The delay of the Industrial Revolution can be attributed significantly to the role of labor costs and the existence of cheap labor alternative models. Throughout history, even as early as the Roman Empire, the potential for technological advancements like the steam engine was evident, yet the economy relied heavily on affordable labor sources, such as slavery. This reliance stymied the urgency for innovation through automation since competing with low-cost labor was less appealing to invest in machinery. In contrast, Britain experienced a different scenario during the Industrial Revolution, where rising labor costs—prompted by a decrease in available workers due to migration and other factors—compelled industries to seek automation solutions. This shift fostered an environment where technological innovations could flourish, creating a cycle of continuous improvements. The question remains as to why advanced economies with the necessary technologies failed to initiate such an industrial takeoff for centuries, indicating a critical relationship between labor costs, automation, and economic progress through history. The gap of over a thousand years from Rome's potential to the eventual Industrial Revolution highlights the complex interplay between social structures and technological advancement.