Curt Doolittle

Theme: Incentives

  • Hey, I’m a 1%’er and raised with noblesse oblige. Take care of the little people

    Hey, I’m a 1%’er and raised with noblesse oblige. Take care of the little people or they won’t fight for you. Fair Trade.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-26 06:43:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735723074515963904

    Reply addressees: @charlesmurray

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/726892024901832706

    IN REPLY TO:

    @charlesmurray

    Just the ones who are willing to vote for Trump. And their wealthier brethren. https://t.co/amtC0nhHr8

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/726892024901832706

  • Rewards from Consumer Capitalism and Rewards from Aristocratic agrarianism provi

    Rewards from Consumer Capitalism and Rewards from Aristocratic agrarianism provide opposite incentives. Dysgenic vs Eugenic.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-26 06:34:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/735720840474460162

    Reply addressees: @charlesmurray

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/733412991534665728

    IN REPLY TO:

    @charlesmurray

    I get pretty irritated about that too. https://t.co/6EtklMG7qI

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/733412991534665728

  • What’s Wrong With Contemporary Capitalism?

    WHAT’S WRONG WITH CONTEMPORARY CAPITALISM WHEN NOT PAYING PEOPLE TO DO GOOD (PRODUCTION), WE HAVE TO PAY PEOPLE FOR NOT DOING BAD. (From elsewhere)

    Competition is necessary for INVENTION, including the inventions in productivity that reduce prices – and competition is necessary to eliminate rent seeking (parasitism). Property, Contract, Money, Prices, Profit, are necessary for people to possess the information necessary to determine how to fulfill their self interest, while acting in the service of others. The problem with capitalism is that large numbers of the population are not able to provide others with any value in exchange for production other than NOT DOING bad things. In other words, an increasing percentage of the populace is unnecessary to production of good and services. But as long as they don’t interfere with the voluntary organization of production, distribution, and trade, by undermining property, contract, money, prices, profit, and competition, and as long as they don’t engage in rent seeking, then by their INACTION they are contributing to the construction of the order we call capitalism, that makes an advanced consumer economy possible. The issue then is if a minority of people are paid for production and the majority of people are not paid for production, but we still need them to produce the possibility of capitalist production, then how will we pay them? In the past one gained access to the market by observing manners, ethics, morals and laws. But if one cannot gain access, then how do we compensate him for not doing bad things. Because it is by not doing bad things that the capitalist method of voluntary organization of production is made possible.

  • What’s Wrong With Contemporary Capitalism?

    WHAT’S WRONG WITH CONTEMPORARY CAPITALISM WHEN NOT PAYING PEOPLE TO DO GOOD (PRODUCTION), WE HAVE TO PAY PEOPLE FOR NOT DOING BAD. (From elsewhere)

    Competition is necessary for INVENTION, including the inventions in productivity that reduce prices – and competition is necessary to eliminate rent seeking (parasitism). Property, Contract, Money, Prices, Profit, are necessary for people to possess the information necessary to determine how to fulfill their self interest, while acting in the service of others. The problem with capitalism is that large numbers of the population are not able to provide others with any value in exchange for production other than NOT DOING bad things. In other words, an increasing percentage of the populace is unnecessary to production of good and services. But as long as they don’t interfere with the voluntary organization of production, distribution, and trade, by undermining property, contract, money, prices, profit, and competition, and as long as they don’t engage in rent seeking, then by their INACTION they are contributing to the construction of the order we call capitalism, that makes an advanced consumer economy possible. The issue then is if a minority of people are paid for production and the majority of people are not paid for production, but we still need them to produce the possibility of capitalist production, then how will we pay them? In the past one gained access to the market by observing manners, ethics, morals and laws. But if one cannot gain access, then how do we compensate him for not doing bad things. Because it is by not doing bad things that the capitalist method of voluntary organization of production is made possible.

  • Charles Murray ON UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME VS UNIVERSAL ECONOMIC DIVIDEND First a

    http://www.aei.org/multimedia/the-doolittle-effect-charles-murrays-in-our-hands/comment-page-1/#comment-154183Dear Charles Murray

    ON UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME VS UNIVERSAL ECONOMIC DIVIDEND

    First a bit of humor: (wink) thank you for further advancing the disparaging narrative against a great norman name. 🙂 What further thought crimes will be done to the sons and daughters of the Norman Radolfo De Dolietta (Doolittle), his descendants, the literate Puritans who escaped the english civil war and founded towns throughout Connecticut – and the many sergeants, captains of generals before and after them. “Dwoo’-little” has been a middle class land-holding name since the Norman conquest. 🙂 And Puritans never needed a reason for production. They were economic eugenicists like all those who advanced Bipartite Manorialism.

