3 ms·

> Everyone is trying to be megacorp these days. Been playing Rome: Total War for the past few days. It going me thinking that empire just can’t stop expanding.

by f6v 6y ago

> Everyone is trying to be megacorp these days. Been playing Rome: Total War for the past few days. It going me thinking that empire just can’t stop expanding. You conquer one province, thinking that barbarian neighbor won’t be a problem ever again. But then you realize your empire now borders some other barbarians who start harassing you. And then you need more troops to keep the new citizens from rioting. Which requires money, which means the drums of war are at it again...

mcculley 6y ago
There are less violent forces behind expansion. Shareholders prefer to invest in companies that are growing. Employees want to work in organizations where they can be promoted.
JumpCrisscross 6y ago
> empire just can’t stop expanding You’re identifying a deficiency of imperial systems. They were one of the only ways to get growth in our close to zero sum past. In a world with a growing global economy, on the other hand, warring and imperialism are self-defeating long run strategies.
- vinceguidry 6y ago
  No, they work just as well as they always do. It's just easier to run in to a bigger, badder imperium.
  - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
    > they work just as well as they always do Objectively, no. They don't. You can't capture the intangible capital of a country through invasion. The greater the ratio of intangible capital (skills, trust, institutions, et cetera) to tangible capital, the less effective classical empires become. Resource-rich countries, on the other hand, are still subject to imperial dynamics.
    - vinceguidry 6y ago
      It happened last century, when the Communists kicked the Nationalists out of mainland China.
      - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
        > when the Communists kicked the Nationalists out of mainland China That's revolution, not imperialism.
        vinceguidry 6y ago
        What's the difference? They invaded, took over, and kicked out the old leaders. It was a war. With territory and everything.
- f6v 6y ago
  > In a world with a growing global economy That’s assuming there’s no end to the growth. But the resources here on earth are limited.
  - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
    > resources here on earth are limited One, there is more in the universe than this earth. And two, the resource intensity of GDP growth is falling. (A new iPhone is more capable than its predecessors without requiring comparatively more resources. And a web comic can create millions in value with comparatively little burn.)
billbrown 6y ago
For a more business-oriented perspective, Eric Weinstein's idea of Embedded Growth Obligations[1] is apt. [1] https://theportal.wiki/wiki/Embedded_Growth_Obligations https://theportal.wiki/wiki/Embedded_Growth_Obligations

by f6v 6y ago

mcculley 6y ago

There are less violent forces behind expansion. Shareholders prefer to invest in companies that are growing. Employees want to work in organizations where they can be promoted.

JumpCrisscross 6y ago

> empire just can’t stop expanding You’re identifying a deficiency of imperial systems. They were one of the only ways to get growth in our close to zero sum past. In a world with a growing global economy, on the other hand, warring and imperialism are self-defeating long run strategies.

vinceguidry 6y ago
No, they work just as well as they always do. It's just easier to run in to a bigger, badder imperium.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago
  > they work just as well as they always do Objectively, no. They don't. You can't capture the intangible capital of a country through invasion. The greater the ratio of intangible capital (skills, trust, institutions, et cetera) to tangible capital, the less effective classical empires become. Resource-rich countries, on the other hand, are still subject to imperial dynamics.
  - vinceguidry 6y ago
    It happened last century, when the Communists kicked the Nationalists out of mainland China.
    - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
      > when the Communists kicked the Nationalists out of mainland China That's revolution, not imperialism.
      - vinceguidry 6y ago
        What's the difference? They invaded, took over, and kicked out the old leaders. It was a war. With territory and everything.
f6v 6y ago
> In a world with a growing global economy That’s assuming there’s no end to the growth. But the resources here on earth are limited.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago
  > resources here on earth are limited One, there is more in the universe than this earth. And two, the resource intensity of GDP growth is falling. (A new iPhone is more capable than its predecessors without requiring comparatively more resources. And a web comic can create millions in value with comparatively little burn.)

billbrown 6y ago

For a more business-oriented perspective, Eric Weinstein's idea of Embedded Growth Obligations[1] is apt. [1] https://theportal.wiki/wiki/Embedded_Growth_Obligations https://theportal.wiki/wiki/Embedded_Growth_Obligations