“What is the single highest return a polity can invest in?”
A: Human gamete markets –Julian le Roux
Theme: Incentives
-
“What is the single highest return a polity can invest in?” A: Human gamete mark
“What is the single highest return a polity can invest in?” A: Human gamete markets –Julian le Roux -
(from elsewhere) Serious people on the margins challenge people to fights as a m
(from elsewhere) Serious people on the margins challenge people to fights as a means of marketing. It works. It’s always worked. It’s just easier today with the internet not gating those challenges and arguments. Serious people in general use some version of ‘either put up and show you understand, ask questions in order to try to understand, or shut up until you can do one or the other rather than virtue signal to yourself that you can render a decision upon that which you clearly and often admittedly don’t understand. Lastly, there is a maximum distance across which semantic relations can be transferred. And frankly it’s pretty hard to ‘think like a dumb or common person’. Just as it’s hard to think like a ‘chimp’. Language (grammar) creates an illusion of commensurability and relative equality. Semantics invalidate that illusion. Which is why classes and disciplines use different vocabularies. And frankly, it’s a form of ‘theft’ when you try to guilt someone into investing the effort in educating you rather than you investing the effort. I’ve spent more than a decade trying to ‘talk down’ to ‘normies’. And frankly, other than improving my prose slightly, I’m not sure it’s been a good investment. So I sympathize with Chris. On the other hand, I am about as anti-abrahamic as one can get and suspect that if I delve into Chris’ work he is relying upon Pilpul at the axiom and law level, even if I would agree with his deductions from it. In other words, it is possible to justify high correspondence and coherence with reality and still not demonstrate high causal relation with reality. That’s what I did with Hoppe and Rothbard and others did with Marx: observations were true and justified falsely, leading to incorrect theories of causality. -
2-How can we demonstrate popular demands that are possible, and preferable,other
2-How can we demonstrate popular demands that are possible, and preferable,other than by market means,when the market expresses what is possible and preferable?One can take some portion of the profits of market exchange made possible by natural law and subsidize non-market goods.
Source date (UTC): 2018-01-12 15:57:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/951845716158185473
Reply addressees: @Mr_Cain_Thaler
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/951843959827062784
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/951843959827062784
-
1 – Markets (people) exploit opportunities that tend toward disequilibrium as th
1 – Markets (people) exploit opportunities that tend toward disequilibrium as the opportunity is exhausted and thought, time, energy, and capital flow to exploit the next. Markets calculate the optimum use of all resources ASSUMING natural law is pursuable in the courts.
Source date (UTC): 2018-01-12 15:55:03 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/951844985678245889
Reply addressees: @Mr_Cain_Thaler
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/951843959827062784
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/951843959827062784
-
Bringing money to ‘bad people’ merely feeds bad behavior. Basic economic law: an
Bringing money to ‘bad people’ merely feeds bad behavior. Basic economic law: anything you subsidize will increase. Bad people bringing money to worse people produces malincentives at source and destination. Bringing bad people to good people is costly.
Source date (UTC): 2018-01-12 13:21:29 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/951806339289878528
Reply addressees: @RyanRoach5 @CurtisHouck @RichLowry @joanwalsh
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/951718518776410112
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/951718518776410112
-
I thought it was a tediously empirical observation – those places are —holes,
I thought it was a tediously empirical observation – those places are —holes, and we no longer have the economic ability to continue immigration of costly peoples.
Source date (UTC): 2018-01-12 07:07:35 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/951712245586817025
Reply addressees: @RyanRoach5 @CurtisHouck @RichLowry @joanwalsh
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/951679412600098816
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/951679412600098816
-
What Are Some Flaws Of Democracy?
If you want to narrow it to one thing, other than it’s merely a vehicle for the industrialization of lying, it’s the perverse malincentives that first mobilize then destroy all accumulated intergenerational capital, in every form, from genetic, to familial, to personal, to fixed, to habitual, to normative, to cultural, to institutional, to knowledge, and to truth itself.
Democracy is the informational equivalent of biological cancer: unregulated consumption (reproduction). Postmodernism, which is the current state religion is reducible to ‘say whatever we have to in order to increase consumption’. It is the worst of all possible worlds.
Democracy makes mankind a plague of locusts on the carrying capacity of not only our planet, but our genes themselves. Just why this is, is quite technical for the economically ignorant. But it is what it is.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-flaws-of-Democracy
-
What Are Some Flaws Of Democracy?
If you want to narrow it to one thing, other than it’s merely a vehicle for the industrialization of lying, it’s the perverse malincentives that first mobilize then destroy all accumulated intergenerational capital, in every form, from genetic, to familial, to personal, to fixed, to habitual, to normative, to cultural, to institutional, to knowledge, and to truth itself.
Democracy is the informational equivalent of biological cancer: unregulated consumption (reproduction). Postmodernism, which is the current state religion is reducible to ‘say whatever we have to in order to increase consumption’. It is the worst of all possible worlds.
Democracy makes mankind a plague of locusts on the carrying capacity of not only our planet, but our genes themselves. Just why this is, is quite technical for the economically ignorant. But it is what it is.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-flaws-of-Democracy
-
You’re thinking monolithically. A moral license. A portfolio of incentives. A se
You’re thinking monolithically. A moral license. A portfolio of incentives. A set of demands. A plan of transition. A means of removing all other options. It is not so much that people must agree, it’s that they must not disagree. It takes a tiny, tiny percentage for revolution.
Source date (UTC): 2018-01-03 16:32:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/948592848076705792
Reply addressees: @zwyrw @TOOEdit
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/948591694911627265
IN REPLY TO:
@zwyrw
@curtdoolittle @TOOEdit Can’t build numbers by calling for revol. This you will attract desperate people and set them up to go to prison. We can build an organic strength, to be victorious out of sheer attractiveness changing cultural perception or superior group ethos, will. ( prepare for 2 scenarios )
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/948591694911627265