Curt Doolittle

Theme: Incentives

  • ITS POSSIBLE TO BREAK THE BIG FINANCIAL HOUSES Contrary to common argument, it i

    ITS POSSIBLE TO BREAK THE BIG FINANCIAL HOUSES

    Contrary to common argument, it is trivially easy to break the big finance houses.

    But all those rent seekers both in finance and government could no longer seek rents.

    This is why we will require revolution. It is not possible to replace those rents and those incentives.

    For us to win they must lose.

    Which is enough incentive for me.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-20 06:24:00 UTC

  • THE INCENTIVES TO MARRY REGRESS TO THE NOBILITY ALONE (There is currently no eco

    THE INCENTIVES TO MARRY REGRESS TO THE NOBILITY ALONE

    (There is currently no economic benefit to marriage for those who do not have property and wish to transfer property across generations – building a clan. So we return to normal form: serial relationships. Marriage evolved as a means of preventing violence over mates, second as a means of controlling property, and third as a means of supporting children, lastly as a means of regulating access to land, and finally of regulating access to ‘respectable society” by imitation of those with children, property, and land. If those needs no longer exist, many will not practice them.)

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-20 05:10:00 UTC

  • One of the most severe problems young men face is the limited number of sources

    One of the most severe problems young men face is the limited number of sources of status signaling available to them that also encourages them to develop wealth, independence, and ultimate liberty from which aristocratic confidence springs.

    I have always enjoyed the company of artists, writers, and nerds, but I always do business with more serious folk – partly because it is my family tradition back to at least the fourteenth century to engage in business, government and military affairs.

    The current era allows us to digitally associate with groups who we might not have personal access to in normal time and space. So I would recommend looking for opportunity locally, friends locally, and signals online where it is information rather than social status, physical features, language, and fashion that we share.

    Most men who are successful want to ‘give back’ to society in some way or another. I want to give back to the people who, like me, had little help on their journey – as a catharsis by which I exorcize past frustrations.

    This is why I love my fellows so much, and encourage them so much, and put in so much of my time and effort – its actually selfish. With each act I compensate for each prior frustration.

    Men need love each other, and strengthen each other, for the women only pretend to, and the government they have elected, tries to destroy us.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-18 04:33:00 UTC

  • QUESTION OF THE DAY: WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH MONEY? Now, I know that people who f

    QUESTION OF THE DAY: WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH MONEY?

    Now, I know that people who follow me vary greatly in their economic status, and I am not so much interested in my fellow rich folk, as I am the ordinary man. But just to open discussion, and likely to make a point:

    If you received $100,000USD tax free out of the blue, what would you do with it?

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-18 04:09:00 UTC

  • Definitions: Capitalism, Mixed Economy, and Socialism: A Eugenic vs Dysgenic Game

    RIGHT: Capitalism: the voluntary organization of production as a the result of the incentives that result from the anarchic evolution of money, prices, exchanges and contracts under the single principle, norm, regulation or law of the voluntary exchange of private property. This process is naturally meritocratic and eugenic and therefore scientific, which is the reason why the marxists despise it. CENTER: Mixed economy: the voluntary organization of production of capitalism, combined with the involuntary confiscation and redistribution of the proceeds of production. It can be dysgenic or eugenic, meritocratic or not, depending upon the amount of confiscation and the use of confiscated proceeds. This is the least worst option in which neither lower nor upper classes can obtain better conditions. (Like marriage).

    LEFT: Socialism: the involuntary organization of production and the distribution of proceeds independent of the contribution to production. It is dysgenic and non meritocratic, and provides insufficient incentives to produce enough to meet demands. But this prevents the lower classes from being ‘left behind’ which is their central intuitionistic fear.

  • Definitions: Capitalism, Mixed Economy, and Socialism: A Eugenic vs Dysgenic Game

    RIGHT: Capitalism: the voluntary organization of production as a the result of the incentives that result from the anarchic evolution of money, prices, exchanges and contracts under the single principle, norm, regulation or law of the voluntary exchange of private property. This process is naturally meritocratic and eugenic and therefore scientific, which is the reason why the marxists despise it. CENTER: Mixed economy: the voluntary organization of production of capitalism, combined with the involuntary confiscation and redistribution of the proceeds of production. It can be dysgenic or eugenic, meritocratic or not, depending upon the amount of confiscation and the use of confiscated proceeds. This is the least worst option in which neither lower nor upper classes can obtain better conditions. (Like marriage).

    LEFT: Socialism: the involuntary organization of production and the distribution of proceeds independent of the contribution to production. It is dysgenic and non meritocratic, and provides insufficient incentives to produce enough to meet demands. But this prevents the lower classes from being ‘left behind’ which is their central intuitionistic fear.

