From: Technotranscendence (neptune@mars.superlink.net)
Date: Fri Aug 27 1999 - 07:26:21 MDT
On Friday, August 27, 1999 2:17 AM O'Regan, Emlyn
<Emlyn.ORegan@actew.com.au> wrote:
> > No, I'm saying that it is only perfectly, 100% reliable if there are no
> > natural monopolies, and nanotech would get rid of those few situations I
> > can
> > see where a natural monopoly might actually exist. Without nanotech we
> > merely have a system that is 99.9% reliable - local monopolies and
cartels
> > can occasionally form around unusual resource scarcities, but tend to be
> > short-lived in the absence of government intervention.
> >
> > IOW, the free market isn't perfect, but it works much better than any
> > other system humans have ever devised.
> >
> With nanotech, where's the need for a market at all? If it irons out all
the
> bumps due to resource scarcities, so vanquishes scarcity, why do we need
> trade?
Information might still be traded.
And nanotech, itself, will not abolish scarcity. It will merely switch
around the level and types of scarcity. Currently, air is hardly considered
a scarce commodity, yet there is still a market in lots other things AND air
quality is marketable item.
Daniel
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:54 MST