Source: Facebook

  • TRUTH, BEAUTY, MORALITY The greeks just couldn’t figure out what they meant by “

    TRUTH, BEAUTY, MORALITY

    The greeks just couldn’t figure out what they meant by “Goodness”.

    I have. It’s productivity on the Obverse, and prohibition of free riding on the Reverse. It’s do not unto others that you wold not have done unto you: impose no cost is the fee for entry into the fruits of the commons, and heroism: contribution to the commons at self sacrifice, in exchange for status.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-15 03:19:00 UTC

  • THE GENETIC BIAS OF NORT SEA EUROPEANS: PATHOLOGICAL ALTRUISM Pathological Altru

    THE GENETIC BIAS OF NORT SEA EUROPEANS: PATHOLOGICAL ALTRUISM

    Pathological Altruism as a means of suppressing free riding.

    I am pretty sure that I’ve nailed the theory of western exceptionalism. It’s probably partly genetic. But that’s not material. What’s material is that it can be codified in law, regardless of genetics.

    Truth is a means of suppressing free riding.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-15 02:41:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://oldeuropeanculture.blogspot.com/2015/05/beltany-stone-circle.html


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-14 09:17:00 UTC

  • Awesome

    Awesome


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-14 07:10:00 UTC

  • MEASURES ARE A PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC DISTRACTION The question is better served by how

    http://www.aei.org/publication/are-middle-class-americans-significantly-better-off-today-than-in-1980/INCOME MEASURES ARE A PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC DISTRACTION

    The question is better served by how we spend our time, what we consume, and what we worry about, than any measure of income. Income is a poor proxy for measuring inter-temporal changes in consumption, and is only a useful measure of temporal asymmetry.

    What is for example, the cost of not fearing the soviet union, the change in crime in Boston and new York?

    Conversely, what is the cost of increase in political friction due to immigration? What is the cost of the conflict over Obamacare? What is the cost of maintaining the post-war empire (probably neutral). What is the cost of outsourcing? What is the cost of failing to reform education?

    Income is the least important of these measures. And that is precisely why it’s the topic of conversation: because it is the least important but the most emotionally loaded topic. It is an elaborate pseudoscientific distraction for purely political purposes.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-14 06:00:00 UTC

  • (MaxSpeak) I’ll try to clarify MaxSpeak’s point: Physicists do not know the firs

    http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/economists-dont-have-physics-envy.htmlNoah, (MaxSpeak)

    I’ll try to clarify MaxSpeak’s point:

    Physicists do not know the first principles of the physical world, but they can usually construct operational proofs using mathematics – just as we can in mathematics construct proofs that at least test their hypothesis. This is because the universe can’t ‘choose’ to remain out of balance.

    Even such, scientists still write in in operational language, with operational definitions, to illustrate that they are not adding information (bias) into their arguments.

    But in economics, not only is the purpose of human though expressly to place the world out of balance so that we can capture the difference for our use, we DO know the first principles of human behavior – and each of us is an excellent subjective and sympathetic test of each and every rational decision in a transformational sequence.

    Yet we do not demand ‘proofs’ in economics as we do in the physical sciences, mathematics or logic. A proof is not a justification. It is a form of criticism. It tells us that something *can* be operationally constructed, and therefore can exist.

    If one cannot construct a bottom up (operational) proof, one cannot prove one’s phenomenon is existentially possible, and free of subjectively added information (bias).

    The operational movements were successful in physics (Bridgman/Operationalism), mathematics (Hilbert and Brouwer/Intuitionism), and in psychology (various/Operationism). But in economics this movement failed (Mises/Praxeology).

    One cannot warranty that an economic theory is true if one has not warrantied that it is operationally possible for humans to perform.

    As such the sequence of theories (at least at the macro level) are self justifying, rather than critical (scientific) and well criticized.

    At some point in the future Hayek’s prediction that the 20th century would be remembered as an era of mysticism (pseudoscience) in the social sciences will be common knowledge.

    These subjects are non trivial, but MaxSpeak has touched on the central problem: once you assume the virtue of full employment the rest is just justification.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev Ukraine

    http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/economists-dont-have-physics-envy.html?


