MORAL (USAGE) The term “Moral” can be used in a specific sense or a general sense. Either as behavior that imposes costs anonymously and indirectly, or as a general term to refer to all moral, ethical, and criminal behavior. Specific: 0) In the series criminal, ethical, and moral, criminal refers to overt crimes, ethical to crimes of interpersonal informational asymmetry (crimes against a person you deal with), and moral to indirect crimes of informational asymmetry (crimes against the social order). General: 1) Objective (decidable) morality: non imposition / reciprocity 2) Normative morality: that portfolio of norms that in the aggregate produce a group evolutionary strategy, and therefore immoral and moral actions may be judged objectively or normatively. 3) Subjective moral intuitions: that moral intuition we possess because of the combination of genetics, environment and training, and our attempt to survive genetic , social, and economic competition. These may be judged normatively and objectively. 4) Fictional Morality: those wishful arguments we make.. etc. These may be judged subjectively, normatively, and objectively.
Source: Original Site Post
-
Via Negativa of Gods
VIA-NEGATIVA OF GODS Rome was pagan all along, and christians were a tiny minority, The emperor’s emphasis on the SI cult was somewhat of an attempt to bring unity (monotheism) to the empire, by expanding the cult of mithras. Its fairly obvious that the christians basically attempted to defeat the martial cult of the western roman empire by appropriating mithraism, the sol invictus cult, and the submission demanded of the jewish and persion and egyptians gods, and then justified it later with the biblical readings and instittions. So the army was infected by exposure to the persians from alexander onward. We already practice polytheism today. The question is not which gods we will all follow, but WHICH GODS WE WILL OUTLAW AND DESTROY. Let me say that again. Via Negativa: We destroy the false gods, the false rationalism, and the false sciences, and only the true gods, the true rationalisms, and the true sciences remain. WE NEED NOT INVENT NEW GODS TO FOLLOW BUT DEFEAT ALL GODS THAT ARE INCOMPATIBLE WITH NATURAL LAW
-
Via Negativa of Gods
VIA-NEGATIVA OF GODS Rome was pagan all along, and christians were a tiny minority, The emperor’s emphasis on the SI cult was somewhat of an attempt to bring unity (monotheism) to the empire, by expanding the cult of mithras. Its fairly obvious that the christians basically attempted to defeat the martial cult of the western roman empire by appropriating mithraism, the sol invictus cult, and the submission demanded of the jewish and persion and egyptians gods, and then justified it later with the biblical readings and instittions. So the army was infected by exposure to the persians from alexander onward. We already practice polytheism today. The question is not which gods we will all follow, but WHICH GODS WE WILL OUTLAW AND DESTROY. Let me say that again. Via Negativa: We destroy the false gods, the false rationalism, and the false sciences, and only the true gods, the true rationalisms, and the true sciences remain. WE NEED NOT INVENT NEW GODS TO FOLLOW BUT DEFEAT ALL GODS THAT ARE INCOMPATIBLE WITH NATURAL LAW
-
Promises
PROMISES Promise salvation to the underclasses. Promise plunder to the laboring classes. Promise opportunity to the merchant classes. Promise rents to the priestly and intellectual classes. Promise conquest to the aristocratic classes.
-
Promises
PROMISES Promise salvation to the underclasses. Promise plunder to the laboring classes. Promise opportunity to the merchant classes. Promise rents to the priestly and intellectual classes. Promise conquest to the aristocratic classes.
-
Why Do We Hate Keynesians?
WHY DO WE HATE KEYNESIANS? —“All I know is that if you’re on Zerohedge you have to yell about Keynesians.”— If you are an investor of any kind, Keyensians (a) deprive you of interest, (b) do random unpredictable policy shifts that you can’t plan for that costs you and our clients all your hard earned money, (c) force you speculate and take risks, just so the government doesn’t destroy your hard earned money. and (d) incrementally drives the economy and the society into higher and higher risks, with large and larger boom and bust cycles, while killing off every safe haven available; and (e) Guarantee that at some point in the near future there will be a global collapse and that all investment for the past century will be wiped out, the dollar and our economy destroyed, and generations will suffer for it.
