Curt Doolittle

Theme: Institution

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. THE VIRTUOUS TARIFFS by Pat Buchanan William

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    THE VIRTUOUS TARIFFS
    by Pat Buchanan

    William McKinley, the veteran of Antietam who gave his name to the McKinley Tariff, declared four years before being elected president: “Free trade results in our giving our money…our manufactures and our markets to other nations. …It will bring widespread discontent. It will revolutionize our values.”

    Campaigning in 1892, McKinley said, “Open competition between high-paid American labor and poorly paid European labor will either drive out of existence American industry or lower American wages.”

    Substitute “Asian labor” for “European labor,” and is this not a fair description of what free trade did to U.S. manufacturing these last 25 years? The results have been some $12 trillion in trade deficits, arrested wages for our workers, six million manufacturing jobs lost, 55,000 factories, and plants shut down.

    McKinley’s future vice president Teddy Roosevelt agreed with him: “Thank God I am not a free trader.”

    What did the Protectionists produce?

    From 1869 to 1900, GDP quadrupled. Budget surpluses ran for 27 straight years. The U.S. debt was cut two-thirds to 7 percent of GDP. Commodity prices fell 58 percent. America’s population doubled, but real wages rose 53 percent. Economic growth averaged 4 percent a year.

    And the United States, which began this era with half of Britain’s production, ended it with twice Britain’s production.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-29 14:01:34 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a profile. THE FALL OF AMERICAN LAW: NOTES FROM READING TH

    Curt Doolittle shared a profile.

    THE FALL OF AMERICAN LAW: NOTES FROM READING THE WRITINGS OF JUDGE ANNA VON REITZ

    As far as i know this problem – these problems – arose over two centuries as the federal government – all post-napoleonic governments – increasingly took on the role of “insurer of last resort”.

    In other words, the presumption of the utility risk mitigation provided by fiat money, federal credit, and income taxes was valued over the sovereignty both individual, local and federal of our assets. And the empirical evidence is that this strategy was not only competitively necessary, but resulted in vast increases in our standards of living.

    I am just working through Anna’s writings now and I’ve noticed a few things that I want to explore:

    CONSTRUCTIVIST
    I am having a bit of trouble decomposing the logical (legal) dependencies of Anna’s arguments, but I think they are to natural law (individual sovereignty).

    Sovereignty, which requires reciprocity, which requires truth(testimony), which is itself a duty(cost), and which together leave us no other means of cooperating other than markets in association, cooperation, production, reproduction, and the production of commons, adjudicated by the common law of tort (property).

    This (markets in everything) is the secret to the west’s success, because both in the ancient and modern world, this system of self government adapts to changes (socks, windfalls) faster than all other known (or possible) systems of government. It makes the optimum use of human incentives. But we must understand it is an *economic* system of government: it forces continuous innovation which constantly reduces prices and increases choices.

    ECONOMIC
    1 – After the civil war, and up through the creation of the federal reserve we converted from a government concerned with sovereignty of property of individuals and states under rule of law (the gold standard system of government) justified by either natural law or common traditional law, to government concerned with the economic condition of individuals and states under discretionary rule (legislative law). Making this change was not without voluminous debate and significant conflict.

    2 – My opinion is that the court lacked sufficient economic knowledge (and under FDR sufficient sovereignty) to reform the law (demand legislation) so that rule of law was preserved AND insurer of last resort functions of the federal or state governments could be created. One of the failings of our common law system is that judges do not specialize outside of family, civil, and criminal as they do in the continental (napoleonic) system. (there are good reasons for and agains). But the court has a myopic view of history as a legal without grasping that our legal systems have poorly adopted to a world consisting almost entirely out of interests in property (distributed possession), rather than possession of property (monopoly possession). I have come to see this as the fundamental problem of adapting our ancient legal systems to the information era (post 1911).

