Author: Curt Doolittle

  • END OF THE CHINESE MIRACLE : AND A FEW POINTS ON THE PRIORITIES OF THE DIFFERENT

    http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/recognizing-end-chinese-economic-miracleTHE END OF THE CHINESE MIRACLE : AND A FEW POINTS ON THE PRIORITIES OF THE DIFFERENT SCHOOLS OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT

    I despise macroeconomic positivism.

    The way I look at economic data is ALWAYS in the context of A) DEMOGRAPHICS, B) GEOGRAPHY C) INSTITUTIONS AND NORMS D) TECHNOLOGY, and E) HISTORY. ONLY within that context does macroeconomic information represent ANYTHING other than NOISE as first BRITAIN’s and then the USA’s Military and Political machine, drive unnatural (meritocratic) behavior into the world economy.

    One organization that consistently provides me with that macro information in which to interpret the macroeconomic noise, so that I can select rare SIGNAL, is STRATFOR. I read everything Friedman puts out. It’s priceless work. And STRATFOR is a valuable intellectual asset for the west if not for humanity.

    Most of us who predicted the crash in 2008 (I was only off by about 90 days) and those of us who have been predicting the Chinese crash (I was off by three years) generally work not with the noise of macroeconomic data, but macroeconomic data tends to inform us about the progress of demographic and institutional change. In the end however, demographics, geography and institution determine economics with technology the disruptive factor that causes change. An organization like STRATFOR helps us interpret macroeconomic noise, pull the signal, and understand what MUST happen over the longer term.

    Now, a gene pool and its culture is a long term investment strategy. And return on perishable commodity speculation is a short term strategy. And return on short term capital imbalances is yet another. Each of us focuses on some different portion of the time scale.

    The different economic factions, from austrians at one end, to monetarists, to Keynesians, to modern monetary theorists at the other, all look at the world through different time frames, because their priorities are different. A modern monetarist tends to see us all as peak life consumers supported by natural and stable momentum, and an austrian as an extended family with shared norms, in a complex and fragile system. Like any other discipline, once you master it, you realize just how ignorant and stupid we all are – and are usually humbled by that experience. You realize that the masculine view of the world is to build a tribe that is better than others, and the female view of the world is to give her children the greatest opportunity to spread her genes. That these two strategies are in conflict is troublesome – but a wise step on evolution’s part. But this competition shows up everywhere in political and economic life. And we tend to see intellectual endeavors in politics and economics as a quest for a universal truth. But it isn’t. It’s a conflict – at best a balance – between the male and female reproductive strategies. And economics at one end or the other, austrian or modern monetary theorist is little more than another example of that conflict – not of truths, but of preferences.

    Most countries do not communicate directly, but through professional communication organizations with personal relationships: think tanks. That most countries would rely on this network is pretty obvious from the differences in incentives between bureaucrats, politicians, and intellectuals. And countries communicate with the least distortion when their intellectuals communicate directly, and the politicians and bureaucrats can make use of the knowledge and relationships between intellectuals. For China and America this is doubly true.

    I am not operating at the level where I have those politically influential connections. Partly because my time preference is very, very long. I’m a pretty ‘male’ male. I care about my tribe. And that’s the domain of politics, ethics, and political economy, not macro economics – which is, for a gene pool, just noise.

    Curt


    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-23 07:42:00 UTC

  • HAVE BEEN THROUGH THE LIFECYLE OF EMPIRE – THE USA IS A FAILED STATE – TIME TO B

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/michael-s-rozeff/the-us-is-a-failed-state/WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH THE LIFECYLE OF EMPIRE – THE USA IS A FAILED STATE – TIME TO BREAK IT UP AND START OVER


    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-23 06:58:00 UTC

  • Why Is Income Redistribution Such A Problem For Republicans? Provide Data And Any Other Quantitative Evidence.

