Curt Doolittle

Category: Law, Constitution, and Jurisprudence

  • Government Under P-Constitution

    Government Under P-Constitution https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/25/government-under-p-constitution/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-25 23:05:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265056342697443328

  • Government Under P-Constitution

    Jan 13, 2020, 5:17 PM

    —“… government under p-constitution”—

    Most people talk about government rather than law and economics because they understand the triviality of decision by majority (voting). But the solution to ‘government’ isn’t government it’s law so that any government can succeed dependent upon the scale of the polity. And once we fix the law, we easily fix the government. And then rest of the solution to the present era is mostly economic. Our government arose in an era of private capital, and we have preserved the maximization of private capital BEYOND its capacity to produce returns. Just as scientific investigation has gone from individuals in workshops to small industry to major industry to requiring multiple governments to fund it – so has every other aspect of ECONOMIC investigation. Once money became shares of stock in the economy (that’s what money is), then we were freed from the problem of hard currency. But we retained the financial institutions, and the ‘limited’ incentives of institutions. And we retained treasuries and governments that exploited private sector gains, rather than produced investments that private sectors cannot. In other words, we made the government irresponsible – when it is the biggest investor in an era where returns require larger and large capital investments. Worse, we let the means of distribution of liquidity (maintain the money supply, suppress interest rates, and encourage spending, by borrowing from the citizen’s future productivity in hope of generating greater returns), intermingle interest on business production, profits from business dividends, and returns on speculative investment (stock market), with consumer spending – thereby creating a vast industry of rent seeking on consumer interest. Worse, we let the academy sell worthless unwarrantied diplomas on a scale embarrassing even to the church’s selling of indulgences for the forgiveness of sins. So between 100K debt for a useless education that serves no other purpose than to achieve what IQ and personality tests would provide any business for a pittance; claiming we need immigrants for academic labor so that universities can pay pittance wages to immigrants for what amounts to clerical work and manual labor; flooding the market with worthless degrees and even more worthless ‘research’; and the interest on that academic debt; the interest on homes artificially inflated; the payment of urban rents artificially inflated; the payment of interest on automobiles made necessary by postwar failures of planning, and we see that TRILLIONS – not billions but TRILLIONS of dollars are extracted from ordinary americans, impoverishing anyone who isn’t involved in the rent-seeking scams, such that they cannot afford to produce children. So THE PROBLEM IS NOT GOVERNMENT. It is the law and the economy, that permits the industrialization of parasitism on a scale never imagined in history other than when the priests of the ancient world threatened the peasantry with damnation if they didn’t provide them with luxurious standards of living by hard manual labor. So, the problem is reorganizing the financial system so that the THEFTS are no longer possible. That is how we will correct ‘what you all feel is wrong’ with the world. NO OTHER PERSON has provided this explanation or this means of restoration of western civilization by the total extermination of any and all who engage in parasitism upon the people. Edit

  • Government Under P-Constitution

    Jan 13, 2020, 5:17 PM

    —“… government under p-constitution”—

    Most people talk about government rather than law and economics because they understand the triviality of decision by majority (voting). But the solution to ‘government’ isn’t government it’s law so that any government can succeed dependent upon the scale of the polity. And once we fix the law, we easily fix the government. And then rest of the solution to the present era is mostly economic. Our government arose in an era of private capital, and we have preserved the maximization of private capital BEYOND its capacity to produce returns. Just as scientific investigation has gone from individuals in workshops to small industry to major industry to requiring multiple governments to fund it – so has every other aspect of ECONOMIC investigation. Once money became shares of stock in the economy (that’s what money is), then we were freed from the problem of hard currency. But we retained the financial institutions, and the ‘limited’ incentives of institutions. And we retained treasuries and governments that exploited private sector gains, rather than produced investments that private sectors cannot. In other words, we made the government irresponsible – when it is the biggest investor in an era where returns require larger and large capital investments. Worse, we let the means of distribution of liquidity (maintain the money supply, suppress interest rates, and encourage spending, by borrowing from the citizen’s future productivity in hope of generating greater returns), intermingle interest on business production, profits from business dividends, and returns on speculative investment (stock market), with consumer spending – thereby creating a vast industry of rent seeking on consumer interest. Worse, we let the academy sell worthless unwarrantied diplomas on a scale embarrassing even to the church’s selling of indulgences for the forgiveness of sins. So between 100K debt for a useless education that serves no other purpose than to achieve what IQ and personality tests would provide any business for a pittance; claiming we need immigrants for academic labor so that universities can pay pittance wages to immigrants for what amounts to clerical work and manual labor; flooding the market with worthless degrees and even more worthless ‘research’; and the interest on that academic debt; the interest on homes artificially inflated; the payment of urban rents artificially inflated; the payment of interest on automobiles made necessary by postwar failures of planning, and we see that TRILLIONS – not billions but TRILLIONS of dollars are extracted from ordinary americans, impoverishing anyone who isn’t involved in the rent-seeking scams, such that they cannot afford to produce children. So THE PROBLEM IS NOT GOVERNMENT. It is the law and the economy, that permits the industrialization of parasitism on a scale never imagined in history other than when the priests of the ancient world threatened the peasantry with damnation if they didn’t provide them with luxurious standards of living by hard manual labor. So, the problem is reorganizing the financial system so that the THEFTS are no longer possible. That is how we will correct ‘what you all feel is wrong’ with the world. NO OTHER PERSON has provided this explanation or this means of restoration of western civilization by the total extermination of any and all who engage in parasitism upon the people. Edit

