Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • by Bill Joslin As far as I know, the difference between guilds and unions is tha

    by Bill Joslin

    As far as I know, the difference between guilds and unions is that guilds worked in both directions (internal-external). they policed the reputation (value) of the guild by training and policing merit within their ranks (the internally facing focus) as well as negotiated with the employers (collective bargaining i.e. external focused activiry)

    where as fraternities looked to insure their own against misfortune (pass the hat to help members in need) as well as policed membership (shine shame those acting immorally). i.e. and two way focus – internal-external. and they didnt seek to provide this insurance beyond their membership (provide what insurance they could by what resources the could collect internally)

    unions only focus externaly. they seek resources from the.employer based on moral justifications for “workers rights” opposed to insuring quality workers. i.e. they don’t bring anything to trade with outside of the threat of state enforced boycott). and don’t ensure quality of work via the merit of their membership but rather replace merit with seniority (disenframchises the most capable of the younger members, who generally then leave to either contract as independents and eventually start their own businesses – i.e. unions incentives the flight of their best and brightest out of their ranks).

    its an imbalance of malincentives offset by moral posturing.

    in other words – guilds and fraternities responded to and use market forces, while unions insulate from market forces.

    think of it this way – a.union which ensures they have the best and brightest within an industry brings to the table something of value to negotiate with employers.

    a union that only brings to the table the option of state enforced boycott equates to extortion.

    ive had many conversations with both owners and tradesmen in the toronto construction market, about establishing a guild, where by membership requires one to maintain a quality of service and skill – if you don’t meet this requirement, or deviate from guild approved best practices, then you’re tossed out.

    by doing so the guild represents quality control of the workforce, in exchange they can then demand better treatment of workers.

    in short, unions do not offer reciprocity.

    guilds as i envision it would be based squarely on reciprocity.

    reciprocity

    reciprocity

    reciprocity.

    Curt Doolittle – might be something of interest here. i.e. how unions would be transformed by reciprocity.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-12 20:54:00 UTC

  • WE AREN’T ENEMIES, NOT IN THE LEAST, UNITED BY NATURAL LAW —“No, neither of us

    WE AREN’T ENEMIES, NOT IN THE LEAST, UNITED BY NATURAL LAW

    —“No, neither of us advocates forcing people to believe anything. All we demand is that due diligence against error, bias and deceit be made in all speech to public (commercial, academic, political etc.). All this means for Christians is to either keep their faith a private matter or, if they feel the need to speak about matters of faith to public, to do so only as a matter of faith, with no pretense of speaking an objective truth. … We’re not enemies, not in the slightest. We just have to agree that the natural law is what unites us.”– Martin Štěpán

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-12 20:32:00 UTC

  • MORE ON GUILDS Guilds limited access, all but eliminated competition and preserv

    MORE ON GUILDS

    Guilds limited access, all but eliminated competition and preserved quality, which prevented optimum market pricing in exchange for optimum benefit to workers – because transport costs for goods were higher than local premium prices. So it’s more of an question of eliminating labor arbitrage.

    Now, other issues were important in the era because tools cost quite a bit, and it prevented the privatization of these tools.

    And they were also like guarantees of weights and measures in that Guild members found guilty of cheating on the public would be fined or banned from the guild.

    One of the policies I want to enforce is right-to-repair which will drive out the cheap goods, drive up prices and durability of goods, ending the disposable, and closing our competitive difference with japan and germany.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-12 20:18:00 UTC

  • GUILDS AND MANAGERIAL CLASS? by Bill Joslin Guilds acted as a counter balance to

    GUILDS AND MANAGERIAL CLASS?

    by Bill Joslin

    Guilds acted as a counter balance to managerial classes.

    A manager didn’t obtain trade or craft specific knowledge. When asking a craftsman “how long for this?” or “how much material for that?”,the manager stood at the mercy of the craftsman’s knowledge. The manager had no way of calculating if the craftsman lied or not.

    In this relationship, the craftsman and guilds they belonged too, could use this barrier of knowledge to protect their own interests (or to abuse managerial ignorance)

    the introduction of stop-watch managers allowed the managerial class to break down the craftsman skill into menial tasks any 200 pound gorilla could perform with minimal training or knowledge. (mechanization did this too)

    this transferred productivity from skilled workers to unskilled workers and broke down the barrier of knowledge that counter balanced managerial incentives.

    It also transferred productivity from the middle to the lower classes.

    …and the result was a void in protecting worker interests.

    marx then applies lower class preference for sour grapes to inter class negotiation… and underclass, left unable to protect their interests because they had nothing to trade (skill) in negotiation with their uppers, lapped it up.

    The trade unions, armed with marxist sophistry, filled the gap which was left by the destruction of the guilds and traditional craftsman knowledge.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-12 20:12:00 UTC

  • THE SUBVERSIVNESS OF THE LIE OF EQUALITY by Bill Joslin (See what happens when w

    THE SUBVERSIVNESS OF THE LIE OF EQUALITY

    by Bill Joslin

    (See what happens when we get bill in the game too???)

    Equivocation of equality as categorical membership with qualitative assessment ( that being the notion that all are equally valuable), results in an obscurity of ingroup distinction i.e. leads to the notion of open borders and franchise for all.

