Curt Doolittle

Theme: Incentives

  • Success in Trump’s industry mirrors international political negotiations: everyo

    Success in Trump’s industry mirrors international political negotiations: everyone is lying to the dispenser of money.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-11 10:02:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664382715433771008

    Reply addressees: @davepell @pmarca

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664200238102667264

    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/664200238102667264

  • All costs are opportunity costs. The Chinese preferred a set of costs and benefi

    All costs are opportunity costs. The Chinese preferred a set of costs and benefits suitable to them. Our preferred costs differ. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-11 08:19:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664356730743164928

    Reply addressees: @ProSyn

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664350111628046336

    IN REPLY TO:

    @ProSyn

    #China: The one-child policy’s human toll has been greater than that of the Cultural Revolution, says Minxin Pei https://t.co/PX0T1Mb5gP

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664350111628046336

  • if a difference in wealth is necessary to influence another’s action, then we ex

    if a difference in wealth is necessary to influence another’s action, then we expect that all organizations should be so structured.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-11 07:46:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664348483332268032

    Reply addressees: @wef

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664336831044067328

    IN REPLY TO:

    @wef

    How is wealth distributed around the world? https://t.co/zW2ndZDFiX #inequality https://t.co/KEw4mHfA53

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664336831044067328

  • BANKERS RARELY KNOW THEY’RE IMMORAL (worth repeating) Well to be honest, they do

    BANKERS RARELY KNOW THEY’RE IMMORAL

    (worth repeating)

    Well to be honest, they don’t even know that themselves. I think a better test is the evidence of the volume of insider trading in the stock market, and the manipulation of the market by large houses in order to bait and trap retail investors on momentum plays. Other immoralities are anti-consumer nonsense like penalties for cell phone usage, entrapment into contracts one cannot afford, baiting people into mortgages they can’t manage, the multitude of investment and insurance schemes, and the entirety of the democratic political process which is a race-to-corruption.

    Most if not all but a few bankers are too ignorant (and from too low in their class rankings) to have any idea what they are really doing.

    I don’t think most politicians know that they are corrupt.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-09 05:45:00 UTC

  • The CEO is a Meritocratic, Not Privileged Occupation – It’s Not Bias, It’s Ability

    ( RE: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289615001300 )

    Across the last two decades ≈ 40% of CEOs were on the top 1% of cognitive ability. Even within CEOs, education/ability was associated with company gross revenue. Becoming and performing as CEO can be considered a difficult mental test battery.

    (I want to add that above the upper 1% line, men vastly outnumber women, which is why men vastly outnumber women in all extremes of life.)

  • The CEO is a Meritocratic, Not Privileged Occupation – It’s Not Bias, It’s Ability

    ( RE: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289615001300 )

    Across the last two decades ≈ 40% of CEOs were on the top 1% of cognitive ability. Even within CEOs, education/ability was associated with company gross revenue. Becoming and performing as CEO can be considered a difficult mental test battery.

    (I want to add that above the upper 1% line, men vastly outnumber women, which is why men vastly outnumber women in all extremes of life.)

  • The Great Decoupling Part II -Is Tech Driving Income Equality? No. But Tech Firms Are.

    (Important concept) (RE: http://techcrunch.com/2015/11/03/marc-andreessen-and-sheryl-sandberg-tech-is-not-driving-income-inequality/ ) [A] POLITICAL ECONOMIST’S ANALYSIS: 1) Yes, global inequality on a COUNTRY by COUNTRY level is declining (profoundly). This is because few countries fail to adopt and practice consumer capitalism (the voluntary organization of production distribution and trade, made possible by fiat money and credit: the use of shares in the nation’s government as a money substitute.) 2) BUT, as a consequence, the FIRM that you work for is now more influential than your COUNTRY in determining your relative income. *If you let that sink in, it will profoundly alter your perception of the world. The west developed rule of law (instead of rule by law), property rights, contract law, accounting, banking, credit, interest, fiat money, fiat credit, high-trust, and consumer capitalism – but like any technology, this consumer capitalism is open to adoption. Furthermore, it is this consumer capitalism that is the origin of western relative prosperity, and democracy is an expensive luxury good made possible by consumer capitalism and high trust. The west will continue to prosper as long as high-trust is preserved. But, preservation of this high trust – the extension of kinship trust to customers and neighbors – is incompatible with current political doctrine. Small homogenous scandinavian countries on the edge of a wet continent with no hostile borders, and no competitors are not role models – they are outliers.* Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Great Decoupling Part II -Is Tech Driving Income Equality? No. But Tech Firms Are.

