Theme: Incentives

  • Definancialization will largely destroy the bad behavior of urban areas

    Definancialization will largely destroy the bad behavior of urban areas.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-06 06:29:00 UTC

  • “The funny thing is, that we can all be superior in one domain or another.”— M

    —“The funny thing is, that we can all be superior in one domain or another.”— Moritz Bierling

    Well that’s the whole trick now isn’t it? Find one that others want you to be superior in, that no one else is superior in. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-04 13:21:00 UTC

  • THE INSTITUTIONAL PROBLEM OF THE MONEY SUPPLY the problem of monetary supply is

    THE INSTITUTIONAL PROBLEM OF THE MONEY SUPPLY

    the problem of monetary supply is created by (a) a single currency for all purposes, and (b) distribution through the financial system rather than consumers.

    Rather than targeting, I use changes in capital (capital-in-total) and sector-interest-rates. (My suspicion is that all we are doing today is spending down capital and calling it efficiency.)

    For example, we can regulate home loan interest separately from regulating car loan interest. We could supply money for purposes instead of regulating interest. This is the amazing property of digital money substitutes.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-04 08:29:00 UTC

  • How do we play this? Use of actresses and models is one way we are undermined. B

    How do we play this?

    Use of actresses and models is one way we are undermined.

    But if you look at WAG’s that’s an empirical market.

    It’s not open to manipulation.

    If you look at WAGS you find something very different from actresses and models. You find real women you would want to be married to.

    How do we redirect “Fandom” to WAGS (who are far better looking and of better character than the models and actresses).

    IN other words, how do we increase the returns for real people, marriage/WAGS and decrease the value of individual artificial products?

    how do we increase the status of market demonstrated excellence (wags) and decrease the status of artificial products?

    It seems pretty easy to me.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-03 14:38:00 UTC

  • In employment, IQ tests are used for two reasons. One, to filter people out both

    In employment, IQ tests are used for two reasons.

    One, to filter people out both above(who would be bored) and below(who would be incompetent).

    Second to provide a legal means of defending against racism/sexism/forced intergration charges.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-02 18:15:00 UTC

  • “If consumers are supplied funds directly from the treasury, and their loans are

    —“If consumers are supplied funds directly from the treasury, and their loans are subsidized by the state, how does this not lead to rampant over consumption by high time preference and inflation? With the inflation being essentially a tax on savers, what is supplied to the savers in return?”—John Zebley

    People borrow money now. They pay principal and interest now. If they paid only principal, directly to the treasury, what is different other than the deprivation of the market of rents on loans from the treasury? In other words, where would the inflation come from? Where is the increase in money supply going to come from? The question is, what happens to all those who currently invest in consumer loans and now have to find alternative sources of investment that are less predictable?

    Now you might say that the total money supply for consumption would increase by the amount of the interest that is currently paid, but one can take the smart way out and simply shorten the payment period, or one can take the chaotic way out and let prices adjust given the short term windfall that such policy would create.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-02 12:36:00 UTC

  • JOSLIN HITS A HOME RUN Patriotism expresses the sentiment of individual ownershi

    JOSLIN HITS A HOME RUN

    Patriotism expresses the sentiment of individual ownership of the commons.

    (Ownership incentive)

    Collectivism expresses consumer incentives of the commons

    (Consumption incentives)

    Anti-authority libertarianism expresses extraction incentives of the commons (Exploitation incentives)

    Only one of them is sustainable.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-01 15:29:00 UTC

  • There used to be value for the professors although that has diminished with the

    There used to be value for the professors although that has diminished with the financialization of the university mission – likewise it appears that the quality of teaching professors has declined by the measurement of research performance rather than student life performance.

    There is social value not accounted for in the material alone.

    There is a concentration of talent in university setting that does not exist outside of that setting and we learn through imitation of it and measurement of other environments by that standard.

    There is value in minimizing the number of inputs (distractions) – although we might argue that insulation from market forces produces worse consequences than minimization of inputs provide.

    Even if there is commodity value in the material, there is unsubstitutable value in tutoring – taking responsibility for the transition in state of each individual. There is very little if any value to administration.

    The relationship between Professors and students in the college system (a collection of professors offering their courses together on the open market).

    LIttle if anything is learned, retained, and practiced outside of the university setting (meaning universities primarily sort not train). There is very questionable measured value of a degree other than sorting and filtering (signaling).

    We could measure this by measuring first two decade performance. But the consequences for universities would be damning.

    The problem of the contemporary university is largely the conflation of vocational(craft), clerical (administrative), STEM (calculative), and religious(civic) services in one institution without variations in price, and the consequential redistribution of debt between those students.