    INCOME REDISTRIBUTION IS A PROBLEM FOR EVERYONE

    Otherwise we wouldn’t have a 1% movement.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-is-income-redistribution-such-a-problem-for-Republicans-Provide-data-and-any-other-quantitative-evidence

  • Where Do Atheists Believe The Bible Came From?

    GOOD ANSWERS HERE, SO I’LL ADD ONE POINT OTHERS SEEM TO MISS

    It is a collection of children’s and campfire stories from an era of profound poverty, ignorance and violence, and most of the new testament was an attempt to rebel against the roman empire the same way that the primitive world attempted to adopt the scripture of Marxism, and the same way that the modern world is attempting to adopt the scripture of Postmodernism as a reaction to science and economics.

    The fascinating part of all this is that the ten commandments are a pretty good system of property rights upon which you can start to build a complex civilization on individual rather than familial or tribal property rights – which were necessary for land holders, but not for migratory peoples.

    This difference in jewish and christian ethics persist today: the land holders and the traders still have different ethical principles and this manifests itself in our voting for different parties with different moral codes.

    https://www.quora.com/Where-do-atheists-believe-the-Bible-came-from

  • What Is Capitalism’s Fundamental Flaw?

    CAPITALISM DOESN’T HAVE A FLAW – IT’S INSUFFICIENT

    It’s a necessary tool for cooperating in a vast division of labor. Humans are not all that meritocratic by nature, and don’t like lotteries.  And capitalism is a necessary, meritocratic, lottery.

    It isn’t just. It isn’t fair. It’s just necessary.  So how do you take what’s necessary and then on top of it, make it somewhat just and somewhat fair?   That’s what we’re always trying to do. It’s just that government as we currently know it, isn’t a very good way of doing that.

    There is a very big difference between fair and desirable.

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-capitalisms-fundamental-flaw

  • How Does Coca-cola Pass National Food Agencies If They Don’t Reveal The Ingredients?

    The ingredients are actually known, and available on the internet.  Water, sugar, salt, and eight or nine oils in very small quantities.  The countries that ban it do it to reject cultural influence, not because of ingredients.  In Coca Cola, the caffeine (unless something has changed) still comes from the Kola nut itself.  And the government has given exclusive rights to the company to use extracts of coca leaves – which is why no one can replicate the flavor.  The rest of the flavors are natural.  And there is a whole lot of science that the company can call on if someone wants to criticize it for some reason.  It’s fine as you don’t live on it. It’s better if you get the stuff made with sugar rather than corn syrup. 🙂  Much better. 🙂

    https://www.quora.com/How-does-Coca-Cola-pass-national-food-agencies-if-they-dont-reveal-the-ingredients

  • Why Is Income Redistribution Such A Problem For Republicans? Provide Data And Any Other Quantitative Evidence.

    INCOME REDISTRIBUTION IS A PROBLEM FOR EVERYONE

    Otherwise we wouldn’t have a 1% movement.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-is-income-redistribution-such-a-problem-for-Republicans-Provide-data-and-any-other-quantitative-evidence

  • Where Do Atheists Believe The Bible Came From?

    GOOD ANSWERS HERE, SO I’LL ADD ONE POINT OTHERS SEEM TO MISS

    It is a collection of children’s and campfire stories from an era of profound poverty, ignorance and violence, and most of the new testament was an attempt to rebel against the roman empire the same way that the primitive world attempted to adopt the scripture of Marxism, and the same way that the modern world is attempting to adopt the scripture of Postmodernism as a reaction to science and economics.

    The fascinating part of all this is that the ten commandments are a pretty good system of property rights upon which you can start to build a complex civilization on individual rather than familial or tribal property rights – which were necessary for land holders, but not for migratory peoples.

    This difference in jewish and christian ethics persist today: the land holders and the traders still have different ethical principles and this manifests itself in our voting for different parties with different moral codes.

    https://www.quora.com/Where-do-atheists-believe-the-Bible-came-from

  • What Is Capitalism’s Fundamental Flaw?

