The primary problem is the differences in opportunity costs as density decreases. Rural people police vast commons that urbans dont.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-15 17:57:58 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/798585850741149696
Category: Economics, Finance, and Political Economy
-
THE EVOLUTION OF SLAVERY Slavery: violence slave Serfdom: land slave Employee: w
THE EVOLUTION OF SLAVERY
Slavery: violence slave
Serfdom: land slave
Employee: wage slave
Consumer: credit slave
Citizen: tax slave
The only freedom is food, water, and shelter, self-sufficiency, with participation in the market purely voluntary.
And only commissions on transactions payment for the commons.
Yet all of us must be paid for policing of the commons if we police it – dividends.
With self-sufficiency and payment for commons we gain liberty. All else is slavery.
Roughly speaking each person could take 10k in dividends at present. Between self-sufficiency and 10k in dividends on our continuous investment in the commons, we would possess liberty.
Otherwise we’re just farmed.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-15 14:36:00 UTC
-
Of course suburbans and rurals have higher sensitivity to costs imposed: the pol
Of course suburbans and rurals have higher sensitivity to costs imposed: the police vast commons that urbanites take for granted.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-15 13:35:00 UTC
-
The primary problem is the differences in opportunity costs as density decreases
The primary problem is the differences in opportunity costs as density decreases. Rural people police vast commons that urbans dont.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-15 12:57:00 UTC
-
End The Age of Monopoly Rule, and restore the west to it’s genius: markets in ev
End The Age of Monopoly Rule, and restore the west to it’s genius: markets in everything.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-15 12:37:00 UTC
-
Markets are simply the only means of preserving asymmetry and removing asymmetry
Markets are simply the only means of preserving asymmetry and removing asymmetry of power and information. Courts are the only means of preserving asymmetry of warranty of performance.
I don’t think markets are subordinate to hierarchy in any sense other than I think that they themselves prohibit hierarchy by permitting the meritocratic rise and fall of the classes by means of DEMONSTRATED ACTIONS.
I don’t think a market for commons divided by the classes of production is a hierarchy, it is just a means of recognizing the forms of production that the meritocratic families have managed to produce and hold onto: families, business, enterprises, territories, and monarchy.
The fact that there is greater SCALE OF MERIT in each class is simply a fact of the market operating to ensure that we demonstrate the greatest rotation and maintain the families businesses, enterprises, and institutions, with the greatest merit.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-15 12:32:00 UTC
-
IT”S NOT ‘BOURGEOISE TO BUILD AN ECONOMY’ YOU IDIOTS. Warriors are cheap because
IT”S NOT ‘BOURGEOISE TO BUILD AN ECONOMY’ YOU IDIOTS.
Warriors are cheap because testosterone is cheap. Warfare is expensive. High Art – Monuments, culture, arts – are the result of conquest. So stop wasting my time. Ok? Culture is the result of wealth made possible by the organized application of violence to construct means of production that provide superior technological and logistical advantage.
So please. masturbate somewhere else. ok? I am thrilled to keep the teenagers happy, and individual excellence is an exceptional resource. But if you can’t accumulate numbers necessary for warfare you’re just jerking off. You aren’t a warrior you’re a dilatant.
Wars are won by technology and supply lines. And technology costs.
Why? The marginal difference between individuals with weapons is far more a factor of exhaustion than it is of ability. War is a game of errors, not excellences.
(It’s like I gotta take everyone back to f—ing grade school)
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-15 11:13:00 UTC
-
define capitalism
define capitalism
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-14 19:38:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/798248653274181632
Reply addressees: @r_objectivism_
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/798160119280402432
IN REPLY TO:
@r_objectivism_
Objectively and historically? Income, lifespan, every life metric stagnated during monarchisms hayday. Didn’t improve until Capitalism. https://t.co/ftYjdDthRg
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/798160119280402432
-
Markets either facilitate our families, tribes, and nations, or they prey upon o
Markets either facilitate our families, tribes, and nations, or they prey upon our families tribes and nations.
Markets and the consumption they provide us, do not create limitless goods. At some point we are no longer advancing our kin, but instead, preventing a future for them.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-14 17:36:00 UTC
-
I mean the INCOME of the working classes in the transition to industry will not
I mean the INCOME of the working classes in the transition to industry will not persist.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-14 12:00:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/798133424724709381
Reply addressees: @SanguineEmpiric
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797948560671055872
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797948560671055872