Theme: Incentives

  • RT @DegenRolf: Public health interventions aimed at improving the food environme

    RT @DegenRolf: Public health interventions aimed at improving the food environment of the poor are misguided and probably even exacerbate o…


    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-08 23:35:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1027337615190765569

  • You Can’t Get Around the Problem.

    Rule of Law, or Social Democracy, or National Socialism, or World Communism. Um. Labor costs are regional and national, while market prices are global. With ‘free trade’, arbitrage means that we seek lower prices and higher consumption at the cost of redistribution of employment from advanced to advancing countries. How you interpret that fact is determined by whether you seek to bring everyone on earth to an average at the expense of those who are already prosperous, or whether you seek to maintain income equality within your polity for the purpose of preserving harmony. National Rule of Law, not National Socialism. They result in the same thing by use of full accounting under rule of law.

  • You Can’t Get Around the Problem.

    Rule of Law, or Social Democracy, or National Socialism, or World Communism. Um. Labor costs are regional and national, while market prices are global. With ‘free trade’, arbitrage means that we seek lower prices and higher consumption at the cost of redistribution of employment from advanced to advancing countries. How you interpret that fact is determined by whether you seek to bring everyone on earth to an average at the expense of those who are already prosperous, or whether you seek to maintain income equality within your polity for the purpose of preserving harmony. National Rule of Law, not National Socialism. They result in the same thing by use of full accounting under rule of law.

  • YOU CAN”T GET AROUND THE PROBLEM. Rule of Law, or Social Democracy, or National

    YOU CAN”T GET AROUND THE PROBLEM.

    Rule of Law, or Social Democracy, or National Socialism, or World Communism.

    Um. Labor costs are regional and national, while market prices are global. With ‘free trade’, arbitrage means that we seek lower prices and higher consumption at the cost of redistribution of employment from advanced to advancing countries.

    How you interpret that fact is determined by whether you seek to bring everyone on earth to an average at the expense of those who are already prosperous, or whether you seek to maintain income equality within your polity for the purpose of preserving harmony.

    National Rule of Law, not National Socialism. They result in the same thing by use of full accounting under rule of law.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-07 15:52:00 UTC

  • AFRICA: INVENTORS ARE NOT GODS. IMHO why do we make investments in authors of in

    AFRICA: INVENTORS ARE NOT GODS.

    IMHO why do we make investments in authors of innovations (gods) rather than techniques (recipes). And why to past rates of discovery and achievement, rather than to current use of techniques? Is it so that we can imitate the characters (gods) by doing nothing, instead of imitate the techniques by doing something?

    My understanding of these things is that while anyone can invent something, they did so because of access to trade routes and the income from creating, defending, taxing, and profiting from them.

    I have spent a bit of time over the past six or eight months trying to learn why Africa, or at least west Africa didn’t achieve an imperial period earlier, and the answer is just that: geographically, west Africa might as well be Australia, and lacking sufficient means of concentrating capital none of the regional emprires were able to amass sufficient wealth (or production) to assert and hold dominance over an area large enough to produce a critical mass of trade until the late modern period – at which time the colonialists arrive.

    I don’t know about the rest of Africa yet, but at least in the west, the region was entering it’s period similar to that of the ‘european franks’ trying to build a military economic, and political order, and westerners compare the region to development of amer-india , which was 7k years behind. It’s not true of west Africa that was simply trying to circumvent the high cost of rather impossible difference from the nexus of world trade in the eastern mediterranean.

    To much focus on the European miracle and not enough focus on the geographic rates of development due to geography. the more I learn the more I understand why the blacksmith is the oldest character in western myth: extraordinary emphasis on mining, smelting, and metalworking. The rest is the military and political order of miners, smelters, metalworkers and cattle raiders for whom farming was a means of serving the animals. And who had a 40% increase in caloric availability due to their adaptation to the drinking of milk. Thats the west’s advantage: accidents. Just as the Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Pakistani-Indian, and the Chinese river valleys were accidents.

    Yes, only europeans could have invented European culture’s odd predilections. But anyone can use the products of them – just like anyone can use the products of every other civilization. And if europeans were more inventive, that is wonderful accident of history that everyone can make use of.

    It is, in my opinion, more important to study why some cultures stagnated and fell, than to study why some got to military, economic, and political critical mass first.

    And we know that answer: lack of military discipline, complacency, and the overextension of rents, the over extension of reach, and the education of competitors with nothing to lose and everything to gain.

    That’s because the reason you “get there first” is luck.

    The reason you fall behind or fail is what you do with a military, political, and economically productive civilization once you achieve it.

    I do not understand african self criticism. What I understand is that every culture must go thru the transition of suppressing local corruption so that the velocity of cooperation can increase, and that capital investment is safe from predation. And without capital to fund a strong military, police, and justice such that there are no economic conditions under which ‘defection’ against the people (corruption), is a malincentive against future returns, then it’s quite difficult.

