Curt Doolittle

Theme: Incentives

  • Help The Disciplined. Let Suffer The Impulsive. Punish the Wicked.– What’s on m

    –Help The Disciplined. Let Suffer The Impulsive. Punish the Wicked.–

    What’s on my mind? I like to help people, sure. An investment in a business that I can understand, that has a track record, the management team is experienced, moral, and smart, and where others of equal or greater experience have already invested? Sure, if I have money available. An investment in a business that I understand, where I know the management personally, without a track record, but where I can add value, exert influence, and rescue it myself if it gets into trouble? Sure, maybe – if my plate isn’t full. A very, very small investment in something I think is very interesting for personal reasons, but I’m willing and likely to lose the entire investment immediately? Maybe. Helping a close friend or family member recover from a personal medical or legal catastrophe? Sometimes – rarely. Helping someone recover from a lapse in judgement (in this case someone who has a problem with gambling, but most often it’s been drunk driving) – never. Paying a high personal or business cost to punish cheaters, liars, and the selfish? Always. (I don’t tell those stories any longer.)

    Help the disciplined, let suffer the impulsive, punish the wicked.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-25 03:04:00 UTC

  • Answer by @curtdoolittle to What are the assumptions of the law of diminishing m

    Answer by @curtdoolittle to What are the assumptions of the law of diminishing marginal utility? http://qr.ae/DTlYB

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-22 21:57:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/525043411234328576

  • ARE THE ASSUMPTIONS BEHIND THE LAW OF DIMINISHING MARGINAL UTILITY? (I can’t fig

    http://www.quora.com/What-are-the-assumptions-of-the-law-of-diminishing-marginal-utility/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=1WHAT ARE THE ASSUMPTIONS BEHIND THE LAW OF DIMINISHING MARGINAL UTILITY?

    (I can’t figure out if this is an honest question or some moron’s bot-work.)

    The only assumption in marginal utility is that it is a general rule of arbitrary precision like all general rules must be constructed of arbitrary precision by logical necessity.

    So as far as I know, no assumptions external to the construction of ALL general theories are present in marginal utility. It is just that the distribution of particulars under social sciences are wider that n the distribution of particulars in the physical sciences: man learns. Hydrogen does as hydrogen is, and that’s the end of it.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-22 17:58:00 UTC

  • MUCH MORE CAPITALIST IS AMERICA THAN GERMANY *Capitalism: the voluntary organiza

    http://www.quora.com/How-much-more-capitalist-is-the-US-than-Germany/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=1HOW MUCH MORE CAPITALIST IS AMERICA THAN GERMANY

    *Capitalism: the voluntary organization of consumer production. (Liberty)

    *Socialism: the involuntary organization of consumer production. (Totalitarianism)

    *Mixed Economy: the voluntary organization of consumer production, and the involuntary redistribution of the rewards earned by organizing consumer production. (A trade-off between liberty and totalitarianism).

    Socialism is impossible, since neither the incentives to produce, nor the means of economic calculation are possible. The only possible means of organizing production that produces surpluses is to provide both individual incentives and the means of rational calculation for pursuing those incentives.

    This means that the only possible means of organizing production that is adaptive to changes in the world (wants and scarcities) is capitalism. This is why the entire world has adopted capitalism (the voluntary organization of consumer production).

    However, the entire world has also adopted mixed economy consumer capitalism: that is, the authoritarian regulation and taking of the rewards from the voluntary organization of production, for the purpose of redistribution (By licit or illicit means, for licit or illicit purposes.)

    So the entire world practices capitalism and none of the world practices socialism. Instead, the whole world practices mixed economy capitalism by taking the maximum amount that they can extract from the organizers of production without disrupting the organization of production.

    Now, the difference between the USA and Germany is such:

    1) germans are less diverse (more homogeneous) and homogeneous societies (see scandinavia) are comfortable with redistribution (sacrifice of my family and children and subsequent generations) for the service of yours. However, diverse polities are not comfortable with sacrificing for their competitors, any more than germans are happy redistributing to Turks, or mediterranean cultures that are lazier and more corrupt. America by contrast has an old historical problem of diversity of many peoples, and self reliance. The more diverse a people the less tolerance for redistribution.

    2) America is not comparable to Germany per se, but to Europe in total. There are 50 American states, and no less than 9 or 10 american regional cultures, and just as brussels is perceived as a dictatorship the american government is perceived as a dictatorship by the central and southern peoples of the american continent, that works for the advantage of the high population centers of immigrants on the coastal areas.

    As such Germany is both more homogenous, smaller, and more likely to redistribute, (over the objections of the south), while America is larger, more diverse, and less willing to redistribute. The reason is that germans are not competitors for power with one another (mostly) but american regions are at war with one another using the government as a proxy.

    For these reasons Germany is less an advocate of a mixed economy than say California or New York, but more so than say Iowa, Georgia and Alaska.

    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-22 17:35:00 UTC

  • “Women control access to sex. But men control access to commitment. [Not committ

    —“Women control access to sex. But men control access to commitment. [Not committing] is just [how] men [are] exercising [their] control – because they are now incentivized to do so. [Under monogamy] they [were] incentivized to commit. [Now they are not]. That’s why the family is being destroyed.”— Kyle Casperson

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-22 09:48:00 UTC

  • What Is The Appropriate Role And Amount Of Government Regulation Of Businesses?

    (The word ‘appropriate’ is a form of linguistic dishonesty that attempts to create a moral statement where none exists.) 

    Instead, the question is whether a MONOPOLY (in this case, the government), that is insulated from prosecution under the law (bureaucrats), and insulated from market pressures (competition), is superior to a POLYPOLY, in which all members are subject to prosecution under the law (citizens) and subject to market pressures (competition).

    The general theory is that monopolies are necessary to START regulation (government), but that once instituted that competing institutions subject to rule of law are superior to democratic and political influences (politicians, corruption, oligarchies), because each individual everywhere in society, if he holds legal standing under universal standing, is capable of policing the regulators. 

    The problem we have in government is that we cannot police the regulators ,and the implication that voting  is a proxy for lawsuits is empirically false.

    As such, removal of corporate protections and extension of liability to all employees of all organizations, and the granting of universal standing, and the requirement that anyone we would consider needing regulation be insured, allows us to construct competing insurance companies that replace corrupt monopoly bureaucracies in government as means of regulation.

    SO it is not the degree of regulation that is the question, but whether regulation should be performed by monopolies or polypolies.  And the answer is that most regulations must be legally imposed by the monopoly we call government, by requiring private insurance, and that the entire population is both responsible for and capable of policing those companies AND their insurers. 

    It should be fairly obvious that POLOPOLY under NOMOCRACY is a superior means of regulation because it eliminates the possibility of corruption endemic to monopolies.  And equally obvious that the market will seek the level of regulation necessary for insurers and producers to defend themselves from activist citizens intent on controlling them by limiting them moral actions.

    It is less obvious that it is government sanction of corruption and government delivery of regulation that is the cause of illicit business activity, precisely because during the early industrial revolution, governments who were envious of collecting new tax revenues granted protections to private businesses and removed the public’s common law ability to regulate such businesses.

    Cheers

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-appropriate-role-and-amount-of-government-regulation-of-businesses

  • What Are The Assumptions Of The Law Of Diminishing Marginal Utility?

    I can’t figure out if this is an honest question or some moron’s bot-work.

    The only assumption in marginal utility is that it is a general rule of arbitrary precision like all general rules must be constructed of arbitrary precision by logical necessity.  

    So as far as I know, no assumptions external to the construction of ALL general theories are present in marginal utility.  It is just that the distribution of particulars under social sciences are wider that n the distribution of particulars in the physical sciences: man learns. Hydrogen does as hydrogen is, and that’s the end of it.

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-assumptions-of-the-law-of-diminishing-marginal-utility

  • What Is The Appropriate Role And Amount Of Government Regulation Of Businesses?

    (The word ‘appropriate’ is a form of linguistic dishonesty that attempts to create a moral statement where none exists.) 

    Instead, the question is whether a MONOPOLY (in this case, the government), that is insulated from prosecution under the law (bureaucrats), and insulated from market pressures (competition), is superior to a POLYPOLY, in which all members are subject to prosecution under the law (citizens) and subject to market pressures (competition).

    The general theory is that monopolies are necessary to START regulation (government), but that once instituted that competing institutions subject to rule of law are superior to democratic and political influences (politicians, corruption, oligarchies), because each individual everywhere in society, if he holds legal standing under universal standing, is capable of policing the regulators. 

