Curt Doolittle

Theme: Institution

  • Austrian: Social Science(facilitation). Chicago: Rule of Law (limited). Mainstre

    Austrian: Social Science(facilitation). Chicago: Rule of Law (limited). Mainstream: Discretionary rule(maximum).

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-20 14:03:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/766999158012076032

    Reply addressees: @mises @NewmanJ_R

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/765716053133438976

    IN REPLY TO:

    @mises

    5 Reasons Why Austrian Economics Is Better than the Mainstream | Jonathan Newman @NewmanJ_R
    https://t.co/lnoxGmwUKT https://t.co/ucMAovjJPU

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/765716053133438976

  • “People join organizations on the premise that they will not ever lead those org

    –“People join organizations on the premise that they will not ever lead those organizations because the cannot attract followers, it would be hard work, it would be scary, and they could FAIL.

    People support a government because “hurr durr … it’s the law”, and the notion of having someone BUT YOURSELF be the final arbiter of YOUR OWN PROBLEMS is actually quite nice – in no small part because people cannot retaliate against you for appeal to the judiciary for a dispute resolution.

    People pray to Zoroastrian offshoot Gods because they’re omnipotent so THEY don’t have to be.”— John Jost

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-20 08:44:00 UTC

  • DO WE CHOOSE OUR RULERS? Actually, it depends on the organization’s SIZE, and me

    DO WE CHOOSE OUR RULERS?

    Actually, it depends on the organization’s SIZE, and method of adaptation.

    – For very large organizations, it’s that no one wills change of leader sufficiently, because of the cost of change.

    – For medium organizations, people choose the leader possible for the group to preserve its power.

    – For small organizations, it’s absolutely true that people choose leaders.

    Choice of leadership is a game: it’s the best one we can get among those that enough people want, not the leader we want.

    Leadership is necessary if for no other reason than to maintain grop solidarity while providing decidability, although consensus building is why we prefer to use them. leaders prevent defection.

    I could go on about this, but leaders exist becasue we need them to. We choose the ones we CAN choose, and we change or resist change dependent upon the cost of doing so.

    In markets we need only negative leaders (judges), but it is very hard to defect and survive. In the production of commons we need positive leaders (deciders), but it is very hard to defect and survive. In commercial organizations we need both judges and deciders, but we have the opportunity to defect, and we are constantly aware of the choices.

    This is then, the same reason we are compensated, not for production, but for our value in the ORGANIZATION of production.

    As far as I know, this well researched, well understood, and effectively a law of organization.

    Economics in everything.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    (ps: any moral argument is suspect. if the argument is not reduced to costs, someone is likely trying to fool you.)

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-20 03:21:00 UTC

  • While European membership produces reduction of local corruption, it comes at th

    While European membership produces reduction of local corruption, it comes at the expense of universalist ambition. https://twitter.com/carlbildt/status/766179916471730176

  • The philosophers that get all the credit, distract from the jurists who do all t

    The philosophers that get all the credit, distract from the jurists who do all the research. Western ‘Science’ = Common Law Tradition.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-18 06:14:00 UTC

  • Q&A: Curt: Why Is Western Civ Eugenic?

    [A]ristocracy, Meritocracy, Rule of Law, Market Economies, Manorialism(controlled access to land), voluntary mate selection, late marriage, nuclear family, migratory skilled labor, Low Tolerance Policing/high trust requirement, aggressive hanging, militial warfare (volunteer infantry), harsh winters, mathusian farming production, plagues, economic shocks, and disasters, have the following effects: 1 – force improved long term, mate selection 2 – lower generational rates of reproduction 3 – limit reproduction to those who are in the genetic ‘middle class’ and upward. 4 – redistribute resources upward to middle class and away from lower class reproduction. 5 – cull lower classes aggressively. Which is important, because every person that’s ‘problematic’ at the bottom is six times as costly as every person that’s ‘beneficial’ at the top. The basic math is like this: to organize a society in the voluntary organization of production you must get 80% of the resources in to 20% of population, and that 20% of the population must be ‘intelligent’ enough to make use of it. That means you must get your median IQ somewhere in the 100-106 range before you can really do much toward developing a high trust market economy. And you want to get as close to 112 to 115 if you want to out-compete the rest of the planet with innovations sufficiently to live what we in the west consider a marginally different quality of life. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Q&A: Curt: Why Is Western Civ Eugenic?

