Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • BLEEDING HEARTS OR ANARCHISTS? There is a movement called ‘Neo-Classical Liberal

    BLEEDING HEARTS OR ANARCHISTS?

    There is a movement called ‘Neo-Classical Liberalism’, whose members refer to themselves as “bleeding heart libertarians”. This movement combines classical anglo american political institutions and the classical liberal sentiments in favor of freedom and innovation, with libertarian economic and political insights, new institutional economics, and modern macro economics.

    I’m torn between trying to coalesce that movement somewhat or simply attempting to repair Austrian Libertarian theory on it’s own by fixing the hole left in praxeology by the failure to incorporate forgone opportunity costs. — It is really a matter of audiences. But audiences matter.

    The rothbardian movement is doing such a good job of promoting libertarianism – albiet among relative populists. The Hoppeians are infinitesimally small in number. (Hans might not like it but I consider myself a Hoppeian). But the Neo-Classical Liberal program has a chance of selling to the broad conservative audience.

    So my plan is to bring the ‘Propertarian Methodology’ of Rothbard and Hoppe to the Neo-Classical Liberal framework, by adding my work on forgone opportunity costs to the Propertarian body of work. This should solve the problem of explaining the differences between Hayek and Mises, and represent them as a single, unified, spectrum of reasoning differing only in temporal preference.

    Propertarian reasoning is the only fully rational explanation of ethics ever developed. Propertarianism unites ethics, economics and politics with econometrics. Combined with the insights provided by the debate over economic calculation and incentives, Propertarianism allows us to fully describe human activity as rational, but limited by knowledge, and fraught with error.

    I realize this is geek speak. But maybe there are a handful of geeks out there who are vaguely interested. 🙂

    My other goal is to write in short, clear sentences.

    I have less confidence in achieving that goal than in solving the greater philosophical problems that I’ve set my mind to.

    Source date (UTC): 2011-12-16 08:22:00 UTC

  • Well, I’m taking the leap: I’m going to write economic and political philosophy

    Well, I’m taking the leap: I’m going to write economic and political philosophy full time. I’ve resigned as CEO of my company.

    WHY? A bunch of reasons.

    a) I’ve wanted to write full time for at least six years. I want to write while I’m still young enough to make a difference. It is my real passion in life.

    b) The various movements around the western world that are being driven by the return of ‘white people’ to their traditional status as a weak minority both in numbers and in influence is creating interesting political and economic changes that are equal to those from the reawakening of Asia now that it has adopted capitalism.

    c) Completing the merger both financially and strategically positioned the combined business for investment.

    d) I was able to lock in what I considered a good if not great share price. The only way to lock the price is really to resign.

    e) The team is quite good. There are rifts and a few key personnel shortages, but everyone knows what they are, and how to fix them. Getting both Steve and Ryan was a feat. Getting the product was another one.

    So I can depart and claim victory for myself and my partners.

    Yes there were things that were really bothering me. But it all comes down to having a dream that you find so compelling that it drives everything else in your life into irrelevancy. And anything that blocks that dream, simply frustrates you. And over time, that frustration turns to either anger or acquiescence. And for me, as someone who is fairly relentless, it had turned to anger which was making me caustic with people I care about. I want to follow my passion. So I chose to lock in a good price (Of course! What else would I do?) and then claim victory, and move on to fulfill my passion.

    GOALS

    I hope to be able to use the insights of anarchic libertarian philosophical reasoning to develop a rational, and economically sound language for anglo american conservatives, so that they are no longer a prisoner of their historical, religious, and allegorical language. Then perhaps the left and the right and the ‘middle’ will be able to engage in meaningful dialog rather than talking past each other. For well over a century humans have discussed a difference in ‘values’ as if they are arbitrary preferences with neutral economic consequences, and therefore preferences not ‘truths’. It is possible to express all human preferences as economic statements and in doing so convert discourse over preferences into discourse over empirical truths. But to do so requires I both write in a language that is more accessible than I am used to, and that I establish a broad set of explicit definitions, as well as explain some fuzzy and erroneous reasoning in the history of thought and in our common vernacular, and to provide a solution for our political institutions that updates our western democratic system for the current state of our economy, and the newfound complexity that has come from increased populations living largely in cities. No civilization in history on any continent has survived this level of urbanization. (It’s true.) Agrarian soft and hard institutions were unable to maintain the ability of people to cooperate and adapt under those pressures. So someone has to solve this problem, and I’m going to at least give it a good try. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2011-12-16 07:52:00 UTC

  • Tonight: Salmon Potato Soup. White onion, Leeks, potatoes (cook then hand blende

    Tonight: Salmon Potato Soup. White onion, Leeks, potatoes (cook then hand blender), red pepper, black pepper, pancetta, salmon cooked in a bit of bacon, a bit of milk. Served with garlic bread. Took about an hour. Hearty.

