1000oz's a day

Dabloodymess

Active Member
I finally got around to reading Sun Tzu's Art of War today, and one particular passage caught my attention:

'Sun Tzu said: In the operations of war, where there are in the field a thousand swift chariots, and a hundred thousand mail-clad soldiers, with provisions enough to carry them a thousand li, the expenditure at home and at the front, including entertainment of guests, small items such as glue and paint, and sums spent on chariots and armor, will reach the total of a thousand ounces of silver per day. such is the cost of raising an army of 100 000 men.'

Chapter 2: Waging War, para. 1

I know everyone here believes silver to be worth more than its current manipulated price, and this just goes to show how much you used to be able to buy with a 1000oz's.... join the thousand ounce club, raise an army! :P
 
I can't remember the source but I read somewhere one of the greatest military leader in Chinese history was rewarded with about 10kg of silver after a lifetime of loyal service by his Emperor.
 
1000 oz of silver per day for 100,000 troops in the field....
How many troops do the US have deployed in Iraq and Afganastahn? what is the US dollar cost per day for the USA in these theaters. how does that relate to the silver price?
It would be interesting to see the comparrison of what silver bought then to now..
 
Absolutely amazing, isn't it? Even just a handful of silver has tremendous real world value in the right place and right time.

If you're basing the discussion up supply and demand, we haven't had silver stocks this low globally since the middle ages and our population is MANY times where it was at during the same period.

It states very simply that silver is so undervalued in the current environment, it's almost criminal.

Makes you want to go scramble for more, eh? ;)
 
Going completely from memory here, but wasn't silver in historical China more valued than gold? Guess it all depends on relative rareness - like in Europe before the discovery of the silver resources in the New World.
 
goldpelican said:
Going completely from memory here, but wasn't silver in historical China more valued than gold? Guess it all depends on relative rareness - like in Europe before the discovery of the silver resources in the New World.

I was under the impression early Egypt was in a similar boat concerning Silver!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-i0lDZjD_H4[/youtube]

Part 1 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qK33cL8mqds
Part 2 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJPHorCqKp0
Part 3 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2ayNzgxcKY

Here's another amazing snippet on Silver values through history some of the newer stackers here might have never seen :

1996 - A treasure found on Westerklief!

vikschat.jpg


The Westerklief silver treasure

As explained on one of the previous pages Wieringen in the early middleages was, as a firm and high point in a large moor-area, an important strategic position along the shippingroutes to the large tradecities of those days.

The Westerklief Silverhoard was the first evidence that Vikingen appreciated this as well, and more than that, decided to permanently settle on Wieringen. The silver hoard, containing Carolingian and Arab coins, bracelets and silver ingots, was probably buried in a turned cookingpot by a Danish viking in the ninth century.

Amateur archeologists found the hoard with help of metal detectors. aldetector. In total silver objects and coins with a combined weight of 1.7 kgs were found, most of this still in the pot they were originally buried in. The value of the silver hoard was large, even in those days. The silver would buy you a large farm, with lifestock and serfs. It is hard to make any concrete statements regarding the origin of the treasure. We know quite precisely what the different objects are, but why they were put together in a pot and buried will probably remain a riddle.

Kees Nieuwenhuijsen has brought forth an original hypothesis, based on a thesis written by Dirk-Jan Henstra at the Groningen University. At his website he has placed his translation of the Lex Frisionum, one of the oldest codes of law for the Dutch area. He thoroughly discusses the peculiarities of this earlymedieval text that can be seen as a mixture of old Germanic common law and Christian (Caroloingian) civil law.
A large portion of the Lex Frisionum is dedicated to a system of fines that was designed to replace the heathen custom of blood-feud. For every type of crime the Carolingian scholars had calculated a fine which the offender had to pay to the victim or his next of kin. Each fine was based on the value of a person and was defined by a special term: "wergeld". One had to pay one full wergeld as compensation for a killing and a portion of it as compensation for an injury caused by the offender. To give a few examples: putting out an eye of a free man cost 40 shillings, pulling someones hair, without permission ofcourse, had a 4 shillings fine.

