(FB 1543759047 Timestamp) ART ISN”T THAT HARD TO PRICE – IT’S HARD TO LIQUIDATE QUICKLY —“…Value of art varies….”— Hmmmm…. One can objectively compare art, particularly by triangulation. One can, with some skill, estimate its current market value by RANGE – dealers are relatively good at it. But doing so requires a rather great deal of knowledge of the pieces in the inventory whether on market or not. When talking of rarities (culturally, technically, or aesthetically significant pieces, or pieces from an artist), one has to understand the liquidity of customers and their incentives. Houses are less ridiculous, and more likely to take a loss, but follow the same general rules. Fashion less ridiculous than houses, but following the same general rules. Ergo, “All Stereotypes Are True”, “Class Stereotypes Are True”, “Taste Stereotypes Are True”, and one need only understand the relationship between Stereotype, Available Inventory, and Current Economic Conditions within that Stereotype. As in all economic questions, the more predictable the price range the lower the value of the service, commodity, product, item. Signal Value is Costly Regardless of Class.
Source: Original Site Post
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1543674852 Timestamp) WHY DO WOMEN UNDERMINE THE CIVILIZATION and CULTURE, the INSTITUTIONS, and MALES? (important explanations) —“…what kind of evolutionary pressure would create a desire to undermine the ingroup. All the plausible explanations I’ve seen had to do with abusing female impulses that have evolved for entirely different purposes….”—Martin Å tÄpán Females undermine the concentration of power in alphas in order to preserve some control over their reproductive choice and access to resources and male-provisioned resources, including defense. ie: females can barter attention, effort, care, and sex if they have control of the attention economy. Which is why females are so conscious (and gay men evidencing it) of attention and approval and agreeableness. So just as females operate on a status and attention economy, they fight within that economy: disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossip, moralizing, undermining, and reputation destruction. And decreasing the number of females is not necessarily in their disinterest – so literally killing off other females increases remaining female market value, so that his the strategy females pursue: that of Hens. Undermining the males (‘sh-t testing’) is useful both at the level of insuring the ‘fitness’ of males in defending them, preserving their ability to choose, assisting them in outing ‘cheaters’ (which women are terrible at, and men excel at), maximizing cost of (returns on) their attention, care, and sex. The only problem here is that women still sexually select for males as if we are under those conditions of hunter gatherers. And this explains the attraction of women to more primitive (less domesticated) groups of males with lower agency despite that the female condition is dependent upon those of us with higher agency, innovation, and adaptivity. Hence the necessity of more domesticated (higher agency) males of defending the ingroup females from conquest or even exposure to, lower agency, higher aggression, males. (FWIW:Delayed marriage provides women with greater reproductive certainty, and therefore greater sortition, and greater formation of genetic castes, and therefore greater speciation – hence white people.) Males conversely, operate on the physical equivalent of the warfare economy, and so losses of males weakens the pack, and dilution of the ingroup male genes weakens male reproductive (evolutionary) persistence, as well as reverses domestication (evolution of agency). I could write on this subject for hours by just weaving through male and female behavior at all levels. And doing so only further demonstrates Acquisitionism and the need for Testimonialism and Natural Law to preserve the Western Advantage given the destructive influences of women.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1543692795 Timestamp) AXIS: Prophet, Philosopher, Law Giver. Difference?
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1543644436 Timestamp) TESTIMONY —“your work will almost certainly end up as one of the top influences in my life. This would probably be true just on the strength of Natural Law of Reciprocity and Testimonialism alone.”— A Friend (That is the core of the work. The rest is explanation and application. )
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1543692709 Timestamp) sick. so taking the day off. sorry.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1543636376 Timestamp) THE ABUSE OF THE TERM “NATION” IN ITS HISTORICAL AND MARXIST-POSTMODERN-FEMINIST CONTEXT (Note: I try to collapse one of the major the cycles of history here, and repeat the same idea from different angles because while the underlying causes are not that difficult, it seems relatively difficult for most of us. Repetition solves that problem.) So Nation = A Race or Subrace or Tribal Group of Similar Genetics, Language, Culture, Traditions, Institutions, and Group Evolutionary Strategy. Period. Everything Else is Just more sophomoric postmodern term abuse. |KIN| Individual > Family > Clan > Tribe > Nation > Race > Man. |TERRITORY| Land > Lands > Country > Empire |RULE| Warriors > Militia > Military (Insurers of Last resort) > Rule(Decidability, monopoly on power) > Government (Management, monopoly on commons) > State (Corporation holding Assets, monopoly on foreign relations) > Empire. In the context of this discussion, either you have a Nation-State, or an Empire. Nation (people), Nation-State (political order), Empire (multi-national political order). We use the term International as a shorthand for inter-imperial, stat, and national. Largely because our terminology evolved during the era of nation states dominated by european nation states – each of which was and always has been an empire, forcibly created by napoleon in france, by the invention of total war, and causing the rest of the world to react to scale in order to produce militaries of capability to resist them. America, Russia, China, and India are Empires. The UK is either a Federation or an Empire, and increasingly demonstrably a Federation. Italy consists of the north and the south – although Federated or Imperial a question unresolved. Spain because – because of her regional conflicts, an empire. France because of Brittany and algeria an empire. The Universalist (pseudoscientific-marxist and sophist-postmodernist and denialist-feminist) movements attempt to construct a