Curt Doolittle

Theme: Incentives

  • “Let Me Help You”: About Bitcoin

    LET ME HELP YOU: BITCOIN —“Is the bitcoin a sustainable form of currency, in accord to propertarianism?”– It is not a form of currency. Demand for a currency is warrantied by a state treasury through the combination of law and taxes. A bitcoin (or equivalent) is a fractional share in the bitcoin (or equivalent) network, liquid within that network, and only within that network. The difference between these money substitutes, as between all money substitutes, is the degree of INSURANCE, or what is called ‘backing’ that limits one’s losses of the time (value) accumulated in money proper: commodity money. Think of tickets you buy at a carnival. A bitcoin is a ticket. Tickets can only be spent at the carnival. No one else will trade with you for them. You can buy a ticket and spend it on a ride, or sell it to someone else to do the same. The difference is that the carnival can issue as many tickets as it wants, and fractional shares are issued by the profitable carnival rider operators. However, as we have seen, (a) bitcoin operators are generally even more incompetent than banks, and (b) often more dishonest than bankers. And those investments are uninsured. Commodity money (hard money) is insured by demand for the commodity. The fact that we break it into countable units and trademark them guaranteeing their weight and measure, serves to increase the value of that commodity. So commodity money is insured by demand for the commodity independent of any institution or technology, and independent of time and space. Everything else we use as money is a money substitute, and as a money substitute, requires insurance by weaker and weaker means. Fiat money (“currency”) is insured by a government treasury. As we have seen governments can lose the ability to insure a currency. Banks and other asset holders issue “notes” (promises) that are redeemable for money at a face value. Some banks and treasuries issue “fractional reserve notes”, meaning that under normal circumstances, these notes are redeemable for money – but as we have seen, when ‘runs’ occur, very little of a bank’s assets are liquid and very little of its assets can be made liquid. Companies issue stocks. Stocks can be traded but only within a network or through the company. Bitcoins different from stock companies in that they only issue stocks in payment for validation of transactions, and because shares in the bitcoin network can be divided at will by their owner, these each bitcoin is a ‘fractional’ share of the network, backed only by demand for these fractional shares, hosted on a fragile voluntary network lacking all insurance. Bitcoins are technically, fractional shares of token money substitutes, in a token money substitute network, and the least insurable and insured form of money substitute that man has yet invented. The material benefits are that they (should be) reasonably hard to steal, (should have) near zero carrying and transaction costs, and if achieve sufficient scale (trillions) might provide some limited market demand – until there is a power failure. BTW: the primary means of war has evolved from military to economic. The primary future means of war will be deprivation of electricity and communication lines. We are currently more dependent upon electricity than water. So, what propertarianism would say is that unless an individual consumer of bitcoins has been informed of these facts, he has been the victim of deception. But if he is informed of these facts then it constitutes a productive, fully informed, warrantied exchange, limited to positive externalities. Further Thoughts:

    • BTC is exceptionally useful for:
      • title registries,
      • the fractional sale of debt instruments in particular,
      • escrows (if implemented)
      • the elimination of transaction costs, and
      • for serving those outside the banking system.
    • Until a bitcoin transaction is as fast, easy, and insured, as a visa transaction it’s pretty much techie porn toy.
    • Conversely, I don’t know why we need stock markets any longer….
    • I dont’ know why we need title firms any longer…..
    • I don’t know why we need check cashing firms any longer.
    • I don’t know why we need consumer interest any longer….

  • If we eliminate the status signals available for childless parents, then we will

    If we eliminate the status signals available for childless parents, then we will eliminate childless parents.  If we eliminate the subsidy of the underclass, and if we sterilize those on the lower margin, the problem will correct itself.

  • If we eliminate the status signals available for childless parents, then we will

    If we eliminate the status signals available for childless parents, then we will eliminate childless parents.  If we eliminate the subsidy of the underclass, and if we sterilize those on the lower margin, the problem will correct itself.

  • The Challenge of Monogamy and Prosperity: Dysgenia.

