- [<] Status Log - created:: 2021-07-31 - status-updated:: 2022-03-13 - status-updated:: 2022-11-09 - current-status:: #articleseed - [S] Marketing - desc:: Large infrastructure projects don't need fancy technology, they just need a large, idle workforce organized by competent leaders. - purpose:: #articleseed/addendum for [[Ancient Priests]] - [b] References - Find the thing about Nile workers at the port engineers who were skilled laborers and had good food and beer. - Mention how seasonal Egypt was; didn't some of the priests basically serve part time as a sort of tithe activity the rich did? - [[The Architect]] and that whole thing in the [[Nahrian Basin]]. Large infrastructure projects don't need fancy technology, they just need an organized group of people united in purpose, but I wanted to expand on an important element of that: idle times. Thanks to the Nile flood seasons, the ancient Egyptians didn't need slaves to build pyramids; they just needed an idle workforce -- a labor surplus combined with an economic surplus. The Nile flood was the natural surplus; it was Of course the phrase “economic surplus” is doing a lot of work here, and some folks with a stronger grasp of formal economics might disagree with my characterization here. After all, it wasn’t seasonal ebbs and flows in economic activity that led to the creation of the Hoover Dam. It was motivated at least in part by reaction to an economic _crash_ sure, but I'd argue that it was more the _idle workforce_ (which would have otherwise sat around and caused trouble for the government) that led to the creation Conservation Corps. It was a government decision to invest in infrastructure, and Roosevelt made that decision at least in part because of the Great Depression. Hardly a time of economic surplus! But there was some surplus; inarguably so, or the government couldn’t have fed and housed and paid all of the workers who built Hoover Dam. The surplus just wasn’t distributed into the hands of the people who needed it to keep from starving. Whether the government decision to invest in infrastructure that led to a redistribution of wealth or a creation of wealth or some combination of both is a question for economics and professionals. From my perspective, it's a straightforward case of "idle workforce + economic surplus + government desire for legitimacy and control = big infrastructure projects." Plain old fashioned militarism; the Romans had to keep their armies busy when they weren't marches, because idle soldiers cause discipline problems.