Curt Doolittle

Theme: Demonstrated Interests

  • A Full Answer of Demonstrated Interests

    Mar 22, 2020, 11:03 AM It is hard to start with first principles. We always want to narrow the domain set of our question rather than start from first principles. The first principle is time. We are in a continuous competition with time, and our inventory of resources, because of the cost of persisting our existence. Cooperation saves time. we have the same input as we did 50k ypb. The ability to cooperate creates possibility of obtaining returns on time. Cooperation provides caloric returns on time. But all opportunities for cooperation are in competition with others’ wants and opportunities, including the opportunity to prey and parasite upon one another. When people come together in proximity they (a) create opportunities for a division of labor (b) increase choice of goods services and information by division of labor (c) decrease opportunity costs of exchange within that division (d) increase opportunity and incentive for parasitism and predation, (e) create institutions to decrease transaction costs – including risk.

    |INTERESTS| Unknown (potential) utility > Known (potential) Utility, Opportunity (potential interest), Demonstrated Interest, Possession, Property, Right, and Title (Proxy).

    1. Unknown (potential) utility…()

    2. Known (potential) Utility …()

    3. Opportunity: any interest that Man my wish to acquire through his investment that has not yet been invested in by others.

    4. Demonstrated Interest: (homesteading)

    5. Possession: Possession is a Fact. Possessions are Personally insured. Consisting of that which one has acted to prevent others from consumption or use.

    6. Property: Property is a Norm. Property is collectively insured. Consisting of that which evolves as general rules of non-imposition between people with similar kinship, interests, or interdependence. Property is that which is insured against non-imposition by a third party organization.

    7. Property Rights: Property Rights are dependent upon the existence of an institution that acts as the insurer of last resort, and enforces rights and obligations in matters of disputes.

    8. Title …..(title proxy for possession)

    THE FOUNDATIONS https://propertarianinstitute.com/2019/03/28/curt-doolittle-updated-his-status-314/ MARKETS https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/05/25/why-and-how-do-free-markets-work/ THE LAW (Halfway down the page, Part 999 – The Law, Property https://propertarianinstitute.com/government-and-law/

  • Definition: Demonstrated Interests

    Definition: Demonstrated Interests https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/definition-demonstrated-interests/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:32:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266104959663247367

  • Definition: Demonstrated Interests

    Mar 22, 2020, 12:30 PM

    —“What’s a Demonstrated interest?”—

    Demonstrated interest without imposing upon others demonstrated interests is a fact. Possession is a fact. Property requires an an agreement. Property rights require an institutional means of enforcement. I bear costs of existing (Natural Interest). I bear costs of acting (Demonstration) I bear costs of acquiring goods, services, information, opportunity. (Demonstrated Interests) I demonstrate an interest by bearing a cost on that which no other has born a cost to demonstrate an interest. I consent to a portfolio of reciprocally insured property with others. I consent or am forced to comply with an institutional means of reciprocally insuring property with others.

    —“Does theft demonstrate an interest? (you still have to invest your time into committing a theft) The stolen good can be a possession as long as defended but it’s not property. If demonstrated interest is obtained by homesteading, can’t it can be obtained by any kind of investment and become possession – but when it’s not collectively insured, it doesn’t become property, and when it’s an imposition of cost on someone who had it collectively insured, it’s a prohibited possession?”—

    Conflating cost and interest. One bears a cost to demonstrate an interest. One bears a cost but fails to demonstrate an interest. So a thief has born a cost and taken possession but he has not demonstrated an interest. But this is an excellent, and deep question that means you are getting to the first foundations.

  • Definition: Demonstrated Interests

    Mar 22, 2020, 12:30 PM

    —“What’s a Demonstrated interest?”—

    Demonstrated interest without imposing upon others demonstrated interests is a fact. Possession is a fact. Property requires an an agreement. Property rights require an institutional means of enforcement. I bear costs of existing (Natural Interest). I bear costs of acting (Demonstration) I bear costs of acquiring goods, services, information, opportunity. (Demonstrated Interests) I demonstrate an interest by bearing a cost on that which no other has born a cost to demonstrate an interest. I consent to a portfolio of reciprocally insured property with others. I consent or am forced to comply with an institutional means of reciprocally insuring property with others.

    —“Does theft demonstrate an interest? (you still have to invest your time into committing a theft) The stolen good can be a possession as long as defended but it’s not property. If demonstrated interest is obtained by homesteading, can’t it can be obtained by any kind of investment and become possession – but when it’s not collectively insured, it doesn’t become property, and when it’s an imposition of cost on someone who had it collectively insured, it’s a prohibited possession?”—

    Conflating cost and interest. One bears a cost to demonstrate an interest. One bears a cost but fails to demonstrate an interest. So a thief has born a cost and taken possession but he has not demonstrated an interest. But this is an excellent, and deep question that means you are getting to the first foundations.

