Look, until we have a classes at the institute, a program, college, or university, working online just allows me to teach a long running online seminar and learn from doing so. I don’t have grad students to enslave, or classroom to preach to, so I do it in public.
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-25 10:14:00 UTC
(a) hire a competent CEO or COO (b) convert the entire organization into one managed by projects (quarterly, and yearly goals), (c) rate the customer satisfaction of those that provide services (d) Reorganize the company to take on the new projects every half year or year.
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-23 16:40:35 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1032668937228570624
Reply addressees: @xmjEE
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1032667505398083585
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/1032667505398083585
https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-examples-of-an-evolutionary-government/answer/Curt-DoolittleEVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENT?
—“What are some examples of an evolutionary government?”—
THE CORRECT ANSWER
The most evolutionary and durable government in the modern world is the Anglo which in english, british, american, canadian, austrialian, and new Zealand versions has gone through multiple reformations and civil wars resulting in little other than revision in the contract between the government and the nobility and the militia. In other words, monarchy, multi house government representing each of the classes, under rule of law (natural law) has survived the longest. And there is no limit to this method of government other than possessing a population that will tell the truth in court, and a bureaucracy that will eschew corruption.
Now, when people ask this question I assume that they are asking what is the best form of government, and the answer is not what they expect: that which solves the problems of the present without creating more problems in the future.
As far as I know Rome has not been improved upon. (And can’t be except outsourcing all functions of the bureaucracy to companies.).
1 Rule of Law (the state my not escape natural law)
2 Monarchy (judge of last resort) with multiple Houses for the Classes.
3 A Universal Militia and property required for enfranchise-ment.
4 Switch to Authoritarianism in Times of War.
5 Redistribute heavily in times of windfalls.
6 Maintain a meritocracy (market) when neither at war nor having windfalls.
7 Reallocate the means of production if they become cal-cified.
Why? This system adapts to all circumstances.
( link https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-examples-of-an-evolutionary-government/answer/Curt-Doolittle )Updated Aug 23, 2018, 12:11 PM
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-23 12:11:00 UTC
(a) There is a vast difference between the state-finance sector, and the entrepreneurship-venture capitalist sector. There are severe issues with the state-finance sector. they have… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=284251642171733&id=100017606988153
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-22 14:59:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1032281065443020800
http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/datafile/margin.htmlMORE DISMANTLING OF SOCIALIST FALLACIES
(a) There is a vast difference between the state-finance sector, and the entrepreneurship-venture capitalist sector. There are severe issues with the state-finance sector. they have everything to do with credit and political manipulation, and nothing to do with entrepreneurship and investment. The injustice is largely in credit sector in the usa, not the entrepreneurial.
(b) The stock market provides a lottery effect for entrepreneurs, and access to capital by which large companies can offload research and development, and reward innovators. There is a reason that the stock market is in the USA and the Bond market in London, and heavy industry in Germany, and military industry in Russia: risk-reward.
(c) The venture capitalist industry is marginally profitable, but when it is profitable it is very profitable. However, because of this lottery effect, many, many companies are started and much innovation happens. Meanwhile calcification occurs at established companies as rents are maximized by employees, management, unions, creditors.
(d) —“You leap to the conclusion that the best capitalists must innovate, which is an incorrect leap. “— Not sure if you’re being dishonest here but I am saying ALL entrepreneurs must innovate, and all capitalists (financial sector) must constantly search for innovators. The reason is that it is nearly impossible to preserve capital at regular rates of inflation. Today, speculating on commodities and investing in property and investing in consumer and business debt provides the principle means by which the financial sector prevents LOSSES. So this is the problem with leftist thinking (people who have never had money or responsibility) it’s that the central problem of making money is entrepreneurial. The central problem of HOLDING money is preventing losses from the continuous process of inflation the government uses to maintain employment.
