Curt Doolittle

Theme: Institution

  • THE LOGIC OF DIVORCE Data suggests that the no fault divorce was one of the wors

    THE LOGIC OF DIVORCE

    Data suggests that the no fault divorce was one of the worst legislative failures in history.

    Now, my view is that we either relegate marriage to the equivalent of a power of attorney, and eliminate common property entirely, or that we return to fault, for the distribution of common property in the event of failure.

    Single motherhood is responsible for the rise in inequality, as much as is third world immigration, and the failure of the education system to create competitive labor, and the university system for selling defective and un-warrantied products.

    Propertarianism would recommend that we eliminate common property because it is not in fact a commons: that which is unavailable for consumption. As such marital assets cannot be considered a commons since they are available for consumption. And so this law is a deception.

    Conversely, fault based divorce increases the risk of exiting the marriage, and increases the incentives for preserving it.

    Likewise alimony and child support are both destructive in that they merely ignore the cost of maintaining two households- especially given that males can no longer trade their productivity, while women can still trade their sex and affection.

    My intuition is that marriage with high penalty was an extremely useful institution inseparable from Liberty, capitalism, and the civic society. It forces concentration of wealth and it’s highly eugenic when in nuclear and absolute nuclear form.

    We are currently practicing the worst of all possible choices.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-15 03:04:00 UTC

  • THE ONLY REASON TO STUDY ECONOMICS IS TO JUSTIFY RULE OF LAW. (ok, yes, I”m taun

    THE ONLY REASON TO STUDY ECONOMICS IS TO JUSTIFY RULE OF LAW.

    (ok, yes, I”m taunting you with that statement)

    Humans are capable of four weapons of influence, and human institutions can be discussed using the frame of reference of any one of them – or all of them. I try to objectively address all of them in my work:

    1) Morality/Gossip/Ostracization/Cult/Religion : Priests and public intellectuals.

    2) Rules/force/punishment/law/Government : Warriors police, judges and politicians.

    3) Volition/exchange/reward/trade/Economics : traders, distributors financiers, bankers

    4) Production/education/utility/Knowledge : craftsmen, engineers, scientists

    Each group specializing in each frame of reference has evolved a language (a set of languages) and a discipline (a set of methods), and institutions (means of propagating, applying, organizing) for the application of their means of influence.

    I use the term ‘legal philosophy’ in the sense that the weapon of influence (force) using the institution of law, is different from the weapon of influence (morality) using gossip (public speech), in the institution of religion.

    Rothbard constructed a religious (cult) narrative, and hayek a legal narrative. My criticisms of mises is that he simply failed, because he conflated science, logic, and craft, thereby creating praxeology as a pseudoscience (by claiming logic constitutes a science). Just why the cosmopolitans (freud, marx, mises, rothbard, cantor, adorno, etc) created so many pseudosciences is something I have written quite a bit about, but can be boiled down to ‘verbalism’ and platonic truth, from the cultural emphasis on scripture and religion, rather than the western tradition of operationalism and testimonial truth, and the cultural emphasis on craft and martial order. (But again this is a very deep topic.)

    So It is not that I fail to grasp that economics must be stated in a particular language. Or that I fail to grasp the missing formal logic of cooperation that mises intuited must exist, but failed to develop. Or that it is possible to articulate economics objectively as a scientific discipline.

    ***It is that since the means of OBTAINING a free society MUST (as far as we know) depend upon the rule of law (Hayek), then the philosophical framework for CONSTRUCTING rule of law must be articulate as a legal one. In fact, no understanding of economics will meaningfully effect rule of law under property rights, other than to justify it. Or more strongly: it is unnecessary to understand economics except as a means of justifying the law necessary to construct the voluntary organization of production.**** (That should be slightly mind-bending for most people.)

