“The scarcity of consumers’ goods must imply a scarcity of their factors. For each consumers’ good there must be more than one scarce factors of production. This is implied in the very existence of human action.”
Because if its factors are abundant, then the good becomes abundant as well (the first sentence). Because if only one scarce factor is involved in producing the good, no economic choice would be implied in producing the good (the second sentence)—and to choose is the essence of human action (the third sentence).
The second sentence, when inverted, also means: we wouldn’t act if everything was abundant. And specifically, to claim that one has abundant time (or space) must mean that he could access the whole of the multiverse—such an existence amounts to having already performed every possible action, and as such wouldn’t act. Put differently, any problem must’ve been already solved somewhere in the multiverse, but you wouldn’t be able to conceptualize any problem if you had access to the whole of the multiverse in the first place.
Related: