Curt Doolittle

Theme: Institution

  • Definancialization

    October 27th, 2018 12:05 PM

    —“Almost every conflict that we could name can be traced back to financial institutions, And they have all been centered around the control of others resources,”—

    [I]f you want to argue that we evolved: from normative governance > to religious governance > to legal governance > to credit governance > (and are moving into digital reputation governance as we have seen in China and the UK) …then yes. If you want to argue that we must definancialize the economy and polity such that we are once again under rule of law instead of credit and digital reputation; and that doing so will end the extraction of rates of reproduction and quality of life from the middle classes in order to increase the reproduction of the lower classes, and payment of the upper classes for doing so, then yes I am in agreement. If you attempt to deny that the organized application fo violence in the systematic use of law, to incrementally suppress free riding, parasitism and predation ISN”T how we civilized mankind by forcing people into markets, that’s going to be very difficult. Because politics(legislation and regulation) and law(Findings of law of Tort) are merely proxies for violence. if you want to argue that redistribution without constraint on reproduction is a good thing then you are engaging in moralizing in a misguided attempt to devolve civilization, standard of living, and replace democracy markets and rule of law with authoritarian central management and it’s deterministic consequences: dysgenia, and consequential impoverishment. Nature isn’t kind, people aren’t equal at all, and the difference in standards of living is little more than the difference in the sizes of the underclasses – those more successful at soft eugenics (suppressing underclass reproduction and upward redistribution of reproduction to the middle class), produced the highest standard of living for the simple reason that rate of raining increases rapidly below the upper thirty percent ( of the west) which is why india cannot become a china for example. But if you want to engage in feminine gossiping, rallying, shaming and ridicule, rather than argument you’re just perpetuating the problem. I know how to definnacialize the economy. I know how to redistribute standard of living from the financial, political, and entertainment classes to the middle productive classes. But are you willint to limit reproduction of the underclasses to one child in return? Economics in everything. It’s just physics for humans.

  • Definancialization

    October 27th, 2018 12:05 PM

    —“Almost every conflict that we could name can be traced back to financial institutions, And they have all been centered around the control of others resources,”—

    [I]f you want to argue that we evolved: from normative governance > to religious governance > to legal governance > to credit governance > (and are moving into digital reputation governance as we have seen in China and the UK) …then yes. If you want to argue that we must definancialize the economy and polity such that we are once again under rule of law instead of credit and digital reputation; and that doing so will end the extraction of rates of reproduction and quality of life from the middle classes in order to increase the reproduction of the lower classes, and payment of the upper classes for doing so, then yes I am in agreement. If you attempt to deny that the organized application fo violence in the systematic use of law, to incrementally suppress free riding, parasitism and predation ISN”T how we civilized mankind by forcing people into markets, that’s going to be very difficult. Because politics(legislation and regulation) and law(Findings of law of Tort) are merely proxies for violence. if you want to argue that redistribution without constraint on reproduction is a good thing then you are engaging in moralizing in a misguided attempt to devolve civilization, standard of living, and replace democracy markets and rule of law with authoritarian central management and it’s deterministic consequences: dysgenia, and consequential impoverishment. Nature isn’t kind, people aren’t equal at all, and the difference in standards of living is little more than the difference in the sizes of the underclasses – those more successful at soft eugenics (suppressing underclass reproduction and upward redistribution of reproduction to the middle class), produced the highest standard of living for the simple reason that rate of raining increases rapidly below the upper thirty percent ( of the west) which is why india cannot become a china for example. But if you want to engage in feminine gossiping, rallying, shaming and ridicule, rather than argument you’re just perpetuating the problem. I know how to definnacialize the economy. I know how to redistribute standard of living from the financial, political, and entertainment classes to the middle productive classes. But are you willint to limit reproduction of the underclasses to one child in return? Economics in everything. It’s just physics for humans.

  • Forcing the Cathedral to Do Penance for The Crime of Yelling Wolf

    October 27th, 2018 9:49 AM CLIMATE: FORCING THE CATHEDRAL TO DO PENANCE FOR THE CRIME OF YELLING WOLF FOR FUN AND PROFIT(for newbs: Cathedral = Academy, Media, State Complex: the new ‘church’.) [I] was directly involved and know the political end of the AGW movement (and lost a lot of money), and I think (as usual) Harrari’s argument (his book) is typical pilpul (his usual articulate bullshit). The people (skeptics) are punishing the academy and state for their handling of the issue. That’s what’s going on. They are forcing the academy and state to do penance for suppressing the counter-research, doing shoddy research, pursuing grant money by fraud, and trying to move to the left in by seizing the opportunity. And my opinion is that it should be criminal to act as the academy and state did in this matter, and people should be in jail for it. That said, we are getting fairly close to an understanding of what is actually going on in the climate, and it’s not clear that other than converting to nuclear power, and cutting the population to 1/6th, that we can (or should) do anything about it. NONE of the predictions, either in the 1970’s with global cooling, or in the 2000’s with AGW, or in the 2010’s with “Climate Change” have played out. Every single period in history, usually created by volcanic activity, has created much higher heat retention, which is rapidly corrected. We are nowhere close to it. Current variations in the climate are within normal ‘noise’, and the statistical analysis of the temperature readings follows the same errors of the statistical analysis of the stock market (shown by mandelbrot) and that this is just noise not signal. All evidence is that very little is going to happen and that all we need to do, if anything, is move to nuclear power, electric vehicles, and cut the population back to 1-3B. Worse, we are entering another cooling period. We have to because of the various perturbations of the orbit and axis. And the recent warming period is nearly over. I think everyone is largely attention seeking, and that as usually, the scientific community is seeking research dollars, the press attention, the state power, and the people who pay for it the truth. The truth is we are affecting the heat retention of the planet. And we have no freaking clue what is going to happen because of it – and we have no freaking clue how the planet will respond to it. But one thing is sure given the history of human thought: what’s being said is hyperbole. Follow Judith Curry’s web site which is the most accurate (scientific) analysis of the movement and its current status. Harrari is just another (((populist))) author selling abrahamic fantasy literature to the weak. STATE OF CLIMATE DATA If y’all can’t understand this report and how ‘moderate’ any change in the climate will be, then y’all are too ignorant and possibly too stupid to open your collective mouths on the subject. https://judithcurry.com/2018/10/11/climate-uncertainty-monster-whats-the-worst-case/

  • Hoppe’s group

    October 28th, 2018 5:01 PM [D]epressing to see Hoppe’s group decline. Of course, if he’d get over being mad at me for crucifying rothbard he’d fill the place to the gills with quality people. Not gonna happen tho. If he reads Propertarianism eventually, he’ll be in the same position as Marx having read the Marginalists. Hoppe is sorta my patron saint. But no way he’s going to tolerate me or mine around.

  • “Almost every conflict that we could name can be traced back to financial instit

    —“Almost every conflict that we could name can be traced back to financial institutions, And they have all been centered around the control of others resources,”—

    If you want to argue that we evolved:

    from normative governance > to religious governance > to legal governance > to credit governance > (and are moving into digital reputation governance as we have seen in China and the UK)

    …then yes.

    If you want to argue that we must definancialize the economy and polity such that we are once again under rule of law instead of credit and digital reputation; and that doing so will end the extraction of rates of reproduction and quality of life from the middle classes in order to increase the reproduction of the lower classes, and payment of the upper classes for doing so, then yes I am in agreement.

    If you attempt to deny that the organized application fo violence in the systematic use of law, to incrementally suppress free riding, parasitism and predation ISN”T how we civilized mankind by forcing people into markets, that’s going to be very difficult. Because politics(legislation and regulation) and law(Findings of law of Tort) are merely proxies for violence.

    if you want to argue that redistribution without constraint on reproduction is a good thing then you are engaging in moralizing in a misguided attempt to devolve civilization, standard of living, and replace democracy markets and rule of law with authoritarian central management and it’s deterministic consequences: dysgenia, and consequential impoverishment. Nature isn’t kind, people aren’t equal at all, and the difference in standards of living is little more than the difference in the sizes of the underclasses – those more successful at soft eugenics (suppressing underclass reproduction and upward redistribution of reproduction to the middle class), produced the highest standard of living for the simple reason that rate of raining increases rapidly below the upper thirty percent ( of the west) which is why india cannot become a china for example.

