Curt Doolittle

Category: Economics, Finance, and Political Economy

  • This annoys the hell out of me. What they mean is, that the windfall to the worl

    This annoys the hell out of me. What they mean is, that the windfall to the world of the end of communism; the windfall to the world of automating clerical work by computers; the windfall to the world by the development of the internet; gave us insane rewards from the late 80’s to the 2001 Crash which reset to normal. But that they dumped money into the economy creating the overexpansion of the housing market, which then led to that correction (crash). Meaning that we are back to the trend of the 1980’s.

    I don’t know how smart you have to be to grok that american’s have been the beneficiaries of numerous windfalls that the rest of the world has not: the conquest of a new continent; the Louisiana Purchase and the western Expansion; the immigration of hordes of the underclasses into those territories; the introduction of fiat currency to finance those immigrants; the crash that followed; the world wars that followed leaving the USA as inheritor of the British Empire; Leaving the US worker the only industrial labor left with production capital intact. This ‘jolly’ led to the social activism of the 1960’s which sought to imitate the soviet union and destroyed most of industrial america. The consequential export of work to other countries free of non-market labor; the use of petrodollars under nixon to defeat the Soviets and the Chinese and World communism, and expanded moreso by Regan to complete that defeat. The use of that military technology to produce computer revolution; and the creation of vast changes in our economy due to technology. At present we are going through another vast change due to amazon, google, and facebook altering the commercial sector dramatically – and the world is catching up eliminating our military advantage, our petro-dollar, our technological advantages. The only advantage we had left was demographic and normative – and the left is destroying that too.

    So when someone says, that we have lost income growth it’s empirically true but logically false. Why? Because we had windfalls from heaven one after another. And the world is returning to the status quo. Except there are 10x as many of us.

    —“The slow early-2000s recovery and expansion, combined with the damage done by the Great Recession, has led to nearly two decades of lost income growth for typical American households,” says economist Elise Gould of the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-12 12:19:00 UTC

  • This annoys the hell out of me. What they mean is, that the windfall to the worl

    This annoys the hell out of me. What they mean is, that the windfall to the world of the end of communism; the windfall to the world of automating clerical work by computers; the windfall to the world by the development of the internet; gave us insane rewards from the late 80’s to the 2001 Crash which reset to normal. But that they dumped money into the economy creating the overexpansion of the housing market, which then led to that correction (crash). Meaning that we are back to the trend of the 1980’s. I don’t know how smart you have to be to grok that american’s have been the beneficiaries of numerous windfalls that the rest of the world has not: the conquest of a new continent; the Louisiana Purchase and the western Expansion; the immigration of hordes of the underclasses into those territories; the introduction of fiat currency to finance those immigrants; the crash that followed; the world wars that followed leaving the USA as inheritor of the British Empire; Leaving the US worker the only industrial labor left with production capital intact. This ‘jolly’ led to the social activism of the 1960’s which sought to imitate the soviet union and destroyed most of industrial america. The consequential export of work to other countries free of non-market labor; the use of petrodollars under nixon to defeat the Soviets and the Chinese and World communism, and expanded moreso by Regan to complete that defeat. The use of that military technology to produce computer revolution; and the creation of vast changes in our economy due to technology. At present we are going through another vast change due to amazon, google, and facebook altering the commercial sector dramatically – and the world is catching up eliminating our military advantage, our petro-dollar, our technological advantages. The only advantage we had left was demographic and normative – and the left is destroying that too. So when someone says, that we have lost income growth it’s empirically true but logically false. Why? Because we had windfalls from heaven one after another. And the world is returning to the status quo. Except there are 10x as many of us. —“The slow early-2000s recovery and expansion, combined with the damage done by the Great Recession, has led to nearly two decades of lost income growth for typical American households,” says economist Elise Gould of the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute.”—

  • This annoys the hell out of me. What they mean is, that the windfall to the worl

    This annoys the hell out of me. What they mean is, that the windfall to the world of the end of communism; the windfall to the world of automating clerical work by computers; the windfall to the world by the development of the internet; gave us insane rewards from the late 80’s to the 2001 Crash which reset to normal. But that they dumped money into the economy creating the overexpansion of the housing market, which then led to that correction (crash). Meaning that we are back to the trend of the 1980’s. I don’t know how smart you have to be to grok that american’s have been the beneficiaries of numerous windfalls that the rest of the world has not: the conquest of a new continent; the Louisiana Purchase and the western Expansion; the immigration of hordes of the underclasses into those territories; the introduction of fiat currency to finance those immigrants; the crash that followed; the world wars that followed leaving the USA as inheritor of the British Empire; Leaving the US worker the only industrial labor left with production capital intact. This ‘jolly’ led to the social activism of the 1960’s which sought to imitate the soviet union and destroyed most of industrial america. The consequential export of work to other countries free of non-market labor; the use of petrodollars under nixon to defeat the Soviets and the Chinese and World communism, and expanded moreso by Regan to complete that defeat. The use of that military technology to produce computer revolution; and the creation of vast changes in our economy due to technology. At present we are going through another vast change due to amazon, google, and facebook altering the commercial sector dramatically – and the world is catching up eliminating our military advantage, our petro-dollar, our technological advantages. The only advantage we had left was demographic and normative – and the left is destroying that too. So when someone says, that we have lost income growth it’s empirically true but logically false. Why? Because we had windfalls from heaven one after another. And the world is returning to the status quo. Except there are 10x as many of us. —“The slow early-2000s recovery and expansion, combined with the damage done by the Great Recession, has led to nearly two decades of lost income growth for typical American households,” says economist Elise Gould of the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute.”—

  • WE ARE FINALLY RECOVERING FROM 2008 America’s middle class had its highest-earni

    WE ARE FINALLY RECOVERING FROM 2008

    America’s middle class had its highest-earning year ever in 2016, the U.S. Census Bureau reported Tuesday.

