Conquer Club

In AP Euro history, we are learning about the thirty years war, and on a side note, we were talking about how the French debt in 1648. Their solution was the sale of Church offices to the highest bidder (those who held church offices were tax exempt). And after the Bourgeoisie and the nobility bought these, there is no more wealth coming from these families (these offices passed from father to son), and classes. So in the long run, it was terrible(for France). It caused the French Revolution (through debt), and created all sorts of problems that most of you are probably familiar with.

I drew a connection to the modern day from this.

What was the connection that you drew?

angola wrote:What was the connection that you drew?

^this

Well right now we do tax the rich, but I saw what you were thinking... I think

its not that complicated folks.

jonka wrote:In AP Euro history, we are learning about the thirty years war, and on a side note, we were talking about how the French debt in 1648. Their solution was the sale of Church offices to the highest bidder (those who held church offices were tax exempt). And after the Bourgeoisie and the nobility bought these, there is no more wealth coming from these families (these offices passed from father to son), and classes. So in the long run, it was terrible(for France). It caused the French Revolution (through debt), and created all sorts of problems that most of you are probably familiar with.

I drew a connection to the modern day from this.

There were some very major differences between then and now.

Interesting comparison. History tends to repeat itself.

Yeah, for real. Good food for thought post. When you see examples of the modern day mimicking what you've described, be sure to bump this thread.

We could probably just keep this on page 1.

Get gabonx and phatscotty in here, that should do it.

A bit tangential, but here's someone else predicting the future:

Yale professor predicts Iraq war outcome

thegreekdog wrote:Interesting comparison. History tends to repeat itself.

Fucking true.... This is something i more than strongly believe.... How did you come up to this point ?
Well done Seriously... % 95 of ppl has no idea of this.

HardAttack wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Interesting comparison. History tends to repeat itself.

Fucking true.... This is something i more than strongly believe.... How did you come up to this point ?
Well done Seriously... % 95 of ppl has no idea of this.

Your cookie is in the mail, you clever, clever fellow.

Japs wrote:Well right now we do tax the rich, but I saw what you were thinking... I think

Its good that we do, I'm trying to say that in France, you didn't see the trickle down of wealth, virtually at all. The Nobility just gained wealth and hoarded it, not having to pay taxes. You see, when you have massive amounts of land, and peasants are virtually stuck working for you because they don't have the means to start a successful enterprise, there is a trickle up. Usually this wealth was taxed, and the remainder used to raise armies, buy art, estates, etc. But now they have all this extra coming in, and they don't know what to do with it (they already have all they need, why try to amass more by investing). The Government isn't making money off of any of this, and it is hurting the economy (less demand for goods by the lower classes because they don't have the money to pay for it), further worsening the gov'ts problem. Luckily we have the power to change this taxation, but unluckily we don't have the benefit of the very rich, highly taxed bourgeoisie.

jonka wrote:In AP Euro history, we are learning about the thirty years war, and on a side note, we were talking about how the French debt in 1648. Their solution was the sale of Church offices to the highest bidder (those who held church offices were tax exempt). And after the Bourgeoisie and the nobility bought these, there is no more wealth coming from these families (these offices passed from father to son), and classes. So in the long run, it was terrible(for France). It caused the French Revolution (through debt), and created all sorts of problems that most of you are probably familiar with.

I drew a connection to the modern day from this.

To be honest, I think the main thing you can draw from it is that, back in the middle ages, people were really naive. I mean, surely the name 'Thirty Years War' would've given them an idea of how long it'd last, it was obviously going to be a bloody expensive thing to keep up and, in the end, cause problems.

French people, eh? Always been pretty hopeless at the whole 'war' thing, bless 'em ...

The Battle of Fishguard was a military invasion of Great Britain by Revolutionary France during the War of the First Coalition. The brief campaign, which took place between 22 February and 24 February 1797, was the most recent effort by a foreign force that was able to land on Britain, and thus is often referred to as the last invasion of Britain.

...

The heroine of the hour was Jemima Nicholas, who with her pitchfork, went out single-handedly into the fields around Fishguard and rounded up 12 French soldiers and 'persuaded' them to return with her to town where she locked them inside St Mary's Church.

I don't think it was called the "Thirty Years' War" until afterwards.

