Curt Doolittle

Theme: Incentives

  • September 14th, 2018 10:17 AM [W]e can’t reinstitute monogamy , only end subsidy

    September 14th, 2018 10:17 AM

    [W]e can’t reinstitute monogamy, only end subsidy and malincentive, and produce status, tax, and rights incentives. Monogamy will return to the majority in whose interest it is, and not for that minority in whose interest it is not. In practice this will mean that reproductively desirable will restore reproduction and those others shall not.

  • September 14th, 2018 9:23 AM —“Women invented rent seeking. It’s their reprodu

    September 14th, 2018 9:23 AM

    —“Women invented rent seeking. It’s their reproductive strategy – to force their costs and the costs of their offspring on the tribe. Working to control some of her income. Hiring other women to raise her children. Marrying the state to bypass the cost of maintenance of a male. Extracting rents from a baby-daddy without the costs of attention, affection, sex, and caretaking, is not only in their interest, its the optimum strategy for maximizing rent in pursuit of consumption. It’s entirely rational. We have produced all the incentives necessary for her to maximize rents.”—

    😉

  • They are disappointed. Disasters are profit opportunities. Malincentives drive n

    They are disappointed. Disasters are profit opportunities. Malincentives drive news.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-13 21:36:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1040353640664522752

    Reply addressees: @jokebot_01

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1040353355451846657

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1040353355451846657

  • JP Morgan: Recession 2020

    TOLD YA SO. But I said it in 2006
    —“Daniel Roland Anderson: Curt Doolittle: You predicted the 2020 crash in 2006, right before the 2008 meltdown? Could you compare and contrast the 2008 crisis with what you see coming, and perhaps how the 2008 housing crash ties in to 2020?”—
    Curt Doolittle: Rakesh Sahgal, Daniel Roland Anderson
    1 – In the end all economics like all politics is and must be demographics. That’s the net of it right there.
    2 – World demographics on the adoption of consumer capitalism and the exhaustion of western advantage.
    3 – Western demographics, immigration, and rates of dysgenia will tip sufficiently to act as last resort.
    4 – Since every generation is a reaction to the generation before it, people behave in predictable cycles.
    5 – The long wave of generations means the world war generations are gone and the communist generation is almost gone.
    6 – People school and swarm to opportunities until disequilibrium requires adjustment of patterns of sustainable specialization and trade because of a sufficient shock to collapse them. There is a relationship between the capital investment, debt load, remaining debt capacity, AND the discovery, forgetting, and learning curves of humans that is measurable in all walks of human life: we are new people about every three to four years: the time it takes to cognitively rehabituate so that we no longer bear the cognitive load of group adaptation to changing conditions. So there is a fairly fixed rate of adaptation that is a relationship between the degree of capital required for any sector.
    7 – The business cycle exists and the austrians are right that they continuously extend if interfered with. This plot (trajectory) is relatively obvious.
    8 – Consumers are literally running out of accumulated entertainment capital to consume. They have been for some time. Much of the expansion of the 90s and 2000’s was expansion of homes to keep the economy generating demand, and use of technology to enable increases in the consumption of entertainment. That inventory is exhausted.
    9 – The technological curve of monetary policy appears to have been exhausted, and the next choice is not settled in policy as to whether to use direct redistribution to consumers (me, galbraith, mmt folks), or to let the government spend it instead (every left economist there is.)
    10 – The technological curve of the transistor’s influence is almost exhausted, as was electricity’s, steam, and water power before it.
    11 – organizing people by markets requires marginal differences in capital and the human capital reserves to make use of them. Those reserves are just about exhausted.
    12 – low hanging fruit of hydrocarbons exploitation has been exhausted; movement of labor has been exhausted; the clerical automation is close to exhausted, and the financialization has led to fragility dependent on hyperconsumption, but consumption of what? We are no longer, and have not for many many years, been enabling underused european human capital, but importing consumers by financing credit in exchange for drastic declines in human capital as is evidenced in the data.
    13 – There is, as I understand it, a relatively long curve between the current technological basis of civilizations, and the next predictable curve which is artificial intelligence, end of oil dependence, and genetic modification. I cannot yet imagine how the economy will organize to produce the same kind of multiples we have been producing since 1830 by the movement of labor from less productive to more, when we will now be in the position of moving labor into less and less productive ends. This means that the bottom has returned to dead weight, and the central problem going forward
    14 – The way I predicted the economy when I was in my 30s and 40’s was studying the relationship between technological opportunities that could be seized by consumers and industry, right down to what was on the shelves in big box stores. And then predicting the life cycle those offerings. (I mean, how much better can a video game get?) The reason is that we have spent the past 200 years moving people into the middle class (meaning living in, able to consume in, and to own property, in the market economy.)
    But what do people have left to consume that is a marginal improvement? NOTHING BUT AESTHETICS AND STATUS SEEKING IDENTITY.
    Which is precisely what we are seeing. Urbanites using fashion because consumption of middle class goods is no longer status provisioning. All of these things can be predicted on a series of overlapping curves on a timeline with ‘loose’ accuracy. Once you consider all of those curves at the same time the interplay of dependency becomes fairly obvious, and you can ‘feel’ how the sentiment will evolve.
    By 2006 I had that set of curves in my head. Which is why I was within 30 days of 2008. (but wrong on china). And I’ve been right about the cycle so far. Trump was a wild card and now i suspect that actions against him will produce movement that accelerates the cycles.
    Now am I all that special? no. There was a fairly well known niche movement in the 90’s and 2000s (contrarianism) that was tracking these cycles, and making predictions. I am not really sure why, given that those were correct and that the austrians were correct, why this isn’t still under discussion other than the overwhelming embarrassment of the economic community, and its movement from broad to near predictions, and the current worldwide civil war between globalists and nationalists has taken attention from prediction of long waves, to simply winning the near term battle.

