Economics of Inter-Group and Intra-Group Morality https://t.co/33lE9NfTm2
Category: Economics, Finance, and Political Economy
-
Economics of Inter-Group and Intra-Group Morality
Economics of Inter-Group and Intra-Group Morality https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/31/economics-of-inter-group-and-intra-group-morality/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-31 01:13:50 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266900661960089601
-
Economics of Inter-Group and Intra-Group Morality
Nov 20, 2019, 10:56 AM by Micah Pezdirtz (flawless, brilliant)
—“Morality describes good in-group behavior. The in-group defines the limit of moral utility. Outside of the in-group, “moral” actions cease congruence with moral actions within it (betraying outsiders does not carry the same cost as betraying your kin). Westerners have a proclivity to universalize the in-group in part due to the particular pro-social behavior selected for by ice age survival conditions. Easterners have evolved differently, where in-group members demand morality towards each other and demand immorality towards outsiders. Reciprocity completes the moral system. A Hegelian synthesis, if you will, of the universalist hypothesis and dualist antithesis. A problem we face switching over to Reciprocity comes from the counter selection factors from both groups: to the universalist, reciprocal behavior violates the silver rule (do not do unto others what you would not have done unto you); to the polymoralist, reciprocal behavior accepts costs to the in-group instead of transference to out-groups. Monomoralists bear costs rightfully owed by out-groups and polymoralists impose costs rightfully due by in-group. So how does this relate to scale? Scale does not only present an explosively high quantity of group members, in and out, but an explosively high quantity of groups. Calculation costs of identifying groups individuals belong to as well as identifying a spectrum of group allegiance to hostility becomes completely heuristically impossible for any practical effectiveness. which may explain why Polymoralism has gained an upper hand (focus on in-group identity, plunder all others) but it destabilizes itself over time as all other out-groups eventually unify against them.” –
(via Brandon Cheshire )
-
Economics of Inter-Group and Intra-Group Morality
Nov 20, 2019, 10:56 AM by Micah Pezdirtz (flawless, brilliant)
—“Morality describes good in-group behavior. The in-group defines the limit of moral utility. Outside of the in-group, “moral” actions cease congruence with moral actions within it (betraying outsiders does not carry the same cost as betraying your kin). Westerners have a proclivity to universalize the in-group in part due to the particular pro-social behavior selected for by ice age survival conditions. Easterners have evolved differently, where in-group members demand morality towards each other and demand immorality towards outsiders. Reciprocity completes the moral system. A Hegelian synthesis, if you will, of the universalist hypothesis and dualist antithesis. A problem we face switching over to Reciprocity comes from the counter selection factors from both groups: to the universalist, reciprocal behavior violates the silver rule (do not do unto others what you would not have done unto you); to the polymoralist, reciprocal behavior accepts costs to the in-group instead of transference to out-groups. Monomoralists bear costs rightfully owed by out-groups and polymoralists impose costs rightfully due by in-group. So how does this relate to scale? Scale does not only present an explosively high quantity of group members, in and out, but an explosively high quantity of groups. Calculation costs of identifying groups individuals belong to as well as identifying a spectrum of group allegiance to hostility becomes completely heuristically impossible for any practical effectiveness. which may explain why Polymoralism has gained an upper hand (focus on in-group identity, plunder all others) but it destabilizes itself over time as all other out-groups eventually unify against them.” –
(via Brandon Cheshire )
-
The Error of Wealth Envy – Fixing the Real Problem
The Error of Wealth Envy – Fixing the Real Problem https://t.co/mRUWgdI7sj
-
The Error of Wealth Envy – Fixing the Real Problem
The Error of Wealth Envy – Fixing the Real Problem https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/30/the-error-of-wealth-envy-fixing-the-real-problem/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-30 23:56:22 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266881166608666625
-
The Error of Wealth Envy – Fixing the Real Problem