    We are equally members of the ingroup (categorical membership) or equally not (not a member of the ingroup)… conflation of “all men are created equally before god” with categorical membership obscures ingroup criteria and disarms any categorical assessment (that dude over in Nigeria was “created equal before god” and thus must be part of our group).

    this obscures calculation of membership benefit. specifically this stands as an example of creating AMBIGUITY. What is it that our group does? DISAMBIGUATE.

    Isonomy and categorical membership as the foundation for the notion of equally DISAMBIGUATES allowing for calculation of membership benefit and policing.

    Qualitative assessment as the foundation for the notion of equality affords obscurity in deciding membership benefit and policing…. which is why, after 100 years of the romantic notions (romantic r@pe of enlightenment ideas) we now have outgroups being extended ingroup benefit while skirting ingroup accountability.

    Truth is, notions such as equality and tolerance, in their initial application, remain critical to creating the world we would like see manifest.

    However, romantic age manipulations of these terms paved the way for the left to use our innovations against us, and the further regions of the right to rejects core mechanisms of what made the west great.

    Gotta admit – our enemies (broadly speaking – platonists) are fucking brilliant, which is why we must be more vigilant.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-12 20:09:00 UTC

  • KING OF THE HILL GAMES EXPOSE THE ENEMY’S TECHNIQUE —“The most surprising thin

    KING OF THE HILL GAMES EXPOSE THE ENEMY’S TECHNIQUE

    —“The most surprising thing Curt Doolittle’s king of the hill games revealed to me (and there’s been a lot of surprising things) was that Christians are just as infuriating to argue with as leftists. Say one honest unflattering thing about Christianity and they come flying out of the woodwork to smite you with fire and brimstone! Oh and the pouting and stomping their feet and the recriminations and the Bible verse quoting and condemnation… it’s too much.”— Shannon Constantine

    (Shannon makes my point about abrahamism better than I can)

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-12 19:51:00 UTC

  • YOU MUST BEGIN WITH A HIGH TRUST POLITY by Bill Joslin I would take the discussi

    YOU MUST BEGIN WITH A HIGH TRUST POLITY

    by Bill Joslin

    I would take the discussion of Trust a step further.

    Law and contract eliminate the NEED for trust. However, law and contract that results in this, can only emerge out of a polity that has established high trust in their informal institutions.

    (which is why, if you introduce a low trust population into the mix, law shifts from rule of law (system which constrains arbitrary discretion) to rule by law (arbitrary discretion hidden behind a mask of calculation).

    The low trust population erodes the informal institutions which results in a demand for formal institutions to fill the gap.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-12 19:48:00 UTC

  • THE INQUISITION, THE CHURCH, IN CONTEXT. The purpose of the inquisition was: …

    THE INQUISITION, THE CHURCH, IN CONTEXT.

    The purpose of the inquisition was:

    … 1) to suppress factions (heresy) that would have weakened the church’s income (they were crooks), their political power, and the church’s ambition to take over as the central government of Europe

    … 2) to standardize punishment given the wide variety of punishments coming out of various localities.

    … 3) identify and prosecute muslims and jews that had pretended to convert but not,

    … 4) and finally it evolved serve as a bludgeon to prosecute enemies during the reformation – and we see this in the witch trials which were the end process of that process combined with pre-christian heathen rituals.

    We should note that the reason the french government was so bloodily overthrown was the same reason for the protestant reformation, which was the same reason for the Cathar / Albigensian crusade arose. The corruption because of the church’s attempt to imitate Byzantium, and Byzantium’s attempt to imitate the empires of the pre-muslim world: rule of ignorant illiterate people by superstition, instead of the western model of patriarchal, continuous domestication of man from slave, to freeman, to citizen, to senate.

    The church was at a level of corruption similar to that of late french monarchy, and what we see in present Washington.

    There is little difference today between Washington DC, Versailles, The church in France, and the church in Italy (where it did succeed in rule somewhat).

    My read of the inquisition is a protestant propaganda campaign, and a more modern atheist campaign. In effect the church tried for many centuries to rule Europe as it did Byzantium and it failed. It failed and the many sovereign states succeeded. Because a monopoly calcifies and feeds corruption and a market competes and defeats corruption.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-12 19:46:00 UTC

  • “I’ve done deep dives into feel-of-sophy… I’d say there are two useful areas t

    —“I’ve done deep dives into feel-of-sophy… I’d say there are two useful areas to explore which I’ve found indispensable… the history of the philosophy of science and the history of the battle between platonists and aristotelians.”— Bill Joslin

    (CD: the rest is nonsense. )

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-12 19:20:00 UTC

  • ” might have done better by reading the summaries of the major philosophers firs

    —” might have done better by reading the summaries of the major philosophers first instead of going through their complete works one by one. Still, I’m going through them pretty fast.”— Martin Štěpán

    I don’t really recommend philosophy, but science and economics instead. That said, myself I just read the Encyclopedia of Philosophy. And most of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and I don’t know how many summaries of the works of philosophers before I ‘bothered’ with the source material. And even then, except for starting with aristotle and plato like everyone else, I worked backwards from the present to the past. Because it’s readily apparent from that process what’s worth reading and what’s drivel.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-12 17:47:00 UTC