On Monday, October 15, 2018 at 5:06:25 AM UTC-10, reader wrote:   
   > >In all honestly, as far as I can tell the only thing   
   > >stopping the Industrial Revolution from happen in ancient   
   > >Roman times, instead of the 18th century, was the Roman   
   > >elite.   
   >   
   > Simple, all of the prerequisite technology elements of the industrial   
   > revolution were not in place.   
   >   
   > China was the leader in technology until about the 17th century.  If it   
   > were to have happened anywhere else it would b china.   
   >   
   > A 1st century roman in egypt described a rudimentary steam engine, which we   
   > associate with the industrial revolution as a primary energy conversion   
   > prerequisite.   
      
   I thought that technological progress doesn't occur when there is a lot of   
   cheap labor.   
      
   In the the case of ancient Rome, wasn't that about slaves?   
      
   And in the case of China up to the 17th c., didn't it experience a population   
   boom after that?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)