    But if you want to engage in feminine gossiping, rallying, shaming and ridicule, rather than argument you’re just perpetuating the problem.

    I know how to definnacialize the economy. I know how to redistribute standard of living from the financial, political, and entertainment classes to the middle productive classes.

    But are you willint to limit reproduction of the underclasses to one child in return?

    Economics in everything.

    It’s just physics for humans.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-27 12:05:00 UTC

  • Because it fits their gated institutional (NPC) narrative

    Because it fits their gated institutional (NPC) narrative

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-26 18:32:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055890014758952960

    Reply addressees: @khunter495

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055535056482000896

    IN REPLY TO:

    @SumofAction

    @curtdoolittle Wondering why they seem to make a judgement that far right is older, when I see the true extreme right as a much younger mix of people.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055535056482000896

  • A consulting company acts as an agent that is outside of the political process

    October 26th, 2018 9:30 AM [M]ost of the time, a consulting company acts as an agent that is outside of the political process, so yes. Conversely, almost universally, the upper 1/2 of any consulting organization is far better than the upper 1% of any department they work for. The reason is simple: all companies that hire consultants within a 3 to 5 year window, are solving the same problems in all their customers within different political and incentive structures – and so none of the problems are ever difficult – only getting them done in the political structure of the organization. The problem is simple economics: people in companies invest in what they do, and change, success, or falure, threaten those investments (their property). A good consultant discovers these investments and promotes them and illustrates how they contributed to the current success. Unfortunately for example, most tech innovation other than improving user interface workflow tends to be a waste of money and all strategy and marketing and strategic consulting is just a way of circumventing a management organization malinvested in a prior.

  • A consulting company acts as an agent that is outside of the political process

    October 26th, 2018 9:30 AM [M]ost of the time, a consulting company acts as an agent that is outside of the political process, so yes. Conversely, almost universally, the upper 1/2 of any consulting organization is far better than the upper 1% of any department they work for. The reason is simple: all companies that hire consultants within a 3 to 5 year window, are solving the same problems in all their customers within different political and incentive structures – and so none of the problems are ever difficult – only getting them done in the political structure of the organization. The problem is simple economics: people in companies invest in what they do, and change, success, or falure, threaten those investments (their property). A good consultant discovers these investments and promotes them and illustrates how they contributed to the current success. Unfortunately for example, most tech innovation other than improving user interface workflow tends to be a waste of money and all strategy and marketing and strategic consulting is just a way of circumventing a management organization malinvested in a prior.

  • Most of the time, a consulting company acts as an agent that is outside of the p

    Most of the time, a consulting company acts as an agent that is outside of the political process, so yes. Conversely, almost universally, the upper 1/2 of any consulting organization is far better than the upper 1% of any department they work for. The reason is simple: all companies that hire consultants within a 3 to 5 year window, are solving the same problems in all their customers within different political and incentive structures – and so none of the problems are ever difficult – only getting them done in the political structure of the organization. The problem is simple economics: people in companies invest in what they do, and change, success, or falure, threaten those investments (their property). A good consultant discovers these investments and promotes them and illustrates how they contributed to the current success. Unfortunately for example, most tech innovation other than improving user interface workflow tends to be a waste of money and all strategy and marketing and strategic consulting is just a way of circumventing a management organization malinvested in a prior.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-26 09:30:00 UTC

  • Cont. 3) By attempting to construct yet another set of fictions, that while inte

    Cont. 3) By attempting to construct yet another set of fictions, that while internally consistent with experience, were not externally consistent with the findings of law, economics, and science: That western civ’s tradition(success) is systemically empirical and eugenic.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-25 21:11:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055567490649088000

    Reply addressees: @PhilosophyCuck @MrKennan1948 @WorMartiN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055556675585875968

    IN REPLY TO:

    @Jonas_Ceika

    @MrKennan1948 @curtdoolittle @WorMartiN The language is very familiar to me. What confuses me is the fact that it’s completely detached from any of my criticisms on the topic.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055556675585875968