Things that are overpriced

Page 8 of 9« First<56789>
June 1st, 2023 at 3:56:48 AM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18222
Quote: Gandler
We only know that because it was the only crop they could profitably grow at the time. If this was not an option other crops may have been discovered. But, yeah Spain would have a much larger grip on the Americas if tobacco did not exist (my suspicion, obviously historical speculation).

Would North America and the Carribean be better off with more Spain and France and less England? That is debatable. At the end of the day they all colonized for profit (as did everyone else including the Native tribes, I am not saying that as a negative ot positive, just a historic fact). Spain and England were just probably the best at it (and maybe the Ottomans).


And the other crops might have had worse effects. The point is tobacco was the first viable cash crop. If not for it what became the 13 colonies would have just been poor farming areas like in Russia. Or for that matter, what became Latin America. I saw it put well once that Spain colonized for gold but England colonized for profitable products that built their GNP. And that is why the Spanish failed long term.

Where did the Ottomas colonize in the Americas?
The President is a fink.
June 1st, 2023 at 5:10:09 AM permalink
Gandler
Member since: Aug 15, 2019
Threads: 27
Posts: 4256
Quote: AZDuffman
And the other crops might have had worse effects. The point is tobacco was the first viable cash crop. If not for it what became the 13 colonies would have just been poor farming areas like in Russia. Or for that matter, what became Latin America. I saw it put well once that Spain colonized for gold but England colonized for profitable products that built their GNP. And that is why the Spanish failed long term.

Where did the Ottomas colonize in the Americas?


I was saying England and Spain were the best at colonies with Ottomans as an honorable runner up. Globally, not just America. But, yes in America's, Spain and England did the best, with only a handful of other countries having relatively minor territory (France, Portugal, Netherlands).

Without tobacco other crops would have emerged. Or maybe not, and maybe North America would be leas sought after. It's all historical speculation. But, they wanted the land, and tobacco just gave them a financial justification so my guess is England would have made it work.
June 1st, 2023 at 5:19:44 AM permalink
DoubleGold
Member since: Jan 26, 2023
Threads: 30
Posts: 2506
The Gold Rush here happened a couple of hundred years earlier than there.

Spanish and Portuguese crowns.

The ports were not too far from the Gold deposits.

Slaves too, to cart the Gold to the shore from inland.


I'd have to research for Tobacco, Tea, and Opium here.

Plenty of Coffee though.


Eventually, the folks revolted and gained their independence.
June 1st, 2023 at 5:26:51 AM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18222
Quote: Gandler
I was saying England and Spain were the best at colonies with Ottomans as an honorable runner up. Globally, not just America. But, yes in America's, Spain and England did the best, with only a handful of other countries having relatively minor territory (France, Portugal, Netherlands).

Without tobacco other crops would have emerged. Or maybe not, and maybe North America would be leas sought after. It's all historical speculation. But, they wanted the land, and tobacco just gave them a financial justification so my guess is England would have made it work.


The Ottomans did not really colonize unless you consider annexing neighboring

It is doubtful it would have worked without another cash crop. Tobacco cash fueled other development. Colonies are not really profitable unless you can integrate them into a larger system.
The President is a fink.
June 1st, 2023 at 6:06:11 AM permalink
Gandler
Member since: Aug 15, 2019
Threads: 27
Posts: 4256
Quote: AZDuffman
The Ottomans did not really colonize unless you consider annexing neighboring

It is doubtful it would have worked without another cash crop. Tobacco cash fueled other development. Colonies are not really profitable unless you can integrate them into a larger system.


That is quite literally colonization, they just managed to stay (mostly) contiguous. But, they has impressive expansion, and managed to hold it until WWI when their empire was carved up.
June 1st, 2023 at 6:35:42 AM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 189
Posts: 18775
Fill lake mead with balls.

Quote:
n 2014 and 2015, the LADWP put 96 million shade balls onto its largest reservoir (Las Virgenes)[5] in response to the United States Environmental Protection Agency's surface water treatment rule,[6] which requires large reservoirs of treated water to be covered.[7][8] The LADWP says that in addition to reducing evaporation, they also reduce UV radiation by-products and algae growth.[9] The balls saved 1.7 million cubic metres of water from evaporating during their deployment from August 2015 to March 2017. However, they required 2.9 million cubic metres of water in their manufacture. Nevertheless, the balls have a lifespan of ten years, and the plastic may be reused after that.


I suppose it would kill all the fish.
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
June 1st, 2023 at 6:46:40 AM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18222
Quote: Gandler
Quote: AZDuffman
The Ottomans did not really colonize unless you consider annexing neighboring

It is doubtful it would have worked without another cash crop. Tobacco cash fueled other development. Colonies are not really profitable unless you can integrate them into a larger system.


That is quite literally colonization, they just managed to stay (mostly) contiguous. But, they has impressive expansion, and managed to hold it until WWI when their empire was carved up.


I would consider that expansionism, not colonization.
The President is a fink.
June 1st, 2023 at 6:50:39 AM permalink
Gandler
Member since: Aug 15, 2019
Threads: 27
Posts: 4256
Quote: AZDuffman
Quote: Gandler
Quote: AZDuffman
The Ottomans did not really colonize unless you consider annexing neighboring

It is doubtful it would have worked without another cash crop. Tobacco cash fueled other development. Colonies are not really profitable unless you can integrate them into a larger system.


That is quite literally colonization, they just managed to stay (mostly) contiguous. But, they has impressive expansion, and managed to hold it until WWI when their empire was carved up.


I would consider that expansionism, not colonization.


Expansion/annexation is colonization. There is no requirment that the land be a certain distance from the original empire. Taking over lands with a clashing culture (Christianity) is debatablely double colonization because it is also cultural colonization.
June 1st, 2023 at 8:39:51 AM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 189
Posts: 18775
I'd say Germany under Hitler was doing expansionism at first. Perhaps later, if enough Germans move into the occupied areas, I'd consider that colonization. Though I think it depends how "German-like" in customs and people the occupied territory already is. That's how I'd differentiate the two.
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
June 1st, 2023 at 8:45:32 AM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 189
Posts: 18775
OTOH, I suppose setting up a puppet government just to drain the target country of goods and services probably is not colonization. You let them live like they did, but aren't really initiating a change nor heavily occupying with much besides troops maybe to keep control.
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
Page 8 of 9« First<56789>