    Source date (UTC): 2011-12-14 18:53:00 UTC

  • WORTH READING: DEFINE ‘RICH’. What is rich? Is ‘Rich’ something we can define or

    WORTH READING: DEFINE ‘RICH’.

    What is rich? Is ‘Rich’ something we can define or calculate? And how much can we tax them?

    It is certainly possible to calculate who is ‘rich’. The goal of every individual is to exit the market. Whether that individual studies hard to get a good (protected) job in big company, or works for the government which by definition is extra-market (and protected), or seeks a (protected) union job, or whether that person does none of that rent-seeking, and instead, exits the market through saving or investment.

    “Rich” means ‘exiting the market’. To exit the market one needs roughly on hundred times the median income, or about 4.5-5M today. It used to be that a million dollars meant something meaningful, but it doesn’t. You can easily burn through it if you’re the kind of person that can make it in the first place.

    Rich is a balance sheet calculation, not an income calculation. If a person’s balance sheet exceeds about one hundred times the median income (which is by definition, the 1%) then realistically, it doesn’t matter how much of their income you tax.

    I suspect that the various means of calculating maximum utility taxation is closer to 60 or 65% based upon what I can find.

    But if you tax the income of a small business person who is trying to exit the market, then we certainly have the right to wipe out social security, wipe out pension programs, fire federal workers and wipe out their savings. Because unless those assets are counted, the definition of ‘rich’ is asymmetrically used to punish people who participate in the market.

    Source date (UTC): 2011-12-13 20:38:00 UTC

  • bravado never ceases to amaze me. It’d take about three days to return iran to t

    http://news.yahoo.com/iran-army-declines-mps-hormuz-exercise-remarks-132115297.htmlIranian bravado never ceases to amaze me.

    It’d take about three days to return iran to the stone age.

    Source date (UTC): 2011-12-13 11:29:00 UTC

  • Reasons For The Decline In Fine Art

    http://www.capitalismv3.com/index.php/2011/12/the-reasons-for-the-decline-in-fine-art/Fourteen Reasons For The Decline In Fine Art

    Source date (UTC): 2011-12-12 20:41:00 UTC

  • created more jobs than Reid ever has. And probably paid more taxes

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/12/12/reid_millionaire_job_creators_are_like_unicorns_because_they_dont_exist.html#.TuakAVgFvgw.facebookI’ve created more jobs than Reid ever has. And probably paid more taxes.

    Source date (UTC): 2011-12-12 20:02:00 UTC

  • If you want to do something that is meaningful to you for a very long time, you

    If you want to do something that is meaningful to you for a very long time, you can become very angry at those things that prevent you from doing it. The feeling starts out as distraction, and matures into simple dissatisfaction, then dissatisfaction turns to frustration, frustration to exhaustion and exhaustion to anger. That anger then tends to spill out onto people around you, and you can treat even those you care most about in ways that they dont deserve, for reasons that are not related to them whatsoever. Your dreams are real if and only if, you are more willing to bear the difficulty of achieving them, then you are the frustration from not trying to achieve them.

    Source date (UTC): 2011-12-12 18:41:00 UTC

  • doesn’t need tighter integration, and the USA needs to split up

    http://mises.org/daily/5830/Is-the-United-States-Too-Big-to-SucceedEurope doesn’t need tighter integration, and the USA needs to split up.

    Source date (UTC): 2011-12-12 16:38:00 UTC

  • Emma West

    http://www.news.britainfirst.org/political-correctness/support-political-prisoner-emma-west-this-christmas/Free Emma West.

    Source date (UTC): 2011-12-11 21:44:00 UTC