Source: Facebook

photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47048758_10156816116342264_4460706927151677440_n_10156816116337264.jpg photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47356078_10156816116697264_7198913500800876544_n_10156816116692264.jpg photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47151740_10156816113127264_3632448468670218240_n_10156816113122264.jpg photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47249479_10156816112927264_8917371452559196160_n_10156816112922264.jpg Bryan Nova BreyFor the Hayekian Triangle there is “stages of production” but there is not “stages of consumption.”

I don’t like when there is asymmetry in measurements.

I understand price x demand curves, yet I’m not sure what is edifying about these triangles.Dec 4, 2018, 12:37 AMBryan Nova BreyAdd stages of consumption.

I see that both you and Bill clarify what each of these stages are. If both lines have staged then you’d get a grid inside the triangle.Dec 4, 2018, 12:59 AM photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47391831_10156816124077264_590423106867167232_n_10156816124072264.jpg Bryan Nova BreyThat’s cool it’s a surfing calculation.Dec 1, 2018, 11:03 AMKari Anne DorstadI would not even be able to begin to figure this out ? LolJan 7, 2019, 9:01 PMACQUISITION AND THE SUPPLY DEMAND CURVE (And Hayekian Triangles).

by Bill Joslin

(Important concept) (“The Grammar of Social Relations.”)

We (Propertarians) often use spectrums, but do so in a linear fashion a-b-c etc. A line in a single dimension, possibly two. Start to end or minimum to maximum. There is always, for any point on the spectrum, a vertical dimension which is context or frame. (CD: usually it’s scale.) We presume, properly, the existential frame, but without explicit expression it leaves us open to frame manipulation.

The vertical dimension would be context – we’re always low context, but there might be something to including in what domain of existence we’re referring to for a spectrum, or accounting for all domains along with the spectrum.

An example: aquisitionalism on a base biological level (domain)-> acquisition of calories and mating opportunities.

Aquisitionalism on an individual level (domain) -> pursuit of “goods’

Aquisitionalism on a social level (domain)-> acquisition of signals and opportunity

Aquisitionalism on a societal level (domain) -> acquisition of advantage

Without specifying or accounting for all domains, we tend to be mistaken for reductionists

—-

(Curt Doolittle Responds: )

Correct.

So we have some spectrum, some time series, and some range of context(conceptual) or conditions (existential).

So, because of (a) w can repeat series indefinitely in text, and this trains people through repetition. (b) text (This venue) does not assist us in creating graphs (supply demand curves), and (c) most people are unfamiliar with Hayekian Triangles, which is how these things are optimally communicated. (d) I am … let us say ‘leery’ of illustrating all these concepts in hayekian triangles, despite the fact that in my mind, I model all these concepts in Gary Becker’s supply and demand curves of Social Science Incentives. (Which is how I plan to teach the class: getting the students to draw all of them.) This converts the textual to the graphical.

So. *A series should define a supply demand curve.*

—THE GRAMMARS OF SOCIAL RELATIONS —

IDEAL TYPE

Hyper Generalization (overgeneralization). an Ideal. This is how most people converse in ordinary language.

SERIES

Hierarchy (series) = The Production Cycle (commonly)

CURVE

Supply = Volume (quantity, amount)

Demand = Criteria for Choice

Intersection = Choice

TRIANGLES

Production Cycle

Possible Production Range

Amount of investment vs trust required.

EQUILIBRIUM BETWEEN COMPETING TRIANGLES

(Mapping two or more curves together)

DYNAMIC STOCHASTIC EQUILIBRIUM MODELS

(how economics is performed today)

So please forgive me if I speak in legal argument using series presuming the user can grasp that I speak in curves not lines.

Because if I wrote at any greater level of complexity, (a) the demand on my time would be logarithmic, (b) it would only be fit for academic publication, and not for production of LAW COMPREHENSIBLE BY MEN.