The height of the wergeld depended on the societal status of the victim. A nobleman had a higher value than a free man, who in turn was valued higher than a serf. Slaves did not have a wergeld, only a replacement value.

To make a long story short: all through the middle ages the fine for killing a free man changed constantly when calculated in coins, but that was because of several monetary reforms that took place. When the intrinsic value - the weight of the silver - is compared, the wergeld remained surprisingly constant during all these centuries. It was, within a narrow bandwith, 1700 grams. Exactly the weight of the silver hoard at Westerklief. Coincidence? Or not...

We now get on a very speculative course, but suppose that in the ninth century Westerklief a free man was murdered. The matter was resolved according to the local Frisian law (Lex Frisionum), but since it was a turbulent time, the receiving party thought it wiser to hide the wergeld until things calmed down again. And perhaps the murderer was a Danish Viking who served under Rorik, explaining the Danish silver in the hoard? Most likely we will never know for sure...

Musea

The original hoard can now be seen in the Rijksmuseum voor Oudheden in Leiden. Thanks to grants from the local authorities a replica could be made of the viking hoard. This can be seen in the local museum Huis van de Aarde te Den Oever. The replica shows the treasure as it was found, the original in Leiden lies highly polished on black velvet.

Link : http://www.pagowirense.nl/wr-his2a.asp

In the old world, silver WAS the lifeblood of commerce and wealth across the entire known world!!!
 
using these numbers from ; http://usliberals.about.com/od/homelandsecurit1/a/IraqNumbers.htm

Cost of deploying one U.S. soldier for one year in Iraq - $390,000 (Congressional Research Service)

TROOPS IN IRAQ

Troops in Iraq - Total 48,000 U.S. troops as of Nov 30, 2010. All other nations have withdrawn their troops.

thats 480 Oz of silver per day using the old Sun Tzu price.

It is US$51,264,000 per day using these figures for 48,000 troops.

at that rate 1 oz equals $106,800 in troop costs.

either my maths and figures suck or silver may be a bit underpriced.
 
goldpelican said:
Going completely from memory here, but wasn't silver in historical China more valued than gold? Guess it all depends on relative rareness - like in Europe before the discovery of the silver resources in the New World.

Funny you mention that, and your totally correct, silver was the metal for Chinese currency and was more valued by them than gold - gold was for ornaments and trinkets, silver was for spending!

And you also mentioned the New World silver discoveries... they were one of the biggest turning points in history. Europe until that point was an economic backwater, with the majority of world trade occurring east of Constantinople (modern day Istanbul).

The Europeans understandably wanted to tap into this lucrative trade route, but the Chinese and other nations didn't want anything that they produced... they wanted silver and the Europeans didn't have anywhere near enough.... until they for all intents and purposes dispossessed the South American tribes of their silver.

But, they didn't stop there, they were still haemorrhaging silver to pay for the silks, pottery and spices that were so sought after in Europe... it was an untenable position to be in, they were essentially running a massive trade deficit to use modern terminology. So the British government, under the guise of the British East India company got the Chinese addicted to opium, on a staggering scale. They now had something to trade in the east that was not only desired, but demanded, and they demanded a high price in silver for it.

With the positions now reversed, the Chinese emperor decided to ban all opium imports in an effort to stymie the outflows of silver into British coffers. The British response was to declare war. Though China was more advanced socially and economically, the Europeans far surpassed them in military technology due to the hundreds of years of infighting in Europe which had led to staggering military advancements. Needless to say the Chinese got very badly beaten, in the first, and soon after the second 'opium war'.

This signalled the end of a massive transfer of wealth from east to west, leading to the ascendency of the west... only now is this imbalance being corrected.

I fully understand if anyone didn't read that, I ended up writing a lot more than I had anticipated :)
 
Sounds about right, 1oz of silver per day.

