Curt Doolittle

Theme: Institution

  • THE ANDRESSON HOROWITZ MODEL AS LANDLESS MONARCHY “Most of our first customers t

    THE ANDRESSON HOROWITZ MODEL AS LANDLESS MONARCHY

    “Most of our first customers that were over a $1M have come as relationships through Andreessen Horowitz.”—Jessica Lessin

    @Jessicalessin @pmarca

    1) Not surprisingly, the Andreessen Horowitz model is identical to that of the monarchies – albeit without land holding.

    2) Entrepreneurial Paternalism vs State Capitalism seek the same end by different means. Classes differ in preference.

    3) Both Paternal models make use of credit. But one tolerates risk, and the other tolerates corruption.

    4) Which is to say that Andresson Horowitz’s experiment is a model for post-democratic, post-state capitalist government

    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-07 01:00:00 UTC

  • TYPE DETERMINES ECONOMIC OUTCOMES (Of course) Abstract: We construct a family sc

    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Papers.cfm?abstract_id=2511173FAMILY TYPE DETERMINES ECONOMIC OUTCOMES (Of course)

    Abstract:

    We construct a family score according to the presence of these three characteristics following E. Todd’s 1984 classification of traditional family types observed around the world. This family score is significantly associated with higher economic outcomes. This association is robust to other factors already identified by previous research as having a role such as geography, ethnic fractionalization, genetic diversity, religion, quality of institutions and legal origin.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-06 15:13:00 UTC

  • GAAP(RULE OF LAW) VS IFRS(NAPOLEONIC LAW) (h/t Johannes Meixner )(From elsewhere

    GAAP(RULE OF LAW) VS IFRS(NAPOLEONIC LAW)

    (h/t Johannes Meixner )(From elsewhere)

    This is the material difference in the origins and persistence of the different accounting systems. All anglo-american policy is traditionally implemented under rule of law that approaches formal logic as much as possible.

    The general rule of american GAAP is pretty simple “represent the truth”. This varies from the Napoleonic countries where there is less suspicion of government involvement and less tolerance for discretion.

    Some of this is terribly important given that in many countries that use Napoleonic law and it’s descendants, the bureaucracy tends to be staffed professionally. Whereas in the states the bureaucracy is staffed by ‘those unfit for real productive work’.

    Hence the general believe that there must be no room for discretion in american law and accounting, and arguments must be decidable by a judge using logical means.

    Just to provide context, this is also the difference between the economic schools of thought:

    1) The conservative ‘Austrian’ branch seeks rules of natural law such that institutions can be improved in order to reduce frictions in the economy.

    2) the classical liberal ‘american’ (or freshwater) branch seeks extensions of rule of law that allow intervention in the economy only under predefined rules as to eliminate political discretion and allow private sector planning without ‘losses’ incurred by government exercise of discretion.

    3) the ‘Saltwater’ or ‘American Jewish’ branch seeks to understand the limits of discretionary action in order to give the government the freedom to interfere in the economy with maximum discretion.

    The Debate over GAAP and IFRS is one of RULES vs JUSTIFICATIONS. the USA differs for this reason. Although you would very likely be hard pressed to find many people able to explain this deep difference between the american (equalitarian) experiment and the continental (authoritarian) experiment.

    As such it is a non trivial difference that reflects the difference in cultures. The principle of ‘going concern’ is a mathematical relationship determined between the creditor and the company officers. It is not a matter for ‘interference’ by the state.

    Hence higher risk organizations in america, and the bigger stock market in america, and the more developed tech and research sector in america, and the bond market in london, and the heavy industrial superiority of germany, and the military superiority of russia.

    Risk increases as we move westward.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-05 14:14:00 UTC

  • Its not complicated: – Facebook used a dating game at exclusive universities to

    Its not complicated:

    – Facebook used a dating game at exclusive universities to reinvent email,

    – just like google used cheap distribution to reinvent the yellow pages.

    – just like slack used open source to reinvent IRC Chat.

    – just like amazon used freely given customer opinion to reinvent the bookstore.

