From: Bart  Croughs <bart.croughs@tip.nl>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 1996 07:47:36 +0800
To: "'cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: Re: National Socio-Economic Security Need for Encryption Technology
Message-ID: <01BB8BAF.679B76C0@groningen08.pop.tip.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


I have thought a bit more about the question I asked a couple of days ago: how can you proof that investment of American capital abroad wouldn't lower the standard of living in the US? So far, I didn't receive a convincing answer to this question. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think I may have a proof. It's a so-called 'reductio ad absurdum'. It goes like this:

"If it would be bad for the standard of living of American citizens when American capital is invested in foreign countries, then it would also be bad for the standard of living of citizens of any American state when capital in this state would be invested in another state. After all, when the negative effect of investing American capital abroad on the standard of living of American citizens outweighs the positive effect, there seems to be no good reason why this would be any different on the level of states within the US. Why would it be bad for American citizens when American capital leaves the country, and at the same time be good for citizens in Arkansas when capital leaves Arkansas?
But if this reasoning is correct, then it would also be bad for the standard of living of citizens of any American city when the capital in this city would be invested in another city. Etcetera. 
This conclusion is clearly absurd, so the original statement that it would be bad for the standard of living of American citizens when American capital is invested in a foreign country, must also be wrong. 


Bart Croughs