—“Warfare and victory in this century will come down to planting this flag, not on the moon but earth: mastery of market fidelity”—William L. Benge
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-18 18:48:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1030889173585149952
—“Warfare and victory in this century will come down to planting this flag, not on the moon but earth: mastery of market fidelity”—William L. Benge
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-18 14:48:00 UTC
No, you don’t understand. Commercial production will evolve to reflect the greatest demand. The aristocracy, the burghers, the craftsmen, the labor, the women, the underclass. It’s just that (a) people are no longer aspiring to consume in imitation of aristocracy, (b) people are no longer trying to aspire to, and consume in imitation of the middle class, (c) and instead are consuming as is the majority, the underclasses, who are, at present, signaling consumption by deformity rather than conformity. We call it individualism. It is. It’s just the only signaling available to them by consumption, rather than production or achievement.
No, you don’t understand. Commercial production will evolve to reflect the greatest demand. The aristocracy, the burghers, the craftsmen, the labor, the women, the underclass. It’s just that (a) people are no longer aspiring to consume in imitation of aristocracy, (b) people are no longer trying to aspire to, and consume in imitation of the middle class, (c) and instead are consuming as is the majority, the underclasses, who are, at present, signaling consumption by deformity rather than conformity. We call it individualism. It is. It’s just the only signaling available to them by consumption, rather than production or achievement.
Short term time preference of the female reproductive (consumption) strategy, versus the long term time preference of the male (capital) strategy.
Reproductive strategy and variation of personality (stages of prey drive) explain all differences in demonstrated behavior.
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-14 14:53:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1029380496969609216
Reply addressees: @DegenRolf
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1029355139281367040
IN REPLY TO:
@DegenRolf
Liberals and conservatives have different tastes for television entertainment. https://t.co/pfzCmhCeyE https://t.co/7a8PtP21Ev
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1029355139281367040
No, you don’t understand. Commercial production will evolve to reflect the greatest demand. The aristocracy, the burghers, the craftsmen, the labor, the women, the underclass.
it’s just that (a) people are no longer aspiring to consume in imitation of aristocracy, (b_ people are no longer trying to aspire to, and consume in imitation of the middle class, (c) and instead are consuming as is the majority, the underclasses, who are, at present, signaling consumption by deformity rather than conformity.
We call it individualism. It is. It’s just the only signaling available to them by consumption, rather than production or achievement.
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-13 21:04:00 UTC
Violence is a ‘market good’ like any other market good. The more demand, the more production. The market demand and willingness to invest on the returns just needs a tipping point.
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-11 17:04:41 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1028326346743795713
Reply addressees: @westernman14
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1028322274389188609
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/1028322274389188609
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0927537117303287 How does your personality correlate with your paycheck? Via Tyler Cowen (note sample is selected from old genetics) —“Gensowski revisits a data set from all schools in California, grades 1-8, in 1921-1922, based on the students who scored in the top 0.5 percent of the IQ distribution. At the time that meant scores of 140 or higher. The data then cover how well these students, 856 men and 672 women, did through 1991. The students were rated on their personality traits and behaviors, along lines similar to the “Big Five” personality traits: openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism. One striking result is how much the trait of conscientiousness matters. Men who measure as one standard deviation higher on conscientiousness earn on average an extra $567,000 over their lifetimes, or 16.7 percent of average lifetime earnings. Measuring as extroverted, again by one standard deviation higher than average, is worth almost as much, $490,100. These returns tend to rise the most for the most highly educated of the men. For women, the magnitude of these effects is smaller… It may surprise you to learn that more “agreeable” men earn significantly less. Being one standard deviation higher on agreeableness reduces lifetime earnings by about 8 percent, or $267,600. There is much more at the link, and no I do not confuse causality with correlation. See also my remarks on how this data set produces some results at variance with the signaling theory of education. Here is the original study.”— —” Agreeableness (negative).”— (Agreeableness is bad for you – particularly women.)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0927537117303287 How does your personality correlate with your paycheck? Via Tyler Cowen (note sample is selected from old genetics) —“Gensowski revisits a data set from all schools in California, grades 1-8, in 1921-1922, based on the students who scored in the top 0.5 percent of the IQ distribution. At the time that meant scores of 140 or higher. The data then cover how well these students, 856 men and 672 women, did through 1991. The students were rated on their personality traits and behaviors, along lines similar to the “Big Five” personality traits: openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism. One striking result is how much the trait of conscientiousness matters. Men who measure as one standard deviation higher on conscientiousness earn on average an extra $567,000 over their lifetimes, or 16.7 percent of average lifetime earnings. Measuring as extroverted, again by one standard deviation higher than average, is worth almost as much, $490,100. These returns tend to rise the most for the most highly educated of the men. For women, the magnitude of these effects is smaller… It may surprise you to learn that more “agreeable” men earn significantly less. Being one standard deviation higher on agreeableness reduces lifetime earnings by about 8 percent, or $267,600. There is much more at the link, and no I do not confuse causality with correlation. See also my remarks on how this data set produces some results at variance with the signaling theory of education. Here is the original study.”— —” Agreeableness (negative).”— (Agreeableness is bad for you – particularly women.)
—“Men and women are dividing duties”—
Um. Women divorce men who split duties. Women demonstrate lower sexual interest in men who split duties. Women have little need for the economic returns of a man if they can obtain child support without providing nesting, care, and sex for a man.
Men are more varied than women, and while most women are desirable to SOME man, approximately a third of men are not desirable for ANY woman. This reflects ancestral rates of reproduction. Under monogamy, the best women do not need to settle and can construct a long term marriage. However, under serial marriage (or polygyny for that matter) women can mate with better genes than they can ‘afford’ due to men’s lower demands – especially when under the influence.
And so we are seeing a return to the historical difference between upper class (propertied) marriages, and underclass (unpropertied) serial monogamy. The primary difficulty being that single mothers produce vast numbers of disastrous children.
Why? over-investment in one or two children, and the tendency not to obtain a mate, whereas single fathers nearly always obtain a new mate, providing a better household.
It’s strange but women apparently evolved to care for five or six children, and do not reach cognitive load (work that balances their sensory and intuitionistic sensitivities) until they have at least three. This is understudied but hopefully we will change that shortly.
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-10 12:36:00 UTC