Category: Economics, Finance, and Political Economy

  • A FRIEND: RECURSIVE COMPUTABLE MATHEMATICS IN ECONOMICS!!!!! Now, before anyone

    http://www.amazon.com/Computable-Foundations-Economics-Routledge-Experimental-ebook/dp/B008SA2EC6/ref=mt_kindle?_encoding=UTF8&meFROM A FRIEND: RECURSIVE COMPUTABLE MATHEMATICS IN ECONOMICS!!!!!

    Now, before anyone throws silly arguments at me, in testimonialism I argue that all hypothesis is performed by free association, and that operational (computational, recursive, intuitionistic) construction is a test of existential possibility (the reduction of error.) Critical rationalists do not make justificationary truth claims, we make moral claims of due diligence – countering the long standing error which conflates truth and testimony. A Testimonialist will make a claim of TRUTHFULNESS: that he has passed all possible means of criticism, and his theory or description survives that criticism.

    In propertarianism, (as well as praxeology reformed), the application of construction to economics is a moral one: that unless every transfer is constructed from productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer free of externality of the same criteria, that we are measuring THE ECONOMICS OF THEFT AND LYING rather than ECONOMICS OF COOPERATION.

    I have not read this work yet ( I have no american credit cards right now and can’t buy it from Amazon. But I’ll get to it shortly.)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-13 05:51:00 UTC

  • “Our modern lifestyle is not a political creation. Before 1700, everybody was po

    —“Our modern lifestyle is not a political creation. Before 1700, everybody was poor as hell. Life was short and brutish. It wasn’t because we didn’t have good politicians; we had some really good politicians. But then we started inventing — electricity, steam engines, microprocessors, understanding genetics and medicine and things like that. Yes, stability and education are important — I’m not taking anything away from that — but innovation is the real driver of progress.”

    — Bill Gates, Rolling Stone, March 13, 2014


    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-11 19:16:00 UTC

  • How do we create commons without rent seeking? Not how do we not-create commons

    How do we create commons without rent seeking? Not how do we not-create commons to avoid rent seeking.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-09 09:33:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641544940296773632

    Reply addressees: @wolfe_fan @mdavilamartinez

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641484405056253953


    IN REPLY TO:

    @sacrorum_rex

    @mdavilamartinez I’ve thought of something I call “post-libertarianism”, something that can incorporate guys from Hoppe to Aristotle

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641484405056253953

  • Empirically because people don’t demonstrably act as such unless they’re shepher

    Empirically because people don’t demonstrably act as such unless they’re shepherds or gypsies. It’s unrewarding.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-09 06:21:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641496540444532736

    Reply addressees: @mdavilamartinez @wolfe_fan

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641487346425139200


    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/641487346425139200

  • Cool conversation. Ancap/rothbard ironically fails praxeologically (incentives).

    Cool conversation. Ancap/rothbard ironically fails praxeologically (incentives). And empirically.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-09-09 06:20:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641496261795950592

    Reply addressees: @mdavilamartinez @wolfe_fan

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/641487346425139200


    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/641487346425139200

  • The Purpose of Privatization?

    [T]HE PURPOSE OF PRIVATIZATION? (important evolutionary hierarchy) 1) To prohibit consumption (create a commons – the ongoing production of a good or service). 2) To increase cooperation by reducing opportunity for conflict. 3) To eliminate rents and fictions on use of such resources in production. 4) To create efficient organizational use of these resources through competition. 5) To permit rational planning (economic calculation) and therefore complex production. 6) To provide individuals with incentives to produce in order to survive without parasitism, and thereby reducing the incentive to cooperate.

    Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
  • The Purpose of Privatization?

    [T]HE PURPOSE OF PRIVATIZATION? (important evolutionary hierarchy) 1) To prohibit consumption (create a commons – the ongoing production of a good or service). 2) To increase cooperation by reducing opportunity for conflict. 3) To eliminate rents and fictions on use of such resources in production. 4) To create efficient organizational use of these resources through competition. 5) To permit rational planning (economic calculation) and therefore complex production. 6) To provide individuals with incentives to produce in order to survive without parasitism, and thereby reducing the incentive to cooperate.

    Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
  • Privatization is Not an Intrinsic Good

