cryofan wrote:
>
> On Sun, 30 Dec 2001 02:52:01 -0800, you wrote:
>
> >> In spite of the fact that most Americans are descended from
> >> people who took advantage of relatively open borders.
> >> In part this is natural human xenophobia and in part this
> >> is simple economics -- wanting to preserve the advantages
> >> (position, connections, environmental adaptations, etc.)
> >> that one has developed over one or more generations.
> >>
> >
> >But that bit of reasoning assumes relative scarcity and static
> >models of wealth. Both of these are increasingly dated.
>
> "Dated"? You mean unfashionable? You mean inconvenient? You mean
> inexpedient? You think scarcity models are dated? That's a good
> one...
> Yes, in some respects, in some areas, scarcity models are not
> applicable, but in some areas, like labor, they rule...
>
I don't think this pedantic playing with words is fruitful to
the discussion. Do you? The static model of wealth is generally
not held as realistic by most of the people here. Also most
people here believe that increasing technology and particularly
MNT will eliminate many types of physical scarcity a bit down
the road and even now many types of supposedly intractable
shortage have historically been overcome by better tech. 'nuff
said
<long screed about some poor janitor getting screwed over by big
bad bureaucrats that go through the trouble to bring millions of
people into the country (with attendant costs) just to pay all
of them less ignored as rambling and pointless.>
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:33 MDT