come on, list them, like you've been asked multiple times.

Bap33 says

As for my flawed view of blah blah blah, that is the part where your line of attack left the tracks. Site your concern again, and READ THE ENTIRE EXCHANGE. Then, if that issue is still bugging you, post my point that you disagree with, and I'll do my best.

Dude, if you think forced tubal ligation is conservative, you are high. Nuf said.

Reality says

Yes. Do a google search, there are multiple sources making the link.

There are, but all the links refer to the writings of one Journalist named Osman. I could find no links that quoted any other source besides Osman for Yayu=Joseph, except a mention on wikipedia that his view was not held by Egyptologists with a link to a refutation published in a scholarly Journal.

Reality says

As for jugs of wine today in exchange for sacks of grain at harvest in the future, after such a credit is established how long do you think it would be before "a standard sack of grain" is developed for accounting/representation purpose as the creditor sell off that promise to someone else in exchange for something else.

Let me put my example in better context.

This is a place where most people are related by blood or marriage, and at the least have known each other their whole lives. When Ra promises Re a sack of grain for a jug of wine today, it's not as an alienated credit transaction between modern people who barely know each other, but closer to an elementary form of reciprocity. You know, Re's cousin is married to Ra's elder brother; and hardly anybody in the village has travelled more than 10 miles from where they were born.

Workmen are paid in rations of bread, beer, and clothing, not currency. People lease land and make big purchases by exchanging not one or two items, but a wide ranch of things, like a bronze statuette, some fish, a few jugs of beer and some linen in return for a land lease. Fee Simple was not practiced in Egypt; all land was owned by the State.

Reality says

How many centrally planned economies do we know have lasted a really long time?

That depends on your definition of centrally planned. Ancient Bronze Age economies had centrally planned infrastructure, corvee labor, all land either owned by the Ruling Class or Communal. In many cases workshops were located in the Villa or Palace or Temple, under the direct control of the Planners. On the other hand, farmers could choose their own crops, and either made their stuff at home or bartered for them in an informal marketplace.

If that fits, then here's some Centrally Planned Economies that survived for a damn long time:
Minoan & Mycenaean Civilization (1000 years)
Assyrian (1200 years)
Sumerian (many thousands of years, but not perfect because Sumerian city-states dispersed and coalesced based on climatic and soil conditions).

I don't know much about Chinese or Indian civilizations prior to 300-500BC, but I bet there are parallels.
Reality says

Coinage need not arise when economies use commodity as currency.

Well, I agree with that. But when currency is an edible commodity, it's hard to see the difference between barter and commercialized transactions.

Grain and sheep have to be eaten fairly soon; copper doesn't rot and can't be eaten. If somebody trades a sack of grain for a roughspun linen kilt, or a lamb for a new copper pickaxe, is the grain or lamb being used as currency or as barter?

so you are saying that liberals want forced birthcontrol for those who show no personal accountability? Anyways, my statement was mine, specificly, and I did not lable it "conservative's view", as you well know, so your entire issue was ziltch? Okie dokie.

As for specific prophecies that I believe were fortold and happened as stated: Here's one, Abraham and Sarah having a son as old folks. Or, for something newer, the savior was to be born 1) to a virgin, 2) in Bethelham, 3) a Jew of King David's blood line, and 4) rejected by the Jews. There are lots more, but most require faith in the Bible having truth, so why bother asking me?

John the Baptist told the folks he was dunking in the river who was coming up next, but I don't know if that counts.

The temple (Solomon's) will be rebuild, right about where the arabs put that golden dome, and that is a sure sign that Jesus is coming back soon. I can imagine that the building of the Temple by removing the arab dome is a good indication of what would trigger the last big war, huh?

Bap33 says

There are lots more, but most require faith in the Bible having truth, so why bother asking me?

