—“As opportunity costs for women to enter in monogamous relations rises, men must pay more premium for exclusivity of monogamic relations in a world where there is mens value of labor in massive deflation and women’s reproductive labor on inflation. And that premium is payed with power because, women don’t need any more comfort.”–Matej Lovrić
Category: Economics, Finance, and Political Economy
-
Fiat Money? It’s A Necessity Not A Preference
Apr 19, 2017 8:15am FIAT MONEY? It’s not that it’s a good thing. It’s that you can’t compete without it. Nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, nitrocellulose, gunpowder, are not ‘a good thing’ in any sense like copper, bronze, iron, and steel are good things. But once extant one must master them or be mastered by them. Fiat money must be mastered or you will be mastered by those who master it. Fiat money is not ‘money’ but a money substitute – a form of token, consisting of tradable shares in the organization we call the state. Just as one used to buy tickets for rides at the amusement park so that the ride-owners would not evade their fees, we buy fiat money so that all commerce in the market is burdened by fees. We cannot chose NO MARKET to participate in (state) so we are left with choosing the markets available. And if we tried to create a libertarian polity without funding that market we would be defeated by any number of forces internal and external.
-
Fiat Money? It’s A Necessity Not A Preference
Apr 19, 2017 8:15am FIAT MONEY? It’s not that it’s a good thing. It’s that you can’t compete without it. Nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, nitrocellulose, gunpowder, are not ‘a good thing’ in any sense like copper, bronze, iron, and steel are good things. But once extant one must master them or be mastered by them. Fiat money must be mastered or you will be mastered by those who master it. Fiat money is not ‘money’ but a money substitute – a form of token, consisting of tradable shares in the organization we call the state. Just as one used to buy tickets for rides at the amusement park so that the ride-owners would not evade their fees, we buy fiat money so that all commerce in the market is burdened by fees. We cannot chose NO MARKET to participate in (state) so we are left with choosing the markets available. And if we tried to create a libertarian polity without funding that market we would be defeated by any number of forces internal and external.
-
America, the land where ‘decent’ and disciplined (moral) people work their asses
America, the land where ‘decent’ and disciplined (moral) people work their assess off to pay absurd mortgage rates by borrowing from themselves (omfg), so that they can afford to move away from ‘indecent’ undisciplined (immoral) people, rather than paying trivial costs for trivial homes, where indecent people are prohibited from living.
Make industrialization of home production unprofitable. And watch what happens…..
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-20 12:16:00 UTC
-
Untitled
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-19/a-look-at-the-ugly-side-of-getting-richhttps://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-19/a-look-at-the-ugly-side-of-getting-rich
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-19 17:48:00 UTC
-
by Bob Moran We’ve built societies where slavery is counter-productive (or at le
by Bob Moran
We’ve built societies where slavery is counter-productive (or at least much less efficient than the alternatives), but it doesn’t mean it’s never a valuable choice given some the circumstances. Just like high trust, the lack of slavery is part of our privileges.
And yet, we are getting guilt tripped for what we built for ourselves and to a certain extent given to others.
High trust: You’re mean because you don’t trust me like your own. –> Why don’t you have high trust societies? Why should we trust you?
Wealth: You’re mean because you don’t give me the same stuff as your own. –> Why are you poor?
Citizenship: You’re mean because you don’t give me the same rights as your own. –> Why are your laws retarded and corrupted?
Land/Conquest: You’re mean because you took land / you don’t give me land –> Why couldn’t you hold land? Why can’t you take it?
Slavery : You’re mean because you don’t (didn’t) treat me like your own. –> Did you prove we could? Did you enslave each other to be sold to outsiders? Did you lack the force to defend yourself?
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-19 14:10:00 UTC
-
FIAT MONEY? It’s not that it’s a good thing. It’s that you can’t compete without
FIAT MONEY?
It’s not that it’s a good thing. It’s that you can’t compete without it.
Nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, nitrocellulose, gunpowder, are not ‘a good thing’ in any sense like copper, bronze, iron, and steel are good things.
But once extant one must master them or be mastered by them. Fiat money must be mastered or you will be mastered by those who master it.
Fiat money is not ‘money’ but a money substitute – a form of token, consisting of tradable shares in the organization we call the state.
Just as one used to buy tickets for rides at the amusement park so that the ride-owners would not evade their fees, we buy fiat money so that all commerce in the market is burdened by fees.
We cannot chose NO MARKET to participate in (state) so we are left with choosing the markets available. And if we tried to create a libertarian polity without funding that market we would be defeated by any number of forces internal and external.
