Theme: Commons

  • IF LABOR IS NO LONGER VALUABLE THEN WHAT DO THE LOWER CLASSES HAVE TO TRADE? SUP

    IF LABOR IS NO LONGER VALUABLE THEN WHAT DO THE LOWER CLASSES HAVE TO TRADE? SUPPRESSION OF FREE RIDING: PROPERTY RIGHTS.

    (a couple of profound ideas here)

    If labor is no longer valuable – at all, then what do the underclasses have to trade?

    Nothing? Well, that’s making a lot of assumptions about the structure of society as if it’s governed by some equivalent of the law of gravity. 😉 So, rather than

    They have suppression of all free riding to trade: obedience to norms; manners, ethics, morals and laws: respect for property rights, and voting to reduce the state, and their utility as consumers to trade.

    But how do we capture those things into something tangible?

    With tokens, so that they exchange their consumption for the production of others. We dont need to distribute money through the financial system any longer. There isnt any need for it. We can directly distribute liquidity to consumers, and bypass the financial system. We can give consumers fiat money or digital currency, and pretty much keep them out of the credit system. This number would need to be a percentage of some revenues such that the citizens possess equal interest in the efficiency of the government, and the need to expand productivity in the economy. Otherwise we create malincentive. But at this point, minimum wage labor is preference not a necessity, and we need not interfere with prices for labor.

    The distribution to citizens is their payment for suppressing free riding in all its forms. If they agree to suppress free riding in all its forms, then they have earned that distribution. If they fail to suppress free riding in all its forms, then they do not earn that payment. This is sufficient incentive both positive and negative to prevent crimes not of passion. And as an incentive, the threat of losing one’s means of sustenance is pretty hard to improve upon. It is better than physical punishment.

    The accumulation of profits is payment for contributing to productivity – for organizing production – now that we know labor is of no value in production, even if problem solving is of value.

    This system of compensating people for their actions is simply transforming the moral code for non-anonymous members engaged in equal production and consumption, into a calculable system for anonymous members engaged in equal suppression of free riding, but unequal organization of production.

    And to do otherwise is to attempt to obtain property rights for free.

    You can’t every achieve equality by any means, but you can certainly pay people from what they earn without cheating them of payment for it. If all of us are producers then we have our production to exchange and equal interest in respect for the necessary properties of production. But if only a few of us are productive (and that is the current state of affairs) why should those people respect the rules of production if they aren’t compensated for it? That’s purely irrational.

    THE OPEN PROBLEM

    Now, the only problem we face is bearing a child that you cannot support is free riding on the backs of others. Immigration is free riding unless you bring your skills with you. The problem of the female obsession with free riding must be solved. And we must have the moral courage to solve it through aggressive punishment of women who bear children that they cannot support, to the same degree we punish males who resort to violence for the purpose of obtaining what they want. A woman who bears a child that she cannot support is, under all conditions, without exception, is blackmail: the choice between an paying a woman for her immoral action, or the harm that will come to an innocent child.

    If we can agree that bearing a child you cannot support is blackmail, or at least a new crime of the same sort. Then it is possible to unite all people in a country with the same interests. Because large scale democratic government simply creates a vehicle for systematic generation of internal conflict given the dissimilarity of ability and interest.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-04 03:13:00 UTC

  • THE ROTHBARDIAN CART BEFORE THE HORSE Rothbard got it backwards. You don’t start

    THE ROTHBARDIAN CART BEFORE THE HORSE

    Rothbard got it backwards. You don’t start with property rights as an assumption. You start in a state of nature with pervasive free riding in any population.

    Crusoe’s island is an obscurant argument. We do not start the development of ethics on an island where the ‘government’ is provided by the sea.

    Instead, we start in a tribe of consanguineous relations all of whom engage in free riding – and we must use violence, shame or remuneration to stop them from free riding so that we can accumulate capital.