Right, and without faith in the bible there is nothing that would indicate the the prophesies are accurate. In my mind for a prophesy to be valid it must.
1. Be recorded before the event it foretells
2. Be detailed -- there should be no room for "alternative" interpretations
3. Something that was not "foreseeable"

The problem with all prophesies that "came true" during bible times, are that they were recorded after the fact. It would be like me writing a book today about how I prophesied all events of the last 10 years, and then pointing to that book as proof that I am a god. You would need to have "faith" that I was not making it all up.

The problem is that all post bible times prophesies are very vague, and could (and have) be interpreted any number of ways.

Bap33 says

so you are saying that liberals want forced birthcontrol for those who show no personal accountability?

Where did you get that from?

Bap33 says

I did not lable it "conservative's view",

In context, it sure looks like you did. You are a self-described "conservative".

Bap33 says

As for specific prophecies that I believe were fortold and happened as stated:

So, you have proof that those things were both prophesied and happened? News to me. :p

Bap33 says

2) in Bethelham

Also, I'd note that not all the Gospels agree that Jesus was from Bethlehem -- Mark and John make no reference to the city. In addition, not all biblical scholars think Jesus was born there.

Bap33 says

3) a Jew of King David's blood line

Not all biblical scholars think Jesus was of David's blood line. In fact, many believe that the Gospels were manipulated to have fulfilled the prophecies.

corntrollio says

Dude, if you think forced tubal ligation is conservative, you are high. Nuf said.

opposite of Con is Lib on here. But, I also gave more to that answer that you skip over in order to futher your trolling.

As for the rest, you are just trolling. Happy trolling, sir.

thunderlips11 says

This is a place where most people are related by blood or marriage, and at the least have known each other their whole lives. When Ra promises Re a sack of grain for a jug of wine today, it's not as an alienated credit transaction between modern people who barely know each other, but closer to an elementary form of reciprocity. You know, Re's cousin is married to Ra's elder brother; and hardly anybody in the village has travelled more than 10 miles from where they were born.

Are you talking about 10,000BC or 1500BC? The simplistic isolated hermit view of the ancient world may have been true in 10,000BC or at times after periodic collapses, but certainly not true during the prosperous times even circa 1500BC (we don't know enough about earlier time). The sophisticated city states along Indus Valley with indoor plumbing dating to between 2000BC to 1500BC clearly indicated they largely lived off their trading network stretching to Persian Gulf and the Nile Delta. The Pyramids and Sphinx (along with zillions of stellas and monuments) indicated that the Egyptians from 3000BC to Alexander's time (circa 350BC), or an even earlier time than that, were not small time villagers or village idiots. Something may have been happening to set them back every few hundred years or every 1500 years or so, but there were periods of very sophisticated economies.

For comparison, it would be a grave mistake to look at bartering society in the 7th century in Europe and conclude that there was never money or banking in Europe before the rise of market towns and cities in the 9th and 10th century. The Romans with their very sophisticated trading netowrks, currency and banking systems came before the 5th-8th century dark age.

On the other hand, farmers could choose their own crops, and either made their stuff at home or bartered for them in an informal marketplace.

In an agricultural society, deciding what crop to plant in which plot is the most important decision. When that decision is left to the farmers and farmers are allowed to trade among themselves, that's not a centrally planned economy. Central planning refers to tightly controlled production planning and exchange ratios conducted by bureaucrats in lieu of market exchange. If farmers are allowed to decide what to plan in a predominantly agro economy, what you have is government tax collection, not central planning for the whole economy per se. In an agro economy, deciding what to plant where is the most important decision in the economy.

Well, I agree with that. But when currency is an edible commodity, it's hard to see the difference between barter and commercialized transactions.

The key there would be whether the grain/sheep is actually used in the exchange or merely a nominal unit of count. i.e. if the parties care about the exact conditions of the specific sheep then it's barter involving the specific sheep; if it's just a unit of sheep among dozens if not hundreds of sheep, then it's a currency. It's a little like numistic value of a coin vs. bullion coin. When dealing with numistics, i.e. quality of the specific coin matter then it's barter. If coins are treated as bullion then it's just commodity "money."

