Author: Curt Doolittle

  • MORE FASCINATING HUMAN STUFF : RATES OF GAY DIVORCE (interesting) Regarding UK c

    MORE FASCINATING HUMAN STUFF : RATES OF GAY DIVORCE

    (interesting)

    Regarding UK civil marriages.

    Women, whether straight or gay:

    a) want to tie the knot faster than men

    b) have higher _emotional_ expectations than men

    c) want to end it sooner, and more frequently than men

    Men, by contrast, are:

    a) slower to grasp and understand emotional relations than women.

    b) form lasting emotional relations mostly out of habituation.

    c) stay in relationships out of habituation – ‘comfort’, (Regularity of a relationship rather than stimulation from the relationship. This is partly because of the long emotional adaptation time men require vs women.)

    d) demonstrate being more sentimental than women after the end of a relationship.

    Durability of Relations:

    For women, children are permanent relations, but men are disposable relations. For men, all women are permanent relations. It’s just reproductive economics. It is this way. Because it has to be this way. Women build their children but men build entire tribes.

    It’s not complicated. What makes it complicated is confusing equality under the law in disputes over property, with equality of productivity in the work place, with inequality of reproductive, moral and personal interests.

    We are equal in economic cooperation, but not in emotional interests or reproduction.

    QUOTE

    “In the seven years since gay couples were able to have civil partnerships, 3.2 per cent of male unions ended in dissolution, compared to 6.1 per cent of female couples.”

    (Note: there is a pretty common life cycle to breakups. It pretty much takes about 20 years to be sure you’ll stay together. But rates decline rapidly after five to seven years.)

    “Sociologists believe the lower rates of ‘divorces’ among gay men may reflect a trend of women committing sooner and having higher expectations for a relationship. Women in civil partnerships tie the knot at an average age of 37.6, compared to men, for whom the average age is 40. Erzsebet Bukodim, sociologist at the University of Oxford, said: “In heterosexual marriage the divorce rate is higher if you enter marriage at a very young age. That might be one of the reasons we’re seeing this [high dissolution rate for women] in civil partnerships.”

    “Gunnar Andersson, professor of demography at Stockholm University, has found in successive studies that women in Norway, Sweden and Denmark are twice as likely to dissolve their civil partnerships than men. He said: “This reflects trends in a heterosexual marriage because women are more prone to say they want to marry – but they’re also more likely to initiate a divorce. Women usually have higher demands on relationship quality, that’s often been said in studies. Even if you control for age there is still a trend of more women ending partnerships than men.”

    “Previous figures show British women in heterosexual relationships are more likely to file for divorce than men. Women initiated the divorce in two thirds of cases in the UK in 2011.”


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-09 04:22:00 UTC

  • STORY OF MY LIFE (venting) Now that you have once again learned what happens whe

    STORY OF MY LIFE

    (venting)

    Now that you have once again learned what happens when you disagree with my business forecasts, and cost us and shareholders millions, can you please stop disagreeing? Its not like this was a unique case.

    Do us all a f–king favor and try to know more than I do. But dont try to be smarter than I am. It wont work. And it costs us money.

    Without intending to I have integrated Austrian thought so deeply that I pretty much see the world as nothing but incentives.

    You collectively still rely on the error of induction. But the past has little bearing on the future unless past incentives are also current incentives.

    This little twist: merging incentives theory with anti-inductivist critical rationalism, defeats induction and inductive intuition at all times.

    And thats your problem. You think you’re rational but your’e not, because induction is false. It is the result of evolution – a cognitive bias.

    And intuition is also inductive. Its how we evolved to make associations. But induction, whether intuitive, rational, or empirical, is still false.

    And even if you try to model it, Empiricism isn’t enough. Its only enough if you measure incentives. Because the past was a product of past incentives and the present is a product of present incentives and empirical data that is divorced from that relationship is worth precisely zero. The past does not predict the future unless incentives are the same. In that sense incentives, and not the past, are all that matter.

    FURTHERMORE.

    And this may be more relevant to you. People are only moral when their interests are marginally indifferent. We would like to think otherwise. But there isn’t any evidence at all to support that desire.

