Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Rusty Witherspoon (12 Feb 2018 19:30 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Tim (12 Feb 2018 23:35 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Cian Witherspoon (13 Feb 2018 00:17 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Cian Witherspoon (13 Feb 2018 00:35 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Tim (13 Feb 2018 00:56 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Cian Witherspoon (13 Feb 2018 01:35 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Phil Pugliese (13 Feb 2018 00:17 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Tim (13 Feb 2018 00:43 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Phil Pugliese (13 Feb 2018 07:32 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Cian Witherspoon (13 Feb 2018 08:01 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Phil Pugliese (13 Feb 2018 18:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level RiftRoamer (15 Feb 2018 15:38 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Caleuche (15 Feb 2018 17:35 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Bruce Johnson (15 Feb 2018 21:03 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Phil Pugliese (15 Feb 2018 21:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Greg Nokes (16 Feb 2018 08:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Phil Pugliese (16 Feb 2018 22:04 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Richard Aiken (27 Feb 2018 03:07 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level shadow@xxxxxx (21 Feb 2018 04:58 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Rupert Boleyn (13 Feb 2018 08:33 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Phil Pugliese (13 Feb 2018 18:28 UTC)
Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Bruce Johnson (13 Feb 2018 23:03 UTC)

Re: [TML] The meaning of world tech level Cian Witherspoon 13 Feb 2018 01:35 UTC

I tried the best I could.
So, it's up to 20 weeks for an order to go through.
I would estimate double the shipping costs, plus manufacturer agent
fees, broker fees, import/export taxes, spread over the total
shipment, added to the cost per unit.
Call it maybe 5-10%.

Actually, this is a great point in favor of the model where low tech
worlds provide materials to the high tech ones, in exchange for
finished goods. THis leads to a steady state of low-tech worlds not
building up their industrial infrastructure because it's easier to
just ship the desired items in.

On 2/12/18, Tim <xxxxxx@little-possums.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 04:16:58PM -0800, Cian Witherspoon wrote:
>> I'm about to get real snarky here:
>
> I can tell.
>
>
>> Way to not get the point of the model.
>
> I got it, but disagreed that your analogy was useful.  Adding
> completely arbitrary distance ratios to it doesn't help at all.
>
> If you're going to try to quantify it, use the fact that in your
> analogy, New York stands for some system that doesn't manufacture the
> high-tech goods.  Beijing stands for a star system that does
> manufacture the goods.  Almost all systems in the OTU have TL C+
> systems of decent population within at most ten jumps, so making a
> 56-jump analogy is ridiculous, bordering on disingenuous.
>
>
> - Tim
> -----
> The Traveller Mailing List
> Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
> Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
> To unsubscribe from this list please go to
> http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=DZZu00eGt8rDmt14P7liTVEolKKLZVUJ
>