Curt Doolittle updated his status.
DO IT
—“I’ve gotten in the habit of checking the last name of the author of everything I read. It’s helped tremendously.”—Darren O’Connor
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 18:05:55 UTC
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
DO IT
—“I’ve gotten in the habit of checking the last name of the author of everything I read. It’s helped tremendously.”—Darren O’Connor
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 18:05:55 UTC
https://www.quora.com/Do-free-market-policies-help-poor-countries/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=046bc1f0&srid=u4QvFree Markets are advocated under the presumption that in a world without government interference **comparative advantage** will provide the optimum market for goods, services, and information to everyone.
However, this doesn’t turn out to be true.
Free-Market is a code word for:
1 – all government non-interference trade by taxation.
2 – all governmental non-interference in trade by policy
3 – socialist government interference in the organization of production, distribution, and trade.
In the **developing world**, this translates to:
1 – on one hand, ‘the reduction and elimination of corruption’ and
2 – on the other hand ‘the privatization of common resources’ by internal members, and ‘the exploitation of common resources’ by outside members.
In the **Developed World** translates to:
1- Forcing all post-war nations to grant human (natural) rights (property rights), rather than territorial expansion (growth by warfare).
2 – Forcing all post-war nations to compete entirely by meritocratic production distribution and trade, so that survival is dependent upon being a good market citizen of the world, thus reducing the chances of another world war.
3 – (Failed Hypothesis) By encouraging democracy (which appears to have been a universal disaster) citizens both 1 and 2 will be brought to bear out of citizen’s self interest. (Despite the fact that communism and islamism are hostile to meritocracy.)
**This is America’s postwar policy in a nutshell.**
Add to this policy the unstated threat that ‘*You can Choose your own government under democracy but if you choose poorly we will punish you so severely that you’ll be back in the stone age.*”
The problem is that America promotes the CARROT but doesn’t mention the STICK. And it turns out that Authoritarian State Capitalism, which is just monarchy at greater scale, is superior to democracy in every case OTHER than small homogenous protestant nation states where everyone is a sixth cousin at the outside.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 17:53:00 UTC
Retweeted Butch Leghorn (@PoseidonAwoke):
@curtdoolittle Academia is the modern church, full of falsehood. The youth see fleeing Christianity and flocking to fake science.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 15:16:49 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1018152343160975360
RT @PoseidonAwoke: @curtdoolittle Academia is the modern church, full of falsehood. The youth see fleeing Christianity and flocking to fake…
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 15:16:35 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1018152285191507969
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
Retweeted Butch Leghorn (@PoseidonAwoke):
@curtdoolittle Academia is the modern church, full of falsehood. The youth see fleeing Christianity and flocking to fake science.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 15:16:35 UTC
Curt Doolittle shared a link.
THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM NEUTRALIZES IQ DIFFERENCES
⢠In both the U.S. and Denmark intelligence failed to predict standard party choice.
⢠This was due to opposing effects of intelligence on economic and social ideology.
â¢Denmark’s multi-party system allows non-standard representations of party choice.
â¢In Denmark, significant systematic intelligence differences observed between parties.
Intelligence is rarely studied as a predictor of vote choice, and at first glance our data supports this neglect: In samples from the U.S. and Denmark (Ns = 1419 and 953), intelligence does not predict the standard operationalization of vote choice in which parties are placed on a single left-vs-right dimension. (Standardized coefficients predicting right-wing vote choice were 0.05 and â0.03, respectively.)
However, this apparent non-effect in fact reflects approximately equal and opposite effects of intelligence on vote choice as transmitted through social and economic ideology. In both countries, higher ability predicts left-wing social and right-wing economic views.
The impact of intelligence on vote choice is thus most visible in true multi-party systems like Denmark, in which parties do not simply pair similar levels of social and economic conservatism, but instead provide diverse combinations of social and economic ideology.
Comparing the parties closest to representing authoritarian egalitarianism (social-right plus economic-left) and libertarianism (social-left plus economic-right), we observed a 0.9 SD intelligence gap.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 14:54:46 UTC
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
WINNING THE WORLD: DO IT.
What wins in this world. Simple.
1. Internal locus of control.
2. Individual sovereignty (I own me).
3. High Agency.
4. Intolerance.
5. A refusal to seek validation.
6. A refusal to seek approval.
7. The ability to think out to 2nd and 3rd order effects.
8. The ability to understand Requisite Variety — the one with the most options wins. As soon as you are limited by your own values, beliefs and morals against an enemy that wields dual-moralism or is polymorphic and peddles lies, you lose. The church offers confessions for a reason, win and then confess. There is no value in losing or dying with “honor”.
9. The understanding that you were dead the day you were born. And you have a duty and role to play.
10. Do it.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 14:48:23 UTC
Retweeted Rolf Degen (@DegenRolf):
In others species, too, females develop a taste for genetic “loser” males if they see them in the company of a female peer. https://academic.oup.com/beheco/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/beheco/ary095/5048798?redirectedFrom=fulltext This was also the topic of the… https://www.facebook.com/741197263/posts/10156495419057264/
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 14:22:46 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1018138738721984512
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
Retweeted Rolf Degen (@DegenRolf):
In others species, too, females develop a taste for genetic “loser” males if they see them in the company of a female peer. https://t.co/qW8B7jEoyU This was also the topic of the great early teenager commedy “Canât Buy Me Love.” https://t.co/yyijTg09lw
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 14:22:24 UTC
RT @DegenRolf: In others species, too, females develop a taste for genetic “loser” males if they see them in the company of a female peer.…
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 14:22:24 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1018138646220804102