  • P-Constitution and “Capitalism”

    P-Constitution and “Capitalism” https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/25/p-constitution-and-capitalism/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-25 23:02:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265055713715314688

  • P-Constitution and “Capitalism”

    Jan 14, 2020, 11:13 AM

    —“so is ok for a person who has made a lot of money to loan it out to people who need money for a fee? That is capitalism baby.”—

    ^Non logical. Investment in production vs rent seeking on consumption. Every half truth in libertarianism obscures a greater lie. The function of interest is pulling forward time (income) for both borrower (producer), lender – AND consumer. The only reason not to conquer and enserf or enslave others is the benefits of cooperation under reciprocity, where reciprocity is free of reasons for retaliation, or worse: productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of negative externalities upon one’s kin and allies. We propose separating productive (investment) credit, from consumer (consumptive) credit, and eliminating consumer credit, and therefore eliminating rent-seeking on others (where rent seeking means profiting from not contributing to production or risk of production). This is just one aspect of where we eliminate rent seeking free riding, socialization of losses and privatization of commons, thereby forcing people into PRODUCTIVE markets and out of markets for rent seeking (parasitism). Second, we propose bypassing the financial sector in order to maintain monetary velocity and money supply thus inverting the distribution of incentives (liquidity) from top by speculation, to bottom by demonstration. Third, we treat citizens as shareholders who may demand dividends, or tolerate state investment. Fourth, we grant all citizens an asset (title), savings, spending(checking), bills, credit, and dividend account and a card to access it directly from the treasury. These funds are un-attachable, and all debts clearable under bankruptcy. (We restore lender beware, which is part of our suppression of ((())) false promise, baiting into hazard). When liquidity is needed it will be distributed directly to citizens as spending, and the commercial sector will fight over that money, and the financial sector fight over supplying the commercial sector with resources. This ends financial parasitism, and it ends international parasitism upon Americans -which should, if I am correct, rapidly alter the world order in our favor again. Fifth, where we have indirectly used the military to fund basic research and ‘health’ to fund basic research, we instead limit what is considered research (gutting the pseudosciences), and created opportunity for more basic research, state retention of proceeds from inventions therefrom, and transferred what is the equivalent of Goldman Sachs, Citi, JP Morgan, to the Treasury, where anyone can propose investments and the people rather than world (alien) elites can benefit from massive investments. In other words we restore the monarchical investment model, or, what is practiced in silicon valley today. This preserves the role of agents for investors – so we still can create wealthy individuals, but it nationalizes the risk, interest, and appreciation on gains, rather than having them privatized by an international elite. This is the western( market) version of how the Chinese(monopoly) have weaponized their financial sector. It will eradicate the world financial class’ ability to use the USA as it’s private hunting preserve. Sixth, this consequence (should) drive out tolerance for immigration and tolerance for government, since all government spending, and all immigration only serves to decrease individual income from dividends and liquidity distributions. Seventh, combined with reformation of the academy (college costs) this should restore the ability for a single income family to produce replacement level children. Capitalism (no common property) like Communism (no private property) is a Jewish invention – libertarianism is just communism for the middle class, like communism is for the working class, like jewish neoconservatism and globalism are for the elite class. These are not european traditions (class markets) they are class-monopolies. Europeans practice rule of law, of reciprocity, of tort, and warranty, meaning demonstrated interest, and markets are the result. Commons are necessary to compete for people. All peoples MUST practice state-private ventures on capital investment beyond the horizon and risk tolerance of individual and institutional investors. So mixed economies are necessary.