    3 – Fiat currency is functionally nothing more than shares in the federal treasury, which in turn is merely an asset of the federal corporation, which in turn is merely a construct of the federal constitution. The problem is that (as Anna illustrates), we have opened up a host of opportunities for predation upon our individual sovereignty, and our personal property, and even our community property, thereby transforming all assets to the state, and only making use of them by license. In effect we have restored feudalism (serfdom) – just serfdom that is comfortable. And the frightening fact is that comfortable serfdom is in demand, and contrary to historical propaganda was in demand in the past also – as was voluntary slavery. Many people are happy to enter into contemporary serfdom and slavery if they have some protection of law. Yet our system no longer distinguishes between the sovereign, the serf, and the slave – thereby ignoring the differences in risk we wish (or can) bear, because of our abilities, our skills, our assets, our families, and our associations. We are taxed by income but not by risk. We are governed by serfdom not by sovereignty. And this is because the law has not kept pace with the economic structure of polities. And to a large degree I blame the Judicial community for failing to grasp the relationship between the demands upon law, and the economic “technology” that we live under.

    CLOSING
    The mistake I see in Anna’s writings is the same mistake I see in ‘gold bugs’ or other people that want to return to hard money. Hard money is a terrible limitation upon the people for no reason – resulting in hard and fast shocks that cannot be insured against (the jury is in on cyclicality of corrections but it is hard to take the position of allowing shorter devastating depressions rather than longer softer recessions) That said, we no longer make use of money as other than debt instruments (all money is merely a token without any backing other than fiat demand for it).

    The question isn’t return to gold standard, or return to fully private property (which merely weakens us from producing the higher returns of the commons). The question is how to restore sovereignty and markets in everything by rule of law given that we have a new monetary technology available to us that is no longer physical – how can we restore the state to its only necessarily useful function: as the insurer of last resort both economic(positive) and judicial (negative).

    And we must recognize that the enlightenment experiment with equality has been a failure and that the upper classes will always seek rents, the financial classes (distributors of liquidity) are now entirely unnecessary (really), and are by their very existence parasitic, and the underclasses, grown more numerous while the middle shrinks – have only serfdom as their desired order.

    There are only two social sciences: the law of tort (property), and its facility and measurement economics. The problem is macro economics seeks to circumvent the law, and the law is ignorant of macro economics.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev Ukraine.

    https://www.facebook.com/avonreitz

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-29 11:50:58 UTC

  • SHARING MATTERS. I don’t promote. Everything we do is through word of mouth. And

    SHARING MATTERS. I don’t promote. Everything we do is through word of mouth. And you are the means by which we introduce others to truth, natural law and an institutional solution to our conflict. -Thanks.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-29 11:11:00 UTC

  • THE VIRTUOUS TARIFFS by Pat Buchanan William McKinley, the veteran of Antietam w

    THE VIRTUOUS TARIFFS

    by Pat Buchanan

    William McKinley, the veteran of Antietam who gave his name to the McKinley Tariff, declared four years before being elected president: “Free trade results in our giving our money…our manufactures and our markets to other nations. …It will bring widespread discontent. It will revolutionize our values.”

    Campaigning in 1892, McKinley said, “Open competition between high-paid American labor and poorly paid European labor will either drive out of existence American industry or lower American wages.”

    Substitute “Asian labor” for “European labor,” and is this not a fair description of what free trade did to U.S. manufacturing these last 25 years? The results have been some $12 trillion in trade deficits, arrested wages for our workers, six million manufacturing jobs lost, 55,000 factories, and plants shut down.

    McKinley’s future vice president Teddy Roosevelt agreed with him: “Thank God I am not a free trader.”

    What did the Protectionists produce?

    From 1869 to 1900, GDP quadrupled. Budget surpluses ran for 27 straight years. The U.S. debt was cut two-thirds to 7 percent of GDP. Commodity prices fell 58 percent. America’s population doubled, but real wages rose 53 percent. Economic growth averaged 4 percent a year.

    And the United States, which began this era with half of Britain’s production, ended it with twice Britain’s production.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-29 10:01:00 UTC

  • THE FALL OF AMERICAN LAW: NOTES FROM READING THE WRITINGS OF JUDGE ANNA VON REIT

    THE FALL OF AMERICAN LAW: NOTES FROM READING THE WRITINGS OF JUDGE ANNA VON REITZ

    As far as i know this problem – these problems – arose over two centuries as the federal government – all post-napoleonic governments – increasingly took on the role of “insurer of last resort”.

    In other words, the presumption of the utility risk mitigation provided by fiat money, federal credit, and income taxes was valued over the sovereignty both individual, local and federal of our assets. And the empirical evidence is that this strategy was not only competitively necessary, but resulted in vast increases in our standards of living.