    That ancestral defense aside, I’ll offer a counter-argument against the ‘Doolittle Effect’:

    1) If women are more narrowly distributed than men. (they are)

    2) And if women only desire to marry and stay married upward. (they do)

    3) And if no man who is available to many women are desirable by women (they aren’t)

    4) And if women do not economically need a man. (they don’t)

    5) And if men marry and divorce bearing child support rather than trading productivity for a new mate, they will almost universally die lonely and poor – and we should see increasing rates of suicide. (We do)

    6) Then there is no incentive for man or woman to marry – or reproduce. (there isn’t)

    7) And the Universal Basic Income will only exacerbate the existing trend. (True)

    8) Because it will increase the possibility of non-working or black-market subsistence for even more people.

    UBI is extremely risky. If instead, we provided returns on the economy per quarter or per year then the incentives of the population would be to limit immigration of dependents, and limit reproduction of the lower classes, as a means of preventing dilution of their income.

    So for this reason a ‘dependable’ UBI provides a malincentive in every possible way; while a ‘market’ or ‘national dividend on the economy’ produces every possible good incentive that the UBI seeks to provide.

    The Singapore and Corpus Christi models are calculable. The intergenerational promissory models of the socialist era are non logical, fragility-inducing, and behaviorally dangerous.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Keiv, Ukraine

    http://www.aei.org/multimedia/the-doolittle-effect-charles-murrays-in-our-hands/comment-page-1/

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-25 05:11:00 UTC

  • WHAT’S WRONG WITH CONTEMPORARY CAPITALISM WHEN NOT PAYING PEOPLE TO DO GOOD (PRO

    WHAT’S WRONG WITH CONTEMPORARY CAPITALISM

    WHEN NOT PAYING PEOPLE TO DO GOOD (PRODUCTION), WE HAVE TO PAY PEOPLE FOR NOT DOING BAD.

    (From elsewhere)

    Competition is necessary for INVENTION, including the inventions in productivity that reduce prices – and competition is necessary to eliminate rent seeking (parasitism).

    Property, Contract, Money, Prices, Profit, are necessary for people to possess the information necessary to determine how to fulfill their self interest, while acting in the service of others.

    The problem with capitalism is that large numbers of the population are not able to provide others with any value in exchange for production other than NOT DOING bad things. In other words, an increasing percentage of the populace is unnecessary to production of good and services. But as long as they don’t interfere with the voluntary organization of production, distribution, and trade, by undermining property, contract, money, prices, profit, and competition, and as long as they don’t engage in rent seeking, then by their INACTION they are contributing to the construction of the order we call capitalism, that makes an advanced consumer economy possible.

    The issue then is if a minority of people are paid for production and the majority of people are not paid for production, but we still need them to produce the possibility of capitalist production, then how will we pay them?

    In the past one gained access to the market by observing manners, ethics, morals and laws. But if one cannot gain access, then how do we compensate him for not doing bad things. Because it is by not doing bad things that the capitalist method of voluntary organization of production is made possible.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-25 04:49:00 UTC

  • find that attractive individuals earn roughly 20 percent more than people of ave

    http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2016/05/how-much-of-the-attractiveness-premium-is-really-about-grooming.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+marginalrevolution%2Ffeed+%28Marginal+Revolution%29#sthash.lNhTjTtO.dpuf—“We find that attractive individuals earn roughly 20 percent more than people of average attractiveness, but this gap is reduced when controlling for grooming, suggesting that the beauty premium can be actively cultivated. Further, while both conventional wisdom and previous research suggest the importance of attractiveness might vary by gender, we find no gender differences in the attractiveness gradient. However, we do find that grooming accounts for the entire attractiveness premium for women, and only half of the premium for men.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-24 17:28:00 UTC

  • THE INCENTIVES OF A CIVILIZATION With the advent of the industrial revolution we

    THE INCENTIVES OF A CIVILIZATION

    With the advent of the industrial revolution we converted from a moral political philosophy – of accumulation – to a commercial one – of consumption.

    Instead of adding commercial consumption to moral accumulation, just as we failed to add a house of the commoners to the house of commercial producers, and the house of the territorial managers(lords), and the house of the territorial judge (kings).

    We replaced moral full accounting with pseudo-empirical, pseudoscientific selective accounting.

    We created excuses to justify our profits at the expense of the civilization, our ancestors, and all generations that follow.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-21 02:53:00 UTC

  • RT @Kasparov63: When a managed economy begins to fail, the only direction is to

    RT @Kasparov63: When a managed economy begins to fail, the only direction is to manage it more & more. It’s how “democratic socialism” lead…

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-19 12:17:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/733270249877934080

  • (I’ve never noticed my investors tolerating it either. 😉 He has financial luxur

    (I’ve never noticed my investors tolerating it either. 😉 He has financial luxuries that are exceptions not rules. +MSFT influence.)

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-19 12:08:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/733268046186418176

    Reply addressees: @pmarca

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/733136258042454016

    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/733136258042454016