    – just like apple used touch sensors to reinvent interaction with devices.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-04 09:05:00 UTC

  • THE CONTRACTUAL SOCIETY: SOCIAL CONTRACT, OATH, JURY, JUDGE —“At the heart of

    THE CONTRACTUAL SOCIETY: SOCIAL CONTRACT, OATH, JURY, JUDGE

    —“At the heart of the tenth-century law was the oath, taken by all freemen from the age of 12, to abstain from and denounce any major crime.

    This common oath enshrined the sense of social community and responsibility that underpinned the law. In this light, theft was seen as an act of disloyalty. If you had broken your oath and committed a serious crime your entire kin could be punished.

    King Athelstan, is reported saying to his councillors that he was concerned about the number of young people being executed under the death penalty, ‘as he sees everywhere is the case’.

    The death penalty could be enforced on anyone 12 years old or over, but the king raised the age of criminal responsibility to 16 because, as he said simply, ‘it is too cruel’.

    That, was around 930. But as late as the early 19th century there are cases of ten, nine and even eight year olds being executed for sheep stealing.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2015-12-04 02:59:00 UTC

  • Government(Particular) vs Rule (Universal)

    [T]here is a very great difference between government and rule.

    • Rule:
    • Government:

    I am not sure all peoples can easily generate judges capable of rule by rule of law. Although wth sufficient training it appears largely possible. I do not think other peoples should participate in the selection of a commons for a people, only in the prevention of privatization of commons, or the socialization of losses into commons. In this sense, colonialism is very different from adjudication. And my feeling is that most nations would benefit from hiring judges. And most would benefit from not being colonized. Rule of law works over time. Law is a science. The production of commons is an extension of the family. It can only grow with the people themselves.

  • Government(Particular) vs Rule (Universal)

    [T]here is a very great difference between government and rule.

    • Rule:
    • Government:

    I am not sure all peoples can easily generate judges capable of rule by rule of law. Although wth sufficient training it appears largely possible. I do not think other peoples should participate in the selection of a commons for a people, only in the prevention of privatization of commons, or the socialization of losses into commons. In this sense, colonialism is very different from adjudication. And my feeling is that most nations would benefit from hiring judges. And most would benefit from not being colonized. Rule of law works over time. Law is a science. The production of commons is an extension of the family. It can only grow with the people themselves.

  • Dear Academy: No. A Liberal Education Is Not A Good Thing. It’s A Bad Thing.

    [C]hristopher. It has become increasingly clear to me that a liberal education only performs its upper and upper middle class adult function as part of a triumvirate of the church’s youth and lower class teachings in myth and idealism, and the military’s middle class teenage training in duty, truth and testimony. We practice a hierarchy of religious systems in the west, none of which alone can produce the uniqueness of western man. Western mans differentiation from the rest is caused by our treatment of the beauty of nature as sacred, our martial universalism, heroism, and truthful testimony before the jury, later improved dramatically by chivalry, piety, and idealism by the church, further improved by the prosperity produced by commercial servicing of others under the Saxon North Sea and river trading civilization that we mistakenly call by one of its effects: Germanic Protestantism above the Hanjal line. The church was a contributor but not a cause. So far the academy post Darwin and post separation from the church, seems to have been a net detriment to western civilization. And the principle means by which the academy has been a net negative has been the adoption of the Cosmopolitan Pseudosciences which the 21st century is rapidly overthrowing: Boazian social science, Freudian psychology, Marxist economics, cantorian mathematics, Frankfurt school politics. And the puritanical offshoots of feminist ethics, postmodern propaganda, and philosophy. If Christianity if not monotheism was the first really great lie perpetuated by propagandizing then pseudoscience from the lectern replaced mysticism from the pulpit. First we learn myths, then reason then science. And those who cannot climb that ladder remain at the prior rung. And how can a classical liberal education exist without grammar, rhetoric, philosophy, history, and debate? At present it appears that the empirical science saves us from the liberal reason just as reason saves us from the Christian/Jewish:Egyptian/Babylonian mysticism of the great lie. So, pray tell, what is a liberal education? Because at present the evidence is quite clear that it is a device for teaching pseudoscience largely to women, absent the test of it by the logic of debate under logical laws of grammar and rhetoric that survive comparison with history, for the sole purpose of profiting from the process of selling them pseudoscience? This criticism.damns the academy, damns the incentives of professors and the academy, damns the content they profess, and damns the vast consequences of their teachings: the use of women voters to systematically dismantle rule of law, the great compromise that is the nuclear family, the inter-generational transfer of knowledge using savings and interest, and the second conquest of the west by pseudoscience women, slaves and immigrants – for profit. So completely similar to the first conquest of the west with the first great lie of monotheism by women, slaves, and immigrants. If anything we must damn the academy and the liberal education as nothing more than profiteering from the systematic destruction of western civilization. And I come to this conclusion from the data. Not from introspection, wishful thinking, and the stated ambitions of the academy – that would require rhetorical fallacy contrary to the evidence. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute. Kiev, Ukraine. http://www.theimaginativeconservative.org/…/liberal-educati…

