Curt Doolittle

Category: Economics, Finance, and Political Economy

  • I think that there is a very great disparity in the industries in which non-whit

    I think that there is a very great disparity in the industries in which non-whites, whites, and jews, show asymmetric earnings. And that it is the choice of industries and the returns on those industries that produce the exaggerated differences. Jewish ethics are not reciprocal.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-22 19:26:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/988136869094395904

    Reply addressees: @Steve_Sailer

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/987823339325411328

    IN REPLY TO:

    @Steve_Sailer

    White privilege and Jewish privilege seem fairly comparable in causes, size, and quantity/quality of evidence for their existence. E.g., whites tend to make more money than nonwhites and Jews tend to make more money than gentiles, and for roughly similar sets of reasons.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/987823339325411328

  • Future of Employment

    We have entered an age where all increases in productivity are offset by increases in inflation, the purpose of which is to preserve employment, of people who are increasingly unemployable, and wage suppression of the working (meaning non-calculating, professional, non-entrepreneurial) classes will continue indefinitely as the world increasingly adds competing labor to the world labor pool. Every person in the middle is only 20% more productive than consumptive, and then only so for certain period of his or her life. so every person at the bottom quartile requires five people to pay for his existence throughout his life. Ergo, we must choose between decreasing the standard of living for all but the upper quintile, and constantly increasing inequality, or suppressing the rates of reproduction of the bottom and producing increasingly consistent equality. There is no alternative. Economics is just an extension of physics.

  • Future of Employment

    We have entered an age where all increases in productivity are offset by increases in inflation, the purpose of which is to preserve employment, of people who are increasingly unemployable, and wage suppression of the working (meaning non-calculating, professional, non-entrepreneurial) classes will continue indefinitely as the world increasingly adds competing labor to the world labor pool. Every person in the middle is only 20% more productive than consumptive, and then only so for certain period of his or her life. so every person at the bottom quartile requires five people to pay for his existence throughout his life. Ergo, we must choose between decreasing the standard of living for all but the upper quintile, and constantly increasing inequality, or suppressing the rates of reproduction of the bottom and producing increasingly consistent equality. There is no alternative. Economics is just an extension of physics.

  • THE PARETO PRINCIPLE AT WORK (A POWER LAW) by Noah J Revoy The worst 20% of the

    THE PARETO PRINCIPLE AT WORK (A POWER LAW)

    by Noah J Revoy

    The worst 20% of the group creates 80% of the negative externalities.

    The worst 20% of that subgroup causes 80% of that groups negative externalities.

    Another way to say that is: Out of a population of 326 million people living in USA, 13 million (4%) create 64% of the harmful externalities.

    The best 20% of the group creates 80% of the positive externalities.

    The best 20% of that subgroup causes 80% of that groups positive externalities.

    Another way to say that is: Out of a population of 326 million people living in the USA, 13 million (4%) create 64% of the beneficial externalities.

    THe people at the bottom aren’t just unproductive, they’re harmful.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-21 09:19:00 UTC

  • We have entered an age where all increases in productivity are offset by increas

    We have entered an age where all increases in productivity are offset by increases in inflation, the purpose of which is to preserve employment, of people who are increasingly unemployable, and wage suppression of the working (meaning non-calculating, professional, non-entrepreneurial) classes will continue indefinitely as the world increasingly adds competing labor to the world labor pool. Every person in the middle is only 20% more productive than consumptive, and then only so for certain period of his or her life. so every person at the bottom quartile requires five people to pay for his existence throughout his life. Ergo, we must choose between decreasing the standard of living for all but the upper quintile, and constantly increasing inequality, or suppressing the rates of reproduction of the bottom and producing increasingly consistent equality. There is no alternative. Economics is just an extension of physics.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-20 22:04:00 UTC

  • “Curt: When Will the Next Correction (collapse) Occur?”

    —“Curt, when do you think is the next economic / financial crisis slanted? Somebody I know well and trust, who got out of dodge last time around, is expecting it to be less than 18 months out, as indicated by the inverted bond yield curve. Is this accurate?”—- Moritz Bierling I have been saying that it looks to me like 2017-2020 since 2006. And that we would have some vast reorganizational catastrophe between 2020 and 2025. I was paying a lot of attention prior to the crisis, and so I was spot on (within 30 days) of estimating it correctly. Even the 2014 return. (I was conversely waaaaaaaaay off on China, which I thought would run out of options by 2010, but is deftly managing their equilibration and converting to totalitarianism before their great correction). I am not paying close enough attention to patterns today, so your friend is probably correct. I don’t need greater precision for my work. The reason being that I’m trying to provide “what to do about it” in advance – although still behind schedule. My understanding, and my strategy, is that we will see convergence in the next 24 months and that will begin the next ‘great wars’ era, because (a) the civil unrest will occupy the west, and (b) world powers in waiting will seize the opportunity, (c) both because they can afford to, and (d) because our ‘model’ (democracy) will have been proven wrong, so they will ‘advance’ under a sense of ‘moral authority to right a tragic wrong’. I think it is extremely unlikely that I err. Why? Humans always pursue available incentives. (PS: 1) I can tell by the loans being generated that we are at the limit of possible credit expansion and I suspect the bond yield is reflecting it. 2) I can tell by the absolutely certain future direction of oil prices that this will coincide with and partly drive the rest of the outcomes I anticipate.) Apr 19, 2018 12:19pm