redefinition of terms to fool the idiots into working against their interests by reversing eugenic paternalism. The Particularist (scientific, empiricist, paternalist) order simply states what exist, and asks us to choose which order is in our interests, advocating the preservation of eugenic paternalism. It’s not complicated. It’s the pseudoscientists, sophists, denialists, and outright liars and idiots that make the current world APPEAR complicated by layers of loading, framing, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit. These questions are all open to simple answer. But the dysgenic left kleptocracy attempts to achieve by pseudoscience sophism denialism and deceit, that which the jewish, christians, and islamists achieved by supernaturalism, sophism, denialism and deceit: another dark age, in the multi-millennial war between the eugenic indo europeans, and the dysgenic afro-asiatics. REVOLT ONE Indo European Expansion by Heroic Paternal Militarism vs Semitic invention of Religious Resistance REVOLT TWO Greco Roman Expansion of Empiricism vs Semitic Religious Resistance REVOLT THREE Anglo-European Expansion of Science, Law, Accounting, and Technology vs Semitic Pseudoscientific, Sophist (pseudo-rational), Denialist, Resistance. Just the eugenic masculine heroic aristocracy against the dysgenic feminine resistance. Male vs Female at Scale. Males fight ingroup for position (pack strategy ). Females fight ingroup to Destroy and never stop (herd strategy). Males fight outgroup to cooperate or destroy. Females encourage outgroup to undermine ingroup. None of this rational choice but purely genetic and evolutionary in influence. Surviving Europeans, the Conquered Persians, and Lost Indo-Aryans applied the male strategy of colonize and domesticate for profit. Semites (afro-asiatics), apply the female strategy and use disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossip, and reputation destruction to excite the underclasses to rebel against those who have made their circumstance possible. The story of Cain and Able is the story of paternal urban agrarian vs maternal herding wanderer. And the different moral intuitions between them and between men and women continue to determine our cyclical competition. Unfortunately, the female intuition is only useful at social scale, and the male intuition at political scale. And when the feminine wins, as we have seen, the great civilizations are destroyed, just as much from plague and war without but from undermining within. Version Two Jews (undermine) > Christians (acquiesce) > Muslims (conquer and replace) Version Three Marxists (undermine) > Postmodernists (acquiesce) > Islamists (conquer and replace) The test of Racial competition of whom only the east asians and indians seem willing to resist by cultural means in india(culturo-centrism), and by state means in china, japan, and Korea (ethnocentrism) That is the explanation of the cycles of history at scale. Cheers
-
(FB 1543690331 Timestamp) FB Nicely Clarifies Categories of Inappropriate Posts
(FB 1543690331 Timestamp) FB Nicely Clarifies Categories of Inappropriate Posts
-
(FB 1543677239 Timestamp) ACQUISITION AND THE SUPPLY DEMAND CURVE (And Hayekian
(FB 1543677239 Timestamp) ACQUISITION 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. -
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1543675502 Timestamp) ÐÑо пÑоÑÑо. Ðам нÑжно болÑÑе ÑÑÑÑкой ÐÑÑÐ¸Ð½Ñ Ð² наÑей кÑлÑÑÑÑе и в РоÑÑии болÑÑе наÑего ÐÑÑинного ТеÑÑиÑÐ¾Ð²Ð°Ð½Ð¸Ñ Ð² Ð¸Ñ . Eto prosto. Nam nuzhno bol’she russkoy Istiny v nashey kul’ture i v Rossii bol’she nashego Istinnogo Testirovaniya v ikh. Es ist einfach. Wir brauchen mehr russische Wahrheit in unserer Kultur und Russland mehr von unserer Wahrheitsfindung in ihrer. It’s simple. We need more Russian Truth in our culture and Russia more of our Truth Telling in theirs.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1543674852 Timestamp) WHY DO WOMEN UNDERMINE THE CIVILIZATION and CULTURE, the INSTITUTIONS, and MALES? (important explanations) —“…what kind of evolutionary pressure would create a desire to undermine the ingroup. All the plausible explanations I’ve seen had to do with abusing female impulses that have evolved for entirely different purposes….”—Martin Å tÄpán Females undermine the concentration of power in alphas in order to preserve some control over their reproductive choice and access to resources and male-provisioned resources, including defense. ie: females can barter attention, effort, care, and sex if they have control of the attention economy. Which is why females are so conscious (and gay men evidencing it) of attention and approval and agreeableness. So just as females operate on a status and attention economy, they fight within that economy: disapproval, shaming, ridicule, gossip, moralizing, undermining, and reputation destruction. And decreasing the number of females is not necessarily in their disinterest – so literally killing off other females increases remaining female market value, so that his the strategy females pursue: that of Hens. Undermining the males (‘sh-t testing’) is useful both at the level of insuring the ‘fitness’ of males in defending them, preserving their ability to choose, assisting them in outing ‘cheaters’ (which women are terrible at, and men excel at), maximizing cost of (returns on) their attention, care, and sex. The only problem here is that women still sexually select for males as if we are under those conditions of hunter gatherers. And this explains the attraction of women to more primitive (less domesticated) groups of males with lower agency despite that the female condition is dependent upon those of us with higher agency, innovation, and adaptivity. Hence the necessity of more domesticated (higher agency) males of defending the ingroup females from conquest or even exposure to, lower agency, higher aggression, males. (FWIW:Delayed marriage provides women with greater reproductive certainty, and therefore greater sortition, and greater formation of genetic castes, and therefore greater speciation – hence white people.) Males conversely, operate on the physical equivalent of the warfare economy, and so losses of males weakens the pack, and dilution of the ingroup male genes weakens male reproductive (evolutionary) persistence, as well as reverses domestication (evolution of agency). I could write on this subject for hours by just weaving through male and female behavior at all levels. And doing so only further demonstrates Acquisitionism and the need for Testimonialism and Natural Law to preserve the Western Advantage given the destructive influences of women.