By "ought" I meant two (2) things: on a large-scale, though individuals willvary, and "ought" as a testable hypothesis.
-----Original Message----- From: jim horsman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 11:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Life Expectancy and Immigration > At some point there must be a "cross-over point". If I live in Third > Worldzania for 60 years, exposed to Typhus, Typhoid, Dengue Fever, malaria, > Plague, TB, and have been mal-nourished, THEN I move to the US I doubt my > life expectancy, AS COMPARED TO AMERICANS, will be all that great, whereas > if my parents bring me to the US when I'm 2 then my life expectancy really > ought to be that of the average American of my socio-economic class. what do you mean "ought"?? it is an empirical question and there is no reason to suppose that anomalies pop up when the data is looked at. i saw a study recently that makes my point. there was a bad famine in the netherlands that ended in may of 1945. babies born before may had a low probabiliy of being fat. those born 3 months after may, had a very great chance of being fat. The genes are the same, but what happened in the womb affects each of our lives.