  • Reciprocity functions as the explanation of the preservation of demonstrated int

    Reciprocity functions as the explanation of the preservation of demonstrated interest https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/reciprocity-functions-as-the-explanation-of-the-preservation-of-demonstrated-interest/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:28:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266104088913215488

  • Reciprocity functions as the explanation of the preservation of demonstrated interest

    Mar 22, 2020, 1:04 PM Reciprocity functions as the explanation of the preservation of demonstrated interest, against which people will not retaliate. Starting with reciprocity instead of the first principle of time, the utility of cooperation, the self defense of limiting yourself to reciprocity, and the offensive defense of your interests by demanding reciprocity starts with presumption (dependency, contingency). Instead: Time > value of cooperation > incentive to cooperate > incentive to cheat > incentive to punish, restitute, prevent > incentive to preserve cooperation (reciprocity) > incentive to produce restitution, punishment, and prevention. So, if we said reciprocity was the first principle we would be stuck with a contingency. But once we start with the necessity of time, proximity, cooperation, incentives, cheating, suppression of it, and work up from there, reciprocity is simply the logical and empirical means of obtaining the greatest rewards and the lowest costs outside of war etc. It provides universal decidability in matters of conflict. But It cannot function as a via positiva. It’ is not a ‘good’. It is the means by which we prevent the bad. Good is anything else that is not bad. This means people adopt a normal distribution of behaviors and we seek to use the test of reciprocity to suppress the violators thereby preserving all the value of cooperation across the scale from the individual to the polity. The problem arises when an unsupportable number of people in any market cannot survive by reciprocal means because they have noting to trade – not even labor – and therefore we have passed the limit of proportionality (reciprocity within the limits of proportionality.) It is no longer possible for these people to obtain ANY proportion of the returns on cooperation. Traditionally that means ‘leave this market for another’ or ‘retreat from the market into subsistence farming’ or ‘retreat from the market into crime’. From which we cull criminals by prosecution and those on subsistence by starvation and disease. Government intervention no longer provides this selection pressure. The current human training is to seek the via positiva moral claim as a demonstration of (in dominance order) fealty < loyalty < conformity < submission to the group. Positives are easy because we only have to imitate them. Negatives are harder, because we are required to think (problem solve). This is why we need multiple means of communicating across a population from high empathy low precision to limited empathy limited precision, to low or no empathy high precision. And it is the preservation of all THREE means that has made possible the western avoidance of monopoly by regression to the mean of the ability of the population.

  • Reciprocity functions as the explanation of the preservation of demonstrated interest

    Mar 22, 2020, 1:04 PM Reciprocity functions as the explanation of the preservation of demonstrated interest, against which people will not retaliate. Starting with reciprocity instead of the first principle of time, the utility of cooperation, the self defense of limiting yourself to reciprocity, and the offensive defense of your interests by demanding reciprocity starts with presumption (dependency, contingency). Instead: Time > value of cooperation > incentive to cooperate > incentive to cheat > incentive to punish, restitute, prevent > incentive to preserve cooperation (reciprocity) > incentive to produce restitution, punishment, and prevention. So, if we said reciprocity was the first principle we would be stuck with a contingency. But once we start with the necessity of time, proximity, cooperation, incentives, cheating, suppression of it, and work up from there, reciprocity is simply the logical and empirical means of obtaining the greatest rewards and the lowest costs outside of war etc. It provides universal decidability in matters of conflict. But It cannot function as a via positiva. It’ is not a ‘good’. It is the means by which we prevent the bad. Good is anything else that is not bad. This means people adopt a normal distribution of behaviors and we seek to use the test of reciprocity to suppress the violators thereby preserving all the value of cooperation across the scale from the individual to the polity. The problem arises when an unsupportable number of people in any market cannot survive by reciprocal means because they have noting to trade – not even labor – and therefore we have passed the limit of proportionality (reciprocity within the limits of proportionality.) It is no longer possible for these people to obtain ANY proportion of the returns on cooperation. Traditionally that means ‘leave this market for another’ or ‘retreat from the market into subsistence farming’ or ‘retreat from the market into crime’. From which we cull criminals by prosecution and those on subsistence by starvation and disease. Government intervention no longer provides this selection pressure. The current human training is to seek the via positiva moral claim as a demonstration of (in dominance order) fealty < loyalty < conformity < submission to the group. Positives are easy because we only have to imitate them. Negatives are harder, because we are required to think (problem solve). This is why we need multiple means of communicating across a population from high empathy low precision to limited empathy limited precision, to low or no empathy high precision. And it is the preservation of all THREE means that has made possible the western avoidance of monopoly by regression to the mean of the ability of the population.

  • Why They Emphasize Intersubjectively Verifiable Property

    Mar 22, 2020, 1:43 PM I can’t always come into possession (exclusive control) over those things in which I’ve demonstrated an interest (by bearing a cost so that I can demonstrate an interest). Just because I have invested doesn’t mean I can come into possession of what I’ve invested in. Awareness > opportunity > resources > demonstrated Interest > (common share > contractual share > possession in fact) This is why reductio analysis fails. And it’s why the jewish libertarians emphasize reductio analysis to bait you into hazard. And why they emphasize intersubjectively verifiable property (physical) rather than demonstrated interests in property in toto, in order to bait you into hazard.

  • Why They Emphasize Intersubjectively Verifiable Property

    Mar 22, 2020, 1:43 PM I can’t always come into possession (exclusive control) over those things in which I’ve demonstrated an interest (by bearing a cost so that I can demonstrate an interest). Just because I have invested doesn’t mean I can come into possession of what I’ve invested in. Awareness > opportunity > resources > demonstrated Interest > (common share > contractual share > possession in fact) This is why reductio analysis fails. And it’s why the jewish libertarians emphasize reductio analysis to bait you into hazard. And why they emphasize intersubjectively verifiable property (physical) rather than demonstrated interests in property in toto, in order to bait you into hazard.

  • Balance Sheet Thinking 😉

    Mar 22, 2020, 1:45 PM

    —“Hm. If I exchange demonstrated interest, then I will be bearing a cost on that which other has already born a cost to demonstrate an interest, won’t I?”—

    Yes, but it’s a voluntary exchange, and if productive, the net is an increase. I other words, the transaction (full accounting again) increases the balance sheet of the individual or group or the individual or group wouldn’t have voluntarily done so.