    THE PROBLEM OF MONOGAMY AND PROSPERITY Unless women can reproduce with the best genes and obtain support from the rest of the genes in exchange for sex, then they will always be a dysgenic influence on mankind. Why? Their offspring are costly and they are capable of any self delusion possible in order to carry on the pretense that their poor choice of father has not resulted in an individual that is a dead parasitic weight on civilization. Monogamy keeps men from violence but forces dysgenia. Do you get it? Addition by John DowThe world is hierarchical and women have not been physiologically able to directly compete in hierarchies and have therefore not being continuously evolving to maintain competitiveness in hierarchies for a long time. Women merely compete with each other to mate with men as far up hierachies as possible. Hierachies naturally reward dominant personalities, therefore the more alpha the male, the more dominant his personality. Dominant women are therefore less efficient to cooperate with in mating than submissive women for alpha males as they seek dominance, and without female submission this forces both parties to pay the price of conflict to resolve disputes. Thus, selection will reward female submission to roughly the same proportion it rewards male dominance. As women seek dominance, and hierachies distribute power in pyramid (pareto) form, women will concentrate at the top of the distribution (where they will be subject to the most marginal dominance) and polygamy will occur by default, unless Men redistribute them. Therefore, monogamy is enforced by the upper class men only to recieve some marginal social benefit in reciprocity from the lower and middle class men (from which they receive peace), their upper class female partners (from which they receive greater psychological bonding and therefore loyalty) and each other (from which they mutually insure each other against “cheating” so they don’t risk being outcompeted by each other in quantity of offspring, to instead focus their competition on the quality of offspring, which is not eugenic to society at large, but highly eugenic to the upper class itself).

  • The Challenge of Monogamy and Prosperity: Dysgenia.

    THE PROBLEM OF MONOGAMY AND PROSPERITY Unless women can reproduce with the best genes and obtain support from the rest of the genes in exchange for sex, then they will always be a dysgenic influence on mankind. Why? Their offspring are costly and they are capable of any self delusion possible in order to carry on the pretense that their poor choice of father has not resulted in an individual that is a dead parasitic weight on civilization. Monogamy keeps men from violence but forces dysgenia. Do you get it? Addition by John DowThe world is hierarchical and women have not been physiologically able to directly compete in hierarchies and have therefore not being continuously evolving to maintain competitiveness in hierarchies for a long time. Women merely compete with each other to mate with men as far up hierachies as possible. Hierachies naturally reward dominant personalities, therefore the more alpha the male, the more dominant his personality. Dominant women are therefore less efficient to cooperate with in mating than submissive women for alpha males as they seek dominance, and without female submission this forces both parties to pay the price of conflict to resolve disputes. Thus, selection will reward female submission to roughly the same proportion it rewards male dominance. As women seek dominance, and hierachies distribute power in pyramid (pareto) form, women will concentrate at the top of the distribution (where they will be subject to the most marginal dominance) and polygamy will occur by default, unless Men redistribute them. Therefore, monogamy is enforced by the upper class men only to recieve some marginal social benefit in reciprocity from the lower and middle class men (from which they receive peace), their upper class female partners (from which they receive greater psychological bonding and therefore loyalty) and each other (from which they mutually insure each other against “cheating” so they don’t risk being outcompeted by each other in quantity of offspring, to instead focus their competition on the quality of offspring, which is not eugenic to society at large, but highly eugenic to the upper class itself).

  • THE PROBLEM OF MONOGAMY AND PROSPERITY Unless women can reproduce with the best

    THE PROBLEM OF MONOGAMY AND PROSPERITY

    Unless women can reproduce with the best genes and obtain support from the rest of the genes in exchange for sex, then they will always be a dysgenic influence on mankind. Why? Their offspring are costly and they are capable of any self delusion possible in order to carry on the pretense that their poor choice of father has not resulted in an individual that is a dead parasitic weight on civilization. Monogamy keeps men from violence but forces dysgenia. Do you get it?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-05-01 10:03:00 UTC

  • THE ECONOMICS OF TIME AND MORALITY (important) (profound) (read more than once)

    THE ECONOMICS OF TIME AND MORALITY

    (important) (profound) (read more than once)

    Under Propertarianism’s Rule of Law by Natural Law, Soros could never have come into existence, could never attack western civilization; could never escape justice; and the takeover of the Universities in the 60’s impossible; the prosecution of communists in the 50’s successful; the and the import of the Frankfurt School impossible.

    Why? Truth, Reciprocity, Existential Possibility.

    Free markets are a lie. There exist no scale independent theories, and likewise, there exist no scale independent markets. They are another cosmopolitan invention. A moral pretense by which to engage in immoral actions.

    The requirement that we not impose costs by externality upon the investments of others causing the loss of capital in territorial, physical, institutional, cultural, normative, informational, familial, and genetic assets limits markets.

    Markets allow us to create opportunity through proximity, informational, informal and formal institutions, and physical infrastructure as a common good. Market opportunities are produced as a common good. We can then serve the common good by converting opportunity into exchanges, the performance of which, creates more than it consumes by the service of the coincidence of wants.