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-14 02:29:00 UTC

  • ON THE MAINSTREAM’S ECONOMICS OF DECEPTION —MARKO— When you’re having a good

    http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/department-of-huh-yourself-british.htmlCOMMISERATING ON THE MAINSTREAM’S ECONOMICS OF DECEPTION

    —MARKO—

    When you’re having a good time , sometimes you can chug away on a bottle of hard liquor for a surprisingly long time. Maybe even more than one bottle with even more good times. If you keep at it , however , eventually you’ll stop. You’ll either pass out , or puke , or die , or some combination thereof. There’s no external “shock” involved – this is all endogenous to your drinking “economy”.

    It’s the same with debt as with booze , and with debt , we call the resulting euphoria “increased aggregate demand” and/or “soaring asset prices”. Most consumers in the UK , and in the US , have long since puked or passed out on debt , and are not about to take on much more , and even if they’re willing , they’re often cut off by their elders (lenders).

    The lack of a housing recovery should be a pretty obvious clue , as you need housing debt to finance a housing recovery. The fact that large , luxury homes have been the only segment providing support to new home sales should be a clue about who is “constrained” and who is not.

    The relatively early and quite vigorous recovery in auto sales should also be a clue. Why did auto sales recover so well , compared to housing and other consumer spending ? Because we engineered subprime 2.0 in the auto lending business by exempting dealers from the new consumer lending regs , to the great consternation of Liz Warren. More debt equals more demand for autos , but since incomes haven’t gone up , it also means more eventual defaults from the debt drunks.

    The entire global demand regime has been built on rising leverage instead of on broadly rising incomes , and that regime has now exhausted itself. Uniquely , economists seem unable to grasp this most important , and obvious , fact.

    You guys are just weird.

    Marko

    —CURT—

    Marko:

    Love the ‘drunk’ analogy.

    That economists are unable to grasp this state of affairs is my position as well. Although some of it is institutional bias, the rest is methodological bias: Macro is a correlative method, as opposed to micro, which is a causal method. Keynesian econ studies how much we can ‘lie’ to encourage economic velocity, Austrian econ studies how we can improve our truthful cooperation with one another to encourage economic velocity. You don’t learn much about a correlative and descriptive model, unless you are able to express it as an operational sequence. And to some degree, while this operational description is unnecessary in the physical sciences because we do not know the first principles of the universe, is misapplied for convenient obfuscatory political reasons in to the social sciences where we *do* know the first principles of human decision making – we are each of us an exceptional instrument for testing the rationality of incentives.

    They aren’t weird. They’re incorrectly incentivized, and insufficiently chastised for what technically, is using untested (uncriticized) pseudoscience for the purpose of engaging in deceit, for the purpose of achieving full employment.

    Now, once we get that this is an elaborate system of ‘lying’ not seen since the invention of scriptural monotheism, it’s clear why the ‘cult’ cannot grasp reality.

    That isn’t to say most economists are bad people, any more than priests were and are, bad people. It’s that they bought the nonsense, found a place in the church of the academy, and practice its rituals: correlative non-causal justification of deceit for ostensibly moral ends.

    The truth is enough. Too bad that’s hard to grasp.

    http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/department-of-huh-yourself-british.html?


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-14 02:07:00 UTC

  • My Niece Animal House came out my freshman year…. 😉

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/dartmouth-frat-inspired-animal-house-shut-article-1.2216559For My Niece

    Animal House came out my freshman year…. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-13 12:42:00 UTC

  • (why are so many ex-pats in Ukraine such douchebags? seriously. i love this coun

    (why are so many ex-pats in Ukraine such douchebags? seriously. i love this country. i love these people. and the next trash talking asshole expat i meet i’m going to punch in the face and piss on. and, yeah. i’m talkin’ to you chicago.)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-13 11:48:00 UTC

  • They call for Walter Block’s head, and Hoppe’s head for things that they DIDN’T

    https://diversitychronicle.wordpress.com/2013/11/18/progressive-professor-urges-white-male-students-to-commit-suicide-during-class/Great. They call for Walter Block’s head, and Hoppe’s head for things that they DIDN’T say, and this guy says evil nonsense directly, and we hear crickets.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-13 09:47:00 UTC