  • P-Constitution and “Capitalism”

    Jan 14, 2020, 11:13 AM

    —“so is ok for a person who has made a lot of money to loan it out to people who need money for a fee? That is capitalism baby.”—

    ^Non logical. Investment in production vs rent seeking on consumption. Every half truth in libertarianism obscures a greater lie. The function of interest is pulling forward time (income) for both borrower (producer), lender – AND consumer. The only reason not to conquer and enserf or enslave others is the benefits of cooperation under reciprocity, where reciprocity is free of reasons for retaliation, or worse: productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of negative externalities upon one’s kin and allies. We propose separating productive (investment) credit, from consumer (consumptive) credit, and eliminating consumer credit, and therefore eliminating rent-seeking on others (where rent seeking means profiting from not contributing to production or risk of production). This is just one aspect of where we eliminate rent seeking free riding, socialization of losses and privatization of commons, thereby forcing people into PRODUCTIVE markets and out of markets for rent seeking (parasitism). Second, we propose bypassing the financial sector in order to maintain monetary velocity and money supply thus inverting the distribution of incentives (liquidity) from top by speculation, to bottom by demonstration. Third, we treat citizens as shareholders who may demand dividends, or tolerate state investment. Fourth, we grant all citizens an asset (title), savings, spending(checking), bills, credit, and dividend account and a card to access it directly from the treasury. These funds are un-attachable, and all debts clearable under bankruptcy. (We restore lender beware, which is part of our suppression of ((())) false promise, baiting into hazard). When liquidity is needed it will be distributed directly to citizens as spending, and the commercial sector will fight over that money, and the financial sector fight over supplying the commercial sector with resources. This ends financial parasitism, and it ends international parasitism upon Americans -which should, if I am correct, rapidly alter the world order in our favor again. Fifth, where we have indirectly used the military to fund basic research and ‘health’ to fund basic research, we instead limit what is considered research (gutting the pseudosciences), and created opportunity for more basic research, state retention of proceeds from inventions therefrom, and transferred what is the equivalent of Goldman Sachs, Citi, JP Morgan, to the Treasury, where anyone can propose investments and the people rather than world (alien) elites can benefit from massive investments. In other words we restore the monarchical investment model, or, what is practiced in silicon valley today. This preserves the role of agents for investors – so we still can create wealthy individuals, but it nationalizes the risk, interest, and appreciation on gains, rather than having them privatized by an international elite. This is the western( market) version of how the Chinese(monopoly) have weaponized their financial sector. It will eradicate the world financial class’ ability to use the USA as it’s private hunting preserve. Sixth, this consequence (should) drive out tolerance for immigration and tolerance for government, since all government spending, and all immigration only serves to decrease individual income from dividends and liquidity distributions. Seventh, combined with reformation of the academy (college costs) this should restore the ability for a single income family to produce replacement level children. Capitalism (no common property) like Communism (no private property) is a Jewish invention – libertarianism is just communism for the middle class, like communism is for the working class, like jewish neoconservatism and globalism are for the elite class. These are not european traditions (class markets) they are class-monopolies. Europeans practice rule of law, of reciprocity, of tort, and warranty, meaning demonstrated interest, and markets are the result. Commons are necessary to compete for people. All peoples MUST practice state-private ventures on capital investment beyond the horizon and risk tolerance of individual and institutional investors. So mixed economies are necessary.