    Median household income in America was $59,039 last year, surpassing the previous high of $58,655 set in 1999, the Census Bureau said.

    The figure is adjusted for inflation and is one of the most closely watched indicators of how the middle class is faring financially, as the Census surveys nearly 100,000 homes.

    The Census said the uptick in earnings occurred because so many people found full-time jobs — or better-paying jobs — last year.

    America’s poverty rate also fell to 12.7 percent, the lowest since 2007, the year before the financial crisis hit.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-12 12:07:00 UTC

  • We Are Finally Recovering From 2008

    America’s middle class had its highest-earning year ever in 2016, the U.S. Census Bureau reported Tuesday. Median household income in America was $59,039 last year, surpassing the previous high of $58,655 set in 1999, the Census Bureau said. The figure is adjusted for inflation and is one of the most closely watched indicators of how the middle class is faring financially, as the Census surveys nearly 100,000 homes. The Census said the uptick in earnings occurred because so many people found full-time jobs — or better-paying jobs — last year. America’s poverty rate also fell to 12.7 percent, the lowest since 2007, the year before the financial crisis hit.

  • We Are Finally Recovering From 2008

    America’s middle class had its highest-earning year ever in 2016, the U.S. Census Bureau reported Tuesday. Median household income in America was $59,039 last year, surpassing the previous high of $58,655 set in 1999, the Census Bureau said. The figure is adjusted for inflation and is one of the most closely watched indicators of how the middle class is faring financially, as the Census surveys nearly 100,000 homes. The Census said the uptick in earnings occurred because so many people found full-time jobs — or better-paying jobs — last year. America’s poverty rate also fell to 12.7 percent, the lowest since 2007, the year before the financial crisis hit.

  • “Curt: What’s a Forgone Opportunity Cost?”— Good question. An opportunity cost

    —“Curt: What’s a Forgone Opportunity Cost?”— Good question. An opportunity cost refers to the difference in cost between alternative choices. A forgone opportunity cost is a form of opportunity cost wherein you bear a cost of *restraint* (not seizing an opportunity) in order to pay for something else. Most notably the institution of property rights itself. So the opportunity cost of buying a pizza versus saving for a motorcycle, or buying a steak dinner versus the forgone opportunity cost of returning a lost wallet to the person that has lost it – contents intact. In general I use forgone opportunity costs to refer to the means by which we pay for normative commons: manners, ethics, morals, traditions, rituals, festivals, where we forgo opportunities for discounts or gains in order to create less tangible goods (morality is the best example.)

  • “Curt: What’s a Forgone Opportunity Cost?”— Good question. An opportunity cost

    —“Curt: What’s a Forgone Opportunity Cost?”— Good question. An opportunity cost refers to the difference in cost between alternative choices. A forgone opportunity cost is a form of opportunity cost wherein you bear a cost of *restraint* (not seizing an opportunity) in order to pay for something else. Most notably the institution of property rights itself. So the opportunity cost of buying a pizza versus saving for a motorcycle, or buying a steak dinner versus the forgone opportunity cost of returning a lost wallet to the person that has lost it – contents intact. In general I use forgone opportunity costs to refer to the means by which we pay for normative commons: manners, ethics, morals, traditions, rituals, festivals, where we forgo opportunities for discounts or gains in order to create less tangible goods (morality is the best example.)

  • “Curt: What’s a Forgone Opportunity Cost?”— Good question. An opportunity cost

    —“Curt: What’s a Forgone Opportunity Cost?”—

    Good question.

    An opportunity cost refers to the difference in cost between alternative choices.

    A forgone opportunity cost is a form of opportunity cost wherein you bear a cost of *restraint* (not seizing an opportunity) in order to pay for something else. Most notably the institution of property rights itself.

    So the opportunity cost of buying a pizza versus saving for a motorcycle, or buying a steak dinner versus the forgone opportunity cost of returning a lost wallet to the person that has lost it – contents intact.