    The conflation of student, research, and sport revenues at the expense of student debt only exacerbates this problem. So by and large the degree process has no empirical measurement other than filtering.

    If instead, universities had to carry student debt on behalf of the student, and could collect it only over 10 years as payroll deduction, and universities had to warranty their degrees just like other purveyors of goods and services, we would end the prior privileges we granted to universities as extensions of the church, and treat them as ordinary businesses (which is how they act) that produce a product that they must involuntarily warranty shall perform in the market.

    If that were the case, it is quite likely that the schools would re-parition, the costs of education would reflect lifetime returns for each discipline, and those people who pay the high cost of ‘university’ (calculative) degrees would return to statistical levels wherein only 10% of a normally distributed ethnically european population would enter university – because that is approximately the maximum percentage of the population that is capable of university level (calculative) work.

    Most importantly, the funding of marxist and postmodern propaganda produced by under sanction of the academy-as-replacment-for-church would be eliminated. etc. etc.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-30 13:26:00 UTC

  • COMING CORRECTIONS, SHIFTS, AND SHOCKS There are corrections, shifts, and shocks

    COMING CORRECTIONS, SHIFTS, AND SHOCKS

    There are corrections, shifts, and shocks to choose from. A correction involves the overinvestment in an opportunity the value of which has peaked. A shift is a change in strategy, demographics, trade routes, or power structures that significantly disrupts the existing sustainable patterns of specialization and trade. A shock is a rapid and unexpected alteration in supply or demand, for which insufficient substitutes are available in the market, or which cause redirection of investments from opportunity, to maintenance, to defense, or to rescue.

    Corrections (business cycles), shifts (demographic cycles), and shocks (natural world, political world, vicissitudes and cycles ) are all, to some degree predictable existentially. Business cycles are historically testable, so are shifts, and so are shocks. But on time scales we cannot ‘time’. Yet all of us seek to maximize returns through ‘timing’. For reasons that it would take a book to cover.

    It certainly appears that we will see a coincidence of correction, shift and shock all at the same time on a global scale, which will likely be exacerbated by seizure of political and military and trade route opportunities given the invasion of advanced civilizations by vast underclasses. I have been predicting this to occur between 2020-2025 since 2004. I was right on timing of everything except china – but everyone else has been wrong on china too. The information is just to crappy to work from. So much so that I stopped following.

    The underlying cause of all economic and political and strategic change is demographic. Ergo, by 2025 a dramatic demographic shift will occur that will likely result in another world war of the military, political economic labor, class variety – or all of the above combined – unless we are very, very lucky. History is not friendly to such coincidences of cycles.

    I would say that the best thing to do is limit one’s ‘enforceable’ debt. That might include just limiting your debts and costs. That might include maximizing all bank debt and maximizing all physical property and stores. It might include just staying fit and armed. But I don’t think there is much defense from a coincidence of cycles of this magnitude other than home, family, and friends.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-30 11:34:00 UTC

  • THE CAUSE OF USA’S DEEP STATE MALINCENTIVES: ERROR. The USA ended up with the br

    THE CAUSE OF USA’S DEEP STATE MALINCENTIVES: ERROR.

    The USA ended up with the british empire and the international network of finance, trade, and law created by the british empire’s ‘globalization’ of knowledge, technology, law, finance, and trade.

    After the second world war, the ‘postwar consensus’ was that to prevent another world war, all nations should limit their actions to the development of ‘human rights’, and markets for commons (democracy) within their borders. Human rights being a pseudo-religious proxy for ‘property rights’. Democracy being a proxy for ‘commercial consumer capitalist state’.

    The problem is, that this cannot be achieved without direct rule. And without exploitation of the local people direct rule of the globe was too expensive in the postwar period. (a problem the soviets and chinese tried to solve through central control – to tragic ends.)

    So the USA’s postwar mission has been a failure for the simple reason that demographic groups are not equally able to produce sufficient returns to construct a voluntary network of specialization and trade because there is not enough productivity to pay for marginal incentives necessary to organize those networks. And there is too little experience with creating commons, and too little chance of preventing privatization of commons, to make consumer capitalist orders possible WITHOUT western rule.

    So it is more that the postwar ideals were institutionalized in the american and british and german systems of government, and we cannot exit them without revolution, because we lack a means of producing alternate incentives for our deep state (bureaucracy) that was specifically ‘bred’ for the purpose it pursues. (we see the uk still trying to create an empire at home.)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-30 10:52:00 UTC