Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • SEE? I NEVER KNOW ABOUT THE COOL STUFF… (Sigh) (I can’t wait for an online ver

    https://cardsagainsthumanity.com/YOU SEE? I NEVER KNOW ABOUT THE COOL STUFF… (Sigh)

    (I can’t wait for an online version we can play on FB.)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-09 08:19:00 UTC

  • THE EASE OF A CONTEMPORARY REVOLUTION You don’t need much. A couple of like mind

    THE EASE OF A CONTEMPORARY REVOLUTION

    You don’t need much. A couple of like minded hellions. A pickup truck is best because it can go anywhere. Some heavy chains. An axe or sledge hammer. Cold chisel, and crow bar. A bolt cutter. A knife, a sidearm, and a rifle. It’s not like we’re going camping. It’s not like we’re in Afghanistan. The entire country is flooded with weapons, tools, food, and money. By the simple act of supplying our numbers. A few hundred or a few thousand men in a few distributed groups, with all of the above, that stays mobile, and makes relatively unpredictable in target choices, achieves through self sufficiency what others attempt to achieve by intent. Command and control is trivial today. The era of marching in the streets is over. The era of rebellion is over. Because with economic velocity comes civilizational fragility. The squirrel cage of your people’s suicide must keep spinning at all times or the whole edifice will crash. The real problem is whether you yourself are a first mover when called upon, or whether you wait for others to do the first wave and then free ride on their achievements. In other words, the question is whether you are a warrior or a cheerleader.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-09 07:48:00 UTC

  • “And so the (left’s) circle of stupid continues.”— Why? Because it is rational

    —“And so the (left’s) circle of stupid continues.”—

    Why? Because it is rational and presumptuous, and not empirical and juridical.

    Conservatism says only ‘demonstrate small successes first, then scale.’

    But the left creates moral hazards we cannot back out of creating a continuous cycle of decline.

    Thush “One may take no action, personal or political, for which one cannot perform restitution and reversal.”

    This is the limit to ‘reciprocity’.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-09 07:36:00 UTC

  • “BANKS” Banks allow large numbers of people to cooperate *anonymously* by aggreg

    “BANKS”

    Banks allow large numbers of people to cooperate *anonymously* by aggregating small amounts of money from those with small amounts of income to leverage the borrowing capacity of fiat money. The first question is only whether *bankers* are providing any coordination value that cannot be provided purely statistically (doubtful. very.) The second question is whether continuous interest or transactional fees are either beneficial(destructive) or preferable(necessary).

    From what I can defend, I see a need for:

    1) Mutual Funds (distributed investment risk for consumers)

    2) Credit Services (and counseling)

    3) Clearing Services (an account or accounts)

    And I do not see any value in an other services.

    The collateral system as I understand it does not achieve the desired purpose. It is a means of regulating BANKS not consumer or business behavior: the deprivation of credit alone is the only motivator for consumers. And as far as I an tell the collateral system is just a means for creating moral hazard and entrapment. The only criteria is whether individuals have an ability to pay from income streams, not whether we can ‘retaliate’ against their assets. Secondly, there is no reason why we require people to pay on a regular schedule rather than as a percentage of their income streams. Much of what we believe is true is not. Money is not money any longer.

    BANKING HIERARCHY: (class based services)

    check cashing services: underclass

    (hole in the market): working poor

    credit unions: labor class (renters)

    savings and loans: homeowners

    banks: small business banks

    commercial banks: medium and large business banks.

    semi-political banks: ‘financial institutions’

    the central bank: the private sector.

    the treasury: the public sector.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-09 07:31:00 UTC

  • the people produce the church(academy) teaches the government administers the tr

    the people produce

    the church(academy) teaches

    the government administers

    the treasury insures (needs to divided)

    the state rules (adjudicates)

    the militia defends

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-09 07:18:00 UTC

  • Damn, Eric. Your videos are exceptional. (update…) OK. I have to talk to you.

    Damn, Eric. Your videos are exceptional.

    (update…)

    OK. I have to talk to you. This is … just fucking awesome.

    There are what? Three, or four novel ideas here?

    And the picture that you paint is intuitively much better than any other I’ve come across because it ‘feels’ like a believable narrative where people are travelling trading and spreading as density increases, and all the normal eddies and flows are happening back and forth.

    Too many questions. Need to watch it a few more times.

    (not sure why you need to go into the atlantean thing, nor jump into the religious thing, but otherwise a great narrative)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-08 16:15:00 UTC

  • By William L. Benge Your ordering: individual action —- cooperative action ind

    By William L. Benge

    Your ordering:

    individual action —- cooperative action

    industriousness —- pro-sociality

    private property —- common property

    Suggests:

    eugenia — dysgenia

    Which is repaired by the duality of reciprocity:

    negativa — positiva

    This repairing may be volunteered instantly or gradually, and by or for a village, town, city, entire regions and continents of persons, a single household, or, in the remotest ultimate possibility, by the entire civilized world.

    The scope is limited by an unmeasured and therefore uncertain liquidity. Only with data can we deny the potential of short-order international breadth, a new worldwide ethos.

    (well done!)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-08 16:04:00 UTC

  • GOOD FOR MANKIND? What’s good for mankind? What’s good for mankind? Just the opp

    GOOD FOR MANKIND?

    What’s good for mankind? What’s good for mankind? Just the opposite of what we do for the commercial short term good: exterminate everyone in every civlization under 106. That’s what’s good for mankind. And it isn’t even open to possible criticism. Because it’s very hard to imagine any meaningful problems remain if we do that. We can do mankind even better, and take it up to 112 or 115, at which point the young and old are fully employable in productive capacity from birth to death. Or up to 125 where mysticism is no longer in demand. You know we will be able to engineer super-humans fairly soon. But it doesn’t help if a minority of super humans (>135) are held down by a plurality of ordinary humans, (>90) and a dearth of subhumans (<90). Now. I’m not recommending that we do what’s objectively good for mankind. I’m simply saying live and let live. But that means, those of us who WANT to live without the burdens of the dead weight of sub-humans and near-humans, have a choice of separating and living and let live – or we have a choice of exterminating, letting us live and others not. Or we have a choice of being overwhelmed by the subhumans. … Now, I”m perfectly happy being accused of casting people as subhuman as long as people are happy casting people as equal. When all the evidence is that the opposite is true.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-08 15:42:00 UTC

  • individual action —- cooperative action industriousness —- pro-sociality pri

    individual action —- cooperative action

    industriousness —- pro-sociality

    private property —- common property

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-08 10:59:00 UTC

  • @bill joslin @joel link to post on personality cost frustration?

    @bill joslin @joel

    link to post on personality cost frustration?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-08 10:51:00 UTC