    Morality is a cost. All moral actions carry costs. Those costs are opportunity costs

    If you are in business with people who have different economic and financial incentives you must treat them as if morality is merely a form of manners, but not a promise of future conduct.

    So please stop trying to be smarter than I am. Cause its not because I am particularly smart. Its because you are not particularly wise.

    Idiots.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-09 03:15:00 UTC

  • YET ANOTHER CATASTROPHIC CONSEQUENCE OF ‘TOLERANCE’ “…the UK is facing its gra

    YET ANOTHER CATASTROPHIC CONSEQUENCE OF ‘TOLERANCE’

    “…the UK is facing its gravest terror threat, including from “several thousand” Islamist extremists who are living here and want to attack the country, Mr Parker said.”

    COMMENT

    If they had written policy and law to specifically address islamists, none of us would care.

    But with their politically correct foolishness they have let loose the bureaucratic interests of the state on citizens: the extended family.

    And by doing so done more to delegitimize the state than libertarians could have wished for.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-09 02:36:00 UTC

  • US adults are dumber than the average human Not quite honest. But the underlying

    US adults are dumber than the average human

    Not quite honest. But the underlying report suggests why our labor force cannot be carried by a shrinking minority.

    http://nypost.com/2013/10/08/us-adults-are-dumber-than-the-average-human/


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-09 02:27:00 UTC

  • i shouldn’t post while getting agitated on important conference calls. the anger

    i shouldn’t post while getting agitated on important conference calls. the anger comes out. sorry. 😐


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 18:28:00 UTC

  • PRE-ORDERED MY KINDLE COPY!!!

    http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00C4GUTYK/ref=tsm_1_fb_lkJUST PRE-ORDERED MY KINDLE COPY!!!


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 18:27:00 UTC

  • LAUGH Yes. I do get it. Ok? It’s just asthma. OK? lol

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHgxCm_nWJYMUTLEY LAUGH

    Yes. I do get it. Ok? It’s just asthma. OK? lol


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 18:11:00 UTC

  • AND LIBERTARIANS HAVE BEEN AFTER THIS FOR DECADES I was there. We hired the fina

    http://on.ft.com/GIPUyrCONSERVATIVES AND LIBERTARIANS HAVE BEEN AFTER THIS FOR DECADES

    I was there. We hired the financial class to fight the state. We just didn’t count on this much immigration.

    So the bullet is in the gun. But we WANT to pull the trigger. Because america and americans will be fine.

    But government will be forever discredited.

    And that is a priceless achievement.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 17:22:00 UTC

  • A couple of years ago I was in a lawsuit with a particularly screwed up individu

    A couple of years ago I was in a lawsuit with a particularly screwed up individual named Muti (who some of us know) who lied to me and everyone else in a venture, about the source of money he committed to contribute. When he fell thru, and he was exposed. And got a note from him. He signed it. A friend witnessed it. I shut down the venture, and paid everyone myself out of my pocket. At the time I was in the middle of divorce and had just finished my second round of cancer and therapy. So this particular douche bag tries every scumbag maneuver in the book, and because judges are stupid, pulled up an arcane bit of logic and misapplied it. It was so bizarre that I was stunned a judge could be that stupid. The fact is, he was just fucking lazy and wanted to get on to the next piece of paper. So we went to arbitration and what they didn’t get, was that I was willing to lose it all on the chance that I would win in court. Immoral people just don’t get it. They think you’re greedy. But it’s not the money. I’d already planned to give it to my ex-wife. But if I won, Id force the guy out of his house cause he was out of cash. Now, I really don’t want to do that either. But if he didn’t settle for a reasonable amount, then I’ll just go to court and roll the dice. Since I don’t get the money either way, it’s just a function of whether it’s moral or not.

    Americans have removed the legal system from most of their lives (which is one of the reasons that we are overpopulated with lawyers) and the courts have built up a pretty good body of law to encourage that. But it’s the very opposite of the common law. It’s a mess. And it’s incomprehensible to ordinary people. And it’s just plain immoral.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 17:18:00 UTC

  • Judges aren’t moral. They are part of the problem. But juries are still moral hu

    Judges aren’t moral. They are part of the problem. But juries are still moral human beings. If you hold the moral high ground, get to the jury and tell the story.

    I love a moral fight.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 17:05:00 UTC