Lagos Sunset Drive 🌇🚘 | Lagos Island to Lagos Mainland 🇳🇬

[@lexusking-nk2nl]

I also love the advertising billboards

[@lexusking-nk2nl]

Dis is d best video i have seen all day

[@mimzy544]

You go still enjoy the ride sha 😂

[@RukkyDINMA]

New subie here. I was in lagos in 2017. Hopefully I will visit soon.

[@RoamingRoutesJourneys]

Thank you 😊

[@esther2462]

Wow! Lagos is beautiful! I visited Lagos. It's very beautiful.

[@RoamingRoutesJourneys]

It’s good you had a great experience😊 Pls kindly subscribe to get more latest updates on this channel. Thanks!

[@ogungbesanoluniyi3662]

Eko ko ni baje o! Lagos for show!

[@BisolaOladipupo]

Wow

[@RoamingRoutesJourneys]

Pls subscribe to get more updates on this channel 😊

[@MummyMikail]

❤❤❤

[@akinjoaquim1013]

Lagos on the rise……

[@anthonyOkoro-yr1ml]

THE SLUM DRIVE 😢😮😮😮😅😅😅.

[@joycee15]

If you don't see traffic in lagos😂 Sorry, it not lagos then😅

[@festusngbeken5364]

I tire ooo, people doing what they were asked to , and payed for... although almost nobody can buy petrol again in this tinubu regime,, maybe 4 that no more vehicles as before,, everyone using their legs

[@Aigberaedion_Samson]

the Industrial Revolution happened in England rather than, say, Moldova. In addition, as Diamond himself points out, China and India benefited greatly from very rich suites of animals and plants, and from the orientation of Eurasia. But most of the poor people of the world today are in those two countries. In fact, the best way to see the scope of Diamond’s thesis is in terms of his own explanatory variables. Map 4 shows data on the distribution of Sus scrofa, the ancestor of the modern pig, and the aurochs, ancestor of the modern cow. Both species were widely distributed throughout Eurasia and even North Africa. Map 5 (this page) shows the distribution of some of the wild ancestors of modern domesticated crops, such as Oryza sativa, the ancestor of Asian cultivated rice, and the ancestors of modern wheat and barley. It demonstrates that the wild ancestor of rice was distributed widely across south and southeast Asia, while the ancestors of barley and wheat were distributed along a long arc from the Levant, reaching through Iran and into Afghanistan and the cluster of “stans” (Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, and Krgyzistan). These ancestral species are present in much of Eurasia. But their wide distribution suggests that inequality within Eurasia cannot be explained by a theory based on the incidence of the species. The geography hypothesis is not only unhelpful for explaining the origins of prosperity throughout history, and mostly incorrect in its emphasis, but also unable to account for the lay of the land we started this chapter with. One might argue that any persistent pattern, such as the hierarchy of incomes within the Americas or the sharp and long-ranging differences between Europe and the Middle East, can be explained by unchanging geography. But this is not so. We have already seen that the patterns within the Americas are highly unlikely to have been driven by geographical factors. Before 1492 it was the civilizations in the central valley of Mexico, Central America, and the Andes that had superior technology and living standards to North America or places such as Argentina and Chile. While the geography stayed the same, the institutions imposed by European colonists created a “reversal of fortune.” Geography is also unlikely to explain the poverty of the Middle East for similar reasons. After all, the Middle East led the world in the Neolithic Revolution, and the first towns developed in modern Iraq. Iron was first smelted in Turkey, and as late as the Middle Ages the Middle East was technologically dynamic. It was not the geography of the Middle East that made the Neolithic Revolution flourish in that part of the world, as we will see in chapter 5, and it was, again, not geography that made the Middle East poor. Instead, it was the expansion and consolidation of the Ottoman Empire, and it is the institutional legacy of this empire that keeps the Middle East poor today. Finally, geographic factors are unhelpful for explaining not only the differences we see across various parts of the world today but also why many nations such as Japan or China stagnate for long periods and then start a rapid growth process. We need another, better theory. THE CULTURE HYPOTHESIS The second widely accepted theory, the culture hypothesis, relates prosperity to culture. The culture hypothesis, just like the geography hypothesis, has a distinguished lineage, going back at least to the great German sociologist Max Weber, who argued that the Protestant Reformation and the Protestant ethic it spurred played a key role in facilitating the rise of modern industrial society in Western Europe. The culture hypothesis no longer relies solely on religion, but stresses

[@RoamingRoutesJourneys]

I’m lost 🤷🏽‍♀️

[@vladtheimpalerofd1rtypajee316]

May Nigeria rise

[@badmusajibade4597]

😊😊❤❤

[@stevestephen2122]

Following from Nairobi

[@RoamingRoutesJourneys]

Thank you 😊

[@CodingExpress]

Rough city, dirts everywhere. Lagos is a big eyesore. That's why when some people go abroad, they don't want to return. Come to Abuja. Very clean looks like abroad. You can bring any foreigner here and walk on the street and you won't feel ashamed

[@joey9419able]

some people aren't worried about that. Just want to experience culture for what it is.....

[@chyke6272]

In the U.S, do you think New York City is as clean and habitable as Washington D.C??? Travel. Learn. Understand.....and stop making noise.

[@Elrykkstorm]

Kindly look up the meaning of tail-gating.

[@CodingExpress]

Look at the third mainland bridge looking dirty. If it were Abuja, they would paid it every month

[@expressinfomedia]

Oga mention the areas,say something about your experience,no be to dey drive around like fool ...if you really want to get likes and subscribers.

[@Aigberaedion_Samson]

the Industrial Revolution happened in England rather than, say, Moldova. In addition, as Diamond himself points out, China and India benefited greatly from very rich suites of animals and plants, and from the orientation of Eurasia. But most of the poor people of the world today are in those two countries. In fact, the best way to see the scope of Diamond’s thesis is in terms of his own explanatory variables. Map 4 shows data on the distribution of Sus scrofa, the ancestor of the modern pig, and the aurochs, ancestor of the modern cow. Both species were widely distributed throughout Eurasia and even North Africa. Map 5 (this page) shows the distribution of some of the wild ancestors of modern domesticated crops, such as Oryza sativa, the ancestor of Asian cultivated rice, and the ancestors of modern wheat and barley. It demonstrates that the wild ancestor of rice was distributed widely across south and southeast Asia, while the ancestors of barley and wheat were distributed along a long arc from the Levant, reaching through Iran and into Afghanistan and the cluster of “stans” (Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, and Krgyzistan). These ancestral species are present in much of Eurasia. But their wide distribution suggests that inequality within Eurasia cannot be explained by a theory based on the incidence of the species. The geography hypothesis is not only unhelpful for explaining the origins of prosperity throughout history, and mostly incorrect in its emphasis, but also unable to account for the lay of the land we started this chapter with. One might argue that any persistent pattern, such as the hierarchy of incomes within the Americas or the sharp and long-ranging differences between Europe and the Middle East, can be explained by unchanging geography. But this is not so. We have already seen that the patterns within the Americas are highly unlikely to have been driven by geographical factors. Before 1492 it was the civilizations in the central valley of Mexico, Central America, and the Andes that had superior technology and living standards to North America or places such as Argentina and Chile. While the geography stayed the same, the institutions imposed by European colonists created a “reversal of fortune.” Geography is also unlikely to explain the poverty of the Middle East for similar reasons. After all, the Middle East led the world in the Neolithic Revolution, and the first towns developed in modern Iraq. Iron was first smelted in Turkey, and as late as the Middle Ages the Middle East was technologically dynamic. It was not the geography of the Middle East that made the Neolithic Revolution flourish in that part of the world, as we will see in chapter 5, and it was, again, not geography that made the Middle East poor. Instead, it was the expansion and consolidation of the Ottoman Empire, and it is the institutional legacy of this empire that keeps the Middle East poor today. Finally, geographic factors are unhelpful for explaining not only the differences we see across various parts of the world today but also why many nations such as Japan or China stagnate for long periods and then start a rapid growth process. We need another, better theory. THE CULTURE HYPOTHESIS The second widely accepted theory, the culture hypothesis, relates prosperity to culture. The culture hypothesis, just like the geography hypothesis, has a distinguished lineage, going back at least to the great German sociologist Max Weber, who argued that the Protestant Reformation and the Protestant ethic it spurred played a key role in facilitating the rise of modern industrial society in Western Europe. The culture hypothesis no longer relies solely on religion, but stresses