    We create opportunities for temporal compression through the division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, and advocacy, and seize them through the identification of a coincidence of wants, thereby converting the potential for temporal compression into the existential compression of time. And it is through this temporal compression that we, collectively, in increasing scales, constantly reduce the cost of existence, and defeat the dark forces of time, ignorance, and scarcity.

    If you understand this you will understand all of human civilization, and the reason we have achieved what no other creatures have achieved.

    We must defeat the dark forces of time, ignorance, distance, and scarcity, and we do so through cooperation, and we cooperate through the incremental suppression of the imposition of costs on one another upon life, body, kin, possessions, and interests, in the form of violence, theft, fraud, falsehood, conspiracy, rents and free-riding.

    We accomplish this incremental suppression by the demand for a warranty of due diligence for our products(materials), services(actions), and information(speech) and the prosecution, restitution, punishment, ostracization, or execution, of those who circumvent that Warranty of Reciprocity by production, action, or speech.

    This leaves us with no option but to participate in voluntary markets under which we limit our productions, actions, and speech to that which consists of productive, fully informed (truthful), warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of imposition of cost upon the life, kin, possessions, and interests of others by externality.

    This explains the entirety of human existence.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Natural Law of Reciprocity

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Scripture of Nobility

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-29 09:23:00 UTC

  • MORE “WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE KEYNESIAN WORLD?” Deficit spending on infrastructure

    MORE “WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE KEYNESIAN WORLD?”

    Deficit spending on infrastructure that produces returns, and is somehow quantifiable, doesn’t seem to be a problem. I don’t see a problem borrowing against the future for the purposes of production (capital increases). In fact, history is very optimistic about both research investment, infrastructure investment, export market investment, and trade route investment (including conquest). It’s just very pessimistic about funding rents, subsidies, and vote-bribes.

    OTOH, Destruction of intergenerational lending, is informationally destructive. Distortion of the interest rate is informationally destructive. Flooding the economy with money is informationally destructive. And cumulatively that destruction appears to be more than even the combination of innovation and productivity can compensate for, even in a period of gold rush created by the technology booms. I mean, if it isn’t working from 1990 to the present, it’s not going to work in more common periods.

    Interest is necessary for the purposes of measurement, and to make use of information by those with demonstrated ability to make judgements. I don’t understand why we pay interest on borrowing from ourselves (the treasury). I don’t understand why we care about our status as a reserve currency except as a means of financing the military empire. And I no longer see much advantage to the preservation of the empire (power projection), only our defense of territory and trade. In fact, the empire has dominated our domestic policy for a century now.

    Lets take it further: I would see no problem in distributing liquidity (dilution of the money supply) if distributed annually or quarterly to consumers on debit cards – other than the moral hazard it would create. This causes industry to fight for consumer dollars, and gives consumers the option to consume or reduce debt. Right now the distortion by financialization (gambling) rather than capitalization is so …. vast … no one has any idea how to measure it. Other than we can see that ‘something isn’t right here’ and we cant find a target that will correct whatever is wrong. (productivity).

    Targets are pretty simple really: how many hours to the 66% of people on either side of the median have to work to pay for all non-signal private goods?

    As far as I know, all interest on consumption of non-signal private goods is money lost from the treasury and capital-producing industry. And that looks like trillions to me.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-26 10:31:00 UTC

  • WHY DO WE HATE KEYNESIANS? —“All I know is that if you’re on Zerohedge you hav

    WHY DO WE HATE KEYNESIANS?

    —“All I know is that if you’re on Zerohedge you have to yell about Keynesians.”—

    If you are an investor of any kind, Keyensians (a) deprive you of interest, (b) do random unpredictable policy shifts that you can’t plan for that costs you and our clients all your hard earned money, (c) force you speculate and take risks, just so the government doesn’t destroy your hard earned money. and (d) incrementally drives the economy and the society into higher and higher risks, with large and larger boom and bust cycles, while killing off every safe haven available; and (e) Guarantee that at some point in the near future there will be a global collapse and that all investment for the past century will be wiped out, the dollar and our economy destroyed, and generations will suffer for it.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-25 20:29:00 UTC

  • PROMISES Promise salvation to the underclasses. Promise plunder to the laboring

    PROMISES

    Promise salvation to the underclasses.

    Promise plunder to the laboring classes.

    Promise opportunity to the merchant classes.

    Promise rents to the priestly and intellectual classes.

    Promise conquest to the aristocratic classes.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-25 18:28:00 UTC