-
Why Do We Hate Keynesians?
WHY DO WE HATE KEYNESIANS? —“All I know is that if you’re on Zerohedge you have to yell about Keynesians.”— If you are an investor of any kind, Keyensians (a) deprive you of interest, (b) do random unpredictable policy shifts that you can’t plan for that costs you and our clients all your hard earned money, (c) force you speculate and take risks, just so the government doesn’t destroy your hard earned money. and (d) incrementally drives the economy and the society into higher and higher risks, with large and larger boom and bust cycles, while killing off every safe haven available; and (e) Guarantee that at some point in the near future there will be a global collapse and that all investment for the past century will be wiped out, the dollar and our economy destroyed, and generations will suffer for it.
-
The Burden of Immigrants
One parasitic burden immigrants often impose is overconsumption. Prosperity requires productivity. Productivity requires accumulated capital. Capital requires savings and investment. When a people become prosperous on account of their propensity to save and invest, that attracts immigrants from less prosperous areas, with less prosperous qualities. Even if they only consume what they produce, (that is, even absent redistribution and entitlements) they did not accumulate the capital which now enables them to produce. And if they do not save and invest at rates comparable to the natives, but consume all of their produce (or more) then they are not adding to the capital structure of their new home, but depreciating it, and eroding the conditions which temporarily allow them to enjoy higher incomes and standards of living than they formerly did. Without those immigrants, the native people could retain exclusive use of that capital structure, and its full productive output, in the form of higher wages for their labor, while continuing to add to it.
-
The Burden of Immigrants
One parasitic burden immigrants often impose is overconsumption. Prosperity requires productivity. Productivity requires accumulated capital. Capital requires savings and investment. When a people become prosperous on account of their propensity to save and invest, that attracts immigrants from less prosperous areas, with less prosperous qualities. Even if they only consume what they produce, (that is, even absent redistribution and entitlements) they did not accumulate the capital which now enables them to produce. And if they do not save and invest at rates comparable to the natives, but consume all of their produce (or more) then they are not adding to the capital structure of their new home, but depreciating it, and eroding the conditions which temporarily allow them to enjoy higher incomes and standards of living than they formerly did. Without those immigrants, the native people could retain exclusive use of that capital structure, and its full productive output, in the form of higher wages for their labor, while continuing to add to it.
-
More “What’s Wrong With the Keynesian World?”
Deficit spending on infrastructure that produces returns, and is somehow quantifiable, doesn’t seem to be a problem. I don’t see a problem borrowing against the future for the purposes of production (capital increases). In fact, history is very optimistic about both research investment, infrastructure investment, export market investment, and trade route investment (including conquest). It’s just very pessimistic about funding rents, subsidies, and vote-bribes. OTOH, Destruction of intergenerational lending, is informationally destructive. Distortion of the interest rate is informationally destructive. Flooding the economy with money is informationally destructive. And cumulatively that destruction appears to be more than even the combination of innovation and productivity can compensate for, even in a period of gold rush created by the technology booms. I mean, if it isn’t working from 1990 to the present, it’s not going to work in more common periods. Interest is necessary for the purposes of measurement, and to make use of information by those with demonstrated ability to make judgements. I don’t understand why we pay interest on borrowing from ourselves (the treasury). I don’t understand why we care about our status as a reserve currency except as a means of financing the military empire. And I no longer see much advantage to the preservation of the empire (power projection), only our defense of territory and trade. In fact, the empire has dominated our domestic policy for a century now. Lets take it further: I would see no problem in distributing liquidity (dilution of the money supply) if distributed annually or quarterly to consumers on debit cards – other than the moral hazard it would create. This causes industry to fight for consumer dollars, and gives consumers the option to consume or reduce debt. Right now the distortion by financialization (gambling) rather than capitalization is so …. vast … no one has any idea how to measure it. Other than we can see that ‘something isn’t right here’ and we cant find a target that will correct whatever is wrong. (productivity). Targets are pretty simple really: how many hours to the 66% of people on either side of the median have to work to pay for all non-signal private goods? As far as I know, all interest on consumption of non-signal private goods is money lost from the treasury and capital-producing industry. And that looks like trillions to me.