Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="faulkton" data-source="post: 6232751" data-attributes="member: 561910">Perhaps in a laboratory setting with non-human entities it could have reached some equilibrium. But when we are dealing with human beings i dont feel it could reach that point before protections are employed.However, considering my fallibility, if we examine the possibility that such protections could be avoided by society as a whole until such an equilibrium was reached we come to another question.Whether or not the overall society benefits more from protective measures or the attainment of said equilibrium. I posit that protectionism is more beneficial to society in its entirety and that is why we have moved in that direction.But seeings as this is really a hypothetical situation, strikingly similar in motive to the one you employed yesterday, i conclude its a mute point in our current discourse.: P</blockquote>

[QUOTE="faulkton, post: 6232751, member: 561910"] Perhaps in a laboratory setting with non-human entities it could have reached some equilibrium. But when we are dealing with human beings i dont feel it could reach that point before protections are employed. However, considering my fallibility, if we examine the possibility that such protections could be avoided by society as a whole until such an equilibrium was reached we come to another question. Whether or not the overall society benefits more from protective measures or the attainment of said equilibrium. I posit that protectionism is more beneficial to society in its entirety and that is why we have moved in that direction. But seeings as this is really a hypothetical situation, strikingly similar in motive to the one you employed yesterday, i conclude its a mute point in our current discourse. [SIZE=36px]: P[/SIZE] [/QUOTE]

Verification