    CAPITALISM DOESN’T HAVE A FLAW – IT’S INSUFFICIENT

    It’s a necessary tool for cooperating in a vast division of labor. Humans are not all that meritocratic by nature, and don’t like lotteries.  And capitalism is a necessary, meritocratic, lottery.

    It isn’t just. It isn’t fair. It’s just necessary.  So how do you take what’s necessary and then on top of it, make it somewhat just and somewhat fair?   That’s what we’re always trying to do. It’s just that government as we currently know it, isn’t a very good way of doing that.

    There is a very big difference between fair and desirable.

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-capitalisms-fundamental-flaw

  • A Defense and Criticism of The Class Philosophy We Call ‘Libertarianism’

    [A]ll philosophy is class philosophy. All philosophies give precedence to one class or another. Libertarianism is a class philosophy as well. A CLASS PHILOSOPHY

      AN ECONOMIC PHILOSOPHY Libertarianism is an economic philosophy that states that:

        A POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY Libertarianism as a political philosophy that states that:

          BRANCHES OF LIBERTARIANISM

          • CLASSICAL LIBERALISM
          • MINIMAL STATE LIBERTARIANISM
          • ANARCHISM
          • ROTHBARDIAN

          LIBERTARIANISM IS AN ARGUMENT AGAINST MONOPOLY AND BUREAUCRACY – NOT SOCIAL GOODSLibertarianism is not an argument against ‘government’. It is an argument against monopoly and bureaucracy which hinder individual innovation and competition, and the creating of ‘differences’ (inequalities) which we then seek to eliminate. Libertarianism is not a prohibition on government. IT IS A PROHIBITION ON A MONOPOLY BUREAUCRACY that we call the STATE, that is able to issue COMMANDS under the guise of LAWS, because it maintains a monopoly on the use of violence to enforce those commands, because that state is isolated from competition, and as such, can pursue the interests of the bureaucracy, or become a tool of special interests that likewise desire monopoly privileges, at the expense of the citizenry. THE POWER OF LIKE-MINDED COMMUNITIES EVEN IF THEIR POWER IS BASED SOLEY ON THEIR VALUE AS CONSUMERS Libertarianism allows us to form our own communities with our own rules and norms, in a balance of power between communities with similar interests. These communities will then compete with one another for population, talent, and services. And people can choose which community to belong to. In this model there is no ‘state’. There are just collections of people who form contractual alliances. Just as we make voluntary commercial organizations, we can make voluntary civic organizations. Consumers are very important. Without consumers and credit it is impossible for commercial organizations to make money, and without the ability to make money there is no ability for people to organize into groups. The lower classes are consumers, and quite honestly, produce very little of value other than their consumption. Lower classes in the libertarian model will either exchange adoption to norms for redistributions in wealthy communities, or organize into their own organizations and charge fees for access to their consumers, which can then be redistributed, thereby minimizing profit. COOPERATING ON MEANS EVEN IF WE HAVE DIFFERENT ENDS: BY EXCHANGES IN THE MARKET AND IN GOVERNMENT The market for competition lets us compete toward different ends and preferences, even if we cooperate on means of achieving them. Monopoly government forces us to compete in government in a win-lose battle for control of the monopoly bureaucracy. Humans have been cooperating in the market on means, despite having disparate ends, for millennia There is no reason that we cannot take this insight as far as possible. MORALITY AND COMPETITION The market allows us to compete upon ends while cooperating upon means. However, competition is morally objectionable to human beings inside the family group, village or tribe. We license and encourage competition, because it produces positive results: a virtuous cycle. We tolerate only one form of immorality: competition. Every other form of involuntary transfer: violence, theft, fraud, omission, externalization, free riding, rent seeking and privatization, systemic corruption, systemic procedural involuntary transfer and warfare – we have constrained or outlawed. We can, in the market, use boycott to deprive organizations of wealth. But it is not always a strong lever. We can use the courts to protect us from violence, theft, fraud and omission if we do not surrender our right to sue. We can use government to protect us from unnecessary competition, free riding and privatization of the commons. when we invest in commons. We can use the state ‘bank’ as an insurer of last resort. We can use multiple houses of government, where we have them, to negotiate exchanges between the classes where market exchange is not possible or creation of commons is not possible, because of the asymmetry of reward of investment in various commons’. But we can only use market and government to cooperate on means of achieving disparate ends, if government is not open to corruttion. And government is open to corruption if it can make laws rather than conttracts. Only the courts can find or discover laws. The government if not corrupt, can only negotiate contracts impossible to negotiate in the market. This emphasis on contracts relies upon the morality of exchange, rather than the immorality of majority rule, or arbitrary command in pursuit of some artificial common ‘good’. ANY OTHER SOLUTION MEANS YOU’RE A THIEF That is, unless your desire is to STEAL rather than EXCHANGE. And you are most likely to want to STEAL rather than exchange if government provides a systematic means of stealing from others. And that’s what government does. It provides a systematic means of stealing. THe common law and property rights provide a systematic means of exchanging instead of stealing.

