Actually I See Everything in Terms of Acquisition, Retention, and Exchange https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/actually-i-see-everything-in-terms-of-acquisition-retention-and-exchange/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 02:59:43 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265840143665180672
May 26, 2020, 11:28 PM —“Curt sees everything in the context sexual gratification. It’s an interesting theory, but doesn’t explain why countless martyrs in the ancient world were voluntarily flayed alive, burned alive, eaten alive, etc., in the name of Christ. It doesn’t explain why children voluntarily died for Christ. It doesn’t explain why the barbarians, in a very short timeframe, put down their weapons and picked up crosses and scripture. Presumably, they didn’t have any problems with women. It simply doesn’t provide an adequate explanation for the dramatic shift in the world resulting from Christ.”—Emil Suric
—“Curt Doolittle what’s your take on that?”—Skye Stewart
I think that’s silly. (Actually i think it’s a rationalization to defend a prior. And Emil is not a foolish person. He is a product of his culture. And like most, even some of the best, he cannot overcome it.) I see everything: 1 – In context of acquisition. 2 – I understand how limited our agency (free will). 3 – I understand that the bias in our cognition has only three axis of variation, of which the physical differences in brain structure and chemical signaling between the sexes is most significant. (the others being developmental hierarchy and developmental degree). 4 – I understand that civilizations use strategies, myths, and grammars to defend them. 5 – And that people are largely ‘bots’ running that software on hardware with different biases. 6 – And it takes both a less biased brain and mind, and a tremendous amount of effort to free ourselves of those inheritances. Most of my work if not all of it provides a uniform system of measurement to circumvent those biases, which producing the first complete language of science: testimony. RELIGION Martyrs were killed because: (a) they would not demonstrate even token loyalty to the empire – instead disloyalty and treason. (b) they were considered atheists (god deniers) and impious in an era where pleasing the gods was considered necessary. (c) they were spreading a falsehood that tacitus correctly called a ‘mischievous superstition’. (d) the religion they were spreading was a hatred of the human race, and of life and joy itself. (e) the religion they were spreading put itself above reality and the state rather than a peerage to reality and the state. (f) they were fomenting an underclass rebellion against the empire’s demonstrated benefits the majority valued with a false promise of supernatural benefits of a hostile minority. (g) they were creating conflict between sects and forenting social unrest. (h)they were reversing the aryan program of incremental domestication of the underclasses and the gradual earning of freedom, liberty, and sovereignty (privilege) creating peers in a majority “middle class” (propertied) civilization. They were rightly considered anti social and treasonous. Just as we rightly consider the ((())) marxists, postmodernists, feminists, hbd-denialists, and anti-traditionalists, ant-moralists, anti-martialists, anti-familists, and sexual deviants today as a means of undermining the aristocracy. The romans were far too kind, have been far too kind during the middle ages, and just as we are far too kind today. They should have exterminated them to the last man woman and child. And in doing so saved europe from the dark ages.
Economic Advice and The Public https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/economic-advice-and-the-public-2/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 00:35:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265803887560339456
Oct 1, 2019, 1:08 PM Economics has been a cudgel for justifying a moral bias, not a science to which we must conform our moral intuitions. Libertarians are largely advocating free riding on the commons just as much as socialist advocate free riding upon the private sector. No economic proposition is decidable by either libertarian or socialist without first solving the question of the distribution of a mixed economy, since only mixed economies can survive competition in the market for polities. The answer of course is just rule of law by reciprocity and that we track investments by the polity in returns and prevent the public from privatizing public gains, just as much as we prevent the public from socializing private gains. In other words, it’s largely a problem of record keeping and accounting. The problem is everyone has an interests in maintaining the lie, and maintaining chaos in the public who resorts to petty moralizing out of ignorance.
Oct 1, 2019, 1:08 PM Economics has been a cudgel for justifying a moral bias, not a science to which we must conform our moral intuitions. Libertarians are largely advocating free riding on the commons just as much as socialist advocate free riding upon the private sector. No economic proposition is decidable by either libertarian or socialist without first solving the question of the distribution of a mixed economy, since only mixed economies can survive competition in the market for polities. The answer of course is just rule of law by reciprocity and that we track investments by the polity in returns and prevent the public from privatizing public gains, just as much as we prevent the public from socializing private gains. In other words, it’s largely a problem of record keeping and accounting. The problem is everyone has an interests in maintaining the lie, and maintaining chaos in the public who resorts to petty moralizing out of ignorance.