  • Counter Intuitive Econ Solved By Operational Analysis: The Internet Increases Prices

    —Economists have two standard very simple models of product competition: firms can compete on price or compete on quantity.— —“whether firms compete on price or quantity depends more on which of these they must commit to earliest, not which is easier to change at the last minute. Knowing this, once you heard that it would be easier to change prices at the last minute for products sold on internet, you should have predicted that the internet would increase quantity competition and reduce price competition. Which it in fact has. Economics is general and robust enough to predict things like how selling products on the internet changes competition. But you have to use it right.”— https://shar.es/17xxNn

    [F]irst, I want to point out that the reason the author is able to make his argument is that he has operationally explained the phenomenon as a sequence of decisions and actions in time.  Yet intuitive economics would suggest that price competition would be increased while operational analysis (incentives) would cause competition to be decreased.   This simple example illustrates why operationalism is so important to the testing of hypothesis. [S]econd, the author is trying to make a different point, but I want to riff off it to show that firms compete in commodity and non-commodity spaces. And to some degree economists study commodity activity where noise and signal cancel one another out. But that isn’t how companies think about competition, it’s how distributors do. I have taught the following means of competition by firms: 1) Price, 2) Quantity, 3) Profitability or Debt 4) Rents (firms like polities accumulate renters) 5) Adaptation Costs (innovator’s dilemma). 6) Geographic Housing Costs (salary costs) 7) Segmentation (startups start in niches and expand) Why? Decreasing production cycles, increasing distribution of production, the increasing importance of TALENT and innovation service industries. vs capital or credit in manufacturing and distribution companies. In a highly efficient market, one can sacrifice profits for talent while larger organizations accumulate internal rents. This is most frequently the reason Generally speaking, higher profits incentivize more rents. And while prices are sticky, internal rents are much stickier than prices. Generally speaking, adaptation costs vary dramatically from industry to industry: service firms trade out people and production firms trade out people and capital. The difference being that GAP regulation and tax policy obscure the tail of fixed vs human capital, largely because we can finance against the illusion of fixed capital value while we cannot finance against the obvious lack of control over human capital. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Counter Intuitive Econ Solved By Operational Analysis: The Internet Increases Prices

    —Economists have two standard very simple models of product competition: firms can compete on price or compete on quantity.— —“whether firms compete on price or quantity depends more on which of these they must commit to earliest, not which is easier to change at the last minute. Knowing this, once you heard that it would be easier to change prices at the last minute for products sold on internet, you should have predicted that the internet would increase quantity competition and reduce price competition. Which it in fact has. Economics is general and robust enough to predict things like how selling products on the internet changes competition. But you have to use it right.”— https://shar.es/17xxNn

    [F]irst, I want to point out that the reason the author is able to make his argument is that he has operationally explained the phenomenon as a sequence of decisions and actions in time.  Yet intuitive economics would suggest that price competition would be increased while operational analysis (incentives) would cause competition to be decreased.   This simple example illustrates why operationalism is so important to the testing of hypothesis. [S]econd, the author is trying to make a different point, but I want to riff off it to show that firms compete in commodity and non-commodity spaces. And to some degree economists study commodity activity where noise and signal cancel one another out. But that isn’t how companies think about competition, it’s how distributors do. I have taught the following means of competition by firms: 1) Price, 2) Quantity, 3) Profitability or Debt 4) Rents (firms like polities accumulate renters) 5) Adaptation Costs (innovator’s dilemma). 6) Geographic Housing Costs (salary costs) 7) Segmentation (startups start in niches and expand) Why? Decreasing production cycles, increasing distribution of production, the increasing importance of TALENT and innovation service industries. vs capital or credit in manufacturing and distribution companies. In a highly efficient market, one can sacrifice profits for talent while larger organizations accumulate internal rents. This is most frequently the reason Generally speaking, higher profits incentivize more rents. And while prices are sticky, internal rents are much stickier than prices. Generally speaking, adaptation costs vary dramatically from industry to industry: service firms trade out people and production firms trade out people and capital. The difference being that GAP regulation and tax policy obscure the tail of fixed vs human capital, largely because we can finance against the illusion of fixed capital value while we cannot finance against the obvious lack of control over human capital. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • QUOTE OF THE DAY —“It’s near criminal that the Nobel committee never awarded a

    QUOTE OF THE DAY

    —“It’s near criminal that the Nobel committee never awarded a Tullock-Krueger prize for rent-seeking.”– Michael Philip

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-14 09:08:00 UTC

  • I just thought of a curated advertising model that would work within Oversing at

    I just thought of a curated advertising model that would work within Oversing at some point in its distant future. I am surprised no one has done it yet. Maybe they have tried and it’s not effective enough for consumer products. Interesting.

    Also, I’ve been against advertising in the FB and google model. But you know, I’m totally in favor of catalog and magazine subscriptions that don’t cost anything. In other words, if the user wants to subscribe to a ‘page’ sponsored by a company then that’s very different from spamming users.

    Anyway. Just ruminating. (Kirill is fixing bugs. I am testing. We are drinking coffee and Borjomi. It’s wet and cold outside. )

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-13 08:19:00 UTC