Curt Doolittle

Theme: Incentives

  • “The only thing I can say for certain is that any increase in US petroleum produ

    —“The only thing I can say for certain is that any increase in US petroleum production necessarily lowers the aggregate extraction rents in *other* countries.”—Jason Cockrell

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-16 10:51:00 UTC

  • DEFLATING “MARKET: We select opportunities for cooperation by reducing its cost

    DEFLATING “MARKET:

    We select opportunities for cooperation by reducing its cost and increasing its returns. And chiefly by buying options(accumulating credit) on future opportunities through successful cooperation.

    The point of demarcation between simple cooperation and a proto-market, is when you produce on speculation, for the purpose of profiting from exchange.

    The point of demarcation between a proto market and a simple market, is when you must use prices to calculate inputs and outputs and estimating prices.

    The point of demarcation between a simple market and a market proper, occurs when we develop institutions for indirect financial cooperation: banking, finance, investment, share-money(Fiat Money).

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-15 08:25:00 UTC

  • “Religions whose gods require blind submission provide priests with higher incen

    —“Religions whose gods require blind submission provide priests with higher incentive to evangelize, since they are the ultimate beneficiaries of that submission.”— Steve Pender

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-12 13:06:00 UTC

  • TAXATION? Do what is “True” and then adjust taxation levels accordingly. What’s

    https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/eliminating-corporate-double-taxation/DOUBLE TAXATION?

    Do what is “True” and then adjust taxation levels accordingly.

    What’s ‘true’ is to eliminate corporate tax on all income distributed as dividends, and preserve or adjust personal income taxes.

    Will this require consequent adjustments? Yes. But they will simplify the tax code, and cause less bad behavior.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-11 19:42:00 UTC

  • ARE YOU A MAN OR A CHILD? Children talk about good and should, bad and shouldn’t

    ARE YOU A MAN OR A CHILD?

    Children talk about good and should, bad and shouldn’t, moral and immoral. Adults talk about incentives, what people demonstrably do, and the development of institutions that take advantage of both, and the prosperity, trust, reduction of parasitism that results.

    Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-10 14:41:00 UTC

  • ideas are easy and cheap. execution is hard and expensive. and without money exe

    ideas are easy and cheap.

    execution is hard and expensive.

    and without money execution is impossible.

    and without customers money is unobtainable.

    All of us have ideas. Few of those ideas are not ‘stupid’. Few of those not-stupid ideas are novel. Few of those novel ideas are valuable to others. Few of those that are of value are valuable enough to pay for. Few of those valuable enough to pay for are economically or technologically possible. Fewer of us are industrious. Fewer of us will make the extraordinary sacrifices. And those that do try to execute with as little money as we can – usually our own, that of family, and that of friends. Few of us who can collect the money can execute well enough to survive until we have enough paying customers to profit.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-09 10:43:00 UTC

  • SIZE OF GOVERNMENT? (AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT) Theoretically, as a rule of thumb,

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_sectorTHE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT? (AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT)

    Theoretically, as a rule of thumb, the maximum is 20%. As a rule of thumb, we can produce about a 20% surplus in the long term, and we can accelerate innovation and consumption to raise that number through debt at the cost of increased volatility and risk.

    The US govt is about 15% of the population but, that’s misleading since we use so many contractors. It’s useful for judging the political bias of the people. Everything I’ve read is that it hovers int the 20-22% range in total.

    %GDP is a better judge of government scale. OECD countries range from about 35 to 55%, with the USA hovering near the low end (34%) but this includes financial magic because of petrodollar demand. France is at the high end with 55%. The general western consensus is that between 40-50 is the liberal ideal. And in total taxation we all reach that number.

    But that assumes that the government employees obtain total compensation equal to but not more than the general population.

    My suggestion (My Demand) is that not all countries need be the same, and as such those that suppress the reproduction of the underclass can most easily (and very rapidly) decrease the cost of ALL government burden, and thereby increase the returns of all shareholders (citizens).

    The USA was designed to exit the parasitism of the upper and lower classes by creating a middle class and upper middle class society on new territory. This is the only form of society in which democratic participation can survive. And this experiment has been under attack – successfully.

    The attack has been achieved by replacing arguments over rule of law (morality) with arguments over consumption (economics).

    The best thing we can do is restore rule of law, natural law, common law of reciprocity in not only goods, and services, but information. And therefore restore markets in everything.

    The best thing you can do for your people is eliminate non-professional immigration, and eliminate underclass reproduction. Period. End of story.

    Like all things: as complexity increases, Via-Negativa defeats via-positiva.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-09 10:03:00 UTC

  • Rothbardianism? Build a Model. Go Ahead, Think It Thru.

    ROTHBARDIANISM? BUILD A MODEL. GO AHEAD. THINK IT THRU. Build a model. Go ahead. Try it. You have an opinion. Prove that you’re not a fucking idiot. What will occur if you could manage to put 1000 rothbadians in a small city on a trade route, tomorrow, what would happen? model it out. 1) it’s easy to find 1000 people to claim they are rothbardians. 2) it’s IMPOSSIBLE to find 1000 people who DEMONSTRATE they are rothbardians. 3) but lets assume for a minute that you can, by luck, get given some land along, say, the new silk road. And you want to set up a rothbardian society. How will you do that? Here is how your conversation will start: “if some rich person (please mommy or daddy), or some nation (please king, or government) will fund (pay me to play around) a libertarian order (a place where I can keep my meagre earnings outside of a major market) I will (I fantasize) move there (away from all the creature comforts of an empire and a mixed economy) to a place only other losers like me will go to, and feel good until we fail and blame it on other people who don’t come for not having our fortitude (subsidy). So, why do people come? What will they do? Why will they choose it over the alternatives? how will you create private defense, private, courts, private property, and how will your courts determine what private property, and what contract terms, they will rule in disputes over, and what not? How will you prevent a nearby city, state, or empire from boycotting you via trade barriers? how will you stop organized crime? How will you stop an influx of people who prey upon nearby cities, states, empires by violence, fraud, conversion, immigration, or fiancialization, or some other scheme? Why will WOMEN want to move there? or live there? If you can’t get 100 libertarianis to agree to the scope of non aggression, or the definition of private property, despite 50 years of trying, how will you get them to take real life and property and commercial risks together? In other words, how can you OPERATIONALIZE rothbardianism? How can you bring it into existence in the real world instead of the fantasy world of silly teenagers and immature young males? I mean, if you can’t operationalize your ideas, you (anyone) is just saying that youre stupid ignorant and fantasizing over hot girs on porn sites, right? I mean what’s the difference between envisioning yourself with some hot chick, envisioning yourself as some athlete, envisioning yourself as some warrior, envisioning yourself as economicallly successful, envisioning yourself as a leader of men, envisioning yourself as a politician, a king, a despot? I mean, if you can’t OPERATIONALIZE some objective and demonstrate that it’s at least POSSIBLE then you’re just masturbating to political porn the way young men masturbate to car porn, gun porn, chick porn. RIght? “I’m a libertarian” is, like “I’m a Marxist” just signaling that you masturbate to political porn unless you can state some strategy for operationally constructing what it is that you desire. I’m pretty smart and I CANNOT OPERATIONALLY CONSTRUCT A LIBERTARIAN ORDER. I CANNOT locate a candidate geographically, discover any incentives that would produce membership, discover sufficient means of organization to produce the minimum commons (rule of law, defense) discover a means of constructing sufficient comparative advantage that it is possible to attract and maintain population (particularly women). Or discover a means of preventing such a territory from being populated by raiders of nearby or remote markets who then seize power until the external markets prey upon them. I can’t do it. Tell me how it can be done. Show me people will do so. Show me rational incentives to do so. And the answer is, that you can’t. All yo ucan do is say “i would prefer to wok on the borderland where I exchange limited regulation and taxation for much lower standard of living and much higher opportunity costs – so high that I can only survive by parasitic remote subsistence on remote markets. Why? subsistence farming by an individual is fucking hard and libertarians aren’t exactly the hardest working folk you know. ROTHBARDIANISM IS NOTHING MORE JEWISH SEPARATIST PARASITISM sold to young ignorant men who have a touch of intelligence, but are of little associative, reproductive, commercial, military, and strategic value, precisely because there is something WRONG (undesirable) about them. it’s just that this parasitic argument, like marxism before it and christianty before it promises the impossible to people not smart enough to falsify that vast overloading and framing that the propaganda is constructed from. It sucks to admit you were played. That you’re not that smart. But libertarianism played a pretty good sized group of people. Not enough to make a political movement. But enough to make a cult for misfit boys. Grow the fuck up. Men fight. They kill. They destroy. They take. They rule. They profit from their rule. They decrease the cost of profiting from their rule. They profit more so. If’ you’re a free riding effeminate loser unwilling to fight, kill, destroy, take, rule, profit from taht rule, and build a civilization that constantly decreases the cost of profiting from that rule then you are just a fucking whinny little bitch. Lift. Run. Explosively Sprint. Read about war. get a weapon. And when the time comes be the first guy to sprint to an opportunity to fight, kill, destroy, take, and rule. Otherwise youre just a child. Not a man. Thus Endeth The Lesson.

  • Rothbardianism? Build a Model. Go Ahead, Think It Thru.