  • Under the p-constitution there is no voting for a federal government since it is

    Under the p-constitution there is no voting for a federal government since it is just a collection of the governors of the states and there is no majoritarianism, just contracts. In any given state constitution, who votes is up to them. In my opinion yes, merit to vote matters.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-25 22:42:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265050517073510401

    Reply addressees: @WalterJ02130480

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265049565381554176

  • Questions on Voting Under Propertarian Constitution

    Questions on Voting Under Propertarian Constitution https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/25/questions-on-voting-under-propertarian-constitution/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-25 22:33:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265048421880168448

  • Questions on Voting Under Propertarian Constitution

    Jan 14, 2020, 12:19 PM by John Mark

    Curt, 3 questions/clarifications:QUESTION 1. Do I understand correctly that each state can choose who gets to vote (depending on what system they choose from the options presented) BUT only citizens can vote – and because the bar for citizenship is so high, most people will not be voting regardless of where they live?

    Answer: (a) CITIZENS: I’m pretty confident on the citizenship criteria – and that’s clearly a federal issue. So I think that’s settled. Yes, Visitors have limited insurance by the courts – they are not equals in court as is a problem in our ‘law’ today. Residents (you are born a resident not citizen) are insured by the government, and citizens (someone who has earned citizenship), and sovereign (someone who has earned the franchise) all seem to be fine. (b) VIA NEGATIVA VENUE: all people have the via-negativa vote via the court, to oppose anything that would harm them. So we have clearly provided a juridical defense to all. But the question is who we provide political OFFENSE(Power) to. Because trade (economic markets), personal and group defense (court), and political offense (political force), provide increasingly powerful levers with increasingly powerful requirements for positive incentives, knowledge, and ability. I think in most cases the people would seek court protection from bad policies, and that only good policies would survive. I don’t like providing a vehicle for bad people to produce bad policies. Remember that while you can produce whatever commons and norms you want you can’t lie or engage in irreciprocity or violate the natural law to do so. And so, I’m pretty confident that the courts will do better than the state as a means of ‘political’ defense. And I don’t see much value in voting other than to throw the bums out. But I’m also aware that democracy is a sort of idiotic cult or false religion. And so it’s not easy to say ‘you can’t vote’. (c ) VIA POSITIVA VENUE: And as for voting, we provide a set of options (they aren’t in there yet, but I might add them today after this post). Voting was a very tough subject to work through, because the tolerance for, and value of, inclusiveness increases as scale decreases. So, voting in say, your village, or town, or county, vs your city or state is very different. On the other hand what we see is people invading an area, then voting to CONSUME ALL POSSIBLE RESOURCES WITHIN IT and then leaving it exhausted by their hyper-consumption. So obviously we have to deal with the empirical reality of a parasitic majority especially since the addition of women. But how much does voting matter? Really? So we either

    • (a) limit voting to the original approval and disapproval of raising of funds
    • (b) limit voting dramatically to a senate, or
    • (c) we create houses for the classes of people by demonstrated merit, or
    • (d) we let people continue the insanity of universal majoritarian democracy and pay for it – with people voting by their feet – because the treasury and the military, in the end, limit what idiots can do.

    In summary:we provide a set of options – but I’m not sure it matters. The competition between court and government under the p-constitution will make it very hard to play silly games. And there is no escape from accountability (ie: california, new york, connecticut) by voting benefits then departing without taking the debts. Under P, there are no state, county, or local debts. They are all apportioned to individuals. And you take your debts with you if you migrate.

    QUESTION 2. There may be more than 50 states because of the (rather ingenious) system where localities can form polities if they can get enough people together? (State lines may end up being redrawn, not just as we separate from the leftist cities but as localities form their own polities?)

    Answer: I expect the number of states to increase and then decrease in pursuit of advantages of scale. I expect city-states to economically insulate themselves from nearby areas. I expect revitalization of each state’s cities. I expect restoration of public transport. Eliminate diversity and you eliminate public frictions, and begin to restore the commons.

    QUESTION 3. Will the blue independent city-states be their own states that form part of the system of governors of states, live under propertarian law, under the supreme court etc, or will they be treated more as independent nations? Will we allow them to “do whatever they want” as long as they don’t allow foreign military presence, or are we ruling them – placing them under P-law, not allowing immigration to those areas either, etc, and just letting them form their own gov’t under P-law and “our rules” but w/ preference for redistribution?

