Curt Doolittle

Theme: Incentives

  • Producing Generations

    A ‘church’, allows us to join a family that may be better than ours. And if not, to obtain recognition and incentive to retain ours, if it is better than others. The Production of Generations: Fitness and Training (fighting)(sports) Education in work ethic and money. Education in the raising of family (reproduction). Education in the organization of production. Education in the organization of the production of commons. Education in fighting conversion, invasion, and war – Requries Education in: – reading, writing, grammar, logic, rhetoric, testimony, truth – numbers, arithmetic, accounting, mathematics and algebra, geometry, calculus, statistics, models, and econometrics. – the history of the family, of production of the commons and politics, of law, and of religion/conversion, invasion/migration, and war/conquest. – the history of arts, and crafts, sciences, and thoughts. Counsel (advice) Banking, and intergenerational lending. Title Registry (including births, marriages, and deaths) Celebrations and Feasts. Hospitaliers Civic Emergency Militia.

  • Objectives and Time Preferences of Different Schools of Economic Thought

    I — OBJECTIVE OF DIFFERENT SCHOOLS — The different economic schools pursue different ends: a) Austrian: Social Science : reduction of frictions. Emphasis on institutions of cooperation. (“Paleo-Libertarianism / Natural Law”) b) Freshwater: Rule of Law: Non-interference with planning, but insurance against informational asymmetries, at the expense of consumption. Emphasis on ‘balance’. (“Classical Liberalism / Constitutionalism”) c) Saltwater: Discretionary Rule – favoring consumption at the expense of savings, capital, and planning. Emphasis on equality and spending. (“social democracy / leftism”) II — TIME PREFERENCE OF DIFFERENT SCHOOLS —- We can judge the time preference by the levers that each school advocates or shuns, from shortest to longest. – Direct Redistribution ( not practiced ) “New” but Saltwater will jump on it. – Fiscal Policy  – Saltwater – Social Policy – Saltwater – Monetary Policy – Freshwater – Tax and Trade policy – Freshwater – Infrastructure Policy – Freshwater – Education Policy (human capital) Immigration Policy (Austrian) – Institutional Policy  (Austrian)

  • Objectives and Time Preferences of Different Schools of Economic Thought

    I — OBJECTIVE OF DIFFERENT SCHOOLS — The different economic schools pursue different ends: a) Austrian: Social Science : reduction of frictions. Emphasis on institutions of cooperation. (“Paleo-Libertarianism / Natural Law”) b) Freshwater: Rule of Law: Non-interference with planning, but insurance against informational asymmetries, at the expense of consumption. Emphasis on ‘balance’. (“Classical Liberalism / Constitutionalism”) c) Saltwater: Discretionary Rule – favoring consumption at the expense of savings, capital, and planning. Emphasis on equality and spending. (“social democracy / leftism”) II — TIME PREFERENCE OF DIFFERENT SCHOOLS —- We can judge the time preference by the levers that each school advocates or shuns, from shortest to longest. – Direct Redistribution ( not practiced ) “New” but Saltwater will jump on it. – Fiscal Policy  – Saltwater – Social Policy – Saltwater – Monetary Policy – Freshwater – Tax and Trade policy – Freshwater – Infrastructure Policy – Freshwater – Education Policy (human capital) Immigration Policy (Austrian) – Institutional Policy  (Austrian)

  • Is Propertarianism Both Chicago and Austrian? Well…

    Sep 04, 2016 11:10am —“Curt: Can we then say that your philosophy is both Chicago and Austrian?”—GREAT QUESTION I have no problem with discretion in fiscal policy(saltwater), rule of law in monetary, infrastructure, and trade policy(Chicago freshwater), and social science in institutional and human capital policy(Austrian). It’s when economists try to conflate any of those TOOLS by misapplying them outside of the knowledge required to truthfully appeal to the public for moral license to act upon opportunities each tool provides that I have a problem. In other words, if it’s true and voluntary that’s fine. If it’s not true and voluntary then it isn’t. My objective is truth in the pursuit of voluntary cooperation through exchanges. And to overthrow the pseudoscientific era of aggregations for the purpose of conducting fraud. Thanks

  • Is Propertarianism Both Chicago and Austrian? Well…

    Sep 04, 2016 11:10am —“Curt: Can we then say that your philosophy is both Chicago and Austrian?”—GREAT QUESTION I have no problem with discretion in fiscal policy(saltwater), rule of law in monetary, infrastructure, and trade policy(Chicago freshwater), and social science in institutional and human capital policy(Austrian). It’s when economists try to conflate any of those TOOLS by misapplying them outside of the knowledge required to truthfully appeal to the public for moral license to act upon opportunities each tool provides that I have a problem. In other words, if it’s true and voluntary that’s fine. If it’s not true and voluntary then it isn’t. My objective is truth in the pursuit of voluntary cooperation through exchanges. And to overthrow the pseudoscientific era of aggregations for the purpose of conducting fraud. Thanks