    [W]ell, the Nobility in western Europe privatized everything and in doing so virtually enslaved Western Europeans. They were civilized by the church, each other and competition for commerce, and eventually displaced, or as in the case of France – murdered wholesale. The rest of Europe surrendered rather than face the same fate. The “Nobles” in eastern Europe privatized everything and in doing so enslaved the eastern europeans. They and their ‘administrators’ were either executed or run out of Europe. The Russian Boyars and Oligarchs privatized everything, and enslaved Russians. They were either massacred (frequently) or imprisoned for it. Now they have been exterminated. Although Putin’s privatization of the commons seems to be holding up relatively well – but it will likely end in similar fashion. How many Arab tribes have privatized everything, yet have been recently tortured and dismembered? PRIVATIZATION Privatization is not an intrinsic good. Privatization is only valuable if it both decreases costs and improves services through competition. Privatization is not so much a good, as much as a monopoly bureaucracy is a bad. That does not mean that common assets managed by competing contractors, in the care of a monarchy is not better than both. (it is). RULE OF LAW Privatization is a distraction from the only source of liberty: rule of law, universal standing, under the common law, under the total prohibition on the imposition of costs against the demonstrated property of any other. This scope of law eliminates all possibility of extra-legal retaliation, and eliminates all demand for the state for the discretionary choice of fault, and all demand for the state as a prohibitor of retaliation for those impositions that humans universally retaliate against. COMMONS Commons are the most effective means of competing against other groups. The west progressed faster in both the ancient and modern periods when they produced the most competitive commons. Property rights and rule of law, the jury process, truth telling and honesty are all normative commons that are exceptionally expensive to construct. Commons prevent rent seeking by private agents. That’s what define’s a private (corporate) or public (civic) commons: something you can’t force costs upon, yet from which all of us gain “fructus” (fruits. Benefits) THE ‘PRESTIGE’: VERBAL SLIGHT OF HAND OF MORAL ‘MAGICIANS’ Conversely, privatization is just another excuse to recreate the oligarchical parasitism of Russia and eastern Europe. We have had enough deceit for one century. The Cosmopolitans were a failure in all their forms: Socialists, Rothbardians, Freshwater economists, and Neocons. The only liberty that is existentially possible is that which was practiced between european aristocracy: rule of law, universal standing, and property-en-toto. While the effort to create an aristocracy of everyone failed, that does not mean that we cannot create an aristocratic rule of law that everyone must adhere to. And why not? The only reason to practice the ethics of libertines (Block and Rothbard) are to license parasitism, and prohibit retaliation. There is no noble ambition here. It is to restore the parasitism of eastern Europe. So, leave the Russians and The Eastern Europeans to their own history. It continues to be a tragedy they struggle to exit from. Liberty is the product of the aristocratic militia: the organized application of violence to institute rule of law such that all parasitism is prohibited, thereby forcing all humans into the market for the productive, fully informed, warrantied exchange of goods and services free of external imposition of costs. Rule of law: Universal constraint, universal standing, strict construction, total prohibition on parasitism, expressed as rights to property en toto, and ‘every man a sheriff’ to enforce it. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Privatization is Not an Intrinsic Good

    [W]ell, the Nobility in western Europe privatized everything and in doing so virtually enslaved Western Europeans. They were civilized by the church, each other and competition for commerce, and eventually displaced, or as in the case of France – murdered wholesale. The rest of Europe surrendered rather than face the same fate. The “Nobles” in eastern Europe privatized everything and in doing so enslaved the eastern europeans. They and their ‘administrators’ were either executed or run out of Europe. The Russian Boyars and Oligarchs privatized everything, and enslaved Russians. They were either massacred (frequently) or imprisoned for it. Now they have been exterminated. Although Putin’s privatization of the commons seems to be holding up relatively well – but it will likely end in similar fashion. How many Arab tribes have privatized everything, yet have been recently tortured and dismembered? PRIVATIZATION Privatization is not an intrinsic good. Privatization is only valuable if it both decreases costs and improves services through competition. Privatization is not so much a good, as much as a monopoly bureaucracy is a bad. That does not mean that common assets managed by competing contractors, in the care of a monarchy is not better than both. (it is). RULE OF LAW Privatization is a distraction from the only source of liberty: rule of law, universal standing, under the common law, under the total prohibition on the imposition of costs against the demonstrated property of any other. This scope of law eliminates all possibility of extra-legal retaliation, and eliminates all demand for the state for the discretionary choice of fault, and all demand for the state as a prohibitor of retaliation for those impositions that humans universally retaliate against. COMMONS Commons are the most effective means of competing against other groups. The west progressed faster in both the ancient and modern periods when they produced the most competitive commons. Property rights and rule of law, the jury process, truth telling and honesty are all normative commons that are exceptionally expensive to construct. Commons prevent rent seeking by private agents. That’s what define’s a private (corporate) or public (civic) commons: something you can’t force costs upon, yet from which all of us gain “fructus” (fruits. Benefits) THE ‘PRESTIGE’: VERBAL SLIGHT OF HAND OF MORAL ‘MAGICIANS’ Conversely, privatization is just another excuse to recreate the oligarchical parasitism of Russia and eastern Europe. We have had enough deceit for one century. The Cosmopolitans were a failure in all their forms: Socialists, Rothbardians, Freshwater economists, and Neocons. The only liberty that is existentially possible is that which was practiced between european aristocracy: rule of law, universal standing, and property-en-toto. While the effort to create an aristocracy of everyone failed, that does not mean that we cannot create an aristocratic rule of law that everyone must adhere to. And why not? The only reason to practice the ethics of libertines (Block and Rothbard) are to license parasitism, and prohibit retaliation. There is no noble ambition here. It is to restore the parasitism of eastern Europe. So, leave the Russians and The Eastern Europeans to their own history. It continues to be a tragedy they struggle to exit from. Liberty is the product of the aristocratic militia: the organized application of violence to institute rule of law such that all parasitism is prohibited, thereby forcing all humans into the market for the productive, fully informed, warrantied exchange of goods and services free of external imposition of costs. Rule of law: Universal constraint, universal standing, strict construction, total prohibition on parasitism, expressed as rights to property en toto, and ‘every man a sheriff’ to enforce it. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Economic Velocity and Trust

    (important concept) [S]pectrum: American Utopianism (absurdly high trust) British Moralism (very kinship trust) German Realism (high trust) Catholic Familialism (medium trust) Eastern European Skepticism (low trust) Russian Nihilism (no trust) Chinese Deceive and Delay (negative trust)