(e) —“What has the capitalist actually “produced”? — You are falling into the error that production has value rather than organizing people to invest, produce, distribute, and exchange. In other words, what do distributors produce? What do retailers and wholesalers produce, what do investors produce, and what do owners, management and staff produce? the answer is that all of us transform state, but only the LEAST SKILLED transform materials. Meanwhile all of the rest is transforming TIME using incentives, using opportunity and money.
(f) People aren’t interested in just profits. There is no evidence of it. Entrepreneurs and venture capitalists are interested in doing good for family, friends, customers, and society, because status signaling is the only meaningful reward once you have wealth.
(g) as far as I can tell it’s not capitalists (entrepreneurs) that are parasitic but the financial sector, politicians, and unions and socialists.
IT is very clear to any of us who have had wealth and responsibility how childlike and victims of Dunning-Kruger overconfidence that well intentioned fools are.
It is very very difficult to build a company, you do it at huge risk to yourself, your health, and our family and your investors. And almost all of them fail. The lottery effect of a market encourages people to take risks and fail. If you eliminate the lottery effect of the market then there is no incentive to take risks given the rate of failure.
What % does your supermarket make? 1% Your gas station? .2%, most businesses? 8%. What is the rate of inflation? 3+%. A very, very, small number of outliers
PROFIT BY SECTOR
Here is a list of profitability by sector:
http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/datafile/margin.html
NET MARGIN COLUMN
The ONLY high profit businesses are in Finance, Banking, and Power.Updated Aug 22, 2018, 11:07 AM
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-22 10:59:00 UTC
by Eric Best The left was once scattered and relatively powerless, though not as much as the true right today, since there weren’t the same societal and institutional pressures keeping them from organizing and acting. They had sources of funding and support both foreign and domestic to lessen the risk they faced. An important fringe leftist in the 60’s would have, for instance, an unassailable position in a University and a circle of admirers among the upper class. Even if a majority of Americans would find them detestable (if they knew who they were), they would not lose their job and more importantly, would not be outcast from their part of society. It took them decades to get where they are now, having taken over so many institutions that their ideology and worldview is now the default. We can’t imitate them because we don’t have 50 years to do it and the social dynamic is totally different. Everyone knows what they can do as an individual in their own life to be better and prepare (i.e. stop being a NEET sperging out uselessly on the internet) but 1 million individuals even of quality do not make an army. What is the first real step to organizing seriously? What does it look like?
by Eric Best The left was once scattered and relatively powerless, though not as much as the true right today, since there weren’t the same societal and institutional pressures keeping them from organizing and acting. They had sources of funding and support both foreign and domestic to lessen the risk they faced. An important fringe leftist in the 60’s would have, for instance, an unassailable position in a University and a circle of admirers among the upper class. Even if a majority of Americans would find them detestable (if they knew who they were), they would not lose their job and more importantly, would not be outcast from their part of society. It took them decades to get where they are now, having taken over so many institutions that their ideology and worldview is now the default. We can’t imitate them because we don’t have 50 years to do it and the social dynamic is totally different. Everyone knows what they can do as an individual in their own life to be better and prepare (i.e. stop being a NEET sperging out uselessly on the internet) but 1 million individuals even of quality do not make an army. What is the first real step to organizing seriously? What does it look like?