Capital is the rabbit strategy in nearly every aspect. https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/capital-is-the-rabbit-strategy-in-nearly-every-aspect/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 18:57:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265718666248642560
Oct 5, 2019, 11:09 AM GENIUS. CHURCHILL ON CAPITAL
—“Capital is the rabbit strategy in nearly every aspect. Machines need quantity over quality — and it is not even close. Quality to create the machine, quantity to move the machine’s product.”– Michael Churchill
(genius)
Oct 5, 2019, 11:09 AM GENIUS. CHURCHILL ON CAPITAL
—“Capital is the rabbit strategy in nearly every aspect. Machines need quantity over quality — and it is not even close. Quality to create the machine, quantity to move the machine’s product.”– Michael Churchill
(genius)
Oct 5, 2019, 12:52 PM
—“The Fed can do whatever it wants. It literally has a football field full of printing presses in the basement. If they want to re-steepen the yield curve, they can do it tomorrow. They just don’t want to change the paradigm. Don’t want to rock the boat. Change will creep in at the margin, probably among the scandis and Japanese, who has been dealing with these problems the longest.”— Michael Churchill
Michael is saying the same thing everyone says, and thats that the state can’t go bankrupt because debt is denominated in dollars that they can print and simultaneously inflate. That’s different from deflation, in which people simply refuse to spend no matter what, or hyperinflation, which means that people are so suspicious of the future value that contracts for complex production are impossible, and demand for cash increases rapidly and the unpredictability appears in temporary (daily, hourly) prices. Money must allow the organization of networks of intertemporal investment, production, distribution, and trade, without providing rents (allowing interest-only gains), or decreasing the tolerance for time differences. In other words, the longer and more complex the Hayekian triangles (networks of production) the more the need for a stable currency. This is why states prefer spending rather than direct inflation. On the other hand I recommend direct distribution rather than inflation or spending, because this is the most direct route to the population and the people tend to spend rather than pay down debts. NOTE: notice I how just talked about economics operationally in descriptive terms (actions) using only Hayekian Triangles, and even when I did, I only did so to teach you the term. conversely note how people use many terms of art in economics. The problem is the individual does not know the difference between an economic term and a financial term. Inflation of the money supply causes inflation of prices to absorb it, such that the purchasing power of TIME (time and other resources are still just time, time to get the resources), stays the same. Deflation generally means decline in prices due to decreasing demand, and both deflation and inflation (increases because of more money, deflation because of less spending, or shift in what’s being produced. Right now restaurant food prices are increasing because more people have jobs and restaurants are having to pay more for staff.)
Oct 5, 2019, 12:52 PM
—“The Fed can do whatever it wants. It literally has a football field full of printing presses in the basement. If they want to re-steepen the yield curve, they can do it tomorrow. They just don’t want to change the paradigm. Don’t want to rock the boat. Change will creep in at the margin, probably among the scandis and Japanese, who has been dealing with these problems the longest.”— Michael Churchill
Michael is saying the same thing everyone says, and thats that the state can’t go bankrupt because debt is denominated in dollars that they can print and simultaneously inflate. That’s different from deflation, in which people simply refuse to spend no matter what, or hyperinflation, which means that people are so suspicious of the future value that contracts for complex production are impossible, and demand for cash increases rapidly and the unpredictability appears in temporary (daily, hourly) prices. Money must allow the organization of networks of intertemporal investment, production, distribution, and trade, without providing rents (allowing interest-only gains), or decreasing the tolerance for time differences. In other words, the longer and more complex the Hayekian triangles (networks of production) the more the need for a stable currency. This is why states prefer spending rather than direct inflation. On the other hand I recommend direct distribution rather than inflation or spending, because this is the most direct route to the population and the people tend to spend rather than pay down debts. NOTE: notice I how just talked about economics operationally in descriptive terms (actions) using only Hayekian Triangles, and even when I did, I only did so to teach you the term. conversely note how people use many terms of art in economics. The problem is the individual does not know the difference between an economic term and a financial term. Inflation of the money supply causes inflation of prices to absorb it, such that the purchasing power of TIME (time and other resources are still just time, time to get the resources), stays the same. Deflation generally means decline in prices due to decreasing demand, and both deflation and inflation (increases because of more money, deflation because of less spending, or shift in what’s being produced. Right now restaurant food prices are increasing because more people have jobs and restaurants are having to pay more for staff.)