Grain and sheep have to be eaten fairly soon; copper doesn't rot and can't be eaten. If somebody trades a sack of grain for a roughspun linen kilt, or a lamb for a new copper pickaxe, is the grain or lamb being used as currency or as barter?

Depends on whether the grain and lamb are treated as specific goods to be enjoyed for their own use value (i.e. to be eaten, so obvious the quality of grain and lamb matter) . . . or whether the grain and lamb are accounting units to be passed off to someone else; the real thing may not even exist in the transaction but merely a representation. Wasn't "shekel" a weight for barley?

Bap33 says

opposite of Con is Lib on here.

No, it's not. That's what uninformed people think. Forced tubal ligation is facsist or some other totalitarian regime. Again, not clear you really know what you're talking about, in addition to being a bigoted religious zealot, which doesn't help.

I know you are, but what am I?

You just said, in writing, that Con is not opposite of Lib here on PatNet ..... interesting. I guess that is correct, as the opposites are only in certian topics. Let me try again: In the arena of religion, it sure seems like there is a division along the Con / Lib line on PatNet, that could be called opposite.

For the 3rd time, I did not say having welfare abusers get fixed was a conservaive idea, I said it was mine. Go double check, and you will find I mentioned this last time too. It's my idea, you can lable it as you wish.

Bap33 says

You just said, in writing, that Con is not opposite of Lib here on PatNet ..... interesting.

So you are saying there cannot be things that are said that are neither liberal nor conservative? Everything is black and white? Your side or my side? That's an incredibly naive view of the world. There are no degrees of anything? There's no middle? There are no other categorizations?

Bap33 says

I guess that is correct, as the opposites are only in certian topics. Let me try again

corntrollio says

So you are saying there cannot be things that are said that are neither liberal nor conservative? Everything is black and white? Your side or my side? That's an incredibly naive view of the world. There are no degrees of anything? There's no middle? There are no other categorizations?

You must have missed my post that showed that I realized I did not allow for all posibilities. Better?

Reality says

The Pyramids and Sphinx (along with zillions of stellas and monuments) indicated that the Egyptians from 3000BC to Alexander's time (circa 350BC), or an even earlier time than that, were not small time villagers or village idiots.

I didn't make that assertion that the ancient worlder was dumber or not at all urbanized. He just didn't live in an era of widespread commercialization. And while many Egyptians lived in cities, most did not - Grain comes from villages on the Nile, it wasn't grown in the center of cities. I'm illustrating that Joe Bronzeage also wasn't engaging in routine currency transactions as part of his daily life, just like a typical medieval peasant did not so. In fact, from the palaces in Crete, production for trade and trade itself appears to have been managed by the Elite, and not by the ordinary denizen.

We don't have evidence that there was even an independent, private merchant class at all in the Bronze Age Med. Most academics, even those postulating a well developed and widespread scale of trade in the Bronze Age Med, identify the trade as more of a tribute system between palaces and states. Copper and Tin were strategic metals carefully traded, hoarded and distributed by the authorities of the day, not by independent traders. Those individuals who were identified with trade, in whose dwellings are found many foreign items and records of transactions, are also government officials of high rank.

Almost all the archeological evidence for grain collection and storage, international trade, etc. are government or temple records, not private transactions.

It's odd that a society that records government land lease contracts and tax and storage transactions failed to implement such record keeping among private citizens involving bulk trades over long distances.

Reality says

In an agricultural society, deciding what crop to plant in which plot is the most important decision. When that decision is left to the farmers and farmers are allowed to trade among themselves, that's not a centrally planned economy. Central planning refers to tightly controlled production planning and exchange ratios conducted by bureaucrats in lieu of market exchange. If farmers are allowed to decide what to plan in a predominantly agro economy, what you have is government tax collection, not central planning for the whole economy per se. In an agro economy, deciding what to plant where is the most important decision in the economy.

Deciding what to plant is definitely a big decision.