    Answer: Every territory must adhere to the natural law in order to defend states from each other. There is no moral reason to do otherwise. Every other option is simply an attempt at parasitism. so everyone is under the same NATURAL via negativa law for the same reason the founders chose that method – prevent conquest of the continent (island) by hostiles. But within it, whatever norms people want are possible there. This will rapidly split people by norms but prevent economic, political, demographic warfare. Edit

  • Questions on Voting Under Propertarian Constitution

    Jan 14, 2020, 12:19 PM by John Mark

    Curt, 3 questions/clarifications:QUESTION 1. Do I understand correctly that each state can choose who gets to vote (depending on what system they choose from the options presented) BUT only citizens can vote – and because the bar for citizenship is so high, most people will not be voting regardless of where they live?

    Answer: (a) CITIZENS: I’m pretty confident on the citizenship criteria – and that’s clearly a federal issue. So I think that’s settled. Yes, Visitors have limited insurance by the courts – they are not equals in court as is a problem in our ‘law’ today. Residents (you are born a resident not citizen) are insured by the government, and citizens (someone who has earned citizenship), and sovereign (someone who has earned the franchise) all seem to be fine. (b) VIA NEGATIVA VENUE: all people have the via-negativa vote via the court, to oppose anything that would harm them. So we have clearly provided a juridical defense to all. But the question is who we provide political OFFENSE(Power) to. Because trade (economic markets), personal and group defense (court), and political offense (political force), provide increasingly powerful levers with increasingly powerful requirements for positive incentives, knowledge, and ability. I think in most cases the people would seek court protection from bad policies, and that only good policies would survive. I don’t like providing a vehicle for bad people to produce bad policies. Remember that while you can produce whatever commons and norms you want you can’t lie or engage in irreciprocity or violate the natural law to do so. And so, I’m pretty confident that the courts will do better than the state as a means of ‘political’ defense. And I don’t see much value in voting other than to throw the bums out. But I’m also aware that democracy is a sort of idiotic cult or false religion. And so it’s not easy to say ‘you can’t vote’. (c ) VIA POSITIVA VENUE: And as for voting, we provide a set of options (they aren’t in there yet, but I might add them today after this post). Voting was a very tough subject to work through, because the tolerance for, and value of, inclusiveness increases as scale decreases. So, voting in say, your village, or town, or county, vs your city or state is very different. On the other hand what we see is people invading an area, then voting to CONSUME ALL POSSIBLE RESOURCES WITHIN IT and then leaving it exhausted by their hyper-consumption. So obviously we have to deal with the empirical reality of a parasitic majority especially since the addition of women. But how much does voting matter? Really? So we either

    • (a) limit voting to the original approval and disapproval of raising of funds
    • (b) limit voting dramatically to a senate, or
    • (c) we create houses for the classes of people by demonstrated merit, or
    • (d) we let people continue the insanity of universal majoritarian democracy and pay for it – with people voting by their feet – because the treasury and the military, in the end, limit what idiots can do.

    In summary:we provide a set of options – but I’m not sure it matters. The competition between court and government under the p-constitution will make it very hard to play silly games. And there is no escape from accountability (ie: california, new york, connecticut) by voting benefits then departing without taking the debts. Under P, there are no state, county, or local debts. They are all apportioned to individuals. And you take your debts with you if you migrate.

    QUESTION 2. There may be more than 50 states because of the (rather ingenious) system where localities can form polities if they can get enough people together? (State lines may end up being redrawn, not just as we separate from the leftist cities but as localities form their own polities?)

    Answer: I expect the number of states to increase and then decrease in pursuit of advantages of scale. I expect city-states to economically insulate themselves from nearby areas. I expect revitalization of each state’s cities. I expect restoration of public transport. Eliminate diversity and you eliminate public frictions, and begin to restore the commons.

    QUESTION 3. Will the blue independent city-states be their own states that form part of the system of governors of states, live under propertarian law, under the supreme court etc, or will they be treated more as independent nations? Will we allow them to “do whatever they want” as long as they don’t allow foreign military presence, or are we ruling them – placing them under P-law, not allowing immigration to those areas either, etc, and just letting them form their own gov’t under P-law and “our rules” but w/ preference for redistribution?

    Answer: Every territory must adhere to the natural law in order to defend states from each other. There is no moral reason to do otherwise. Every other option is simply an attempt at parasitism. so everyone is under the same NATURAL via negativa law for the same reason the founders chose that method – prevent conquest of the continent (island) by hostiles. But within it, whatever norms people want are possible there. This will rapidly split people by norms but prevent economic, political, demographic warfare. Edit