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-19 08:15:00 UTC
-
BECKER’S USE OF MARGINALISM IN VIOLENCE AND REVOLUTION (predatory gains are line
BECKER’S USE OF MARGINALISM IN VIOLENCE AND REVOLUTION
(predatory gains are linear, losses to prey are exponential)
—“…a simple calculation that predatory interest groups and their taxpaying victims make: what return on my investment can I get by lobbying government? Becker’s insight is that the gains to predators are linear, but the losses to prey are exponential, thereby stiffening the resistance of victims as the aggression of predators plods on without similarly increased vigor. Think of a gang of robbers taking half the crop from peasants. They then return for the second half. The gain to the gang of the second half cut is the same as in their first extortion. Yet for peasants to lose the last half of their crops means possible starvation and the certain loss of seed corn. They can be expected to resist violently…”—
Violence is always extant.
This of course, is why the government’s search for pareto optimums, and biology and the market’s search for nash equilibriums are so different, and why Pareto optimums are so dangerous: the state produces ‘trigger events’ by some linear increase that produces a revolution: the exponential cost is too high and war or revolution is preferable to on more incremental predation.
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-17 22:49:00 UTC
-
What Kind of Anti-Market are You? (You’re some kind, I promise)
WHAT KIND OF ANTI-MARKET ARE YOU? What kind of anti-market activity do you prefer? – Fascism: anti-market for politics, commons, norms, and limited market for goods, services, and information – Libertarianism: anti-market for commons, politics, but market for norms, goods, services, information. – Libertinism: anti-market for norms,politics, but market for goods, services and information. – Classical Liberalism: markets for good services and information, with limited-market for commons. – Aristocracy: markets for everything except law and politics. – Democratic socialism: minimum markets for politics, commons, and private property. – Socialism: anti market for goods, services, and information – Communism: anti market for politics, commons, norms, goods, services, and information. CONSERVATIVE (MALE) Social Conservatives limit the market for goods, services, information, norms, commons, politics, to that which is EVIDENTIARY, and imposes no costs, requiring individuals develop agency and discipline – however they do so in archaic moral (childlike) language with a touch of economics thrown in. PROGRESSIVE (FEMALE) Social Progressives limit the market for goods services, information, norms, commons, and politics to that which is HYPOTHETICAL, and imposes any possible costs, therefore NOT requiring individuals to develop agency and discipline – however they do so in modern moral and pseudoscientific language. The Frankfurt School modernized female discourse, but we have had no aristocratic school equivalent (until now) to modernize male language. Why? Uncomfortable Truths that ask us to pay the costs of discipline in pursuit of agency is harder (more expensive in the short term) than Comforting Lies that tell us to forgo the costs of discipline and agency in the short term in favor of consumption (indiscipline) in the short term. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute, Kiev, Ukraine.
-
What Kind of Anti-Market are You? (You’re some kind, I promise)
WHAT KIND OF ANTI-MARKET ARE YOU? What kind of anti-market activity do you prefer? – Fascism: anti-market for politics, commons, norms, and limited market for goods, services, and information – Libertarianism: anti-market for commons, politics, but market for norms, goods, services, information. – Libertinism: anti-market for norms,politics, but market for goods, services and information. – Classical Liberalism: markets for good services and information, with limited-market for commons. – Aristocracy: markets for everything except law and politics. – Democratic socialism: minimum markets for politics, commons, and private property. – Socialism: anti market for goods, services, and information – Communism: anti market for politics, commons, norms, goods, services, and information. CONSERVATIVE (MALE) Social Conservatives limit the market for goods, services, information, norms, commons, politics, to that which is EVIDENTIARY, and imposes no costs, requiring individuals develop agency and discipline – however they do so in archaic moral (childlike) language with a touch of economics thrown in. PROGRESSIVE (FEMALE) Social Progressives limit the market for goods services, information, norms, commons, and politics to that which is HYPOTHETICAL, and imposes any possible costs, therefore NOT requiring individuals to develop agency and discipline – however they do so in modern moral and pseudoscientific language. The Frankfurt School modernized female discourse, but we have had no aristocratic school equivalent (until now) to modernize male language. Why? Uncomfortable Truths that ask us to pay the costs of discipline in pursuit of agency is harder (more expensive in the short term) than Comforting Lies that tell us to forgo the costs of discipline and agency in the short term in favor of consumption (indiscipline) in the short term. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute, Kiev, Ukraine.