AlgyTaylor wrote: To be honest, I think the main thing you can draw from it is that, back in the middle ages, people were really naive. I mean, surely the name 'Thirty Years War' would've given them an idea of how long it'd last, it was obviously going to be a bloody expensive thing to keep up and, in the end, cause problems.

What the heck, I'll come out and ask it. Are you mentally retarded? Seriously, no joke.

Yeah mate, totally

AlgyTaylor wrote: To be honest, I think the main thing you can draw from it is that, back in the middle ages, people were really naive. I mean, surely the name 'Thirty Years War' would've given them an idea of how long it'd last, it was obviously going to be a bloody expensive thing to keep up and, in the end, cause problems.

I'm going to go ahead and believe that this is simply an attempt at humor and laugh (a little bit). I'm afraid to consider the alternative.

AlgyTaylor wrote: French people, eh? Always been pretty hopeless at the whole 'war' thing, bless 'em...

Yeah, that Napolean dude was clueless on the battlefield. Joan of Arc too.

Woodruff wrote:

AlgyTaylor wrote: To be honest, I think the main thing you can draw from it is that, back in the middle ages, people were really naive. I mean, surely the name 'Thirty Years War' would've given them an idea of how long it'd last, it was obviously going to be a bloody expensive thing to keep up and, in the end, cause problems.

I'm going to go ahead and believe that this is simply an attempt at humor and laugh (a little bit). I'm afraid to consider the alternative.

AlgyTaylor wrote: French people, eh? Always been pretty hopeless at the whole 'war' thing, bless 'em...

Yeah, that Napolean dude was clueless on the battlefield. Joan of Arc too.

Side note: France has been beating up on Germany forever, Germany has only beaten up on them 3 times. We should really make fun of the Germans for being terrible at war.

jonka wrote:

Japs wrote:Well right now we do tax the rich, but I saw what you were thinking... I think

Its good that we do, I'm trying to say that in France, you didn't see the trickle down of wealth, virtually at all. The Nobility just gained wealth and hoarded it, not having to pay taxes. You see, when you have massive amounts of land, and peasants are virtually stuck working for you because they don't have the means to start a successful enterprise, there is a trickle up. Usually this wealth was taxed, and the remainder used to raise armies, buy art, estates, etc. But now they have all this extra coming in, and they don't know what to do with it (they already have all they need, why try to amass more by investing). The Government isn't making money off of any of this, and it is hurting the economy (less demand for goods by the lower classes because they don't have the money to pay for it), further worsening the gov'ts problem. Luckily we have the power to change this taxation, but unluckily we don't have the benefit of the very rich, highly taxed bourgeoisie.

Actually this is the pattern not just in France. It was the pattern in India, Russia, China, ancient Greece and Rome, many ancient African nations, etc... etc.

Woodruff wrote:Yeah, that Napolean dude was clueless on the battlefield. Joan of Arc too.

How many times have the French conquered England in the last 900 years, eh? Never. And how many times has England/Britain conquered France? Twice in the last 90-odd years.

Point proven. The French are rubbish cheese-eating surrender monkeys and they know it.


(Pour le membres Francais - je plaisanterie, vouz pouvez insulte mon accent terrible et nourriture c'est encore plus mauvais )

AlgyTaylor wrote:

Woodruff wrote:Yeah, that Napolean dude was clueless on the battlefield. Joan of Arc too.

How many times have the French conquered England in the last 900 years, eh? Never. And how many times has England/Britain conquered France? Twice in the last 90-odd years.

Point proven. The French are rubbish cheese-eating surrender monkeys and they know it.


(Pour le membres Francais - je plaisanterie, vouz pouvez insulte mon accent terrible et nourriture c'est encore plus mauvais )

We've conquered France twice in the past 90 years? Thats news to me....

Titanic wrote:

AlgyTaylor wrote:

Woodruff wrote:Yeah, that Napolean dude was clueless on the battlefield. Joan of Arc too.

How many times have the French conquered England in the last 900 years, eh? Never. And how many times has England/Britain conquered France? Twice in the last 90-odd years.

Point proven. The French are rubbish cheese-eating surrender monkeys and they know it.


(Pour le membres Francais - je plaisanterie, vouz pouvez insulte mon accent terrible et nourriture c'est encore plus mauvais )

We've conquered France twice in the past 90 years? Thats news to me....

I conquered France once.

But only because I held SA for a turn right before it.