Date: Sun, 2 Dec 90 15:04:23 -0700
From: FELLOWS STEVEN B -5 CR [email removed]
Subject: (1908) Shipping: Interstellar Trade: Why?
"A few reasons why I think people will be dispersed throughout space, receiving
goods from other planets."
"1)Overpopulation. 'creates a market for food'
The only cure for overpopulation is population control. Emigration may have
some effect on it, and feeding it only makes it worse. I really have a hard
time believing that it's economical to feed a planet from another planet as a
matter of course. You need a *good* reason to have a sizable population on a
planet that can't support it. It makes much more sense to put the people where
the food is.
I agree with you that Traveller seems to assume that space shipping costs are
negligible, but on the other hand, player traders can make out quite well. This
doesn't match up. Run some scenarios past yourself. Say you have a planet
full of people in one system, and a farming planet in another system. Assume a
reasonable price for the food, and add in the trading cost, and see what you
get.
"2)The necessary support industry is not available and would be too costly
to transplant."
This does happen out of necessity in small colonies or research stations.
But, given the shipping costs in the players guides, I can't see it being
economical to import bulk goods. small amount of goods will always be traded,
as not much is needed, and it's cheaper to trade for that, but the more that
you need something, the more important it is to produce it locally.
"Land caravans were used instead of sea transport because of the danger and
thus relatively costly expense of sea transport."
Whhhhat? Caravans are more expensive then sea transport, that's why bulk goods
are sent by sea.
"Additionally, once you get a space faring population why would there be
interest in transplanting a whole society and making it self sufficient? This
would be extremely costly and unattractive to everone but the extremely wealthy
(individuals and organizations)."
I don't know of anyone or any group that wouldn't rather be self sufficient if
it's economically possible. Again, you seem to assume that transport is
cheaper then development, which I would argue against.
Jim Baranski