  • Graphing Societies By Neuroticism and Individualism

    Once we evolved sentience we required a fanciful positive incentive in order to deal with the fact that the universe is hostile to us, does not care about us, and will exterminate us in a heartbeat if we cease the struggle. And that our collective consciousnesses in each tribe constitute the god we speak to so that together we maintain the illusion that there is some ‘hope’ for us. So some cultures look to the past(china, japan), some to the future(the west), and some to fantasy (Islam, Christianity, but most certainly Hinduism), and some to the rejection of reality altogether (Buddhism). That describes all possible extremes of present-avoidance available to man. I did not say that spirituality provided what is good for man. In fact, other than Stoicism, I think all cults in history are as destructive in some sense while constructive in another (But why does Christianity create prosperity?) But they all provide the same escape from stresses in the present through membership in a virtual ‘pack’ or ‘herd’ that we can appeal to through direct subjective introspection of the patterns in that system of thought. All of which is largely an external consequence of sentience without the ‘internet’ equivalent of constant communication from mind to mind that seems to occur between pack and herd animals. Individual thought comes at a high price. As an aside: stress is created by what psychologists call ‘neuroticism’. So some personalities feel this need greatly, and some personalities feel it very little. If we combine this with intelligence, we see some people have a trust issue because of dunning Kruger effects (they cannot tell whether someone lies or not). So if we combine intelligence vs neuroticism we get a pretty obvious way of graphing different populations and societies.Westerners have higher creativity, and this seems to be correlated with the fact that we have higher neuroticism. It may be that either higher demand for individualism produces higher neuroticism or the inverse.

  • Graphing Societies By Neuroticism and Individualism

    Once we evolved sentience we required a fanciful positive incentive in order to deal with the fact that the universe is hostile to us, does not care about us, and will exterminate us in a heartbeat if we cease the struggle. And that our collective consciousnesses in each tribe constitute the god we speak to so that together we maintain the illusion that there is some ‘hope’ for us. So some cultures look to the past(china, japan), some to the future(the west), and some to fantasy (Islam, Christianity, but most certainly Hinduism), and some to the rejection of reality altogether (Buddhism). That describes all possible extremes of present-avoidance available to man. I did not say that spirituality provided what is good for man. In fact, other than Stoicism, I think all cults in history are as destructive in some sense while constructive in another (But why does Christianity create prosperity?) But they all provide the same escape from stresses in the present through membership in a virtual ‘pack’ or ‘herd’ that we can appeal to through direct subjective introspection of the patterns in that system of thought. All of which is largely an external consequence of sentience without the ‘internet’ equivalent of constant communication from mind to mind that seems to occur between pack and herd animals. Individual thought comes at a high price. As an aside: stress is created by what psychologists call ‘neuroticism’. So some personalities feel this need greatly, and some personalities feel it very little. If we combine this with intelligence, we see some people have a trust issue because of dunning Kruger effects (they cannot tell whether someone lies or not). So if we combine intelligence vs neuroticism we get a pretty obvious way of graphing different populations and societies.Westerners have higher creativity, and this seems to be correlated with the fact that we have higher neuroticism. It may be that either higher demand for individualism produces higher neuroticism or the inverse.

  • Why Don’t We MIX Economies?

    Sep 05, 2016 12:48pm WHY IS IT THAT WE DON”T MIX ECONOMIES?

    • Military (Slavery) – labor dependent
    • Communist (Serfdom) – skill dependent
    • Democratic Socialist (freedom) – mentally dependent
    • Capitalist (liberty) – capital dependent

    If nations are smaller there are more ‘top slots’ but each having less free capital for use in corruption available. All era’s face information problems when they scale. This is ours. The answer is always the same: information and institutions.

  • Why Don’t We MIX Economies?

    Sep 05, 2016 12:48pm WHY IS IT THAT WE DON”T MIX ECONOMIES?

    • Military (Slavery) – labor dependent
    • Communist (Serfdom) – skill dependent
    • Democratic Socialist (freedom) – mentally dependent
    • Capitalist (liberty) – capital dependent

    If nations are smaller there are more ‘top slots’ but each having less free capital for use in corruption available. All era’s face information problems when they scale. This is ours. The answer is always the same: information and institutions.

  • Soros v Hayek and Why.

    Aug 22, 2016 2:48pm SOROS V HAYEK, AND WHY When where Soros disagrees with Hayek he relies on the criticism of the rational actor hypothesis, saying that people do not in fact act this way. But here again we have Hayek as a social scientist seeking rule of law, versus Soros as a financier seeking discretionary rule. The difference in the western heroic tradition and the Jewish tradition is illustrated once again: we peers may not interfere with the sovereignty of other peers with actions that interfere with their plans. Ergo: rule of law. Soros, as a cosmopolitan, seeks only to increase transactions regardless of the impact on the peerage, and the consequences to intertemporal capital. So yet again we see the metaphysics of the Aryans’ no harm to the commons, vs the Cosmopolitans’ maximum consumption. Hayek’s advocates do not know how to criticize Soros.