    Africa will do fine. But it will take the same time it has everyone else. At least africans aren’t fighting it like other groups.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-07 14:52:00 UTC

  • Why does the SHTA get blamed rather than the creation of the Fed? Why does the F

    Why does the SHTA get blamed rather than the creation of the Fed? Why does the Fed get blamed rather than the industrialization of farming? Why does farming get blamed rather than immigration? Nothing evenly rotates. Everything starts with demographics – not markets or money.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-06 18:34:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1026536891712253953

    Reply addressees: @Race_Skin @ThomasSowell @PeterSchiff @zerohedge @JohnStossel @mises @LearnLiberty @TrueDilTom @TruthGundlach @realDonaldTrump @DA_Stockman

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1026473515476811776


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Race_Skin

    Why does the stock market get blamed for the #GreatDepression and not the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of the 1930’s?

    @ThomasSowell @PeterSchiff @zerohedge @JohnStossel @mises @LearnLiberty @curtdoolittle @TrueDilTom @TruthGundlach @realDonaldTrump @DA_Stockman

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1026473515476811776

  • Paradigm Shifts

    Author: William S. Lind CD: 1 – Unipolar Power (Monopoly) vs return to balance of powers – nationalism (Markets). 2 – An Endless Supply of Money vs Return to ‘harder’ money (markets) 2 – Wilsonianism (Expansionary Democracy) vs Nationalism (Markets) 3 – Cultural Marxism (Anti-Whitism) vs Nationalism (Markets) 4 – The End of White Acquiescence. By William S Lind. The Establishment knows how to succeed in obtaining what it cares about, power and money, within the current paradigms. Those paradigms include America as the only real world power, before which all other nations must bow; an endless supply of money; Wilsonianism, i.e. forcing “democracy” down all other countries’ throats; and cultural Marxism, which seeks to put women over men, blacks over whites, and gays over straights (where they conflict, cultural Marxism takes precedence over democracy). But those paradigms are all beginning to shift. President Trump represents, at least in part, new paradigms which leave today’s Establishment irrelevant, isolated, and powerless. In response, the Establishment howls in fear and in hatred, especially hatred of a President who represents the heartland instead of the coastal elites. If we look at each of the above paradigms, we can see the shifts occurring. Not only does America lack the military power, money, and moral credit to dictate to every other country, all countries now face the challenge of Fourth Generation war, war waged by entities other than states. This challenge renders competition between states obsolete, something President Trump seems instinctively to grasp, at least in part. He knows a post-Communism Russian-American rivalry makes no strategic sense; he correctly thinks NATO is obsolete; and he may sense that states everywhere face crises of legitimacy, although of widely varying intensity. The Establishment howls because one of its major components, the Military-Industrial-Congressional complex must have “peer competitors”, other states it can inflate as threats, in order to justify the trillion dollars a year we spend on national security. F-35s, Ford-class aircraft carriers, and opposed amphibious landings have little relevance to 4GW. Meanwhile, the money is running out. The U.S., and most of the rest of the world, is heading for a colossal debt crisis. When it hits, we may not be able to afford $100 billion a year in defense, much less a trillion. This points to a third paradigm shift: the end of Wilsonianism. Our “defense” budget is really an offense budget. It supports a military that is supposed to force “democratic capitalism”, which is really oligarchic rent-seeking, down the throats of every people on earth — along with cultural Marxism and its definitions of “human rights”. Even if the money were not about to run out, Wilsonianism would be doomed from the start. Russell Kirk wrote, “There is no surer way to make a man your enemy than telling him you are going to remake him in your image for his own good.” Even Robespierre, too late, said that missionaries with bayonets are seldom welcome. President Trump grasps that attempts to turn places such as Afghanistan into Switzerland are foolish nonsense. Yet at the same time, he chose a neo-con, one of the people who tried to turn Iraq into a peaceful, secular democracy by invading it and destroying the state, as his national security advisor. So he still has a ways to go to ride this paradigm shift. ( cd: my view is that trump sees punishment until defeat and making ‘better choices’ rather than reconstruction in our demon-cratic image as his strategy and it’s working.) The last shift he not only grasps but rode into the White House on: the revolt of America’s heartland against political correctness, e.i., cultural Marxism. The Establishment either believes in cultural Marxism (most democrats) or is too cowardly to challenge it (most Republicans). Heartland voters are fed up with it, its advocates, and its sacred “victims” groups, most of whom distinguish themselves by their bad behavior. In a political battle between the coastal elites and their clients on the one hand and the heartland on the other, the heartland will win. Look at the percentage of whites among people who actually vote in all the swing states. The collapse of white acquiescence in cultural Marxism, both here and in Europe, may be the biggest paradigm shift of them all. And so, faced with irrelevance, the Establishment howls, froths at the mouth and chews the carpet, raging at President Trump. Like a madman whose derangement is killing him, it screams meaningless words, most ending in “ism”, as it dies. I’m sure the President will give it a grand funeral.