    [A]ristocracy, Meritocracy, Rule of Law, Market Economies, Manorialism(controlled access to land), voluntary mate selection, late marriage, nuclear family, migratory skilled labor, Low Tolerance Policing/high trust requirement, aggressive hanging, militial warfare (volunteer infantry), harsh winters, mathusian farming production, plagues, economic shocks, and disasters, have the following effects: 1 – force improved long term, mate selection 2 – lower generational rates of reproduction 3 – limit reproduction to those who are in the genetic ‘middle class’ and upward. 4 – redistribute resources upward to middle class and away from lower class reproduction. 5 – cull lower classes aggressively. Which is important, because every person that’s ‘problematic’ at the bottom is six times as costly as every person that’s ‘beneficial’ at the top. The basic math is like this: to organize a society in the voluntary organization of production you must get 80% of the resources in to 20% of population, and that 20% of the population must be ‘intelligent’ enough to make use of it. That means you must get your median IQ somewhere in the 100-106 range before you can really do much toward developing a high trust market economy. And you want to get as close to 112 to 115 if you want to out-compete the rest of the planet with innovations sufficiently to live what we in the west consider a marginally different quality of life. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Executive Roles and Character (biz)

    [W]e are all suited for different roles. I prefer partnerships rather than hierarchies. And this is how I usually operate. SALES (PRESIDENT/CEO) – I like Sales and Revenue jobs – but it’s hard to control relationships upon which sales depend. One needs to be more intuitive and ‘likeable’, gather and distribute information, rather than creative. (I have to be likeable and share information) PROFIT AND LOSS (CTO/OPERATIONS) – I love P&L jobs – I have control over them. One needs to be better at problem solving, and persuasive. Creativity is necessary and rewarding. (I have to be right and creative) BALANCE SHEETS (MBA/FINANCE) – I hate Balance Sheet jobs. – I never feel like I can control them. One needs to keep a lot of details in memory, and resort them, and report on them. And most creativity is … limited. (I have to be diligent, and not wrong.) This is how I tell people why I prefer NOT to hold the CEO role, but the problem is finding someone not stupid enough to be the CEO. Normally I don’t like to take the CEO title, but prefer to have a ‘President’ and myself the “Chief Strategy Officer”. In a perfect world you have a three person partnership for customers (president and CEO), inside the company (CTO/Strategy), and suppliers (CFO/MBA). I don’t believe in using CPAs for CFO, and instead use MBA’s for CFO, and CPA’s for VP accounting. In my experience CPA’s cannot accurately report BOTH financial and operational accounting on the same P&L and Balance Sheet, nor do they produce rolling reports that let you see trends. Why? Because this requires a bit of extra work developing posting ‘macros’ (Processes) so that data isn’t pooled (munged), and so that it’s clear whether one is making money from operations, from capital trades, or from financialising the business. Curt Doolittle

  • Executive Roles and Character (biz)

    [W]e are all suited for different roles. I prefer partnerships rather than hierarchies. And this is how I usually operate. SALES (PRESIDENT/CEO) – I like Sales and Revenue jobs – but it’s hard to control relationships upon which sales depend. One needs to be more intuitive and ‘likeable’, gather and distribute information, rather than creative. (I have to be likeable and share information) PROFIT AND LOSS (CTO/OPERATIONS) – I love P&L jobs – I have control over them. One needs to be better at problem solving, and persuasive. Creativity is necessary and rewarding. (I have to be right and creative) BALANCE SHEETS (MBA/FINANCE) – I hate Balance Sheet jobs. – I never feel like I can control them. One needs to keep a lot of details in memory, and resort them, and report on them. And most creativity is … limited. (I have to be diligent, and not wrong.) This is how I tell people why I prefer NOT to hold the CEO role, but the problem is finding someone not stupid enough to be the CEO. Normally I don’t like to take the CEO title, but prefer to have a ‘President’ and myself the “Chief Strategy Officer”. In a perfect world you have a three person partnership for customers (president and CEO), inside the company (CTO/Strategy), and suppliers (CFO/MBA). I don’t believe in using CPAs for CFO, and instead use MBA’s for CFO, and CPA’s for VP accounting. In my experience CPA’s cannot accurately report BOTH financial and operational accounting on the same P&L and Balance Sheet, nor do they produce rolling reports that let you see trends. Why? Because this requires a bit of extra work developing posting ‘macros’ (Processes) so that data isn’t pooled (munged), and so that it’s clear whether one is making money from operations, from capital trades, or from financialising the business. Curt Doolittle

  • ON NORMS AS PROPERTY (again, as I’ve said, others who follow will do much better

    https://propertarianforum.wordpress.com/2016/07/22/property-and-norms/BUTCH ON NORMS AS PROPERTY

    (again, as I’ve said, others who follow will do much better jobs at communicating these ideas than I do. I tend to write proofs, and others tend to write explanations. And it is explanations most of us need once the proof is constructed. I’m thrilled that Butch has really made the jump. He’s the first guy that I know of to use both testimonialism and proeprtarianism in the same argument.)

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-17 06:27:00 UTC