RE: NAC units, was Odd FT Idea

Er, hello, this is not far off Australia as we are now. 

Look at the example of Australia in about the 60s, population around 15
million and quite a thriving economy. Use a similar model for the middle
aged colonies and it seems quite reasonable.

-----Original Message-----
From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com [mailto:jatkins6@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 8 July 1998 13:07
To: FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk
Subject: Re: NAC units, was Odd FT Idea

You wrote: 

>And don't forget there are some large colonies that would be fielding
>thier own units. I could forsee a strong anti-Earth bias on many of 
the >major colony worlds. "What does Earth bring to the NAC? A partial
>continent and an island. We represent a whole frigg'n WORLD!"

A lot of it depends on what your assumptions on colony growth are.  
Remember the US has (1997) 267.6 million inhabitants, and the UK (1995) 
another 58.6. Plus an industrial base that's been 200 years in the 
making.  Another few decades (18 or so) might increase that.  A colony 
with even 10 or 15 million people and a 100-year old industrial base is 
a fairly poor second in economic terms.  

John M. Atkinson