Curt Doolittle

Form: Reply

  • Why Does The Tech Community Seem To Be So Liberal?

    I have no idea why you think the tech community as a whole is liberal.  All the data that I’ve ever seen shows that libertarianism is the only overrepresented political representation in the technology community.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-tech-community-seem-to-be-so-liberal

  • Lots of love out there for you. You can do it

    Lots of love out there for you. You can do it.

    Source date (UTC): 2012-06-25 11:47:00 UTC

  • MAGICAL THINKING? A DIFFERENCE IN PREFERENCES. QUESTION: “What are the best exam

    MAGICAL THINKING? A DIFFERENCE IN PREFERENCES.

    QUESTION: “What are the best examples of “magical libertarian thinking about markets?”

    ANSWER: “I am not sure that there is anything magical. I think that libertarians prefer to pay one set of consequences, and statists to pay different consequences. A libertarian is perfectly OK with it taking ten years to solve a problem. A statist isn’t. A libertarian would rather have to battle an irresponsible corporation using the market than an irresponsible government that is outside the market. And in the end, that’s really the only difference.

    I have been debating these topics for a long time and I am pretty sure that it all boils down to that distinction. The libertarians are right that the state creates monopolies, and that most of the problems we face are the product of government. The left is right in that the market works slowly and that there are consequences to relying upon it exclusively. Some people seek to define the best balance of market and state. Others seek the extremes.”

    Source date (UTC): 2012-06-16 15:04:00 UTC

  • Political Movements: How Globally Influential Are Nazi And Fascist Factions?

    ( Pretty bad answers so far. I’ll try to help. )

    I can speak to the US, UK, Germany and Greece, all of whom have  active movements at present — with England’s two groups currently the most activist and noticeable.  Although in Greece, the degree of stress and the Greek problem of Turkish immigration into Europe (akin to Mexican in the states) is the fuel for an rapidly expanding movement.

    The fascist (Nazi) movements consist largely of working class males.  In these countries, the movements generally expand during times of economic duress.  This is because of a variety of factors but largely that these males are displaced by competition from immigrants.  (There is some suspicion but not good data, that it is driven by difficulties in finding mates as well, since mates are a status symbol.) Their concern in this regard is not without merit, really.  In their view, they tow the social line, adhere to rules and norms, and are not rewarded for it, and instead are displaced both economically and socially. So they see society as ‘unfair’ to them.

    These movements are not large. In the single digits of suport. (Although in the UK they have managed to capture of few seats recently.  But because these movements are vocal and somewhat frightening, they get a lot of press. Consequently, the governments tend to be highly concerned about them. In no small part because they are subgroups of a supposedly social majority that is not satisfied with the state of affairs, thus invalidating the existing government, and posing a threat to the dominant political ideology.  It’s probably useful to keep in mind that a) chaos and loss of faith in a government can occur more easily in a country than we assume  b) a revolution only requires that five to ten percent of a population be united and willing to deploy violence in some organized fashion. So it is not irrational to take these groups seriously if they have any chance of getting above five percent support of the population.

    But in real terms they are not so much politically influential as they are a measure of dissatisfaction that is so great that it is driving some percentage of the population to advocate violent change to the status quo.  Their very presence is a meaningful yardstick.

    https://www.quora.com/Political-Movements-How-globally-influential-are-Nazi-and-fascist-factions

  • Political Movements: How Globally Influential Are Nazi And Fascist Factions?

    ( Pretty bad answers so far. I’ll try to help. )

    I can speak to the US, UK, Germany and Greece, all of whom have  active movements at present — with England’s two groups currently the most activist and noticeable.  Although in Greece, the degree of stress and the Greek problem of Turkish immigration into Europe (akin to Mexican in the states) is the fuel for an rapidly expanding movement.

    The fascist (Nazi) movements consist largely of working class males.  In these countries, the movements generally expand during times of economic duress.  This is because of a variety of factors but largely that these males are displaced by competition from immigrants.  (There is some suspicion but not good data, that it is driven by difficulties in finding mates as well, since mates are a status symbol.) Their concern in this regard is not without merit, really.  In their view, they tow the social line, adhere to rules and norms, and are not rewarded for it, and instead are displaced both economically and socially. So they see society as ‘unfair’ to them.

    These movements are not large. In the single digits of suport. (Although in the UK they have managed to capture of few seats recently.  But because these movements are vocal and somewhat frightening, they get a lot of press. Consequently, the governments tend to be highly concerned about them. In no small part because they are subgroups of a supposedly social majority that is not satisfied with the state of affairs, thus invalidating the existing government, and posing a threat to the dominant political ideology.  It’s probably useful to keep in mind that a) chaos and loss of faith in a government can occur more easily in a country than we assume  b) a revolution only requires that five to ten percent of a population be united and willing to deploy violence in some organized fashion. So it is not irrational to take these groups seriously if they have any chance of getting above five percent support of the population.

