Curt Doolittle

Theme: Governance

  • It’s not posturing. It’s a warning “We don’t really know who did what but we see

    It’s not posturing. It’s a warning

    “We don’t really know who did what but we see evidence of the gas, and that shit can’t happen. So let’s just make clear – in a non-deadly way this time – that this shit isn’t happenin’ on our watch. There was too much pussy under Obama, and shit got outta hand. So the grownups are back in charge. And you fuckers do not want us to get serious with you.”

    That’s not posturing. That’s communication in the language of the audience.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-08 13:41:00 UTC

  • ***Until we set the house and senate on fire, nothing is going to change. When w

    ***Until we set the house and senate on fire, nothing is going to change. When we do that, everything will change.***

    (from elsewhere)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-08 10:45:00 UTC

  • THE RIGHT’S WHINY LITTLE BITCHES (bitching) Conspiracy theory, psychologism, nih

    THE RIGHT’S WHINY LITTLE BITCHES

    (bitching)

    Conspiracy theory, psychologism, nihilism, projection, shaming, ridicule, rallying ….

    Either you can conduct a full accounting of the interests involved in a decision, or you can’t. Either you understand the material – economic, military, strategic, or you don’t. Either you have been in charge of large numbers of people or you haven’t. Either you have been in charge of other people’s money or you haven’t. Either you have been in charge of satisfying a constituency that placed you in power or you haven’t. And either you can demonstrate by WHAT YOU MEASURE (fully accounting) that you grasp all of the above – then you’re just a little princess in the school yard raspberrying the girls who don’t like you.

    Just how its. You want a powerful Right? How about not talking like little fucking school girls who don’t get their way.

    Only children and women make moral arguments. Men talk strategy, money, economy, and violence.

    Either man up and be the Right, or you’re part of the problem.

    I can’t fucking figure out if this [Syria Chem-Weapons Bombing] made any sense or not. As far as I can tell, it amounts to nothing more than “we have no idea who did this, but you really don’t wanna do this, cause we’ll nuke your fucking asses if you use chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons for anything other than a massive invasion by a hostile state actor – and even then it needs to be a last resort, used against soldiers”.

    As far as I know there are at least twelve facilities that were not shut down in Syria. As far as I know, the weapons are available on the black market but Syria can’t afford them, and they are too dangerous to transport. As far as I know Assad (the regime) does not have sufficient control over his commanders in the field to prevent the use of these weapons if they are found – and useful. As far as I know the iranians also supply their factions with these chemical weapons and have money and infrastructure to purchase, make, and distribute them. As far as I know the only demonstration of force that is possible amidst this uncertainty is to attack a known base – yet give warning, so that all actors involved understand that war is war, but human rights are human rights, and the global order is predicated on human rights and markets as a means of prohibiting the past violence. And this method has been reasonably successful compared to the pre-war period.

    Sigh. I wanna win too. Jacking off is just jacking off….

    Until we set the house and senate on fire, nothing is going to change. When we do that, everything will change.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-08 10:03:00 UTC

  • RT @nntaleb: The strike has ~0 military impact. Russians were informed & Syrians

    RT @nntaleb: The strike has ~0 military impact. Russians were informed & Syrians could clear area.
    All it says: no Chem Weapons even if it…

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-07 14:57:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/850362019702243332

  • “If you were given a new position as head of a large, multi-national company, wh

    —“If you were given a new position as head of a large, multi-national company, which was still around in spite of poor to abysmal management over the course of 100 or so years, how long do you think it would take you to turn that company around and set it on the right track?

    Assuming you have the knowledge and acumen for the job from years of experience successfully running other, smaller, but similar companies.

    Do you think you’d make any mistakes along the way? Do things that seem like mistakes to the casual observer, who doesn’t have your same experience, information, and understanding of the situation?

    How long before you start to see real results?

    Two years?

    Five years?

    Ten?

    Twenty?

    What about two and a half months?”—Danny O’Quillinan

    In my experience, almost always, the problems are :

    1) Debt that can’t be exited.

    2) Maximized rent-seeking that can’t be exited. (pensions etc)

    3) A board or management that can’t be exited, and Incentives that are perversely against the interests of the business.

    4) Capital Equipment or Information Systems, Contractual relations that are deadly but extremely difficult to change without causing even worse damage to the business immediately.

    5) Poor quality employees that cannot be trained to compete in the new market.

    6) The loss of the upper 10-20% of the best talent leaving you with little to work with – talent is the most scarce transitional capital.

    7) Inability to attract the talent necessary to restore competitive excellence.

    8) You’ve been hired too late, and they either want a fall guy, an organized end to the business, a sale to a competitor at fire sale prices. Or they’re stupid and they think a miracle will happen.

    The principle problem in restoring a company is whether you are able to bring in enough talent to make the change with a good enough plan, and enough capital to do it with, and have enough time to do it with, and if once you achieve it, the end product is worth more than what you have already.

    I have never seen a company I could not turn around assuming I had those options. The truth is that in the company, and in all companies, everyone or at least a lot of them, know what to do, but there are some sort of political or economic barriers that prevent them from doing it.