  • Commercialism

    —“There are too many examples of how the short-sighted, or medium-sighted, values of our commercial elite conflict with the long-term values of the genetic and cultural group. This isn’t a new phenomenon but its effects have been amplified since the industrial revolution and our defenses have not kept pace with or adequately utilized the technological advances of the day. The influence of the commercial sector is vast and restraints on it are ineffective. An additional problem is that since the death of god and the disintegration of our religious institutions, we perceive profit in wholly materialistic terms. I think your emphasis on an expanded appreciation of property may be an antidote to this aspect of the problem.”— Tim Spillane Commercialism (Unregulated Capitalism) = Universalism at the expense of the people who make such commerce possible.

  • Commercialism

    —“There are too many examples of how the short-sighted, or medium-sighted, values of our commercial elite conflict with the long-term values of the genetic and cultural group. This isn’t a new phenomenon but its effects have been amplified since the industrial revolution and our defenses have not kept pace with or adequately utilized the technological advances of the day. The influence of the commercial sector is vast and restraints on it are ineffective. An additional problem is that since the death of god and the disintegration of our religious institutions, we perceive profit in wholly materialistic terms. I think your emphasis on an expanded appreciation of property may be an antidote to this aspect of the problem.”— Tim Spillane Commercialism (Unregulated Capitalism) = Universalism at the expense of the people who make such commerce possible.

  • People Are 100% Responsible

    [P]eople ARE 100% responsible for their success and failures TO REACH THEIR FULL POTENTIAL in the market for competency. 1) Any attempt to reach more than their relative ability to reach their full potential must be obtained by stealing from others who are more competent, and causing harm to the polity because of it. 2) pareto rule MUST exist: 10% do 50% of the value, 10% of that 10% do 50% of the value, and 10% of that 10% do 50% of the value and so on. Meaning that most people below a certain threshold, are a relative dead weight on society and mankind. 3) The difference is that conservatives desire and enjoy hierarchy and are not troubled by ‘fulfilling their duty of their position” while liberals think of almost nothing else than that others are superior to them in position, and are so because of competency. 4) Where competency means genes, ability, personality, morals, ethics, values, manners, habits, speech, appearance. 5) Classes exist. At every seven points we vary in vocational ability, and at every 15 points social ability, and at ever4 30 points we are nearly different species, with the commonality of language producing the illusion of compatibility. 6) We are, all of us, and must be, rewarded for the returns we provide to others when they cooperate with us. 7) And the results of that competition is a lottery with only so many pareto-efficient winners. Who, if they make good choices, can create an intergenerational family that persists their status – something that requires selective mating to prevent regression to the collective mean.

  • People Are 100% Responsible

    [P]eople ARE 100% responsible for their success and failures TO REACH THEIR FULL POTENTIAL in the market for competency. 1) Any attempt to reach more than their relative ability to reach their full potential must be obtained by stealing from others who are more competent, and causing harm to the polity because of it. 2) pareto rule MUST exist: 10% do 50% of the value, 10% of that 10% do 50% of the value, and 10% of that 10% do 50% of the value and so on. Meaning that most people below a certain threshold, are a relative dead weight on society and mankind. 3) The difference is that conservatives desire and enjoy hierarchy and are not troubled by ‘fulfilling their duty of their position” while liberals think of almost nothing else than that others are superior to them in position, and are so because of competency. 4) Where competency means genes, ability, personality, morals, ethics, values, manners, habits, speech, appearance. 5) Classes exist. At every seven points we vary in vocational ability, and at every 15 points social ability, and at ever4 30 points we are nearly different species, with the commonality of language producing the illusion of compatibility. 6) We are, all of us, and must be, rewarded for the returns we provide to others when they cooperate with us. 7) And the results of that competition is a lottery with only so many pareto-efficient winners. Who, if they make good choices, can create an intergenerational family that persists their status – something that requires selective mating to prevent regression to the collective mean.

  • September 12th, 2018 6:14 PM by Skye Stewart Dig a little most lefties don’t int

    September 12th, 2018 6:14 PM by Skye Stewart

    Dig a little most lefties don’t intuitively grasp Econ 101. So rich people qualitatively are those who have taken from others. Of course, opponents, forgetting there is no ‘pure’free market, often forget many rich people have their positions due precisely to unearned political rents to some degree. So some naturally get pissed off when they see economic inequality, and are sometimes wrong in their assumptions about its causal nature, while others do not get pissed off though they should be since it was unearned, at least economically.

  • September 12th, 2018 6:14 PM by Skye Stewart Dig a little most lefties don’t int

    September 12th, 2018 6:14 PM by Skye Stewart

    Dig a little most lefties don’t intuitively grasp Econ 101. So rich people qualitatively are those who have taken from others. Of course, opponents, forgetting there is no ‘pure’free market, often forget many rich people have their positions due precisely to unearned political rents to some degree. So some naturally get pissed off when they see economic inequality, and are sometimes wrong in their assumptions about its causal nature, while others do not get pissed off though they should be since it was unearned, at least economically.