    The problem we have in government is that we cannot police the regulators ,and the implication that voting  is a proxy for lawsuits is empirically false.

    As such, removal of corporate protections and extension of liability to all employees of all organizations, and the granting of universal standing, and the requirement that anyone we would consider needing regulation be insured, allows us to construct competing insurance companies that replace corrupt monopoly bureaucracies in government as means of regulation.

    SO it is not the degree of regulation that is the question, but whether regulation should be performed by monopolies or polypolies.  And the answer is that most regulations must be legally imposed by the monopoly we call government, by requiring private insurance, and that the entire population is both responsible for and capable of policing those companies AND their insurers. 

    It should be fairly obvious that POLOPOLY under NOMOCRACY is a superior means of regulation because it eliminates the possibility of corruption endemic to monopolies.  And equally obvious that the market will seek the level of regulation necessary for insurers and producers to defend themselves from activist citizens intent on controlling them by limiting them moral actions.

    It is less obvious that it is government sanction of corruption and government delivery of regulation that is the cause of illicit business activity, precisely because during the early industrial revolution, governments who were envious of collecting new tax revenues granted protections to private businesses and removed the public’s common law ability to regulate such businesses.

    Cheers

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-appropriate-role-and-amount-of-government-regulation-of-businesses

  • How Much More Capitalist Is The Us Than Germany?

    • Capitalism: the voluntary organization of consumer production.  (Liberty)
    • Socialism: the involuntary organization of consumer production. (Totalitarianism)
    • Mixed Economy: the voluntary organization of consumer production, and the involuntary redistribution of the rewards earned by organizing consumer production. (A trade-off between liberty and totalitarianism).

    Socialism is impossible, since neither the incentives to produce, nor the means of economic calculation are possible.  The only possible means of organizing production that produces surpluses is to provide both individual incentives and the means of rational calculation for pursuing those incentives.

    This means that the only possible means of organizing production that is adaptive to changes in the world (wants and scarcities) is capitalism.  This is why the entire world has adopted capitalism (the voluntary organization of consumer production). 

    However, the entire world has also adopted mixed economy consumer capitalism: that is, the authoritarian regulation and taking of the rewards from the voluntary organization of production, for the purpose of redistribution (By licit or illicit means, for licit or illicit purposes.)

    So the entire world practices capitalism and none of the world practices socialism. Instead, the whole world practices mixed economy capitalism by taking the maximum amount that they can extract from the organizers of production without disrupting the organization of production. 

    Now, the difference between the USA and Germany is such:
    1) germans are less diverse (more homogeneous) and homogeneous societies (see scandinavia) are comfortable with redistribution (sacrifice of my family and children and subsequent generations) for the service of yours. However, diverse polities are not comfortable with sacrificing for their competitors, any more than germans are happy redistributing to Turks, or mediterranean cultures that are lazier and more corrupt.  America by contrast has an old historical problem of diversity of many peoples, and self reliance.   The more diverse a people the less tolerance for redistribution.

    2) America is not comparable to Germany per se, but to Europe in total. There are 50 American states, and no less than 9 or 10 american regional cultures, and just as brussels is  perceived as a dictatorship the american government is perceived as a dictatorship by the central and southern peoples of the american continent, that works for the advantage of the high population centers of immigrants on the coastal areas.

    As such Germany is both more homogenous, smaller, and more likely to redistribute, (over the objections of the south), while America is larger, more diverse, and less willing to redistribute.  The reason is that germans are not competitors for power with one another (mostly) but american regions are at war with one another using the government as a proxy.

    For these reasons Germany is less an advocate of a mixed economy than say California or New York, but more so than say Iowa, Georgia and Alaska.

    Cheers

    https://www.quora.com/How-much-more-capitalist-is-the-US-than-Germany

  • What Are The Assumptions Of The Law Of Diminishing Marginal Utility?

    I can’t figure out if this is an honest question or some moron’s bot-work.

    The only assumption in marginal utility is that it is a general rule of arbitrary precision like all general rules must be constructed of arbitrary precision by logical necessity.  

    So as far as I know, no assumptions external to the construction of ALL general theories are present in marginal utility.  It is just that the distribution of particulars under social sciences are wider that n the distribution of particulars in the physical sciences: man learns. Hydrogen does as hydrogen is, and that’s the end of it.

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-assumptions-of-the-law-of-diminishing-marginal-utility