    But in real terms they are not so much politically influential as they are a measure of dissatisfaction that is so great that it is driving some percentage of the population to advocate violent change to the status quo.  Their very presence is a meaningful yardstick.

    https://www.quora.com/Political-Movements-How-globally-influential-are-Nazi-and-fascist-factions

  • In The Us, Is It Realistic To Try To Achieve Labor/progressive Goals In Businesses Through More Active Shareholder Participation Rather Than Government Regulation?

    Being a shareholder is like being a voter. It’s more symbolic than meaningful. Companies of any size are affected either by a) threats to the brand perception by customers or b) threats at regulation.  These two are more effectives strategies than minority share ownership.

    IMHO there is a trending body of thought that suggests shareholders are not owners but speculative lenders. The recent Apple dividend distribution was caused by economists blogging and publicly decrying the company’s hoard.  This caused the company to issue dividends defensively.  And the powerlessness (and frankly, lack of utility) of shareholders was part of that discussion.  Lynn Stout has written a book “The Shareholder Value Myth” and I think it accurately represents the mythology around shareholder ownership.

    https://www.quora.com/In-the-US-is-it-realistic-to-try-to-achieve-labor-progressive-goals-in-businesses-through-more-active-shareholder-participation-rather-than-government-regulation

  • In The Us, Is It Realistic To Try To Achieve Labor/progressive Goals In Businesses Through More Active Shareholder Participation Rather Than Government Regulation?

    Being a shareholder is like being a voter. It’s more symbolic than meaningful. Companies of any size are affected either by a) threats to the brand perception by customers or b) threats at regulation.  These two are more effectives strategies than minority share ownership.

    IMHO there is a trending body of thought that suggests shareholders are not owners but speculative lenders. The recent Apple dividend distribution was caused by economists blogging and publicly decrying the company’s hoard.  This caused the company to issue dividends defensively.  And the powerlessness (and frankly, lack of utility) of shareholders was part of that discussion.  Lynn Stout has written a book “The Shareholder Value Myth” and I think it accurately represents the mythology around shareholder ownership.

    https://www.quora.com/In-the-US-is-it-realistic-to-try-to-achieve-labor-progressive-goals-in-businesses-through-more-active-shareholder-participation-rather-than-government-regulation

  • What Is The Libertarian Position On Laws About Filming Up Women’s Skirts Without Their Consent?

    Anon is correct.

    The reason that someone can violate another’s privacy is because there are insufficient property rights due to the ‘tragedy of the commons’ in ‘public’ areas.

    However, we don’t need to get that complicated.  If all citizens of a village are shareholders, and shareholders vote to create a contractual obligation that we don’t look up women’s skirts, then there is nothing that violates ‘libertarian’ principles.  It’s a private corporation.  The shareholders determined the rules.  The people can voluntarily go to that village or not.

    The problems for libertarians are a) that we don’t have the right of exclusion (we can’t randomly forbid people from shopping malls or city streets), and b) we don’t have the right of secession, which means we can’t set up our own rules for our own neighborhoods.  This amounts to the government causing and subsidizing bad behavior.

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-libertarian-position-on-laws-about-filming-up-womens-skirts-without-their-consent

  • What Is The Libertarian Position On Laws About Filming Up Women’s Skirts Without Their Consent?

    Anon is correct.

    The reason that someone can violate another’s privacy is because there are insufficient property rights due to the ‘tragedy of the commons’ in ‘public’ areas.

    However, we don’t need to get that complicated.  If all citizens of a village are shareholders, and shareholders vote to create a contractual obligation that we don’t look up women’s skirts, then there is nothing that violates ‘libertarian’ principles.  It’s a private corporation.  The shareholders determined the rules.  The people can voluntarily go to that village or not.

    The problems for libertarians are a) that we don’t have the right of exclusion (we can’t randomly forbid people from shopping malls or city streets), and b) we don’t have the right of secession, which means we can’t set up our own rules for our own neighborhoods.  This amounts to the government causing and subsidizing bad behavior.

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-libertarian-position-on-laws-about-filming-up-womens-skirts-without-their-consent

  • What Are The Best Examples Of “magical Libertarian Thinking About Markets”?

    I am not sure that there is anything magical.  I think that libertarians prefer to pay one set of consequences, and statists to pay different consequences.  A libertarian is perfectly OK with it taking ten years to solve a problem. A statist isn’t. A libertarian would rather have to battle an irresponsible corporation using the market than an irresponsible government that is outside the market. And in the end, that’s really the only difference.  

    I have been debating these topics for a long time and I am pretty sure that it all boils down to that distinction.  The libertarians are right that the state creates monopolies, and that most of the problems we face are the product of government, and that the government exacerbates those problems. The left is right in that the market works slowly and that there are consequences to relying upon it exclusively.  Some people seek to define the best balance of market and state. Others seek the extremes.

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-best-examples-of-magical-libertarian-thinking-about-markets