    Property is what’s left as you increasingly suppress various forms of involuntary extraction. Property is not the cause. It is the consequence.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-23 15:57:00 UTC

  • PARLOR GAME, GENTEEL, LIBERTARIAN SURRENDER MONKEYS Parlor Game, genteel, libert

    PARLOR GAME, GENTEEL, LIBERTARIAN SURRENDER MONKEYS

    Parlor Game, genteel, libertarian surrender monkeys. Gah! You cannot seduce the renters and free riders into liberty. You’re just generating your own reality distortion field in a pathetic desperate hope to surround yourself with crumbs of positive, bias-confirming signals entirely of your own creation.

    The truth is radical: liberty is obtained at the point of a piercing metal object, for the good of man, over the vehement objection of those who would choose an easier path through life by parasitic conquest of those of us willing and able to pay the high cost of our liberty.

    There is no possible discount on liberty. We cannot obtain it by genteel argument. It is an unnatural if desirable state of affairs. And the lie that humans desire liberty rather than humans desire consumption perpetuates the myth that we can obtain our liberty at a discount. We cannot. They do not.

    Liberty is perhaps a matter for ratio-scientific argument on the institutions necessary for its construction and preservation.

    But the net requirement for liberty is the same: the organized use of violence by a liberty seeking minority to produce private property rights for their own benefit, and the benefit of others, against the will of those who would seek to construct EXTRACTIVE institutions for the benefits of themselves and the deception of others.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-22 03:01:00 UTC

  • NOT ONLY ATLAS SHRUGS The average anglo american male acts as if he’s an owner o

    NOT ONLY ATLAS SHRUGS

    The average anglo american male acts as if he’s an owner of the commons, even if he doesn’t express it that way. His ‘civic’ cultural values are inherited.

    But, what if, instead of walking around constantly caring for the commons in both physical and behavioral contexts, those same men, ceased to care about, maintain, defend, or care about those commons. And instead, like the non-germanic world, treated the commons as something not their responsibility, not worthy of their attention, not worthy of their sacrifice.

    I mean, thats how the rest of the world works. Why not here?

    Why is it that northern europeans developed the universal commons, an the rest of people didn’t?

    John Galt doesn’t have to disappear. He doesn’t have to stop working. He just has to stop caring.

    And, so, are we seeing John Galt expressed in the actions of men?

    We are. Not in elites. In common men. Not by active rebellion. But by simply ‘opting out’.

    The most destructive acton we can take, is not revolution.

    It’s just not caring any more.

    Feminism.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-21 13:56:00 UTC

  • “COLLECTIVE BONDS” = COMMUNAL PROPERTY AND FREE-RIDING VS PRIVATE PROPERTY WITHO

    “COLLECTIVE BONDS” = COMMUNAL PROPERTY AND FREE-RIDING

    VS PRIVATE PROPERTY WITHOUT FREE RIDING

    “…the individual in (parts of) europe was liberated from the “collective bonds” because europeans started outbreeding in the early medieval period and, over the subsequent generations, the frequencies and perhaps even types of altruism genes changed in the populations. europeans quit behaving like inbred pashtuns who are always looking for revenge when their familiy’s honor is tainted because they (the europeans) were no longer inbred.”….

    -HBD Chick


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-06 09:15:00 UTC

  • IS IT THAT SIMPLE? I THINK IT IS: USE INSTITUTIONS TO PUSH FREE RIDING INTO THE

    IS IT THAT SIMPLE? I THINK IT IS: USE INSTITUTIONS TO PUSH FREE RIDING INTO THE MARKET.

    The market suppresses free riding. The market and the ABSOLUTE NUCLEAR FAMILY, extinguish all opportunities for free riding. Everywhere. you can’t even free-ride on your family.

    The ANF was an unnatural development in human history. Private property was the outcome of it. I had always thought that the

    But marginal indifferences between individual production were low and now they are not. Our physical differences may be minor. But our abilities to use symbols, logic, instruments, and machines, are not. These technologies and tools multiply our abilities, and our differences are compounded by that multiplication.