    ROTHBARDIANISM? BUILD A MODEL. GO AHEAD. THINK IT THRU. Build a model. Go ahead. Try it. You have an opinion. Prove that you’re not a fucking idiot. What will occur if you could manage to put 1000 rothbadians in a small city on a trade route, tomorrow, what would happen? model it out. 1) it’s easy to find 1000 people to claim they are rothbardians. 2) it’s IMPOSSIBLE to find 1000 people who DEMONSTRATE they are rothbardians. 3) but lets assume for a minute that you can, by luck, get given some land along, say, the new silk road. And you want to set up a rothbardian society. How will you do that? Here is how your conversation will start: “if some rich person (please mommy or daddy), or some nation (please king, or government) will fund (pay me to play around) a libertarian order (a place where I can keep my meagre earnings outside of a major market) I will (I fantasize) move there (away from all the creature comforts of an empire and a mixed economy) to a place only other losers like me will go to, and feel good until we fail and blame it on other people who don’t come for not having our fortitude (subsidy). So, why do people come? What will they do? Why will they choose it over the alternatives? how will you create private defense, private, courts, private property, and how will your courts determine what private property, and what contract terms, they will rule in disputes over, and what not? How will you prevent a nearby city, state, or empire from boycotting you via trade barriers? how will you stop organized crime? How will you stop an influx of people who prey upon nearby cities, states, empires by violence, fraud, conversion, immigration, or fiancialization, or some other scheme? Why will WOMEN want to move there? or live there? If you can’t get 100 libertarianis to agree to the scope of non aggression, or the definition of private property, despite 50 years of trying, how will you get them to take real life and property and commercial risks together? In other words, how can you OPERATIONALIZE rothbardianism? How can you bring it into existence in the real world instead of the fantasy world of silly teenagers and immature young males? I mean, if you can’t operationalize your ideas, you (anyone) is just saying that youre stupid ignorant and fantasizing over hot girs on porn sites, right? I mean what’s the difference between envisioning yourself with some hot chick, envisioning yourself as some athlete, envisioning yourself as some warrior, envisioning yourself as economicallly successful, envisioning yourself as a leader of men, envisioning yourself as a politician, a king, a despot? I mean, if you can’t OPERATIONALIZE some objective and demonstrate that it’s at least POSSIBLE then you’re just masturbating to political porn the way young men masturbate to car porn, gun porn, chick porn. RIght? “I’m a libertarian” is, like “I’m a Marxist” just signaling that you masturbate to political porn unless you can state some strategy for operationally constructing what it is that you desire. I’m pretty smart and I CANNOT OPERATIONALLY CONSTRUCT A LIBERTARIAN ORDER. I CANNOT locate a candidate geographically, discover any incentives that would produce membership, discover sufficient means of organization to produce the minimum commons (rule of law, defense) discover a means of constructing sufficient comparative advantage that it is possible to attract and maintain population (particularly women). Or discover a means of preventing such a territory from being populated by raiders of nearby or remote markets who then seize power until the external markets prey upon them. I can’t do it. Tell me how it can be done. Show me people will do so. Show me rational incentives to do so. And the answer is, that you can’t. All yo ucan do is say “i would prefer to wok on the borderland where I exchange limited regulation and taxation for much lower standard of living and much higher opportunity costs – so high that I can only survive by parasitic remote subsistence on remote markets. Why? subsistence farming by an individual is fucking hard and libertarians aren’t exactly the hardest working folk you know. ROTHBARDIANISM IS NOTHING MORE JEWISH SEPARATIST PARASITISM sold to young ignorant men who have a touch of intelligence, but are of little associative, reproductive, commercial, military, and strategic value, precisely because there is something WRONG (undesirable) about them. it’s just that this parasitic argument, like marxism before it and christianty before it promises the impossible to people not smart enough to falsify that vast overloading and framing that the propaganda is constructed from. It sucks to admit you were played. That you’re not that smart. But libertarianism played a pretty good sized group of people. Not enough to make a political movement. But enough to make a cult for misfit boys. Grow the fuck up. Men fight. They kill. They destroy. They take. They rule. They profit from their rule. They decrease the cost of profiting from their rule. They profit more so. If’ you’re a free riding effeminate loser unwilling to fight, kill, destroy, take, rule, profit from taht rule, and build a civilization that constantly decreases the cost of profiting from that rule then you are just a fucking whinny little bitch. Lift. Run. Explosively Sprint. Read about war. get a weapon. And when the time comes be the first guy to sprint to an opportunity to fight, kill, destroy, take, and rule. Otherwise youre just a child. Not a man. Thus Endeth The Lesson.

  • Insight Into Money: Tokens for Hydrocarbons.

    Apr 21, 2017 10:43am THE USD and EURO function as the Reserve Token Money for the purchase of the commodity money: hydrocarbons, and the USA uses its premium for the financing of the world military, and the Europeans use their premium to delay the onset of the collapse of their generous redistribution scheme. Now, what happens if say, iran or russia or both are able to determine obtian sufficient control over hydrocarbon distribution that they can require hydrocarbons are purchased with their token money? Well the USA and Europe will no longer be able to sell their token money. And so the USA will not be able to apy for its military, and europe for its generous redistribution scheme. The USA and canada can produce sufficient hydrocarbons and if necessary nuclear energy without going to the internatinoal market for additional supply. But europe cannot, and must in turn become a client state of either russia, iran, or both.