  • “Curt: When Will the Next Correction (collapse) Occur?”

    —“Curt, when do you think is the next economic / financial crisis slanted? Somebody I know well and trust, who got out of dodge last time around, is expecting it to be less than 18 months out, as indicated by the inverted bond yield curve. Is this accurate?”—- Moritz Bierling I have been saying that it looks to me like 2017-2020 since 2006. And that we would have some vast reorganizational catastrophe between 2020 and 2025. I was paying a lot of attention prior to the crisis, and so I was spot on (within 30 days) of estimating it correctly. Even the 2014 return. (I was conversely waaaaaaaaay off on China, which I thought would run out of options by 2010, but is deftly managing their equilibration and converting to totalitarianism before their great correction). I am not paying close enough attention to patterns today, so your friend is probably correct. I don’t need greater precision for my work. The reason being that I’m trying to provide “what to do about it” in advance – although still behind schedule. My understanding, and my strategy, is that we will see convergence in the next 24 months and that will begin the next ‘great wars’ era, because (a) the civil unrest will occupy the west, and (b) world powers in waiting will seize the opportunity, (c) both because they can afford to, and (d) because our ‘model’ (democracy) will have been proven wrong, so they will ‘advance’ under a sense of ‘moral authority to right a tragic wrong’. I think it is extremely unlikely that I err. Why? Humans always pursue available incentives. (PS: 1) I can tell by the loans being generated that we are at the limit of possible credit expansion and I suspect the bond yield is reflecting it. 2) I can tell by the absolutely certain future direction of oil prices that this will coincide with and partly drive the rest of the outcomes I anticipate.) Apr 19, 2018 12:19pm

  • “CURT: WHEN WILL THE NEXT CORRECTION (COLLAPSE) OCCUR?” —“Curt, when do you th

    “CURT: WHEN WILL THE NEXT CORRECTION (COLLAPSE) OCCUR?”

    —“Curt, when do you think is the next economic / financial crisis slanted? Somebody I know well and trust, who got out of dodge last time around, is expecting it to be less than 18 months out, as indicated by the inverted bond yield curve. Is this accurate?”—- Moritz Bierling

    I have been saying that it looks to me like 2017-2020 since 2006. And that we would have some vast reorganizational catastrophe between 2020 and 2025.

    I was paying a lot of attention prior to the crisis, and so I was spot on (within 30 days) of estimating it correctly. Even the 2014 return.

    (I was conversely waaaaaaaaay off on China, which I thought would run out of options by 2010, but is deftly managing their equilibration and converting to totalitarianism before their great correction).

    I am not paying close enough attention to patterns today, so your friend is probably correct. I don’t need greater precision for my work. The reason being that I’m trying to provide “what to do about it” in advance – although still behind schedule.

    My understanding, and my strategy, is that we will see convergence in the next 24 months and that will begin the next ‘great wars’ era, because (a) the civil unrest will occupy the west, and (b) world powers in waiting will seize the opportunity, (c) both because they can afford to, and (d) because our ‘model’ (democracy) will have been proven wrong, so they will ‘advance’ under a sense of ‘moral authority to right a tragic wrong’.

    I think it is extremely unlikely that I err.

    Why? Humans always pursue available incentives.

    (PS:

    1) I can tell by the loans being generated that we are at the limit of possible credit expansion and I suspect the bond yield is reflecting it.

    2) I can tell by the absolutely certain future direction of oil prices that this will coincide with and partly drive the rest of the outcomes I anticipate.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-19 12:19:00 UTC

  • You see, there is a big difference between saying “this would be good” and askin

    You see, there is a big difference between saying “this would be good” and asking the question “what information and incentives are available under these conditions?”

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-19 09:40:00 UTC

  • What would happen if we prevented renting in cities the way we prevent renting i

    What would happen if we prevented renting in cities the way we prevent renting in suburbs?

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-19 09:35:00 UTC