          ON THE NECESSARY, ADVANTAGEOUS, AND LUXURY FUNCTIONS OF GOVERNMENT

          A) NECESSARY PROPERTIES The NECESSARY properties of of a government are:

            These are the minimum properties of a government. B) ADVANTAGEOUS PROPERTIES In addition to these properties, it may also be possible for a group of people to afford to also have government engage in the following:

              These are advantageous properties of government. C) PROPERTIES THAT ARE LUXURIES In addition to these properties, it may be possible for a group of people to afford to also have the government engage in the following LUXURIES:

                These are LUXURIES that can be provided by some governments under rare circumstances in exceptional periods of time, where malthusian and group selection problems have been temporarily held at bay by technological innovation. The government is not the source of the ‘good things’. The courts, under the common law and property rights is the source of ‘good things’. The government has destroyed the common law, the rule of law, and crated both corporatism and socialism. And we now suffer between two factions that try to control the government for corporatist or socialist means.

                RESERVATIONS ABOUT LIBERTARIANISM

                THE ANCIENT SOURCE OF LIBERTY AND THE DESIRE FOR LIBERTARIANISM White males (the european, or perhaps germanic, race) seek status under the ancient indo-european proscription for heroism via competition. The west is unique for having produced this philosophy of aristocratic egalitarianism – inclusion in equalitarian leadership, and therefore obtaining the reward of property rights, by demonstrated heroism. And the high trust society of the west is the result of aristocratic egalitarianism (heroic achievement, demonstrated excellence, virtue). For most of history, and pre-history, males could achieve this only through combat. With the advent of manorialism, males could demonstrate their fitness through hard work. With the advent of chivalry males could demonstrate their heroic status by charitable service. With the advent of consumer capitalism, males could demonstrate their heroic fitness in commerce. Heroic achievemnet grants access to mates (we have a lof of data on this now that confirms this fact – to the point where we know how many dollars in income per inch of height under 5’10” you must earn to gain the same quality of attractive woman…. Really.) Women are as shallow about status as men are about physical attraction – and the data is the data. As such, white males are intuitively attracted to libertarianism if they see in libertarianism a means of pursuing traditional signals for mating, social status, and wealth. That libertarianism is a rigorous philospohy equalled in detail only by Marxism, and is articulated in economic language and analytical philosophy. It is accessible only to those people with both incentive to learn it, and the ability to understand it. This is why libertarianism is a minority white male philosophy. It is an aristocratic philosophy and difficult to access. Other cultures lack both the mythology and cultural values for heroism and egalitarianism Which is why other cultures also cannot produce the high trust society. And without the high trust society, the wealth necessary for redistribution (charity) is impossible to achieve at scale. RESERVATIONS ABOUT LIBERTARIANISM

                • 1) DISCOUNT-DRIVEN PACIFISM.
                • 2) LIBERTY IS A DESIRE OF THE MINORITY.
                • 3) LACK OF ORGANIZATION.