    I am just working through Anna’s writings now and I’ve noticed a few things that I want to explore:

    CONSTRUCTIVIST

    I am having a bit of trouble decomposing the logical (legal) dependencies of Anna’s arguments, but I think they are to natural law (individual sovereignty).

    Sovereignty, which requires reciprocity, which requires truth(testimony), which is itself a duty(cost), and which together leave us no other means of cooperating other than markets in association, cooperation, production, reproduction, and the production of commons, adjudicated by the common law of tort (property).

    This (markets in everything) is the secret to the west’s success, because both in the ancient and modern world, this system of self government adapts to changes (socks, windfalls) faster than all other known (or possible) systems of government. It makes the optimum use of human incentives. But we must understand it is an *economic* system of government: it forces continuous innovation which constantly reduces prices and increases choices.

    ECONOMIC

    1 – After the civil war, and up through the creation of the federal reserve we converted from a government concerned with sovereignty of property of individuals and states under rule of law (the gold standard system of government) justified by either natural law or common traditional law, to government concerned with the economic condition of individuals and states under discretionary rule (legislative law). Making this change was not without voluminous debate and significant conflict.

    2 – My opinion is that the court lacked sufficient economic knowledge (and under FDR sufficient sovereignty) to reform the law (demand legislation) so that rule of law was preserved AND insurer of last resort functions of the federal or state governments could be created. One of the failings of our common law system is that judges do not specialize outside of family, civil, and criminal as they do in the continental (napoleonic) system. (there are good reasons for and agains). But the court has a myopic view of history as a legal without grasping that our legal systems have poorly adopted to a world consisting almost entirely out of interests in property (distributed possession), rather than possession of property (monopoly possession). I have come to see this as the fundamental problem of adapting our ancient legal systems to the information era (post 1911).

    3 – Fiat currency is functionally nothing more than shares in the federal treasury, which in turn is merely an asset of the federal corporation, which in turn is merely a construct of the federal constitution. The problem is that (as Anna illustrates), we have opened up a host of opportunities for predation upon our individual sovereignty, and our personal property, and even our community property, thereby transforming all assets to the state, and only making use of them by license. In effect we have restored feudalism (serfdom) – just serfdom that is comfortable. And the frightening fact is that comfortable serfdom is in demand, and contrary to historical propaganda was in demand in the past also – as was voluntary slavery. Many people are happy to enter into contemporary serfdom and slavery if they have some protection of law. Yet our system no longer distinguishes between the sovereign, the serf, and the slave – thereby ignoring the differences in risk we wish (or can) bear, because of our abilities, our skills, our assets, our families, and our associations. We are taxed by income but not by risk. We are governed by serfdom not by sovereignty. And this is because the law has not kept pace with the economic structure of polities. And to a large degree I blame the Judicial community for failing to grasp the relationship between the demands upon law, and the economic “technology” that we live under.

    CLOSING

    The mistake I see in Anna’s writings is the same mistake I see in ‘gold bugs’ or other people that want to return to hard money. Hard money is a terrible limitation upon the people for no reason – resulting in hard and fast shocks that cannot be insured against (the jury is in on cyclicality of corrections but it is hard to take the position of allowing shorter devastating depressions rather than longer softer recessions) That said, we no longer make use of money as other than debt instruments (all money is merely a token without any backing other than fiat demand for it).

    The question isn’t return to gold standard, or return to fully private property (which merely weakens us from producing the higher returns of the commons). The question is how to restore sovereignty and markets in everything by rule of law given that we have a new monetary technology available to us that is no longer physical – how can we restore the state to its only necessarily useful function: as the insurer of last resort both economic(positive) and judicial (negative).

    And we must recognize that the enlightenment experiment with equality has been a failure and that the upper classes will always seek rents, the financial classes (distributors of liquidity) are now entirely unnecessary (really), and are by their very existence parasitic, and the underclasses, grown more numerous while the middle shrinks – have only serfdom as their desired order.

