Theme: Incentives

  • Again, you (and I, and most people somewhere on the spectrum) tend to not grasp

    Again, you (and I, and most people somewhere on the spectrum) tend to not grasp the need or want, or utility of groups relying on others for information, for incentives, for moral justification, to act to gether to achieve a goal.

    We are what’s called ‘disagreeable’ in the literature, but what that means is that we are not easily swayed by empathy or social conformity or emotional appeals vs truth.

    That’s not a ‘truth’ it’s a utility in the division of cognitive and emotional labor necessary to explore all time and population distributions in the polity.

    Reply addressees: @CamoDiver


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 21:26:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790493998525624320

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790484072340296057

  • In economics we jokingly refer to competition as “coopera-tition”. After all , w

    In economics we jokingly refer to competition as “coopera-tition”. After all , what is the difference between market competition and non-market conflcit?


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 19:49:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790469612431106533

    Reply addressees: @radiofreenw

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790468587263508725

  • Well, the left uses comedy, and the right uses ‘shockery’ and so Stew and team a

    Well, the left uses comedy, and the right uses ‘shockery’ and so Stew and team are reaching the audience with the message they want and are willing to listen to.

    I can speak to a tiny fraction of very educated or at least very informed people. Populists can reach orders of…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 18:20:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790446997582848113

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790380001629544724

  • yes but it results in the comfort of complaining and dismissing instead of the h

    yes but it results in the comfort of complaining and dismissing instead of the hard work of attempting to produce a network of institutions and incentives that constrain negative human behavior as much as possible. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 01:43:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790196141675475000

    Reply addressees: @JackOfAwlTrades

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790195237333156122

  • NO TAXES? WHAT ABOUT THE COMMONS!?!? —“Taxes are just the price for a commons.

    NO TAXES? WHAT ABOUT THE COMMONS!?!?

    —“Taxes are just the price for a commons.”—

    No, that’s not the point. It’s that taxes instead of fees produce a moral hazard that disconnects the revenue from the services, and provides opportunity for the special interests, rent seeking, and corruption that evolve into the pervasive in any government of any size over some period of time.

    The commons are important, and must be paid for. But the purpose of a legislature on behalf of a people, is to determine if they are, and those they represent, are willing to pay that fee for that commons whether material, service, or informational.

    However, there will always be people seeking to take advantage of membership in a polity, and from the commons that a polity produces by its mere existence, by free riding on the commons produced by others.

    As such people unwilling to contribute to the commons of course can be evicted from the polity for not doing so. That’s what criminals do. That’s what rent seeking and corruption do. That’s what free riders do.

    The difficulty is in distributing those costs, and doing so by some means of proportionality that recognizes both the contributions and burdens of participation in a polity.

    No free lunches. Sorry marxists and libertarians. 😉

    Cheers
    CD

    Reply addressees: @platypoo7 @CatcusBlack


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 01:12:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790188479168524288

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790184550011908281

  • ELECTRIC VEHICLES FROM CHINA AND USE OF TARIFFS TO DEFEND DOMESTIC INDUSTRIES? (

    ELECTRIC VEHICLES FROM CHINA AND USE OF TARIFFS TO DEFEND DOMESTIC INDUSTRIES?
    (RE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54hl57_M7vs @firstpost )

    Why The Tariffs?
    1) No one will trust the Chinese supply chain. Chinese strategy is ‘delay and deceive’. They use moral language to hid immoral ambitions.…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-13 22:23:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790145748270530593

  • ELECTRIC VEHICLES FROM CHINA AND USE OF TARIFFS TO DEFEND DOMESTIC INDUSTRIES? (

    ELECTRIC VEHICLES FROM CHINA AND USE OF TARIFFS TO DEFEND DOMESTIC INDUSTRIES?
    (RE: https://t.co/KkONn9ltoF @firstpost )

    Why The Tariffs?
    1) No one will trust the Chinese supply chain. Chinese strategy is ‘delay and deceive’. They use moral language to hid immoral ambitions. This strategy is as old as Sun Tzu. The Chinese NEVER have a moral ambition any more than the Russians or the Mullahs of Iran

    2) EV’s are a strategic industry and EV’s produce external strategic industries.

    3) But most importantly if the price of a good is lower because of lower labor costs (china) and government subsidy (china) then you are:
    … a) Exporting your labor and their income to another country;
    … b) Exporting capital to another country and not creating capital internally;
    … c) And/or depriving your population of skills both in the industry and in tangent industries.

    So when England sold it’s looms to Spain, and Spain to East Asia, this made sense. But the same is not true of technical skills, scientific research, and a skilled work force.

    So when the USA wanted to avoid another world war and create a world of free trade, it made sense to export the American economic advantages to developing countries and countries that needed reconstruction from the wars.

    However, the moment a group seeks to impose authoritarianism, to undermine the world order of free trade, and to seditiously undermine economies, there is no longer an advantage in importing cheaper goods for the population. (In economics this is called ‘accounting for both the seen and unseen costs’).

    This disadvantage to export of capital, income, labor, skill, technology, and scientific research is especially true in a place like America where the problem is more one of extraordinary wealth resulting in the vast majority of the country rising to exceed the level of their personal, financial, economic, and political incompetency (whole country peter principle), and then putting that wealth into poor choices in a population rolling in hyper-consumptive hedonism at the cost of their physical and mental health, and their social and political cohesion as a people.

    Cheers
    CD


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-13 22:23:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790145748014600192

  • That’s simply not true. yes there are 100M too many people in the USA for the co

    That’s simply not true. yes there are 100M too many people in the USA for the coming future economy, but that does not mean that health insurance, medicare, social security, and the military can be funded with a smaller population. So a transition would (will) be extremely painful and cause unrest and possible revolt. If instead we were to ‘exit’ the costly unwanted then yes it might still be possible.

    Reply addressees: @Slfdstrctshield


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-13 05:15:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1789887195135848448

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1789886127047905780

  • @SRCHicks, all; The USA (other than some tech sectors of CCP’s China) is the onl

    @SRCHicks, all;
    The USA (other than some tech sectors of CCP’s China) is the only place in the world entrepreneurs find institutions, finance, culture, law, heroic encouragement, tolerance forgiving failure, and a market that if penetrated expands to the world.
    Even trying to raise capital in Europe or Canada is almost impossible. Even so, it’s dependent on your plan to gain access to US markets, capital, and even moving to the USA.
    Our US institutions were designed for the middle class. The rest of the world is still in that natural state of the caretaker state for the bottom at the expense of the middles, or in the interest of the top at the expense of the rest, or in the worst case, the low trust that prohibits any organization of any scale for the common good, and everything other than tribalism, familism and corruption. Though we are succeeding more than expected in dragging mankind into relative prosperity – at the cost of our own civilization.
    Heroism, High Trust, and rule of law (favors the middle class), and a population with an IQ as close to 115 matter. And the combination is rare. Mostly because of that last property.
    Cheers
    CD

    Reply addressees: @SRCHicks


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-10 22:23:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1789058721076690944

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1789054203098259578

  • It’s the means of sedition against meritocracy and aristocracy at the cost of su

    It’s the means of sedition against meritocracy and aristocracy at the cost of suppression of dysgenics by economic reward and punishment achieved by one’s own doing.

    Hence dependency > childhood > female > feminine > separatist > judaism > abrahamic sequence > marxist sequence…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-07 00:05:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787634760400998641

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS @radiofreenw

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787629656155320619