  • Paradigm Shifts

    Author: William S. Lind CD: 1 – Unipolar Power (Monopoly) vs return to balance of powers – nationalism (Markets). 2 – An Endless Supply of Money vs Return to ‘harder’ money (markets) 2 – Wilsonianism (Expansionary Democracy) vs Nationalism (Markets) 3 – Cultural Marxism (Anti-Whitism) vs Nationalism (Markets) 4 – The End of White Acquiescence. By William S Lind. The Establishment knows how to succeed in obtaining what it cares about, power and money, within the current paradigms. Those paradigms include America as the only real world power, before which all other nations must bow; an endless supply of money; Wilsonianism, i.e. forcing “democracy” down all other countries’ throats; and cultural Marxism, which seeks to put women over men, blacks over whites, and gays over straights (where they conflict, cultural Marxism takes precedence over democracy). But those paradigms are all beginning to shift. President Trump represents, at least in part, new paradigms which leave today’s Establishment irrelevant, isolated, and powerless. In response, the Establishment howls in fear and in hatred, especially hatred of a President who represents the heartland instead of the coastal elites. If we look at each of the above paradigms, we can see the shifts occurring. Not only does America lack the military power, money, and moral credit to dictate to every other country, all countries now face the challenge of Fourth Generation war, war waged by entities other than states. This challenge renders competition between states obsolete, something President Trump seems instinctively to grasp, at least in part. He knows a post-Communism Russian-American rivalry makes no strategic sense; he correctly thinks NATO is obsolete; and he may sense that states everywhere face crises of legitimacy, although of widely varying intensity. The Establishment howls because one of its major components, the Military-Industrial-Congressional complex must have “peer competitors”, other states it can inflate as threats, in order to justify the trillion dollars a year we spend on national security. F-35s, Ford-class aircraft carriers, and opposed amphibious landings have little relevance to 4GW. Meanwhile, the money is running out. The U.S., and most of the rest of the world, is heading for a colossal debt crisis. When it hits, we may not be able to afford $100 billion a year in defense, much less a trillion. This points to a third paradigm shift: the end of Wilsonianism. Our “defense” budget is really an offense budget. It supports a military that is supposed to force “democratic capitalism”, which is really oligarchic rent-seeking, down the throats of every people on earth — along with cultural Marxism and its definitions of “human rights”. Even if the money were not about to run out, Wilsonianism would be doomed from the start. Russell Kirk wrote, “There is no surer way to make a man your enemy than telling him you are going to remake him in your image for his own good.” Even Robespierre, too late, said that missionaries with bayonets are seldom welcome. President Trump grasps that attempts to turn places such as Afghanistan into Switzerland are foolish nonsense. Yet at the same time, he chose a neo-con, one of the people who tried to turn Iraq into a peaceful, secular democracy by invading it and destroying the state, as his national security advisor. So he still has a ways to go to ride this paradigm shift. ( cd: my view is that trump sees punishment until defeat and making ‘better choices’ rather than reconstruction in our demon-cratic image as his strategy and it’s working.) The last shift he not only grasps but rode into the White House on: the revolt of America’s heartland against political correctness, e.i., cultural Marxism. The Establishment either believes in cultural Marxism (most democrats) or is too cowardly to challenge it (most Republicans). Heartland voters are fed up with it, its advocates, and its sacred “victims” groups, most of whom distinguish themselves by their bad behavior. In a political battle between the coastal elites and their clients on the one hand and the heartland on the other, the heartland will win. Look at the percentage of whites among people who actually vote in all the swing states. The collapse of white acquiescence in cultural Marxism, both here and in Europe, may be the biggest paradigm shift of them all. And so, faced with irrelevance, the Establishment howls, froths at the mouth and chews the carpet, raging at President Trump. Like a madman whose derangement is killing him, it screams meaningless words, most ending in “ism”, as it dies. I’m sure the President will give it a grand funeral.

  • Feminine Monopolies vs. Masculine Markets

    FEMININE MONOPOLIES: French Communism, French Democratic Socialism, French authoritarian Socialism: The three jewish-catholic universalist political strategies. -vs- Communism, Libertinism, Neo-Conservatism: the three jewish universalist political strategies. – vs – MASCULINE MARKETS: National Socialism, Classical Liberalism, Aristocratic Nomocracy. The three white nationalist political strategies.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. —:People are willing to listen to things ou

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    —:People are willing to listen to things outside their Overton window if they perceive that it will give them what they want politically (while old tactics/assumptions don’t cut the mustard). Everyday the left is doing half our job for us, e.g. Sarah Jeong, by waking our people up to the fact that what they thought would work (being nice/tolerant) will not work.”—John Mark


    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-04 16:57:32 UTC