–GRAMMARS–

Note that this pattern of grammars exists EVERYWHERE in every discipline.

photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47048758_10156816116342264_4460706927151677440_n_10156816116337264.jpg photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47356078_10156816116697264_7198913500800876544_n_10156816116692264.jpg photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47151740_10156816113127264_3632448468670218240_n_10156816113122264.jpg photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47249479_10156816112927264_8917371452559196160_n_10156816112922264.jpg Bryan Nova BreyFor the Hayekian Triangle there is “stages of production” but there is not “stages of consumption.”

I don’t like when there is asymmetry in measurements.

I understand price x demand curves, yet I’m not sure what is edifying about these triangles.Dec 4, 2018, 12:37 AMBryan Nova BreyAdd stages of consumption.

I see that both you and Bill clarify what each of these stages are. If both lines have staged then you’d get a grid inside the triangle.Dec 4, 2018, 12:59 AM photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/47391831_10156816124077264_590423106867167232_n_10156816124072264.jpg Bryan Nova BreyThat’s cool it’s a surfing calculation.Dec 1, 2018, 11:03 AMACQUISITION AND THE SUPPLY DEMAND CURVE (And Hayekian Triangles).

by Bill Joslin

(Important concept) (“The Grammar of Social Relations.”)

We (Propertarians) often use spectrums, but do so in a linear fashion a-b-c etc. A line in a single dimension, possibly two. Start to end or minimum to maximum. There is always, for any point on the spectrum, a vertical dimension which is context or frame. (CD: usually it’s scale.) We presume, properly, the existential frame, but without explicit expression it leaves us open to frame manipulation.

The vertical dimension would be context – we’re always low context, but there might be something to including in what domain of existence we’re referring to for a spectrum, or accounting for all domains along with the spectrum.

An example: aquisitionalism on a base biological level (domain)-> acquisition of calories and mating opportunities.

Aquisitionalism on an individual level (domain) -> pursuit of “goods’

Aquisitionalism on a social level (domain)-> acquisition of signals and opportunity

Aquisitionalism on a societal level (domain) -> acquisition of advantage

Without specifying or accounting for all domains, we tend to be mistaken for reductionists

—-

(Curt Doolittle Responds: )

Correct.

So we have some spectrum, some time series, and some range of context(conceptual) or conditions (existential).

So, because of (a) w can repeat series indefinitely in text, and this trains people through repetition. (b) text (This venue) does not assist us in creating graphs (supply demand curves), and (c) most people are unfamiliar with Hayekian Triangles, which is how these things are optimally communicated. (d) I am … let us say ‘leery’ of illustrating all these concepts in hayekian triangles, despite the fact that in my mind, I model all these concepts in Gary Becker’s supply and demand curves of Social Science Incentives. (Which is how I plan to teach the class: getting the students to draw all of them.) This converts the textual to the graphical.

So. *A series should define a supply demand curve.*

—THE GRAMMARS OF SOCIAL RELATIONS —

IDEAL TYPE

Hyper Generalization (overgeneralization). an Ideal. This is how most people converse in ordinary language.

SERIES

Hierarchy (series) = The Production Cycle (commonly)

CURVE

Supply = Volume (quantity, amount)

Demand = Criteria for Choice

Intersection = Choice

TRIANGLES

Production Cycle

Possible Production Range

Amount of investment vs trust required.

EQUILIBRIUM BETWEEN COMPETING TRIANGLES

(Mapping two or more curves together)

DYNAMIC STOCHASTIC EQUILIBRIUM MODELS

(how economics is performed today)

So please forgive me if I speak in legal argument using series presuming the user can grasp that I speak in curves not lines.

Because if I wrote at any greater level of complexity, (a) the demand on my time would be logarithmic, (b) it would only be fit for academic publication, and not for production of LAW COMPREHENSIBLE BY MEN.

–GRAMMARS–

Note that this pattern of grammars exists EVERYWHERE in every discipline.