    In general I use forgone opportunity costs to refer to the means by which we pay for normative commons: manners, ethics, morals, traditions, rituals, festivals, where we forgo opportunities for discounts or gains in order to create less tangible goods (morality is the best example.)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-12 11:55:00 UTC

  • The Costs Of Knowledge Transfer

    The transfer of knowledge is dependent upon at least ten “supply demand” curves. Such that the contract (exchange) of knowledge is a function of the costs involved in an exchange. In other words, some communication is low cost and some is worthwhile, and some is very costly, and some is prohibitively costly, and some is simply impossible no matter what is done. So transfer of knowledge is one of the most complex human endeavors in no small part because of high causal density with diverse means of increasing costs. |METHOD| Suggest > Communicate(illustrate) > Explain > Teach > Train(Repetition) > Saturate(Immersion) ie: Cost—>+ |LEARNING| Learns through inference (145+) < Learns through Suggestion(135+) < Learns through Illustration (125+) < Learns through Explanation (115+) < Learns through Teaching (105+) < Learns through Training (95+) < Learns through Immersion (85+) < Learning challenged (85-) ie: Cost—>+ |ABILITY| Same Sigma > .5 Sigma > 1 Sigma(helpful) > 1.5 Sigma > 2 Sigma (Difficult)> 2.5 Sigma > 3 Sigma(~Impossible) > 3.5 Sigma > 4 Sigma(~Inconceivable) ie: Cost—>+ |CONTEXT| Enemies(resisting cooperation) > Negotiation (exploring cooperation) > Discovery (cooperation) > Pedagogy (education) > Court/Jury(dispute resolution) ie: Cost (Consequence) —>+ |MODEL| Impulsive(emotive) > Intuitionistic(sympathetic) > Reasonable(verbal)* > Logical-Rational(internally consistent)* > Scientific(Externally consistent) > Ratio-Scientific (Internal and external) > Testimonial (Complete) ie: Cost—>+ |PRIORS| Prior Technical Knowledge < Prior Specific Knowledge* < Prior General Knowledge < Limited General Knowledge ie: Cost—>+ |CONTENT| Identical < Near Identical < Analogistic < Novel < Counter Intuitive < Counter Investment < Counter Status(signal) Investment ie: Cost—>+ |TRUST| Suggestibility(False Positive) > Honest-Reasonable(Exchange Positive) > “Dunning Kruger(False Negative)” ie: Cost—>+ |STRATEGY| Seeking to Understand > Seeking to Disagree > Seeking to Falsify > Seeking to Deny* > Denial. ie: Cost—>+ |HONESTY| Intellectual honesty > Intellectual skepticism > Intellectual Dishonesty*. ie: Cost—>+ This (large) set of causal relations, illustrates the difficulty in the range of communication problems Suggesting > Communicating(illustrate) > Explaining > Teaching > Training(Repetition). And illustrates why it’s simply false to say that if one cannot understand it, one cannot explain it. Instead, it is, that all other causal axis being equal, one should be able to explain a phenomenon to a peer. But as the difference in peerage increases the problem of communication even if all participants are intellectually honest. Please notice the technique used, involves extensive use of deflation (reduction to first causes), use of operational (not ideal) definitions, in series(further deflating), with cost attributions. So that while we may not compute cardinality, we can calculate ordinality by triangulation. This is one of the many methods we use to limit the ability to engage in ignorance, error, bias, suggestion, and deceit. While I am one of the most accessible people working today, I find that the vast majority of the time, the inability to communicate ideas is almost always a function of cost of doing so. And limited knowledge, signal-anchoring, intellectual dishonesty, and dunning kruger effects, are most obvious. Why? Because either you can comprehend and refute an argument, or you can say “I do not comprehend it, and can levy no opinion.” There is a very great difference between the sophism of rationalism and the requirements for empirical science(external correspondence), and the requirements for ratio empirical science (add internal coherence), and the requirement for complete science (add operational, reasonable-choice, moral-reciprocal, scope completeness and limits). There is a reason why Rationalism is used in hermeneutic interpretation LEGISLATION and SCRIPTURE and why Ratio-empiricism is used in physical science, and why Testimony (although often poorly unarticulated in the study of law) requires operational testimony, test of the rational man, test of reciprocity, and test of full accounting and limits. Not the least of which is that words carry little decidability but property carries with it conflict and decidability. Why? Because the courts determine the facts (testimony and truthfulness), and then apply tests of reasonableness, reciprocity, externality, and then test them against the legislation – which is not meant to be, or practiced, as true or just, but simply the ‘rules’ of decidability in matters of conflict. And from this we can learn a great deal about the difference between argument in court where our frauds and deceptions will provide us with punishment, and the jury decides whether we err or deceive, and debate, where the jury decides whether we err or deceive, and petty argument where we seek to learn(test), or fraud(win), or educate(help). There are very few intellectually honest people in the world. There are fewer that can learn and make use of multi-dimensional (causally dense) methods of thought. And fewer who are willing to pay the high cost of attempting to articulate and teach those causally dense methods of thought that are counter to signal, norm, intuition and discipline. But the influence of reason(falsification), of natural law(reciprocity), of mathematics (the science of measurement), of science(empiricism-correspondence), and (hopefully, in the near future, Testimonialism) has been profound – and responsible for the great leaps in human mastery of the self, of nature, and of the universe. |TRUTH| {Generation 1: Heroism > Oath ‘Reporting’ > Property} > {Generation 2: Falsification > Natural Law > Mathematics} > {Generation 3: The Abrahamic Dark Age of Conflation} > {Generation 4: Empiricism > Economics > Testimonialism} Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine