"invasion"?

[Bhadraiah Mallampalli]

Why does it need so much labor to get such a simple picture? The "self
interest" of the world population, I mean the self interest of individual
citizens of various lands can work in three ways.

1. Movement of money/capital through investment.

2. Movement of money/capital through trade.

3. Movement of people.

The first possibility is ruled out in ancient world. There is no way ancient
greece can invest money in Gupta civilization and expect a return after 5
years.

The second is very much possible. Capital "does" move by trade. A country
that produces best goods at a good price will attract more capital
accumulation through trade. But in trade, there is no movement of people,
and both parties benefit "nearly" equally. To be able to barter any one
item, the other partner must have something valuable to other partner. If
not, the barter ratio gets adjusted accordingly and it becomes "equal".
Pricing is a deep subject.

The third possibility is applicable only for two lands in the known history
of man kind: India and USA. No other country has the history of immigration
of people from "all over the world". Every other land had only sporadic or
limited immigration, or movements that wiped out earlier residents. If
people from all over the ancient world moved to India for warm waters or
peaceful quality life, some people may have moved in as immigrants, some as
invaders.

Indians are more or less Aryan? I hate this question, but I suppose (2)
maintains racial purity and (3) leads to mixing. What is more or less in
DNAs?

Regards
Bhadraiah


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com