    There are only two social sciences: the law of tort (property), and its facility and measurement economics. The problem is macro economics seeks to circumvent the law, and the law is ignorant of macro economics.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev Ukraine.

    https://www.facebook.com/avonreitz

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-29 07:50:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. PETER THEIL: UNIVERSITIES ARE AS CORRUPT AS T

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    PETER THEIL: UNIVERSITIES ARE AS CORRUPT AS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH 500 YEARS AGO

    (The church and academy that sprung from it, have master the art of profiting from the distributing of information under the promise of future good, without warranty of their claims. This is why propertarianism is necessary: to prevent profiting from goods, services, and information, that are not warrantied.)

    26 Jul 2018
    Technology giant Peter Thiel argued this week that American universities are as corrupt as the Catholic Church of 500 years ago.

    Speaking to a group of conservative students on Wednesday night, tech legend Peter Thiel compared American universities to the Catholic Church of 500 years ago.

    “The analogy that I’ve used is that perhaps the universities today are as corrupt as the Catholic Church was 500 years ago,” Thiel said. “If you think about the eve of the Reformation when Martin Luther posted his 95 theses on the church doors, there were all these priests that did not do very much work in much the same way that college professors and administrators are today. You had to pay these indulgences the way that you have to pay runaway tuition today.”

    Thiel went on to argue that American society teaches young people that the quality of their lives will be determined by their success at college. “It’s also a story of salvation,” he added. “If you get a college diploma, you will be saved. If you don’t get one, you will end up in a very bad place. We need a sort of reformation. I’ve often described the universities as the atheist church. It’s not going to reform itself from within. The reformation will come from without.”

    Thiel also made the case that universities simply aren’t working the way that they used to. Decades ago, a college education was the key to a vibrant and lucrative future. Now that college degrees have become the standard, more debt-carrying students find themselves without fruitful employment even once they have their diploma.

    “Universities are supposed to provide a one size fits all education for everybody,” Thiel said. “They are not working the way they used to. We have an education bubble in this country. There is no single thing in this country where the costs have gone up more than they have gone up in education for the last 40 or 50 years.”

    “It’s like the opposite of technology,” he finished. “With technology, you do more with less. With education, we are doing less and less but spending more and more every year.”

    You can watch Thiel’s remarks below.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-27 23:15:09 UTC

  • Peter Theil: Universities Are as Corrupt as The Catholic Church 500 Years Ago

    (The church and academy that sprung from it, have master the art of profiting from the distributing of information under the promise of future good, without warranty of their claims. This is why propertarianism is necessary: to prevent profiting from goods, services, and information, that are not warrantied.) 26 Jul 2018 Technology giant Peter Thiel argued this week that American universities are as corrupt as the Catholic Church of 500 years ago. Speaking to a group of conservative students on Wednesday night, tech legend Peter Thiel compared American universities to the Catholic Church of 500 years ago. “The analogy that I’ve used is that perhaps the universities today are as corrupt as the Catholic Church was 500 years ago,” Thiel said. “If you think about the eve of the Reformation when Martin Luther posted his 95 theses on the church doors, there were all these priests that did not do very much work in much the same way that college professors and administrators are today. You had to pay these indulgences the way that you have to pay runaway tuition today.” Thiel went on to argue that American society teaches young people that the quality of their lives will be determined by their success at college. “It’s also a story of salvation,” he added. “If you get a college diploma, you will be saved. If you don’t get one, you will end up in a very bad place. We need a sort of reformation. I’ve often described the universities as the atheist church. It’s not going to reform itself from within. The reformation will come from without.” Thiel also made the case that universities simply aren’t working the way that they used to. Decades ago, a college education was the key to a vibrant and lucrative future. Now that college degrees have become the standard, more debt-carrying students find themselves without fruitful employment even once they have their diploma. “Universities are supposed to provide a one size fits all education for everybody,” Thiel said. “They are not working the way they used to. We have an education bubble in this country. There is no single thing in this country where the costs have gone up more than they have gone up in education for the last 40 or 50 years.” “It’s like the opposite of technology,” he finished. “With technology, you do more with less. With education, we are doing less and less but spending more and more every year.” You can watch Thiel’s remarks below.

