Category: Economics, Finance, and Political Economy

  • Untitled

    http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/10/why-are-liberal-cities-so-unaffordable/382045/


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-30 07:38:00 UTC

  • (from elsewhere) (worth repeating) The problem is one of scale. Families operate

    (from elsewhere) (worth repeating)

    The problem is one of scale. Families operate on non monetary internal signals, but families still operate as an economy. That economy simply makes use of kin selection. But outside of the family it is nearly impossible to construct kin selection without an island or a northern european peninsula.

    ****You cannot break the Dunbar number without an information and incentive system to compensate for exceeding human cognitive ability****

    Cults rely on expensive rituals and verbal contrivance in order to attempt to construct some alternative kinship alliance. This is why only very eccentric cults with high costs of entry and ritual persist beyond the original founders.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-29 11:06:00 UTC

  • Inequality? Again: 1) feminism and single motherhood along racial lines generate

    Inequality?

    Again: 1) feminism and single motherhood along racial lines generates theft from those with good discipline and who create a single household cost, to those with poor discipline and who generate two household costs. The “fair answer” then is to ignore all marriage corporation in taxation, everyone file individual taxes, and halve the income and double the deductions of married cohabiting people, so that married people who co-habitate are not unfairly taxed. If we did that, then taxes would have to be adjusted higher on everyone now that money was not stolen from efficient families to expensive single mothers.

    2) companies left the states because we are no longer the exclusive members of the wealth club, able to export products to others. And did so because overpaid labor in the postwar period tried to further increase their take. So rather than lose other markets or lose this market to others, Americans had no choice but to move production to companies with new markets.

    I left for that reason. Plus government employees are predatory members of the lower classes. And I am sick of living in fear of them.

    3) Education never was able to compensate for racial differences in ability and preference, and cannot now compensate for both biological differences and cultural differences as well.

    Educators are overpaid given the statistical relationship between teacher compensation and other graduates with same iq, especially given that teachers do not marginally improve in performance after the first six months of employment.

    Our children are largely taught indoctrination and falsehoods and we can prove that by testing against other cultures.

    So we can no longer produce employment asymmetrically from the rest of the world.

    If we examine voting history we see that without women voters, none of these policies would have been possible to pass. So this state of affairs is due to feminists and socialists.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-26 04:02:00 UTC

  • THOUGHTS ON THE FED Uncomfortable truth: It is not clear that we will or are mor

    THOUGHTS ON THE FED

    Uncomfortable truth: It is not clear that we will or are morally bound to end the fed, only that we are morally bound to eliminate a monopoly currency for other than the payment of taxes (fees, or commissions – however we choose to structure it.)

    The reason is, that it is not clear that savers and investors are due appreciation of the currency. It is very hard to argue that they are due appreciation (or loss) of the currency. In fact, it appears the opposite is true: that they have not earned the appreciation of the currency-of-the-commons. It is clear that if they can invest in any alternate currency, then purchase the payment-for-commons-currency as needed, that this involves no unearned gain, or forced loss – as such it is not immoral.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-25 13:40:00 UTC

  • Answer by @curtdoolittle to What are the assumptions of the law of diminishing m

    Answer by @curtdoolittle to What are the assumptions of the law of diminishing marginal utility? http://qr.ae/DTlYB


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-22 21:57:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/525043411234328576

  • Answer by @curtdoolittle to How much more capitalist is the US than Germany?

    Answer by @curtdoolittle to How much more capitalist is the US than Germany? http://qr.ae/DTDZg


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-22 21:35:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/525037710835462144

  • IS THE APPROPRIATE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION OF BIG BUSINESS? (The word ‘app

    http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-appropriate-role-and-amount-of-government-regulation-of-businesses/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=1WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION OF BIG BUSINESS?

    (The word ‘appropriate’ is a form of linguistic dishonesty that attempts to create a moral statement where none exists.)

    Instead, the question is whether a MONOPOLY (in this case, the government), that is insulated from prosecution under the law (bureaucrats), and insulated from market pressures (competition), is superior to a POLYPOLY, in which all members are subject to prosecution under the law (citizens) and subject to market pressures (competition).

    The general theory is that monopolies are necessary to START regulation (government), but that once instituted that competing institutions subject to rule of law are superior to democratic and political influences (politicians, corruption, oligarchies), because each individual everywhere in society, if he holds legal standing under universal standing, is capable of policing the regulators.

    The problem we have in government is that we cannot police the regulators ,and the implication that voting is a proxy for lawsuits is empirically false.

    As such, removal of corporate protections and extension of liability to all employees of all organizations, and the granting of universal standing, and the requirement that anyone we would consider needing regulation be insured, allows us to construct competing insurance companies that replace corrupt monopoly bureaucracies in government as means of regulation.