  • Dear Academy: No. A Liberal Education Is Not A Good Thing. It’s A Bad Thing.

    [C]hristopher. It has become increasingly clear to me that a liberal education only performs its upper and upper middle class adult function as part of a triumvirate of the church’s youth and lower class teachings in myth and idealism, and the military’s middle class teenage training in duty, truth and testimony. We practice a hierarchy of religious systems in the west, none of which alone can produce the uniqueness of western man. Western mans differentiation from the rest is caused by our treatment of the beauty of nature as sacred, our martial universalism, heroism, and truthful testimony before the jury, later improved dramatically by chivalry, piety, and idealism by the church, further improved by the prosperity produced by commercial servicing of others under the Saxon North Sea and river trading civilization that we mistakenly call by one of its effects: Germanic Protestantism above the Hanjal line. The church was a contributor but not a cause. So far the academy post Darwin and post separation from the church, seems to have been a net detriment to western civilization. And the principle means by which the academy has been a net negative has been the adoption of the Cosmopolitan Pseudosciences which the 21st century is rapidly overthrowing: Boazian social science, Freudian psychology, Marxist economics, cantorian mathematics, Frankfurt school politics. And the puritanical offshoots of feminist ethics, postmodern propaganda, and philosophy. If Christianity if not monotheism was the first really great lie perpetuated by propagandizing then pseudoscience from the lectern replaced mysticism from the pulpit. First we learn myths, then reason then science. And those who cannot climb that ladder remain at the prior rung. And how can a classical liberal education exist without grammar, rhetoric, philosophy, history, and debate? At present it appears that the empirical science saves us from the liberal reason just as reason saves us from the Christian/Jewish:Egyptian/Babylonian mysticism of the great lie. So, pray tell, what is a liberal education? Because at present the evidence is quite clear that it is a device for teaching pseudoscience largely to women, absent the test of it by the logic of debate under logical laws of grammar and rhetoric that survive comparison with history, for the sole purpose of profiting from the process of selling them pseudoscience? This criticism.damns the academy, damns the incentives of professors and the academy, damns the content they profess, and damns the vast consequences of their teachings: the use of women voters to systematically dismantle rule of law, the great compromise that is the nuclear family, the inter-generational transfer of knowledge using savings and interest, and the second conquest of the west by pseudoscience women, slaves and immigrants – for profit. So completely similar to the first conquest of the west with the first great lie of monotheism by women, slaves, and immigrants. If anything we must damn the academy and the liberal education as nothing more than profiteering from the systematic destruction of western civilization. And I come to this conclusion from the data. Not from introspection, wishful thinking, and the stated ambitions of the academy – that would require rhetorical fallacy contrary to the evidence. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute. Kiev, Ukraine. http://www.theimaginativeconservative.org/…/liberal-educati…

  • Philip Saunders Frames The Narrative Correctly

    [F]rom Philip:

    “The operating philosophy of the 20th century was relativism in the domain of ideas, combined with universalism in the realm of institutions. This expressed itself in the subjectivistic movements of modernism and postmodernism, combined with the socio-economic trends of communism, fascism and statist neoliberalism. “The 21st century is the polar opposite. With unlimited access to information and global connectivity, we’re moving towards more universalism in the domain of ideas, culture and philosophy (which is not to be misunderstood for homogeneity, but rather the belief that there are universal standards by which ideologies or cultures can be judged or disputed), combined with relativism in the domain of institutions. “