Humans are demonstrably amoral (both predatory and productive) as we see fit in the moment. If this was not true we would not need so many institutions to train people on the one hand; and manners, norms, traditions and laws to assist us in cooperating; and parents, neighbors, police, judges, generals and soldiers to insure those manners, norms, traditions, and laws. We feel (almost all of us) the instinct to lie/cheat/steal/kill, just as we feel (almost all of us) the instinct to tell the truth, to transact honestly, to avoid imposition of costs, and avoid harm. Just as we feel (almost all of us) the instinct to invest in future cooperation and engage in signaling. The simple truth is that we are so exceptional at creating manners, ethics, morals, traditions, laws and institutions of their defense, that it is almost always inadvisable to violate them rather than engage in productive cooperation, no matter how limited the value or returns on cooperation are to us. That evolution has provided us with the emotions of pride and fulfillment and shame and fear, when we demonstrate those moral and immoral actions, is simply evolution’s expansion of offspring-defense to the rest of the band, and tribe (now community). And the value of that expansion of that trait of kin-selection to what we call ‘morality’ is the result of nothing more than the danger of being outcast versus the (absurdly high) rewards of cooperation. Language evolved (it appears) to increase the (absurdly high) rewards of cooperation. The adage “many hands make light work” doesn’t include a metric, but Adam Smith gave us one: divsion of labor does not merely increase linearly, but logarithmically such that the labor of one person when spread to ten is on the order of ten THOUSAND times more productive. In simple terms the better your language(correspondence), the better your verbal ability (iq), the better your division of labor (institutions of property), ad the greater your suppression of free riding, parasitism and predation (crime), the faster you will produce, the more calories you will capture in relation to output, and the more offspring you can afford, the more advanced tools and weapons you can produce. Hence why tolerance for milk (40% increase in calories form the same production) plus horse+wheel+plus bronze), allowed a small population north of the black sea to spread from spain to china. ANd why guns, germs, steel, law, and accounting allowed a small population to rapidly rule and transform the world. The primary problem is that we wish to remain children with a steady state and little stress, when it is the continuous conquest of stresses that provides evolutionary adaptation and innovation. In other words, our moral sensations are evolutionarily correct, but our work sensations are evolutionarily counter-productive. You cannot save your way out of poverty, nor avoid work your way into prosperity.
Humans are demonstrably amoral (both predatory and productive) as we see fit in the moment. If this was not true we would not need so many institutions to train people on the one hand; and manners, norms, traditions and laws to assist us in cooperating; and parents, neighbors, police, judges, generals and soldiers to insure those manners, norms, traditions, and laws. We feel (almost all of us) the instinct to lie/cheat/steal/kill, just as we feel (almost all of us) the instinct to tell the truth, to transact honestly, to avoid imposition of costs, and avoid harm. Just as we feel (almost all of us) the instinct to invest in future cooperation and engage in signaling. The simple truth is that we are so exceptional at creating manners, ethics, morals, traditions, laws and institutions of their defense, that it is almost always inadvisable to violate them rather than engage in productive cooperation, no matter how limited the value or returns on cooperation are to us. That evolution has provided us with the emotions of pride and fulfillment and shame and fear, when we demonstrate those moral and immoral actions, is simply evolution’s expansion of offspring-defense to the rest of the band, and tribe (now community). And the value of that expansion of that trait of kin-selection to what we call ‘morality’ is the result of nothing more than the danger of being outcast versus the (absurdly high) rewards of cooperation. Language evolved (it appears) to increase the (absurdly high) rewards of cooperation. The adage “many hands make light work” doesn’t include a metric, but Adam Smith gave us one: divsion of labor does not merely increase linearly, but logarithmically such that the labor of one person when spread to ten is on the order of ten THOUSAND times more productive. In simple terms the better your language(correspondence), the better your verbal ability (iq), the better your division of labor (institutions of property), ad the greater your suppression of free riding, parasitism and predation (crime), the faster you will produce, the more calories you will capture in relation to output, and the more offspring you can afford, the more advanced tools and weapons you can produce. Hence why tolerance for milk (40% increase in calories form the same production) plus horse+wheel+plus bronze), allowed a small population north of the black sea to spread from spain to china. ANd why guns, germs, steel, law, and accounting allowed a small population to rapidly rule and transform the world. The primary problem is that we wish to remain children with a steady state and little stress, when it is the continuous conquest of stresses that provides evolutionary adaptation and innovation. In other words, our moral sensations are evolutionarily correct, but our work sensations are evolutionarily counter-productive. You cannot save your way out of poverty, nor avoid work your way into prosperity.
So the germans haven’t been far out of aristocracy, they had developed the first professional bureaucracies in Europe, and had them before democracy.
So they never rebelled against the… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=281556525774578&id=100017606988153
Source date (UTC): 2018-08-19 17:06:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1031226008194740224