  • Peter Theil: Universities Are as Corrupt as The Catholic Church 500 Years Ago

    (The church and academy that sprung from it, have master the art of profiting from the distributing of information under the promise of future good, without warranty of their claims. This is why propertarianism is necessary: to prevent profiting from goods, services, and information, that are not warrantied.) 26 Jul 2018 Technology giant Peter Thiel argued this week that American universities are as corrupt as the Catholic Church of 500 years ago. Speaking to a group of conservative students on Wednesday night, tech legend Peter Thiel compared American universities to the Catholic Church of 500 years ago. “The analogy that I’ve used is that perhaps the universities today are as corrupt as the Catholic Church was 500 years ago,” Thiel said. “If you think about the eve of the Reformation when Martin Luther posted his 95 theses on the church doors, there were all these priests that did not do very much work in much the same way that college professors and administrators are today. You had to pay these indulgences the way that you have to pay runaway tuition today.” Thiel went on to argue that American society teaches young people that the quality of their lives will be determined by their success at college. “It’s also a story of salvation,” he added. “If you get a college diploma, you will be saved. If you don’t get one, you will end up in a very bad place. We need a sort of reformation. I’ve often described the universities as the atheist church. It’s not going to reform itself from within. The reformation will come from without.” Thiel also made the case that universities simply aren’t working the way that they used to. Decades ago, a college education was the key to a vibrant and lucrative future. Now that college degrees have become the standard, more debt-carrying students find themselves without fruitful employment even once they have their diploma. “Universities are supposed to provide a one size fits all education for everybody,” Thiel said. “They are not working the way they used to. We have an education bubble in this country. There is no single thing in this country where the costs have gone up more than they have gone up in education for the last 40 or 50 years.” “It’s like the opposite of technology,” he finished. “With technology, you do more with less. With education, we are doing less and less but spending more and more every year.” You can watch Thiel’s remarks below.

  • PETER THEIL: UNIVERSITIES ARE AS CORRUPT AS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH 500 YEARS AGO (T

    PETER THEIL: UNIVERSITIES ARE AS CORRUPT AS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH 500 YEARS AGO

    (The church and academy that sprung from it, have master the art of profiting from the distributing of information under the promise of future good, without warranty of their claims. This is why propertarianism is necessary: to prevent profiting from goods, services, and information, that are not warrantied.)

    26 Jul 2018

    Technology giant Peter Thiel argued this week that American universities are as corrupt as the Catholic Church of 500 years ago.

    Speaking to a group of conservative students on Wednesday night, tech legend Peter Thiel compared American universities to the Catholic Church of 500 years ago.

    “The analogy that I’ve used is that perhaps the universities today are as corrupt as the Catholic Church was 500 years ago,” Thiel said. “If you think about the eve of the Reformation when Martin Luther posted his 95 theses on the church doors, there were all these priests that did not do very much work in much the same way that college professors and administrators are today. You had to pay these indulgences the way that you have to pay runaway tuition today.”

    Thiel went on to argue that American society teaches young people that the quality of their lives will be determined by their success at college. “It’s also a story of salvation,” he added. “If you get a college diploma, you will be saved. If you don’t get one, you will end up in a very bad place. We need a sort of reformation. I’ve often described the universities as the atheist church. It’s not going to reform itself from within. The reformation will come from without.”

    Thiel also made the case that universities simply aren’t working the way that they used to. Decades ago, a college education was the key to a vibrant and lucrative future. Now that college degrees have become the standard, more debt-carrying students find themselves without fruitful employment even once they have their diploma.

    “Universities are supposed to provide a one size fits all education for everybody,” Thiel said. “They are not working the way they used to. We have an education bubble in this country. There is no single thing in this country where the costs have gone up more than they have gone up in education for the last 40 or 50 years.”

    “It’s like the opposite of technology,” he finished. “With technology, you do more with less. With education, we are doing less and less but spending more and more every year.”

    You can watch Thiel’s remarks below.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-27 19:15:00 UTC

  • Mark Facebook – Mistake of Doubling Down

    Everyone doubles down. It’s the opposite of what you should do. Facebook (Mark) should have taken the opposite route: taken the position that it is impossible to monitor speech on this scale and that FB is at this point a necessary piece of world infrastructure similar to the other communication platforms and that they cannot possibly audit the content. and that countries must develop laws for regulating their own citizens on the platform as they do on all other platforms. FB would then regulate where advertising displays without regulating the content on the platform. Dum dum dum.