    There are reasons why a small internal community like judaism or gypsies or any other cult can rely on the pressure of ostracism. But to possess land, and build fixed capital necessary for organized production, one requires the institution of law.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-14 01:51:00 UTC

  • LEGAL INSTITUTIONS VERSUS RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS A Truth: contracts provide bett

    LEGAL INSTITUTIONS VERSUS RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS

    A Truth: contracts provide better memory and incentive than do beliefs.

    So if you want a behavior: moms teach children beliefs.

    Adults teach behaviors by institutions and incentives.

    We defend the intent of those institutions by contract.

    The first contract is a constitution enumerating the means of constructing those institutions.

    Prior to that contract property exists as that which we are able to defend.

    Property rights can only be constructed consequent to that contract.

    Anyone who speaks of encouraging belief or value instead of contract and institution merely has failed to mature into a political adult from a mere parent or shaman.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-13 06:45:00 UTC

  • CURIOUS: CULTURAL OBSERVATIONS As a CEO my style is very American: meaning liber

    CURIOUS: CULTURAL OBSERVATIONS

    As a CEO my style is very American: meaning libertarian in management: I try to create as much of a bottom-up organization as possible with as little management as possible, and to attract the best talent possible, because the best talent wants to demonstrate creative expression – in a country where creative expression is a competitive value.

    The general thinking in the states is that employees know customers the best and so we need to empower them to serve customers. We get profits from helping them serve customers. The more we help them the more profits we make. The increase in credit capacity and the petro dollar has not been good for us in this respect, because it has given consumers a lot of free money to inflate the economy while reducing our discipline. In Europe consumers are much ‘poorer’ by every possible measure and so companies must fight for their attention. Conversely, people are much more patient with companies and regulations and rules than americans would be. So the culture tolerates the business climate and visa versa.

    But where this shows up is lack of rotation in Europe, and less radical innovation, while we get better engineering out of germans (again, who I think ‘do it right’) in education at least – if not in an oppressiveness that is beyond my comfort. And without the humor that my anglo peers survive on. 🙂

    I wonder how Oversing will play in european countries? Will europeans be able to handle(tolerate) that much transparency? That much honesty? That much measurement? That much social rather than hierarchical feedback? That much customer service? Or will just young competitors make use of such a product? Or will more hierarchical companies turn off the transparency and use it as command and control? Young people get it. Technology people worldwide seem to get it. Ukrainian’s get it. Russians get it. South American’s get it.

    Hmmm…. What else….

    In the states we try to push independent thinking farther down the chain than is possible. And we don’t train the bottom to be capable. We pretend everyone can become a member of the middle (or upper middle) class and fail the majority by doing so. (we have the world’s most absurd education system in that regard. for the upper half it’s awesome. but for the lower half its a tragedy.)

    Germany does it about right. They focus on making the lower half excellent and so the upper half has better assets to work with that way. And it shows. Maybe Finland does it better. But they have a more homogenous society to work with so they can create a better universal educational system. But Finn’s are too timid in business. Germans are the most honest after americans. I notice that it’s actually easier to deal with germans than other americans and I have to stop myself from couching everything inoffensively when talking.

    I don’t really understand the UK system. And I have had very bad experiences there. So maybe I’m biased. People turn out more literate. The middle turns out pretty well and the top excellent. But the bottom is… not as bad as the states in incompetence, but worse than the states in rent seeking behavior. Our bottom end can’t find work but they don’t try to avoid it. I don’t understand the class in the UK that seeks to avoid labor at all costs, and do the minimum whenever possible. It could be that class exists all over Europe but I only have access to it in the UK and Canada. And it’s really visible to me in both the UK and Canada.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-08 11:53:00 UTC

  • THINKING OUT LOUD (Product Development) CLOUD DRIVES. We’ve been discussing exte

    THINKING OUT LOUD (Product Development)

    CLOUD DRIVES.

    We’ve been discussing external file systems, because some people integrate with Google docs, or Sharepoint. And I’ve considered (my favorite) integrating with Dropbox. But honestly, while it originally made sense, i can’t see the point in it.