    (Important concept) (RE: http://techcrunch.com/2015/11/03/marc-andreessen-and-sheryl-sandberg-tech-is-not-driving-income-inequality/ ) [A] POLITICAL ECONOMIST’S ANALYSIS: 1) Yes, global inequality on a COUNTRY by COUNTRY level is declining (profoundly). This is because few countries fail to adopt and practice consumer capitalism (the voluntary organization of production distribution and trade, made possible by fiat money and credit: the use of shares in the nation’s government as a money substitute.) 2) BUT, as a consequence, the FIRM that you work for is now more influential than your COUNTRY in determining your relative income. *If you let that sink in, it will profoundly alter your perception of the world. The west developed rule of law (instead of rule by law), property rights, contract law, accounting, banking, credit, interest, fiat money, fiat credit, high-trust, and consumer capitalism – but like any technology, this consumer capitalism is open to adoption. Furthermore, it is this consumer capitalism that is the origin of western relative prosperity, and democracy is an expensive luxury good made possible by consumer capitalism and high trust. The west will continue to prosper as long as high-trust is preserved. But, preservation of this high trust – the extension of kinship trust to customers and neighbors – is incompatible with current political doctrine. Small homogenous scandinavian countries on the edge of a wet continent with no hostile borders, and no competitors are not role models – they are outliers.* Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Great Decoupling, and The Influence of Internatioanl Firms In Creating Local Inequality

    (RE: http://andrewmcafee.org/2012/12/the-great-decoupling-of-the-us-economy/ )

    chart19813-650x443

    [I]nformation is the model for both natural and social sciences. If wages for labor rose in the industrial era and are declining in the information era then those prices (wages) are telling us something. If wages for problem solvers was limited in the era of concentrated capital (early industry), and is expanding in the era of distributed capital between temporary alliances of firms – then we should see increasing wages where capital is concentrated and decreasing wages where distributed.

    So instead of internationally wealthy and poor countries we also have internationally wealthy and poor firms and a decoupling of the previous dependence on the local state. And we have a declining wage for anyone not in a firm able to concentrate capital.  The influence of local economy on global companies must decline. And to make matters worse, capital today is available at zero cost. So the only marginally competitive value is in human beings marginally superior to other human beings. Meaning that human capital  – the high end of ability – is increasingly important and labor decreasingly important. Technological man is the scarce resource(genetics). High trust is the scarce political environment(culture). The industrial era was an outlier. Farming went from a good business in 1830, to a terrible business in 1930. Industrial labor is following farming. And white collar labor is close behind. Hence Propertarianism tells me that we must pay off the unemployable to maintain the commons, and decrease their numbers

  • The Great Decoupling, and The Influence of Internatioanl Firms In Creating Local Inequality

    (RE: http://andrewmcafee.org/2012/12/the-great-decoupling-of-the-us-economy/ )

    chart19813-650x443

    [I]nformation is the model for both natural and social sciences. If wages for labor rose in the industrial era and are declining in the information era then those prices (wages) are telling us something. If wages for problem solvers was limited in the era of concentrated capital (early industry), and is expanding in the era of distributed capital between temporary alliances of firms – then we should see increasing wages where capital is concentrated and decreasing wages where distributed.

    So instead of internationally wealthy and poor countries we also have internationally wealthy and poor firms and a decoupling of the previous dependence on the local state. And we have a declining wage for anyone not in a firm able to concentrate capital.  The influence of local economy on global companies must decline. And to make matters worse, capital today is available at zero cost. So the only marginally competitive value is in human beings marginally superior to other human beings. Meaning that human capital  – the high end of ability – is increasingly important and labor decreasingly important. Technological man is the scarce resource(genetics). High trust is the scarce political environment(culture). The industrial era was an outlier. Farming went from a good business in 1830, to a terrible business in 1930. Industrial labor is following farming. And white collar labor is close behind. Hence Propertarianism tells me that we must pay off the unemployable to maintain the commons, and decrease their numbers