I read this was the average wage, even through the middle ages.

Today, $30 silver, can you live getting paid $30 a day?

Slam
 
Total side tangent, but the 1oz a day made me recall something I calculated the other day - the salary when I left uni and the salary I earn 15 years later is exactly the same in ounces of gold. Skills & experience have gone up, real remuneration hasn't. My earnings in gold peaked about a couple of years ago and have been declining since.
 
Sun Tzu: Art of War - Forgive me if I'm wrong 1000 ozs per day for 100,000 warriors = 1/10th of an oz per soldier. $3 per day. One can of your warmest Arabian beer please?
 
Dabloodymess said:
I fully understand if anyone didn't read that, I ended up writing a lot more than I had anticipated :)
A good informative read, thank you.
 
Dynoman said:
Sun Tzu: Art of War - Forgive me if I'm wrong 1000 ozs per day for 100,000 warriors = 1/10th of an oz per soldier. $3 per day. One can of your warmest Arabian beer please?

Yes indeed your correct, that is 1/10th a day if you shared 1000oz's between 100 000 soldiers. The thing is it is hard to tell exactly how much a soldiers wage was, because Sun Tzu mentions spending money on lots of things in that passage, such as supplies... so the 1000oz a day is what was needed to supply and pay the army of 100 000..... and then there is no way to tell if Sun Tzu was over or understating the figure.

Edit: Im no maths whiz, but its less than 1/10th of an ounce....... a lot less..... 1000 divided by 100 000 = 0.01
 
Dabloodymess said:
will reach the total of a thousand ounces of silver per day. such is the cost of raising an army of 100 000 men.'
I think this is a translation problem. I just looked the original Chinese version. It says 1000 oz gold, not silver. Actually, the importance of this sentence is all about saying the cost would be huge for the war rather than quantify it.
 
Are you guys sure that 1000ozs between 100,000 soldiers isn't 1/100oz each? You'd think that people who dealt in silver would understand fractions :p
 
lionfishcoin said:
Dabloodymess said:
will reach the total of a thousand ounces of silver per day. such is the cost of raising an army of 100 000 men.'
I think this is a translation problem. I just looked the original Chinese version. It says 1000 oz gold, not silver. Actually, the importance of this sentence is all about saying the cost would be huge for the war rather than quantify it.

Glad you could clear that up, the more it was broken down the less plausible it seemed that 1000oz's was the correct figure... things get lost in translation all the time unfortunately :/

And yes thats the gist of that section of the book... essentially saying that the cost of going to war is massive, so you better be sure that you win. This is kind of in the wrong section now :P
 
col0016 said:
Are you guys sure that 1000ozs between 100,000 soldiers isn't 1/100oz each? You'd think that people who dealt in silver would understand fractions :p

Frikk: Now we are down to 30 cents Tzunshine, I ain't fightin no Mongol for dat !
 
they are running about 120k before the troop surge in afghanistan. add up the cost to the american taxpayer and feel sorry for them. no wonder they are running a deficit. this is one mother of a whole they are digging. add on the costs of looking after the injuries when they stop and i go cold. bush's little wars are costing dearly. would be nice for silver to correct though. actually i would rather have no war and keep silver low so i can stack. hmmmm sad.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>......................
Austalian troops are there to you know.Your paying for them.
 
I was thinking about this again in bed (Like I have better things to do) & it occurred to that it hardly matters if the US is deployed killing people or sitting on a canvas bed in West Point. The cost is covered by the corporation, that being the USA. They say it was costing half a bill per day to wage Iraq but in reality it's all easily covered by the State. What is the cost per household in the US ? Would it even amount to 30 minutes labor per day ? The payoff is access to oil, Bush & Bush Jr are both oilmen. Whatever reasons they had to wage war aside, energy demands in the form of black gold obviously constituted the primary objective. They didn't invade Iraq to steal it's Gold did they !
 
Back
Top