Nov 22, 2019, 12:20 PM Let’s say you have 10m in assets. 1M in a home, 100k liquid 60k in cars. What do you suppose the rest of that money is doing? You see, that’s all the separates us by income. People with more money have more investments and spend a bit more on food, clothing, cars, home, and entertainment. It’s all status signaling. The rest of that money is out ‘working’ for them. But, what’s it doing? Organizing research, investment, financing, organizing, producing, distributing, and trading. The result of which is lower-priced goods, services, and information, so that the totality of what you consume is cheaper in costs of time and ‘body wear and tear’ than it was in the past. Now, what do you suppose separates poor countries from wealthy countries? It’s how much money is out there researching, investing, financing, organizing, producing, distributing, and trading. People don’t CONSUME much differently. It’s all status signaling. We have some pretty bad behavior (obesity, bad food, lack of exercise, lack of sufficient socialization). Wat’s the biggest problem? We can’t segregate by race, ethnicity, and class so that the average Christian with high investment children can have both a cheap house, a decent community, and a good school, without the ‘underclass riff-raff’ problem that is the unspoken falsehood of our age. Fix the forced integration problem and restore voluntary disassociation, and we will have cheap decent white neighborhoods free of the alien underclasses who are biologically and cognitively and therefore socially different. I can, we can, fix (a) the cost of housing in good neighborhoods and schools, and (b) the cost of education, and (c) the cost of money (credit, interest) very easily. Then high investment parents (whites) will separate from low investment parents (non-whites) and we will have far less conflict because we will have far fewer interactions. As a consequence, the less evolved (domesticated) peoples to put lower investment into their families and children (because it won’t matter anyway) will restore their drive to conformity in order to gain access to shared benefits. At present they simply destroy our incentive to produce shared benefits.
-
The Error of Wealth Envy – Fixing the Real Problem
Nov 22, 2019, 12:20 PM Let’s say you have 10m in assets. 1M in a home, 100k liquid 60k in cars. What do you suppose the rest of that money is doing? You see, that’s all the separates us by income. People with more money have more investments and spend a bit more on food, clothing, cars, home, and entertainment. It’s all status signaling. The rest of that money is out ‘working’ for them. But, what’s it doing? Organizing research, investment, financing, organizing, producing, distributing, and trading. The result of which is lower-priced goods, services, and information, so that the totality of what you consume is cheaper in costs of time and ‘body wear and tear’ than it was in the past. Now, what do you suppose separates poor countries from wealthy countries? It’s how much money is out there researching, investing, financing, organizing, producing, distributing, and trading. People don’t CONSUME much differently. It’s all status signaling. We have some pretty bad behavior (obesity, bad food, lack of exercise, lack of sufficient socialization). Wat’s the biggest problem? We can’t segregate by race, ethnicity, and class so that the average Christian with high investment children can have both a cheap house, a decent community, and a good school, without the ‘underclass riff-raff’ problem that is the unspoken falsehood of our age. Fix the forced integration problem and restore voluntary disassociation, and we will have cheap decent white neighborhoods free of the alien underclasses who are biologically and cognitively and therefore socially different. I can, we can, fix (a) the cost of housing in good neighborhoods and schools, and (b) the cost of education, and (c) the cost of money (credit, interest) very easily. Then high investment parents (whites) will separate from low investment parents (non-whites) and we will have far less conflict because we will have far fewer interactions. As a consequence, the less evolved (domesticated) peoples to put lower investment into their families and children (because it won’t matter anyway) will restore their drive to conformity in order to gain access to shared benefits. At present they simply destroy our incentive to produce shared benefits.
-
WHAT IS RENT SEEKING?: (economics) When an individual or organization seeks to g
WHAT IS RENT SEEKING?: (economics) When an individual or organization seeks to gain added income without any reciprocal contribution of productivity. Typically involves trade policy, industrial policy, government-funded and social service programs.
-
WHAT IS RENT SEEKING?: (economics) When an individual or organization seeks to g
WHAT IS RENT SEEKING?: (economics) When an individual or organization seeks to gain added income without any reciprocal contribution of productivity. Typically involves trade policy, industrial policy, government-funded and social service programs.