    I mean, lets say that Facebook allowed file sharing. They can’t because it would turn into a pirate bay. But Oversing is not very different from FB except it’s for business instead of social activity, and it costs money, rather than advertising, and so liability remains with the content originator, and anonymity isn’t possible like it is in social media. Just the opposite. So, if you upload a file of any kind to Oversing, it’s within that business-social network, and you have to be in the network to use it. We do that on purpose. Furthermore, Dropbox is in the amazon cloud and so is oversing. I mean, the only reason we can think of is to separate file system costs. But that’s meter-able anyway.

    So the only reason I get to, I guess, is for really large files we will have a problem with our technology, because we would have to provide a background upload manager of some sort.

    I can see adding external links, but we do that anyway. I mean, if you’re doing large media gigs, it’s much easier to just mirror your local drive in Dropbox or share on Google Drive and then send links to customers.

    So do we implement a max file size and then ask customers to link external files for over that size? That seems like the best option to me.

    But I would love advice.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-08 10:26:00 UTC

  • 1) That the family structure of all worldwide organizations, from business and i

    http://www.quora.com/What-are-the-principle-ideas-of-the-American-political-theorist-James-Burnham-and-what-is-their-importance/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=1BURNHAM?

    1) That the family structure of all worldwide organizations, from business and industry to politics and government would be replaced by professional managers with empirical expertise in individual disciplines. (Law, Accounting, Finance, Economics, Marketing (Propaganda), etc.)

    “The Managerial Society”

    2) That Democracies must always result in Oligarchies, without exception, out of necessity.

    3) That the entire marxist, socialist, postmodern, (and feminist) program was both dishonest and contrary to science and reason. And that all that will occur no matter what we do, is that we will replace one set of oligarchs with another set of oligarchs and because these oligarchs will function as elites, there will no material difference.

    4) IMPLIED: that the managerial class will destroy family, culture, and nation.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-27 09:48:00 UTC

  • What Are The Principle Ideas Of The American Political Theorist James Burnham And What Is Their Importance?

    1) That the family structure of all worldwide organizations, from business and industry to politics and government would be replaced by professional managers with empirical expertise in individual disciplines. (Law, Accounting, Finance, Economics, Marketing (Propaganda), etc.)
    “The Managerial Society”

    2) That Democracies must always result in Oligarchies, without exception, out of necessity.

    3) That the entire marxist, socialist, postmodern, (and feminist) program was both dishonest and contrary to science and reason.  And that all that will occur no matter what we do, is that we will replace one set of oligarchs with another set of oligarchs and because these oligarchs will function as elites, there will no material difference.

    4) IMPLIED: that the managerial class will destroy family, culture, and nation.

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-principle-ideas-of-the-American-political-theorist-James-Burnham-and-what-is-their-importance

  • Does Civil Society Include Business?

    Um. Yes. It doesn’t include GOVERNMENT

    https://www.quora.com/Does-civil-society-include-business

  • What Are The Principle Ideas Of The American Political Theorist James Burnham And What Is Their Importance?

    1) That the family structure of all worldwide organizations, from business and industry to politics and government would be replaced by professional managers with empirical expertise in individual disciplines. (Law, Accounting, Finance, Economics, Marketing (Propaganda), etc.)
    “The Managerial Society”

    2) That Democracies must always result in Oligarchies, without exception, out of necessity.

    3) That the entire marxist, socialist, postmodern, (and feminist) program was both dishonest and contrary to science and reason.  And that all that will occur no matter what we do, is that we will replace one set of oligarchs with another set of oligarchs and because these oligarchs will function as elites, there will no material difference.

    4) IMPLIED: that the managerial class will destroy family, culture, and nation.

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-principle-ideas-of-the-American-political-theorist-James-Burnham-and-what-is-their-importance

  • Does Civil Society Include Business?

    Um. Yes. It doesn’t include GOVERNMENT

    https://www.quora.com/Does-civil-society-include-business