    The ANF then will survive only as an aristocratic family structure. It is for wealthy people who can accumulate capital. For those people it is both eugenic, and highly competitive.

    That means liberty will be reduced to jewish-liberty, rather than aryan-liberty. It means the high trust society can and will end in america. The ANF is a genetically influenced relation. Its a north-sea thing. Otherwise forget it.

    (Dammit.)


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-06 06:38:00 UTC

  • LIBERTARIAN MATERIALIST DIALECTIC Free Riding (thesis) vs No Free Riding (antith

    LIBERTARIAN MATERIALIST DIALECTIC

    Free Riding (thesis) vs No Free Riding (antithesis) = Private Property, and paying the free riders off via rents (synthesis)

    (Nerd humor)


    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-04 01:23:00 UTC

  • LOOKING LIKE CENTRAL AMERICA? Loving the commons is not common. It’s unique to P

    http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-pico-union-trash-20131029,0,73522.storyLA LOOKING LIKE CENTRAL AMERICA?

    Loving the commons is not common. It’s unique to Protestantism and the absolute nuclear family (ANF). Everyone else ruins the commons.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-29 09:12:00 UTC

  • PRETTY LEAVES! (sweet) I love the fall. Kiev is prettiest in summer. It’s a gree

    PRETTY LEAVES!

    (sweet)

    I love the fall. Kiev is prettiest in summer. It’s a green city. (The green hides the poor condition of the commons – terrible roads, sidewalks, and dirty buildings.)

    There is nothing like New England and Olde England in the fall. Nothing. Sigh. Although the whole Tennessee and Kentucky thing in the mountains is almost spiritual as well. But that’s true pretty much all year ’round.

    Out of our window I can see the steeple of the church in my current cover photo. Still half green but lots of orange and yellow.

    Ukraine is a poor and corrupt country. But you know, I remember the 1960’s when abandoned depression era houses were still standing in fields all around our house. It’s possible for neighborhoods, cities and countries to ‘come back’ with time.

    Boston was a dump in the early 8o’s after decades of socialist influence in government. So was new york. But once we’d had enough of the ‘great society’ nonsense, crime was heavily punished and investments were made and the cities came back – mostly. At least they aren’t what they used to be.

    The miracle city in the east is probably Prague. And Kiev is trying to slowly repeat that miracle, by prettifying one neighborhood at a time. If the government hand’ killed it’s ability to borrow the residential boom in kiev alone from development would carry the country.

    In a city where the wage monthly wage is about $600, compared to say, Atlanta where it’s about $7,000, apartments are hovels, and decent one’s three times their salary. This is purely because of a shortage. And the shortage purely a problem of incompetence, corruption and lack of credit.

    We seek pictures of Maydan, Kreshatik, Saksaganskogo, or where I live on Saghaidachnogo, and it’s beautiful sure. But the majority of kiev is those horrid soviet era apartment buildings with external porches enclosed in random wood and glass aftermarket panels, with dirty air conditioners and wires hanging off them, and rust, crumbling mortar, peeling paint, graffiti and unkempt lawns.

    I mean, we’ve been tearing that stuff down in the USA as a ‘great society’ failure of family-destroying, civic culture-destroying, ‘manufactured slums’ for decades now. But people here still live in them.

    It’s no wonder why everyone dresses well. Its inexpensive status signaling. It’s all they can signal with.

    So I’m going to appreciate the people, the leaves and the ancient architecture, and hope that over time, all architectural remnants of the great soviet collapse are slowly replaced by something taht does these wonderful people justice.

    🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-09 04:46:00 UTC

  • GOOGLE AS A PUBLIC GOOD? Anyone seen any data or model or even loose argument ab

    GOOGLE AS A PUBLIC GOOD?

    Anyone seen any data or model or even loose argument about the value of the public good created by Google?

    The marginal difference between google and the next competitor is nontrivial.

    Not just as a search engine but as a network if technologies


    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-27 07:35:00 UTC