"harryagain" wrote in message
...

"Simon Brown" wrote in message
...


"harryagain" wrote in message
...

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 28/04/15 23:21, Capitol wrote:
The majority of people will try to choose the cheapest
long term solution, as that's all they can afford.

Its not even in the end a choice. A society that chooses expensive not
very effective ways of doing things will not be able to stand against a
society that chooses cheaper and more effective ways.

Europe colonised the world because it had technology at its disposal.

Europe colonised the world long before the steam engine.

Using the technology of ocean going ships.

In many cases driven by religion and greed.

It was money that made it all possible.

It was much more the drive to do it that made it possible.

The concentration of wealth.

Doesn’t explain the Vikings that rampaged
over a surprising amount of the world.

Accumulating yet more wealth.
An upward spiral.
(Which is why socialism always fails.)

Hasn’t failed in Norway. They have done much better
with their socialised oil and gas system than Britain has.


More socialist myths.

Facts, actually.

Norway has a conservatve government ****-fer-brains.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erna_Solberg

Irrelevant to the fact that their oil and gas is government
owned and so is quite a bit of their hydro too. You can't
get any more socialist than that and when their GDP per
capita is fourth in the entire world, only a fool/bigot would
be stupid enough to claim that that is anything like a failure.

Brain dead Socialism always fails wherever implemented.

It clearly did not in Norway.

Or anywhere else that has a govt owned public
road system, and govt owned education system.

Cheaper is rarely more effective.
Eg Smart bombs v. dumb bombs.
Rifles v. muskets

You get the opposite effect with much technology,
cheaper makes it viable for everyone to have it.

The proles always drive Fords et al.

Cheaper is clearly more effective with that type of technology.

The rich drive BMWs.

Yes, but that has nothing to do with more effective.