    Why did Microsoft displace IBM, but google and apple and sun fail to displace microsoft given all msft’s series of failures? the error was on both sides. Would you rather have 80% of your revenue dependent upon the iPhone or Windows+Office? (Samsung is a better phone btw).

    Why did nokia fail and iphone/samsung eat their lunch?

    Why is search a dead tennis ball and Walmart, Home Depot and Amazon together have replaced Sears (and its imitators)?

    Why did amazon succeed and barnes and noble (and everyone else) fail?

    When the Xbox team was started why did they demand separate offices away from the rest of campus, and why did that product (sort of) succeed where most other microsoft initiatives fail?

    I can usually diagnose a company in two weeks, and with certainty in thirty days. The problems are not hard.

    If you can’t turn it in two to three years you probably can’t turn it. I would make mistakes. Everyone does. Your strategy for the turnaround has to assume you will make mistakes, and have multiple tiers of success so that you can achieve different levels of success depending upon mistakes surprises, and shocks.

    THE PEOPLE ARE THE PROBLEM.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-07 14:54:00 UTC

  • Retweeted NassimNicholasTaleb (@nntaleb): The strike has ~0 military impact. Rus

    Retweeted NassimNicholasTaleb (@nntaleb):

    The strike has ~0 military impact. Russians were informed & Syrians could clear area.

    All it says: no Chem Weapons even if it wasn’t you.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-07 10:58:00 UTC

  • You know, I’m pretty disappointed, but I’m not sure that whacking someone’s airf

    You know, I’m pretty disappointed, but I’m not sure that whacking someone’s airfield for using chemical weapons is the same thing as getting involved.

    Hell, I talk tough to my wife when she crosses the line, my business partners, my friends, and the guy on the street, and I’m willing to get into fights over it.

    How much did Rothbard lie to create libertarianism?

    We have no idea what we’re doing we just do the best we can. Is trump better than Obama? Probably much better. Is he better than clinton? Certainly. Is he as good as we can get? In the current era maybe. Is he as good as we would like or need? No. Is it possible to create a polity without a decider-of-last resort? Um, the gypsies, jews, and muslims shure make it look like the answer is ‘no’, and the chinese and the westerners sure make it look like the answer is ‘yes’

    Mises Institute has a ridiculously long and deep reputation for “heaping undue praise” on its heroes, and “constructing elaborate strawmen” by which to attack its enemies. And the Jewish Economic and Political strategy advanced under the (False) adoption of western terms liberty and austrian economics is just ‘gypsy separatism’, ‘jewish separatism’, and ‘muslim tribal separatism’ sold to the disenfranchised beta males, as a hope for their own minority separatism.

    Let us see, empirically, whether the best we can get in the current era moves the condition of liberty for us forward or not. My view is that he has bought us time to organize and create a revolution. And that if we conduct the revolution under his administration it will not be met with the same suppressive violence that it would have under Clinton’s.

    Cheers.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-07 10:37:00 UTC

  • SUMMARY There is no source of Sovereignty, Liberty, Freedom, and the luxury of s

    SUMMARY

    There is no source of Sovereignty, Liberty, Freedom, and the luxury of subsidy of the weak, other than a monarchy, martial aristocracy, and militia of the enfranchised. Because there is no method of decidability, no method of insurance, and no process other than violence: threat, punishment, murder, and revolt. And the method of licensing violence and revolt early and often is a constitution of natural law that provides the incentive to prosecute individuals at all levels by anyone with the information to do so – such that no power can ever accumulate sufficiently to deny a group, the militia, the aristocracy, or the monarchy the license to first prosecute by juridical means, then by martial means. This institution is self perpetuating if for no other reason than the universality, the status, and the high cost of obtaining that status and responsibility. Expensive rituals endure. Every man a sheriff. A warrior. A Judge.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-07 09:06:00 UTC

  • “The lesson of the 20th century is that domination by Oratores (priests, public

    —“The lesson of the 20th century is that domination by Oratores (priests, public intellectuals, politicians) without integration of Bellatores (Warriors, Sheriff’s, Judges) is suicide.”–William Butchman

    And that was the oratores (Boaz, Marx, Freud, Frankfurt, French Postmodernists, Feminists) intended you know. They did it on purpose.

    Poincare, Maxwell, Darwin, Menger, Spencer, Nietzsche, and the Romantics were right – and the Cosmpolitans were terrified of them.

    So they lied, often, and with vigour, and aggressively seized the academy, the media, and entertainment, in order to lie as frequently and as vigorously as possible.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-06 11:07:00 UTC

  • I told ya we’d kill libertarianism. We got every intellectually honest libertari

    I told ya we’d kill libertarianism. We got every intellectually honest libertarian. We sent the left-libertarians home where they belong. We restored violence to the discourse. And left the douchebag pussies in the cold where they belong – whining for mommy while chanting nap nap nap.

    There are still weak men everywhere. But they are intellectually, morally, spiritually, and physically weak. They will have to find another lie to comfort them

    Libertinism (rothbardian libertarianism), is dead.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-05 21:42:00 UTC