But having all the workshops making all finished goods in the Palaces (Crete) and having all the land ownership in the hands of an elite isn't central planning? The organization of roads, canals, storage systems? Having the elites come to your farm and account for all of your crop production?

Except for choosing what to produce on your leased farm that you are prohibited from owning outright, it seems to me that every other link in the chain resembles a centralized economy.

In Knossos, the gender and age of tens of thousands of sheep were recorded by "collectors", government workers. The wool was processed by hundreds of slaves or "palace-dependent" workers (we're not sure exactly about their status, but they received regular rations from the state). Clothes were made largely by other palace-dependent workers. The resulting textiles were either distributed to the workers in the form of clothes as part of a ration, or given as tribute as decided by administrators. Nowhere in the chain are any independent merchants, outside of palace administrators, either explicitly mentioned in records, or evident in the form of uncovered sites.

I know I'm using a lot of Cretan history, but it's the one I'm most familiar with. I do love ancient Greece.

Russians were allowed to have garden plots in the Soviet Union and decide what vegetables to grow on them. When government run stores actually had goods, they were free to choose which ones to buy. But nobody calls the Soviet Union a free market economy because some decisions were made by individuals.

There is no such thing as a perfectly free market or a perfect command economy. However, the Bronze Age Mediterranean strikes me as a lot closer to the latter.

Reality says

Depends on whether the grain and lamb are treated as specific goods to be enjoyed for their own use value (i.e. to be eaten, so obvious the quality of grain and lamb matter) . . . or whether the grain and lamb are accounting units to be passed off to someone else; the real thing may not even exist in the transaction but merely a representation. Wasn't "shekel" a weight for barley?

You can't store sheep or grain for very long, it doesn't keep indefinitely. Even if it's a representation, it has to be stored somewhere, and eventually it has to be consumed. Which begs the question what the ultimate purpose was for.

I believe it was largely collected to feed the elite, provide laborers with rations, short term famine insurance, and aid for the poor or indigent, with all praise to the Pharaoh and the various Gods when it was distributed.

Using these commodities as currency was probably quite secondary to consuming it.

Not saying they weren't used as currencies at all.

Many of the stories about Jesus' birth were intended to legitimize him by using neighboring religions.

The three wise men were supposed to be Zoroastrian priests who had a tradition that their savior would be born from a virgin.

John the Baptist was the principle prophet of the Mandaeans, a now-obscure water cult that still exists in Iraq:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandaeism

These stories and many others like them serves to say "Look, this other nearby religion acknowledges the legitimacy of Jesus."

Doesn't prove that Christianity is wrong, but it is a bit funny that they repeatedly assimilated stories and people from nearby religions into their own.

I'm thinking that Enoch's book needs to be included so the tech and alien crowd can get on board the God bus too.

This next week should be exciting. I'd like to see the Arc of the Covenant turn up, or some other artifact.

Many of the stories about Jesus' birth were intended to legitimize him by using neighboring religions.

Yeah, as Patrick said, even the various traits of Jesus were probably cribbed -- resurrection, not much known between birth and age 30 or so, Dec 25, etc.:

http://listverse.com/2009/04/13/10-christ-like-figures-who-pre-date-jesus/

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Tony Manero says

The holy spirit needs a good fuck.

Yeah, probably. I mean if it only gets laid every several thousand years, that's probably the case, even if people can't stop talking about it for thousands of years afterward.

corntrollio says

Yeah, as Patrick said, even the various traits of Jesus were probably cribbed -- resurrection, not much known between birth and age 30 or so, Dec 25, etc.:

Yeah, I would say highly probable that that Jesus was a retelling of much older stories.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa2.htm

Dionysus, a Greek God, and Osiris, an Egyptian God were viewed as mythical characters. Osiris may have been the first god-man. His story has been found recorded in pyramid texts which were written prior to 2,500 BCE. These and other saviors were truly interchangeable.
...A person who was initiated into one of the mysteries had no difficulty switching to another Pagan mystery religion.