    SO it is not the degree of regulation that is the question, but whether regulation should be performed by monopolies or polypolies. And the answer is that most regulations must be legally imposed by the monopoly we call government, by requiring private insurance, and that the entire population is both responsible for and capable of policing those companies AND their insurers.

    It should be fairly obvious that POLOPOLY under NOMOCRACY is a superior means of regulation because it eliminates the possibility of corruption endemic to monopolies. And equally obvious that the market will seek the level of regulation necessary for insurers and producers to defend themselves from activist citizens intent on controlling them by limiting them moral actions.

    It is less obvious that it is government sanction of corruption and government delivery of regulation that is the cause of illicit business activity, precisely because during the early industrial revolution, governments who were envious of collecting new tax revenues granted protections to private businesses and removed the public’s common law ability to regulate such businesses.

    Cheers


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-22 18:12:00 UTC

  • ARE THE ASSUMPTIONS BEHIND THE LAW OF DIMINISHING MARGINAL UTILITY? (I can’t fig

    http://www.quora.com/What-are-the-assumptions-of-the-law-of-diminishing-marginal-utility/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=1WHAT ARE THE ASSUMPTIONS BEHIND THE LAW OF DIMINISHING MARGINAL UTILITY?

    (I can’t figure out if this is an honest question or some moron’s bot-work.)

    The only assumption in marginal utility is that it is a general rule of arbitrary precision like all general rules must be constructed of arbitrary precision by logical necessity.

    So as far as I know, no assumptions external to the construction of ALL general theories are present in marginal utility. It is just that the distribution of particulars under social sciences are wider that n the distribution of particulars in the physical sciences: man learns. Hydrogen does as hydrogen is, and that’s the end of it.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-22 17:58:00 UTC

  • MUCH MORE CAPITALIST IS AMERICA THAN GERMANY *Capitalism: the voluntary organiza

    http://www.quora.com/How-much-more-capitalist-is-the-US-than-Germany/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=1HOW MUCH MORE CAPITALIST IS AMERICA THAN GERMANY

    *Capitalism: the voluntary organization of consumer production. (Liberty)

    *Socialism: the involuntary organization of consumer production. (Totalitarianism)

    *Mixed Economy: the voluntary organization of consumer production, and the involuntary redistribution of the rewards earned by organizing consumer production. (A trade-off between liberty and totalitarianism).

    Socialism is impossible, since neither the incentives to produce, nor the means of economic calculation are possible. The only possible means of organizing production that produces surpluses is to provide both individual incentives and the means of rational calculation for pursuing those incentives.

    This means that the only possible means of organizing production that is adaptive to changes in the world (wants and scarcities) is capitalism. This is why the entire world has adopted capitalism (the voluntary organization of consumer production).

    However, the entire world has also adopted mixed economy consumer capitalism: that is, the authoritarian regulation and taking of the rewards from the voluntary organization of production, for the purpose of redistribution (By licit or illicit means, for licit or illicit purposes.)

    So the entire world practices capitalism and none of the world practices socialism. Instead, the whole world practices mixed economy capitalism by taking the maximum amount that they can extract from the organizers of production without disrupting the organization of production.

    Now, the difference between the USA and Germany is such:

    1) germans are less diverse (more homogeneous) and homogeneous societies (see scandinavia) are comfortable with redistribution (sacrifice of my family and children and subsequent generations) for the service of yours. However, diverse polities are not comfortable with sacrificing for their competitors, any more than germans are happy redistributing to Turks, or mediterranean cultures that are lazier and more corrupt. America by contrast has an old historical problem of diversity of many peoples, and self reliance. The more diverse a people the less tolerance for redistribution.

    2) America is not comparable to Germany per se, but to Europe in total. There are 50 American states, and no less than 9 or 10 american regional cultures, and just as brussels is perceived as a dictatorship the american government is perceived as a dictatorship by the central and southern peoples of the american continent, that works for the advantage of the high population centers of immigrants on the coastal areas.

    As such Germany is both more homogenous, smaller, and more likely to redistribute, (over the objections of the south), while America is larger, more diverse, and less willing to redistribute. The reason is that germans are not competitors for power with one another (mostly) but american regions are at war with one another using the government as a proxy.

    For these reasons Germany is less an advocate of a mixed economy than say California or New York, but more so than say Iowa, Georgia and Alaska.

    Cheers


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-22 17:35:00 UTC

  • What Are The Assumptions Of The Law Of Diminishing Marginal Utility?

    I can’t figure out if this is an honest question or some moron’s bot-work.

    The only assumption in marginal utility is that it is a general rule of arbitrary precision like all general rules must be constructed of arbitrary precision by logical necessity.  

    So as far as I know, no assumptions external to the construction of ALL general theories are present in marginal utility.  It is just that the distribution of particulars under social sciences are wider that n the distribution of particulars in the physical sciences: man learns. Hydrogen does as hydrogen is, and that’s the end of it.

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-assumptions-of-the-law-of-diminishing-marginal-utility